Datasets:

bigcode
/

starcoder2data-extras

Dataset card Data Studio Files Files and versions Community

Subset (12)

arxiv · 1.56M rows

Split (1)

train · 1.56M rows

content stringlengths 1 15.9M
\section{Introduction} The use of (central) sequence algebras in the theory of operator algebras has a long history, dating back to McDuff's characterization of factors which absorb the hyperfinite II$_{1}$-factor with separable predual $R$, as those whose central (W-)sequence algebra contains a unital copy of $R$ \cit {mcduff_central_1970}. Applications in the context of C-algebras are both abundant and far-reaching, and they often appear in connection with classification of C-algebras. For instance, the fact that the central (C-)sequence algebra (with respect to a nonprincipal filter) of a Kirchberg algebra is purely infinite and simple is a major cornerstone in the work of Kirchberg and Phillips \cite{kirchberg_embedding_2000}, which is the starting point of the classification of Kirchberg algebras; see \cit {kirchberg_classification_2000} and \cite{phillips_classification_2000}. Another major application of central sequence algebras has been to the theory of strongly self-absorbing C-algebras \cite{toms_strongly_2007}, which have become a fundamental part of Elliott's classification programme of nuclear C-algebras. Indeed, the tight connections that strongly self absorbing C-algebras have with classification, have prompted a deeper study of ultrapowers and (central) sequence algebras. In this context, the use of model-theoretic methods has become predominant \cit {farah_model_2014,farah_model_2013,farah_model_2014-1,farah_model_2016,farah_countable_2013,eagle_saturation_2015 . The most prominent features of ultrapowers are model-theoretic in nature, and include what model theorists usually refer to as \L os' theorem and countable saturation. Even though relative commutants do not have a satisfactory model-theoretic analog, it is shown in \cit {farah_relative_2015} that for a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, its ultrapower and its relative commutant are indistinguishable, and in fact isomorphic assuming the Continuum Hypothesis (CH). Ultrapowers (and relative commutants) have also been a crucial tool in the study of group actions on operator algebras. They have been used in the classification of amenable group actions on the hyperfinite II$_{1}$-factor by Connes \cite{connes_outer_1975}, Jones \cite{jones_actions_1980} and Ocneanu \cite{ocneanu_actions_1985}. In their proofs, a crucial step is to show that any outer action admits equivariant embeddings of matrix algebras into its relative commutant, a condition that is now known as the Rokhlin property. In the context of C-algebras, relative commutants were used in connection with the Rokhlin property for group actions in the work of Herman-Jones \cite{herman_period_1982}, Kishimoto \cite{kishimoto_rohlin_1995}, Izumi \cite{izumi_finite_2004}, Hirshberg-Winter \cit {hirshberg_rokhlin_2007}, and the first-named author \cit {gardella_compact_2015}. The study of Rokhlin dimension has also made extensive use of these tools, for example in \cite{gardella_compact_2015} and \cite{hirshberg_rokhlin_2016}, as well as the more recent work on strongly self-absorbing actions \cite{szabo_strongly_2015}. As is clear from these works, the use of sequence algebras in the equivariant setting becomes even more delicate when the acting group is not discrete, since a continuous action on an operator algebra may induce a discontinuous action on its relative commutant. As such, equivariant (central) sequence algebras are interesting objects whose systematic study is justified by their wide application in the literature. The present work takes up this task. For a given compact second countable group $G$, we consider actions of $G$ on C-algebras ($G$-C-algebras) as structures in the framework of continuous model theory. When the group $G$ is finite, one can regard a $G$-action as a usual metric structure by adding a function symbol for every element of the group. This does not work for a general compact group, since the canonical action on the ultrapower that one obtains in this way is not always continuous; see Example~\ref{eg:NotCts}. On the other hand, adding a sort for the group and enforcing uniform bounds on the continuity moduli of an action would not capture the notion of ultrapower of $G$-actions. The solution adopted in \cite{gardella_model_2017 , suggested by the theory of compact quantum groups and their actions on C-algebras, consists in replacing in the language for C-algebras the sort for the whole C-algebras with several sorts for the \emph{isotropy components }of the action, indexed by representations of $G$ on finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces. This gives a language $\mathcal{L}_{G}^ \text{C}}$, which has function and relations symbols corresponding to the C-algebra operations as well as function symbols for the restriction of the -homomorphism coding the action to the isotropy components. It is shown in \cite{gardella_model_2017} that $G$-C-algebras form an axiomatizable class in such a language, and explicit axioms are provided. In this paper, we will consider $G$-C-algebras as structures with respect to several other languages. Such languages are very natural, as they correspond to notions of morphisms other than -homomorphisms---such as completely positive contractive maps, or order zero completely positive contractive maps---that are of crucial importance for the recent theory of C-algebras. There are important model-theoretic reasons to consider such languages. Indeed, as the recent work on the model theory of C-algebras has shown \cite{farah_model_2016}, most of the properties of C-algebras considered in the C-algebra literature can be captured model-theoretically. As most maps that arise naturally in the applications are not elementary, and often are not even -homomorphisms, it is important to keep track of the exact \emph{complexity }of formulas needed to describe C-algebraic properties, including which \emph{operations} are needed to describe them. As it turns out, the multiplication symbol in many cases can be dispensed of, and replaced with other predicates that capture the ordered operator space structure, or the \textquotedblleft order zero\textquotedblright\ structure of a given C-algebra. This careful analysis will make it apparent how various regularity property are automatically preserved by several C-algebraic and model-theoretic constructions. We present a number of applications to C-dynamics in Section~4 and Section~5. We focus mainly on strongly self-absorbing actions (in the sense of \cite{szabo_strongly_2015}), actions with finite Rokhlin dimension (in the sense of \cite{hirshberg_rokhlin_2015} and \cite{gardella_rokhlin_2014 ), and general dimensional inequalities in C-algebras. The main novelty in this part is that we shift the attention from the actions themselves to the study of equivariant maps between them; this is in the spirit of $KK$-theory and other related theories. In particular, we consider equivariant order zero maps between C-dynamical systems; this is inspired in the notion of weak containment for representations and measure-preserving actions of countable groups, which are fundamental in modern ergodic theory and representation theory. The notion of strongly self-absorbing action has been recently introduced and studied by Szab\'{o} in \cit {szabo_strongly_2015,szabo_strongly_2016}, where it is shown that many familiar properties of strongly self-absorbing C-algebras have natural analogues for strongly self-absorbing actions. Building on this work, in Section~4 we investigate the model-theoretic properties of strongly self-absorbing actions. In particular, we show that the continuous part of the central sequence algebra of a strongly self-absorbing action is indistinguishable from the continuous part of the sequence algebra, and in fact equivariantly isomorphic assuming CH, thus generalizing results from \cite{farah_relative_2015}. We take the occasion to remove an unnecessary assumption present in \cite{farah_relative_2015}, and observe that all the results hold for reduced products with respect to an arbitrary countably incomplete filter, even without the assumption that the corresponding reduced product be countably saturated. We also show that the classification problem for strongly self-absorbing actions of a fixed compact second countable group on C-algebras is smooth in the sense of Borel complexity theory. This is no longer the case for actions with approximately inner half-flip, even if one restricts to actions on the Cuntz algebra $\mathcal{O}_{2}$. Indeed, we observe that the relations of conjugacy and cocycle conjugacy for $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$-actions on \mathcal{O}_{2}$ with approximately $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$-inner half-flip are complete analytic sets. Most of the results of this section admit natural generalizations to the case of a locally compact (not necessarily compact) second countable group $G$. This presents additional technical difficulties, which can be overcome by considering a more general framework than the usual framework for first order logic for metric structures.\ For the sake of simplicitly, we will only consider the case when $G$ is compact. Section~5 contains applications to dimensional inequalities in C-algebras. This is done through the notion of \emph{(equivariant) order zero dimension (with and without commuting towers)} for an (equivariant) homomorphism. The case of dimension zero corresponds to the notion of positive existential embedding, which has been studied in \cite{goldbring_kirchbergs_2015} and, under the name of sequentially split -homomorphism, in \cit {barlak_sequentially_2016}. As an example, if $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ is an action of a compact group $G$ on a C-algebra $A$, then the Rokhlin dimension of $\alpha $ is equal to the $G$-equivariant order zero dimension of the factor embedding $\theta \colon A\rightarrow C(G,A)$. As an application of the syntactic characterization of $G -equivariant order zero dimension together with results from \cit {farah_model_2016}, we obtain the following result, which is new in the non-unital case. \begin{thmintro} Let $G$ be a compact group, and $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra $A$. The \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A^{G})\leq \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A\rtimes G)\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)+1)(\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A)+1)-1 \end{equation* an \begin{equation} \mathrm{dr}(A^{G})\leq \mathrm{dr}(A\rtimes G)\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }(A)+1)(\mathrm{dr}(A)+1)-1. \end{equation} \end{thmintro} We use results from the literature to give many other examples of -homomorphisms with finite order zero dimension which do not come from group actions. Notable examples are the unital inclusions $\mathcal{O _{\infty }\rightarrow \mathcal{O}_{2}$ and $\mathcal{Z}\rightarrow U$, where $U$ is any UHF-algebra of infinite type. As a consequence of our general results, we recover and extend useful inequalities relating the nuclear dimension, decomposition rank, and Rokhlin dimension of the $\mathcal{Z}$- and $U$-stabilization of an arbitrary ($G$-)C-algebra. Similar statements hold for the $\mathcal{O}_{\infty }$- and $\mathcal{O}_{2}$-stabilizations, and this allows us to recover a result from \cite{matui_decomposition_2014}: the nuclear dimension of a Kirchberg algebra is at most 3. (The actual dimension of Kirchberg algebras has been computed in \cite{bosa_covering_?}: it is 1.) Some of the nuclear dimensional estimates that we derive here have also been observed in \cite{barlak_rokhlin_2015}, while the estimates involving the decomposition rank are new. One of our main results requires that we first prove the following equivariant generalization of the main result from \cite{dadarlat_trivialization_2008}, which is interesting in its own right. \begin{thmintro} Let $X$ be a compact metrizable space of finite covering dimension, let $G$ be a compact metrizable group, let $(D,\delta)$ be a strongly self-absorbing, unitarily regular $G$-C-algebra, and let $(A,\alpha)$ be a separable, unital $G$-$C(X)$-algebra. If $A_x$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing, then there is a $C(X)$-linear $G$-isomorphism \[(A,\alpha)\cong (D\otimes C(X), \delta\otimes \iota_{C(X)}).\] \end{thmintro} Combining the theorem above with our results related to order zero dimension, we prove the following. The second assertion is a significant generalization of previous results from \cite{hirshberg_rokhlin_2015} and \cite{gardella_regularity_?}, which only considered the case $D=\mathcal{Z}$. \begin{thmintro} Let $G$ be a compact group, let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, let $A$ be a separable $D$-absorbing C-algebra, let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ be an action of $G$ on $A$ with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers, and let $\delta :G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut \left( D\right) $ be any strongly self-absorbing action (such as the trivial action). Then $(A,\alpha )$ is $G$-equivariantly isomorphic to $\left( D\otimes A,\alpha \otimes \delta \right) $. Furthermore, the fixed point algebra $A^{G}$ and the crossed product $A\ltimes G$ are $D$-absorbing. \end{thmintro} Absorption of the trivial action on the Jiang-Su algebra is particularly useful, since it opens the doors of a possible classification of actions with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers. Indeed, showing absorption of well-behaved objects is a common feature in most of the classification results for group actions. These aspects will be explored in subsequent work. We also deduce new Rokhlin dimension estimates for actions with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers of finite groups on $\mathcal{Z} -absorbing C-algebras, which imply that the possible values of the Rokhlin dimension in this case are $0$ and $1$. \begin{thmintro} Let $G$ be a finite group, let $A$ be a C-algebra, and let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers. Then $\alpha \otimes \mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}}$ has Rokhlin dimension at most $1$. If $A$ is $\mathcal{Z}$-absorbing, then $\alpha $ has Rokhlin dimension at most $1$. \end{thmintro} This represents a satisfactory parallel with the $\{0,1,\infty \}$-type behaviour that nuclear dimension and decomposition rank tend to have in the noncommutative setting. It is also particularly satisfactory, since proving finiteness of the Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers is a far easier task than proving that the Rokhlin dimension is (at most) 1. In the particular case when $A$ is a commutative unital C-algebra $C\left( X\right) $ for some compact Hausdorff space $X$, such a result can be seen as a dynamical version of the main result of~\cit {tikuisis_decomposition_2014}, which states that \textrm{dr}$(C(X)\otimes \mathcal{Z})\leq 2$. Finally, we also prove that finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers implies the Rokhlin property for finite group actions on UHF-absorbing C-algebras. \begin{thmintro} Let $G$ be a finite group, let $A$ be an $M_{\|G\|^{\infty }}$-absorbing C-algebra, and let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ be an action with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers. Then $\alpha $ has the Rokhlin property. This in particular applies to Cuntz algebras of the form $\mathcal{O}_{n\|G\|}$. \end{thmintro} Again, this is very relevant from a computational point of view: proving directly that an action has the Rokhlin property is often challenging, and there are not many tools available. On the other hand, Rokhlin dimensional estimates are much easier to come by, particularly for finite groups. Having access to the Rokhlin property is highly valuable, since it entails classifiability of the action, and the structure of the crossed product is extremely well-understood (see, for example, \cite{gardella_crossed_2014}). We include an appendix, containing the relevant notions and results from model theory that are used in this paper; see also the appendix of \cit {gardella_model_2017}. A quick introduction to logic for metric structures can be found in \cite{ben_yaacov_model_2008}, and as it pertains to C-algebras in \cite{lupini_invitation_2017}, while \cite{farah_model_2016} is a more complete reference for the model-theoretic study of C-algebras. The model-theoretic perspective is crucial to our approach, as it allows us to isolate the semantic content of properties of $G$-C-algebras and equivariant embeddings, such as the Rokhlin property, Rokhlin dimension, $G -equivariant sequentially split -homomorphism (in the terminology of \cit {barlak_sequentially_2016,barlak_spatial_2017}), $G$-equivariant order zero dimension (introduced here). In turn, this is the fundamental ingredient to effortlessly deduce preservation results from the semantic characterizations of regularity properties of C-algebras obtained in \cit {goldbring_kirchbergs_2015,farah_model_2016}, subsuming, simplifying, and generalizing many results from the literature. The realization that the \textquotedblleft continuous part of the ultrapower\textquotedblright\ of a G$-C-algebra is just its ultrapower as an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}} -structure allows us to clarify its properties, including saturation and \L os' theorem, which are here deduced from general model-theoretic facts. This subsumes and technically simplifies the proof of many particular instances that had previously appeared in the literature. We then crucially use the full strength and semantic content of saturation and \L os' theorem in the proof of our main results. The model-theoretic study of $G$-C-algebras, including the notion of first-order theory, is also fundamental in our study of strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebras. Particularly, we show that the first-order theory provides a complete invariant (up to isomorphism) for such $G$-C-algebras. This is the crucial step in our computation of the Borel complexity of the classification problem for strongly self-absorbing $G $-C-algebras. For the rest of the paper, $G$ will be a second countable \emph{compact} group. We denote by $C(G)$ the unital C-algebra of continuous, complex-valued function on $G$. The multiplication operation on $G$ induces a unital -homomorphism $\Delta \colon C(G)\rightarrow C(G\times G)\cong C(G)\otimes C(G)$ given by $\Delta ( f) ( s,t)= f(st)$ for $f\in C(G)$ and $s,t\in G$. A unitary representation $\pi \in \mathrm Rep}(G)$ on a finite-dimensional Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ defines the subspace of \emph{matrix units} for $\pi $. \begin{equation} C(G)_{\pi }=\left\{ \langle \xi ,\pi (f)\eta \rangle \colon \xi ,\eta \in \mathcal{H}\text{, }f\in C(G)\right\}. \end{equation* \subsubsection{Acknowledgements} We would like to thank Mauro Di Nasso for referring us to the notion of good ultrafilter, and Bradd Hart for drawing our attention to the framework of real-valued logic, and Yasuhiko Sato for electronic correspondence concerning the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:InclZUHF} as well as for helpful comments and remarks on our work. We are also grateful to G\'{a}bor Szab\'{o} for his comments and for pointing out connections with the preprint \cit {hirshberg_rokhlin_2016}. Finally, we are in debt to Ilijas Farah, Isaac Goldbring, Alexander Kechris, and Robin Tucker-Drob for several helpful conversations concerning the present work. \section{Languages for C-algebras\label{Section:languages}} \subsection{The ordered selfadjoint operator space language\labe {Subsection:osos-language}} An \emph{ordered selfadjoint operator space}, as defined in \cit {blecher_ordered_2007,russell_characterizations_2015}, is a matricially normed and matricially ordered $\ast $-vector space that admits a selfadjoint completely isometric complete order embedding into a C-algebra. Concretely, one can defined an ordered selfadjoint operator space as a selfadjoint closed subspace of $B(H)$ with the inherited matricial norms, matricial positive cones, and involution. Ordered selfadjoint operator spaces have been abstractly characterized in \cit {werner_subspaces_2002,russell_characterizations_2015,russell_characterizations_2016 , and further studied in \cit {werner_multipliers_2004,blecher_ordered_2006,blecher_ordered_2007,ng_operator_2011,karn_adjoining_2005,karn_order_2011 . For ordered operator spaces $X$ and $Y$, we denote by $\mathrm{CPC}(X,Y)$ the set of all selfadjoint completely positive completely contractive linear maps $X\rightarrow Y$. (Observe that in an ordered selfadjoint operator space the matrix positive cones are not necessarily spanning. Therefore a completely positive linear map on an ordered operator space is not necessarily selfadjoint.) An ordered selfadjoint operator space $X$ can be naturally seen as a structure in the language $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}}$ that contains \begin{itemize} \item sorts $M_{n}(X)$, with $n\in \mathbb{N}$, for the matrix amplifications of the space $X$, with balls centered at the origin as domains of quantification; \item a sort for each finite-dimensional C-algebra $F$, with balls centered at the origin as domains of quantification; \item function symbols for the vector space operations and the involution in $X$ and $F$; \item predicate symbols for the norms in $M_{n}(X)$ and in $F$; \item predicate symbols for the distance function from the cone of positive elements in $M_{n}(X)$ and in $F$; \item predicate symbols for the function $F^{k}\times X^{k}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ given by \begin{equation} (\overline{y},\overline{z})\mapsto \inf\limits_{t\in \mathrm{CPC (F,X)}\max\limits_{j=1,\ldots ,k}\left\Vert t(y_{j})-z_{j}\right\Vert . \end{equation} \end{itemize} We call such a language the \emph{ordered selfadjoint operator space languag } $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}}$. Observe that the $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos }$-terms can be seen as degree $1$ matrix -polynomials without constant terms. These are expressions of the form \begin{equation} \alpha _{1}^{\ast }x_{1}\beta _{1}+\cdots +\alpha _{n}^{\ast }x_{n}\beta _{n}+\gamma _{1}^{\ast }x_{1}^{\ast }\delta _{1}+\cdots +\gamma _{n}^{\ast }x_{n}^{\ast }\delta _{n} \end{equation* where $n$ is a positive integer, $\alpha _{j},\beta _{j},\gamma _{j},\delta _{j}$, for $1\leq j\leq n$, and are scalar matrices It is clear that a function between ordered selfadjoint operator spaces is an $\mathcal{L}^ \mathrm{osos}}$-morphism if and only if it is \emph{selfadjoint}, \emph completely positive }and \emph{completely contractive}, and it is an \mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}}$-embedding if and only if it is a \emph selfadjoint completely isometric complete order embedding}. In particular, any C-algebra can be seen as an $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}}$-structure in the obvious way, by considering its canonical matrix norms and matrix positive cones. It is observed in \cite[Appendix C {goldbring_kirchbergs_2015}, \cite[Section 3 and Section 5]{farah_model_2016} that all the predicates above are definable in the usual language of C-algebras as considered in \cite{farah_model_2014,farah_model_2016}. An operator system is a closed, selfadjoint subspace $X\subset A$ of a \emph unital} C-algebra that contains its unit. The \emph{operator system language }$\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osy}}$ is obtained from the ordered operator space language by adding a constant symbol for the unit in $X$. The \mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osy}}$-terms can be seen as degree $1$ matrix -polynomials \emph{with a constant term}. \subsection{The order zero language\label{Subsection:order-zero}} If $A,B$ are C-algebras, we denote by $\mathrm{OZ}(A,B)$ the space of completely positive contractive order zero maps $A\rightarrow B$. The \emph order zero language }$\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{oz}}$ for C-algebras is obtained from $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}}$ by adding, for any finite-dimensional C-algebra $F$ and any $k\in \mathbb{N}$, a predicate symbol to be interpreted as the function $F^{k}\times A^{k}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, given by \begin{equation} (\overline{y},\overline{z})\mapsto \inf\limits_{t\in \mathrm{OZ (F,X)}\max\limits_{j=1,\ldots ,k}\left\Vert t(y_{j})-z_{j}\right\Vert . \end{equation* It is proved in \cite[Section 5.2]{farah_model_2016} that such functions are definable in the usual language of C-algebras as considered in \cit {farah_model_2014,farah_model_2016}. This follows from the structure theorem for completely positive contractive order zero maps \cite[Corollary 4.1 {winter_completely_2009} and stability of the relations defining cones of finite-dimensional C-algebras \cite[Section 3.3]{loring_lifting_1997}. A C-algebras can be seen as an\emph{\ }$\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{oz}} -structure in the obvious way. Let $A$ and $B$ be C-algebras and let f\colon A\rightarrow B$ be a function. Then $f$ is an $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm oz}}$-morphism if and only if $f$ is a completely positive contractive order zero map. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:orthogonality}In the order-zero language one can express the fact that a pair $( a_{1},a_{2}) $ of elements of a C-algebra $A$ are (almost) orthogonal. Indeed one can consider the canonical basis elements $( e_{1},e_{2}) $ of $\mathbb{C}\oplus \mathbb{C}$ and the formula $\varphi ( e_{1},e_{2},x_{1},x_{2}) $ defined b \begin{equation} \inf_{t\in \mathrm{OZ}(\mathbb{C}\oplus \mathbb{C},A)}\max \left\{ \left\Vert t( e_{1}) -x_{1}\right\Vert ,\left\Vert t( e_{2}) -x_{2}\right\Vert \right\} \text{.} \end{equation* We have that if $\varphi ( e_{1},e_{2},a_{1},a_{2}) <\varepsilon $, then \left\Vert a_{1}a_{2}\right\Vert <2\varepsilon $. Conversely, for every \varepsilon >0$ there exists $\delta >0$ such that if $a_{1},a_{2}$ are positive contractions such that $\left\Vert a_{1}a_{2}\right\Vert <\delta $, then $\varphi ( e_{1},e_{2},a_{1},a_{2}) <\varepsilon $. \end{remark} \subsection{The C-algebra language\label{Subsection:C-language}} The\emph{\ C-algebra language} $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$ is obtained from \mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{\mathrm{osos}}}$ by adding a function symbol for the multiplication operation in $M_{n}(A)$, for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Similarly, the \emph{unital C-algebra language }$\mathcal{L}^{1\text{,C}}$ is obtained from $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$ by adding a constant symbol for the unit. Observe that the terms in $\mathcal{L}^{1\text{,C}}$ (respectively, $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$) can be canonically identified with matrix -polynomials with (respectively, without) constant term. A\emph{\ matrix -polynomial }is a linear combination of expressions of the form X_{1}\cdots X_{n}$ where $X_{j}$, for $j=1,\ldots ,n$, is either a scalar matrix, or $x$ or $y^{\ast }$ for some variable $x,y$. A function between C-algebras is an $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$-morphism ($\mathcal{L}^{1\text ,C}}$-morphism) if and only if it is a (unital) -homomorphism, and an \mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$-embedding ($\mathcal{L}^{1\text{,C}}$-embedding) if and only if it is a (unital) injective -homomorphism. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:existentially-definable}The following properties of C-algebras have been proved to be definable by a uniform family of existential positive $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$-formulas---see Definition \re {Definition:uniform-family}---in \cite[Theorem 2.5.1 and Theorem 5.7.3 {farah_model_2016}: real rank zero, stable rank at most $n$, quasidiagonality, simplicity, being simple and purely infinite, being simple and TAF, being abelian of real rank at most $n$. Considering unital C-algebras and positive existential $\mathcal{L}^{1\text{,C}}$-formulas gives approximate divisibility. \end{remark} \begin{remark} \label{Remark:existentially-definable-separable}The following properties of C-algebras have been proved to be definable by a uniform family of existential positive $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$-formulas among \emph separable }C-algebras in \cite[Theorem 2.5.1 and Theorem 5.7.3 {farah_model_2016}: being UHF; being AF; being $D$-absorbing for a given strongly self-absorbing C-algebra $D$; and being $\mathcal{K} -absorbing---also called \emph{stable}---where $\mathcal{K}$ is the algebra of compact operators. \end{remark} \subsection{The nuclear languages\label{Subsection:nuclear-language}} The \emph{nuclear ordered selfadjoint operator space language} $\mathcal{L}^ \mathrm{osos}\text{-}\mathrm{\mathrm{nuc}}}$ is obtained from $\mathcal{L}^ \mathrm{osos}}$ by adding, for every $k\in \mathbb{N}$ and every finite-dimensional C-algebra $F$, a predicate symbol for the function X^{k}\times F^{k}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ \begin{equation} (\overline{x},\overline{y})\mapsto \inf\limits_{s\in \mathrm{CPC (X,F)}\max\limits_{j=1,\ldots ,k}\left\Vert s(x_{j})-y_{j}\right\Vert . \end{equation* It is proved in \cite[Section 5]{farah_model_2016} that such a function is definable in the language of C-algebras considered in \cit {farah_model_2014,farah_model_2016}. In the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:completely positive contractive-morphism}, we will need the following version of the Choi-Effros lifting theorem: if A,B$ are C-algebras, $A$ is separable, $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is a nuclear completely positive contractive map, $E\subset A$ is a finite-dimensional subspace, and $\varepsilon >0$, then there exists a completely positive contractive map $\eta \colon \overline{f(A)}\rightarrow A $ such that $f\circ \eta $ is the identity map on $\overline{f(A)}$, and \left\Vert (\eta \circ f)(x)-x\right\Vert <\varepsilon \Vert x\Vert $ for all $x\in E$. When $A$, $B$, and $f$ are unital, this is a consequence of the Choi-Effros lifting theorem for operator systems; see \cite[Lemma 3.8 and Section 4.3]{choi_completely_1976}. The general case can be reduced to the unital one by taking unitizations; see \cite[Proposition 2.2.1 and Proposition 2.2.4]{brown_c-algebras_2008}. \begin{lemma} \label{Lemma:completely positive contractive-morphism} Let $A$ and $B$ be C-algebras, and let $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ be a function. Consider the following assertions: \begin{enumerate} \item $f$ is a nuclear completely positive contractive map; \item $f$ is an $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{osos}\text{-}\mathrm{nuc}}$-morphism; \item $f$ is a completely positive contractive map. \end{enumerate} Then (1)$\Rightarrow $(2)$\Rightarrow $(3), and they are all equivalent if either $A$ or $B$ is nuclear. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The implication (1)$\Rightarrow $(2) uses the Choi-Effros lifting theorem as stated above. The proof is the same as the proof that nuclearity passes to quotients and that decomposition rank and nuclear dimension are nonincreasing under quotients; see \cite[\S 2.9]{winter_covering_2003}, \cit [Section 3]{kirchberg_covering_2004}, and \cite[Proposition 2.3 {winter_nuclear_2010}. The implication (2)$\Rightarrow $(3) is obvious. Finally, if either $A$ or $B$ are nuclear, then any completely positive contractive map $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is nuclear, which gives (3) \Rightarrow $(1). \end{proof} The \emph{nuclear order zero language} $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{oz}\text{- \mathrm{nuc}}$ and the \emph{nuclear C-algebra language} $\mathcal{L}^ \text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$, are defined as above starting from $\mathcal{L}^ \mathrm{oz}}$ and $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$, respectively. It follows from Lemma \ref{Lemma:completely positive contractive-morphism} that any nuclear completely positive contractive order zero map (nuclear -homomorphism) between C-algebras is an $\mathcal{L}^{\mathrm{oz}\text{-}\mathrm{nuc}} -morphism ($\mathcal{L}^{\text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$-morphism), and the converse holds for nuclear C-algebras. It is proved in \cite[Section 5]{farah_model_2016} that any predicate that is definable in $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$ is also definable in \mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$. However, considering the larger language $\mathcal L}^{\text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$ gives a more generous notion of (positive) existential formula. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:existentially-definable-nuclear}The following properties of C-algebras are definable by a uniform family of existential positive \mathcal{L}^{\text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$-formulas (see \cite[Section 5 {farah_model_2016}): nuclearity, having nuclear dimension at most $n$, and having decomposition rank at most $n$. \end{remark} \subsection{Actions of groups on C-algebras} Denote by $\mathrm{Aut}(A)$ denote the group of automorphisms of $A$, endowed with the topology of pointwise convergence. An action of $G$ on a C-algebra $A$ is a (strongly) continuous group homomorphism $\alpha\colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$. An action of $G$ on $A$ can be regarded as an injective nondegenerate -homomorphism \begin{equation} \alpha\colon A\rightarrow C( G,A) \text{,} \end{equation* defined by $\alpha(a)(g)=\alpha_{g^{-1}}(a)$ for all $g\in G$ and all $a\in A$. With respect to the identification $C( G,A) \cong C(G)\otimes A$, such a map satisfies the identit \begin{equation} ( \Delta \otimes \mathrm{id}) \circ \alpha =( \mathrm{id \otimes \alpha ) \circ \alpha \text{.} \end{equation This identity characterizes the injective nondegenerate -homomorphisms that arise from actions as above. \begin{definition} A \emph{$G$-C-algebra} is a C-algebra endowed with a distinguisued action of $G$. \end{definition} An irreducible representation $\pi $ of $G$ on a finite-dimensional Hilbert space defines a subspace $A_{\pi }$ of $A$, called $\pi $-\emph{isotypical component }or $\pi $-\emph{spectral subspace , given by \begin{equation} \left\{ a\in A:\alpha \left( a\right) \in C(G)_{\pi }\otimes A\right\} \text .} \end{equation* In the particular case when $\pi $ is the trivial representation, one obtains the \emph{fixed point algebra }$A^{G}$. It is explained in \cite[Section 3.4]{gardella_model_2017} how $G -C-algebras can be seen as structures in the logic for metric structures with respect to the language $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$, which is the language obtained from the language of C-algebras $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$ by replacing the sort for the C-algebra with sorts indexed by $\mathrm{Rep (G)$, to be interpreted as the isotypical components. Furthermore, one adds function symbols to be interpreted as the restriction of the action to the isotypical components, regarded as maps $A_{\pi }\rightarrow C(G)_{\pi }\otimes A_{\pi }$. (Observe that $C(G)_{\pi}$ is finite-dimensional.) Explicit \emph{axioms }for $G$-C-algebras are provided in \cite[Section 3.4 {gardella_model_2017}, thus showing that $G$-C-algebras form an $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\text{C}}$-axiomatizable class. For each language for C-algebras \mathcal{L}$ that we considered above, one can consider the corresponding $G -\emph{equivariant version }$\mathcal{L}_{G}$, which can be obtained from \mathcal{L}$ exactly as $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$ is obtained from \mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$. In the following, if $A$ is a C-algebra, and $\mathcal{F}$ is a filter over a set $I$, then we let $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}A$ be the corresponding reduced product. When $A$ is a $G$-C-algebra, $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}A$ is endowed with the canonical coordinate-wise action of $G$. We let $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ be the subalgebra of $a\in \prod_{\mathcal{F}}A$ such that the map $g\mapsto g^{\prod_{\mathcal{F }A}a$ is continuous. This is a $G$-C-algebra, which can be identified with the reduced product of $A$ with respect to $\mathcal{F}$ when regarded as a structure in the langusge of $G -C-algebras $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$; see \cite Proposition 3.12]{gardella_model_2017}. It is worth noticing that $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is in general different from $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}A$ for a $G$-C-algebra $A$, even in the case when \mathcal{F}$ is an ultrafilter over $\mathbb{N}$, as the next example shows. \begin{example} \label{eg:NotCts}The canonical inclusion of $C\left( G\right) $ inside \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}C\left( G\right) $ is surjective for any ultrafilter \mathcal{U}$. However, the inclusion of $C(G)$ in the (nonequivariant) C-algebra ultrapower $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}C(G)$ is in general strict. For example, if $G=\mathbb{T}$ and $u\in C(\mathbb{T})$ is the canonical unitary generator, then the element $\left[ u^{n}\right] $ of $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}C \mathbb{T})$ with representative sequence $(u^{n})_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ does not belong to $C(\mathbb{T})$, since the canonical action of $\mathbb{T}$ on $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}C(\mathbb{T})$ is not continuous at $[u^{n}]_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$. It follows that $C(\mathbb{T})=\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{\mathbb{T }C(\mathbb{T})$ is properly contained in $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}C(\mathbb{T})$. \end{example} \subsection{Languages for \texorpdfstring{$A$}{A}-bimodules\labe {Subsection:bimodules}} Let $A$ and $B$ be C-algebras. Then $B$ is an $A$-bimodule if it is endowed with linear maps $b\mapsto a\cdot b$ and $b\mapsto b\cdot a$ for $a\in A$, satisfying $\max \left\{ \left\Vert a\cdot b\right\Vert ,\left\Vert b\cdot a\right\Vert \right\} \leq \max \left\{ \left\Vert a\right\Vert ,\left\Vert b\right\Vert \right\} $ as well as the natural associativity requirements. When $A,B$ are $G$-C-algebras, then we say that $B$ is a \emph{$G -equivariant $A$-bimodule} if it is an $A$-bimodule satisfying (g^{A}a)\cdot (g^{B}b)=g^{B}(a\cdot b)$, and $(g^{B}b)\cdot (g^{A}a)=g^{B}(b\cdot a)$ for all $a\in A$, $b\in B$ and $g\in G$. If f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism, then it induces a canonical $G$-equivariant $A$-bimodule structure on $B$, defined by a\cdot b:=f(a)b$ and $b\cdot a=bf(a)$ for $a\in A$ and $b\in B$. We let $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C,}A\text{-}A}$ be the language obtained from \mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$ by adding symbols for the $A$-bimodule structure. Similar definitions apply to the other languages for C-algebras considered above. The interpretation of an $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C,}A\text{-}A}$-formula in a $A$-bimodule is defined in the obvious way. \subsection{The Kirchberg language\label{Subsection:Kirchberg}} Fix a C-algebra $A$. In this subsection, we define the Kirchberg language $\mathcal{L ^{K}(A)$, which fits into the more flexible setting described in Subsection \ref{Subsection:general}. This language is obtained from $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$ by replacing the symbols for the matrix norms with pseudometric symbols $d_{F}$ for every finite set F$ in the unit ball of $A$. The distinguished collection $t_{A}^{c}(x)$ of positive quantifier-free conditions that is part of the language $\mathcal{L ^{K}(A)$ consists of the conditions $\max_{a\in F}\left\Vert ax-xa\right\Vert =0$ for every finite subset $F$ of the unit ball of $A$. One can regard $A$ as an $\mathcal{L}^{K}(A)$-structure by interpreting d_{F}$ on $M_{n}( A) $ as the pseudometric \begin{equation} ( x,y) \mapsto \max_{a\in M_{n}(F)}\left\Vert a( x-y) \right\Vert \text{.} \end{equation} Suppose that $\mathcal{U}$ is an ultrafilter. Then the reduced power of $A$ as an $\mathcal{L}^{K}(A)$-structure is equal to the Kirchberg invariant $F_ \mathcal{U}}(A)$ as introduced by Kirchberg in \cite{kirchberg_central_2006 ; see also \cite{ando_non-commutativity_2015}. Considering reduced powers instead of ultrapowers yields the generalization of the Kirchberg invariant to arbitrary filters considered in \cit {szabo_strongly_2015,barlak_sequentially_2016}. In the following, we denote by $t_{A}^{c}( x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}) $ the type $t_{A}^{c}( x_{1}) \cup \cdots \cup t_{A}^{c}( x_{n}) $. If $A$ is \emph{unital}, then $F_{\mathcal{ }}( A) $ is equal to $A^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}A$. Let $\kappa $ be an infinite cardinal that is larger than the density character of $A$, and let $\mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete $\kappa -good filter. (When $A$ is separable, one can take any countably incomplete ultrafilter.) Considering an approximate unit for $A$ shows that $F_ \mathcal{F}}(A)$ is unital. Let $t(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})$ be a positive primitive quantifier free $\mathcal{L}^{1\text{,C}}$-type. The corresponding \emph{multiplier }$\mathcal{L}^{K}(A)$-\emph{type } t_{A}^{m}(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n})$ is defined as follows. Any condition in $t \overline{x})$ should be replaced with all the conditions obtained by substituting every occurrence of a basic formula of the form $\left\Vert \mathfrak{p}(\overline{x})\right\Vert $, for some -polynomial $\mathfrak{p}$ with constant term, with the basic formula $\left\Vert b\ \mathfrak{p} \overline{x})\right\Vert $, where $b$ is some element of the unit ball of $A$. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:F}It follows from Remark~\ref{rmk:charactPosQtfFreeTyp} that the following statements are equivalent: \begin{enumerate} \item $t(\overline{x})$ is realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$, \item $t^{m}(\overline{x})$ is realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$, \item $t^{m}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A) , \item $t^{m}(\overline{x})\cup t_{A}^{c}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $A$. \end{enumerate} Furthermore $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$ is positively quantifier-free $\mathcal{L ^{1\text{,\textrm{C}}}$-$\kappa $-saturated. When $\mathcal{U}$ is an ultrafilter, $F_{\mathcal{U}}(A)$ is quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}^{1\text{ \textrm{C}}}$-$\kappa $-saturated. \end{remark} Various results from \cite{kirchberg_central_2006} can be seen as consequences of Remark \ref{Remark:F}. Suppose now that $A$ is a $G$-C-algebra. Then one can consider $A$ as an \mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-structure. In this case, the reduced power of $A$ as an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-structure with respect to a filter $\mathcal{F} ---which we denote by $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$---recovers the equivariant version of the Kirchberg invariant considered in \cit {szabo_strongly_2015,barlak_sequentially_2016}. Again, the following proposition follows from the general remarks of Subsection \re {Subsection:general}. If $t(\overline{x})$ is a positive primitive quantifier free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-type, then the corresponding multiplier $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-type $t_{A}^{m}(\overline{x})$ can be defined as above. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:F}Suppose that $A$ is a $G$-C-algebra, $\kappa $ is a cardinal larger than the density character of $A$, $\mathcal{F}$ is a countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter, and $t(\overline{x})$ is a positive primitive quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-type. Then $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ is a unital $G$-C-algebra, and the following statements are equivalent: \begin{enumerate} \item $t(\overline{x})$ is realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$, \item $t^{m}(\overline{x})$ is realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$, \item $t^{m}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $F_{\mathcal{F }^{G}(A)$, \item $t(\overline{x})\cup t_{A}^{c}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $A$. \end{enumerate} Furthermore $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$ is positively quantifier-free $\mathcal{L _{G}^{1\text{,\textrm{C}}}$-$\kappa $-saturated. \end{proposition} Similar conclusions hold if one replaces filters with ultrafilters, and positive primitive quantifier free types with arbitrary quantifier free types. \section{Strongly self-absorbing \texorpdfstring{$G$}{G}-C-algebras\labe {Section:ssa}} In this section, we exhibit some applications of model theory to strongly self-absorbing actions on C-algebras, as introduced and studied in \cit {szabo_strongly_2015,szabo_strongly_2016}. We regard $G$-C-algebras as structures in the language of $G$-C-algebras $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$. An $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-morphism between $G$-C-algebras is a $G -equivariant -homomorphism, and an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-embedding is an injective $G$-equivariant -homomorphism. If $A$ and $B$ are $G -C-algebras, then we denote by $A\otimes B$ the \emph{minimal} tensor product of $A$ and $B$ endowed with the continuous $G$-action defined by g^{A\otimes B}(a\otimes b)=(g^{A}a)\otimes (g^{B}b)$. \subsection{Positively \texorpdfstring{$\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-}{ existential injective -homomorphisms\label{Subsection:seq-split}} An injective -homomorphism $\theta \colon A\rightarrow M$ between \emph separable} $G$-C-algebras is $G$-equivariantly sequentially split, in the sense of \cite[Definition 3.3]{barlak_sequentially_2016}, if and only if it is positively $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-existential, as defined in Subsection \ref{Subsection:existential-embedding}. For arbitrary $G -C-algebras, the notion of positively $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}} -existential injective -homomorphism is more generous than being $G -equivariantly sequentially split. In the case of a compact group $G$, Theorem \re {Theorem:positive-existential-embedding} applied to $G$-C-algebras recovers \cite[Lemma 3.6 and Corollary 3.7]{barlak_sequentially_2016}. In the case of compact $G$, Lemma 2.3, Corollary 2.4, Proposition 2.5, Proposition 2.9, Proposition 3.8 and Corollary 3.17 of \cite{barlak_sequentially_2016} are then an immediate consequence of the definition of positively $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\text{C}}$-existential injective -homomorphism; see Proposition \re {Proposition:limit}. Proposition 3.11 of \cite{barlak_sequentially_2016} is a particular instance of \cite[Proposition A.33]{gardella_model_2017}, since the fixed point algebra $A^{G}$ of a $G$-C-algebra is positively existentially definable. By appropriately choosing the functor, one can also see that Proposition \ref{Proposition:functor} has as particular instances the following results from \cite{barlak_sequentially_2016}: (I), (II), (IV) of Theorem 2.10, Proposition 3.9, Proposition 3.12, Corollary 3.14, Corollary 3.15, Proposition 3.16. It follows from Proposition \ref{Proposition:definable-class} that if $A,B$ are C-algebras and $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is a positively $\mathcal{L}^ \text{C}}$-existential injective -homomorphism, then $A$ has any of the properties listed in Remark \ref{Remark:existentially-definable} or\ Remark \ref{Remark:existentially-definable-separable}, whenever $B$ does. The same assertion holds for any of the properties listed in Remark \re {Remark:existentially-definable-nuclear} when $B$ is nuclear. In particular, this observation recovers (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (7), (11), the first part of (12), the first half of (14), and (16) of \cite[Theorem 2.11 {barlak_sequentially_2016}. Other preservation results have been obtained in \cit {gardella_classification_2014,gardella_classification_2014-1 . We present here an additional preservation result does not seem to follow from the results mentioned above. Recall the definition of real rank from \cite[Definition V.3.2.1]{blackadar_operator_2006}. \begin{proposition} Suppose that $A,B$ are C-algebras and $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is a positively $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C}}$-existential injective -homomorphism. If $B$ has real rank at most $n$, then $A$ has real rank at most $n$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Without loss of generality, we can assume that $A,B$ are separable. After unitizing, we can assume that $A,B$ are unital, $f$ is unital, and $f$ is a positively $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C,}1}$-existential injective -homomorphism. We identify $A$ with its image under $f$. Fix selfadjoint elements a_{0},\ldots ,a_{n}\in A$ and $\varepsilon >0$. Since $B$ has real rank at most $n$, there exist selfadjoint elements $b_{0},\ldots ,b_{n}\in B$ such that $b_{0}^{2}+\cdots +b_{n}^{2}$ is invertible, and $\left\Vert a_{i}-b_{i}\right\Vert <\varepsilon $ for every $i=0,1,\ldots ,n$. Since the inclusion $A\subset B$ is a positively $\mathcal{L}^{\text{C,}1} -existential -homomorphism, we can conclude that there exist selfadjoint elements $c_{0},\ldots ,c_{n}\in A$ such that $c_{0}^{2}+\cdots +c_{n}^{2}$ is invertible, and $\left\Vert c_{i}-a_{i}\right\Vert <\varepsilon $ for every $i=0,1,\ldots ,n$. \end{proof} \subsection{Commutant existential theories\label{Subsection:commutant-theory } The notion of weak containment and weak equivalence are introduced in the general setting of logic for metric structures in\ Subsection \re {Subsection:existential}. In this section we consider, in the case of $G -C-algebras, the natural \emph{commutant }analogs of such notions. Suppose that $A,B$ are $G$-C-algebras. We say that $A$ is \emph{commutant positively weakly contained }in $B$ if for some (equivalently, any) cardinal $\kappa $ larger than the density character of $A$ and $B$ and for some (equivalently, any) countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter $\mathcal{F}$ on has that every $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-type $t$ that is realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ is also realized in $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$. Equivalently, for any unital $G$-C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$ of density character less than $\kappa $ there exists a $G$-equivariant injective unital -homomorphism from $C$ to $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$. If $A$ is unital, then $A$ is commutant positively weakly contained in $B$ if and only if there exists a unital -homomorphism from $A$ to $F_{\mathcal{F }^{G}(B)$ for any filter $\mathcal{F}$ as above. A syntactic characterization of commutant positively weak containment can be obtained using Proposition \ref{Proposition:F}. Suppose that $A$ is a $G$-C-algebra, and let $t_{A}^{c}(\overline{x})$ be the collection of conditions $\max\nolimits_{j=1,\ldots ,n}\left\Vert x_{j}a-ax_{j}\right\Vert \leq 0$, for $a\in A$. Recall that if $t(\overline{ })$ is a positive (primitive) quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}} -type, then $t_{A}^{m}(\overline{x})$ denotes the positive (primitive) quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-type obtained from $t(\overline{x})$ by replacing every occurrence of $\left\Vert \mathfrak{p}(\overline{x )\right\Vert $ for some $G$--polynomial $\mathfrak{p}$ with $\left\Vert b{ \mathfrak{p}(\overline{x})\right\Vert $ where $b$ is an arbitrary element of $A$ of norm at most $1$. We then have that $A$ is commutant positively weakly contained in $B$ if and only if, for any positive primitive quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-type $t(\overline{x})$, t_{A}^{m}(\overline{x})\cup t_{A}^{c}(\overline{x})$ is approximately satisfied in $A$ if and only if $t_{B}^{m}(\overline{x})\cup t_{B}^{c} \overline{x})$ is approximately satisfied in $B$. Two C-algebras are\emph{\ commutant positively weakly equivalent} if they are each commutant positively weakly contained in the other. For unital nuclear $G$-C-algebras, the following characterization of commutant weak \mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-containment follows from the Choi-Effros lifting theorem. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:nuclear}Suppose that $A$ is a unital nuclear $G -C-algebra, and $B$ is a $G$-C-algebra. Then $A$ is commutant positively weakly contained in $B$ if and only if for any separable nuclear $G -invariant unital C-subalgebra $A_{0}\subset A$ and separable $G -C-subalgebra $B_{0}\subset B$, there exists a sequence $(\phi _{n})_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ of completely positive contractive maps $\phi _{n}\colon A_{0}\rightarrow B$ such that, for every compact subset $K\subset G$, for every $x,y\in A_{0}$, and for every $b\in B_{0}$, we have that \begin{equation} \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty }\left\Vert b(\phi_n (x)\phi_n (y)- \phi_n (xy))\right\Vert =0, \ \ \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty }\left\Vert \phi_n (x)b-b\phi_n (x)\right\Vert =0 \end{equation* \begin{equation} \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty }\left\Vert b\phi_n (1)-b\right\Vert =0, \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty }\max\limits_{g\in K}\left\Vert b(\phi_n (g^{A}x)-g^{B}\phi_n (x))\right\Vert =0\text{.} \end{equation} \end{proposition} The notions of \emph{commutant weak containment} and commutant existential theory are defined analogously, considering arbitrary (not necessarily positive primitive) quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-types. \subsection{Space of separable nuclear \texorpdfstring{$G$}{G}-C-algebras and smooth classification} We now observe that there exists a natural standard Borel space of separable \emph{nuclear }$G$-C-algebras. Indeed, by Kirchberg's nuclear embedding theorem \cite[Theorem 6.3.12]{rordam_classification_2002}, any separable nuclear C-algebra is -isomorphic to the range of a conditional expectation on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$. Given such a conditional expectation $E$, set $A=E \mathcal{O}_{2})$. Write $\mathrm{CPC}(\mathcal{O}_{2})$ for the semigroup of all completely positive contractive maps of $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ into itself, endowed with the topology of pointwise convergence in norm. Given an action $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$, one can define a continuous function $\rho _{\alpha }\colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{CPC} \mathcal{O}_{2})$ by $\rho _{\alpha }(g):=\alpha _{g}\circ E$. Then \begin{enumerate} \item $\rho _{\alpha}( gh) =\rho _{\alpha}( g) \circ \rho _{\alpha}( h) $ for every $g,h\in G$, and \item $\rho _{\alpha}( 1) =E$. \end{enumerate} Conversely, any pair $( E,\rho) $, consisting of a conditional expectation E\colon \mathcal{O}_2\to\mathcal{O}_2$ and a continuous function $\rho\colon G\to \mathrm{CPC}(\mathcal{O}_2)$ satisfying (1) and (2), arises from a continuous action of $G$ on the range of $E$, as described above. Observe that $\mathrm{CPC}( \mathcal{O}_{2}) $ is a Polish space when endowed with the topology of pointwise convergence. Similarly, the space \mathrm{Exp}( \mathcal{O}_{2}) $ of conditional expectations defined on \mathcal{O}_{2}$ is a Polish space when endowed with the topology of pointwise convergence. (This can be seen for instance by observing that conditional expectations onto a given C-subalgebra are precisely the idempotent maps of norm $1$ mapping onto that C-subalgebra \cite[Theorem II.6.10.2]{blackadar_operator_2006}.) The space $G$\textrm{-}$\mathrm{C}^{\ast }\mathrm{ALG}$ of pairs $(E,\rho )$ arising from a continuous action of $G$ on the image of $E$, is a $G_{\delta }$ subset of the space $\mathrm{Exp}(\mathcal{O}_{2})\times \mathrm{CPC} \mathcal{O}_{2})$, hence a Polish space with the induced topology; see \cite Theorem 3.11]{kechris_classical_1995}. We will regard $G$\textrm{-}$\mathrm{ }^{\ast }\mathrm{ALG}$ as the Polish space of separable nuclear $G -C-algebras. For an element $(E,\rho)\in G$\textrm{-}$\mathrm{C}^{\ast \mathrm{ALG}$, we write $C^{\ast }(E,\rho)$ for the associated $G -C-algebra. It is easy to see, by induction on the complexity, that any $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\text{C}}$-formula $\varphi (x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n},\gamma _{1},\ldots ,\gamma _{m})$ induces a Borel map $\hat{\varphi}\colon G\text{\emph{-} \mathrm{C}^{\ast }\mathrm{ALG}\times \mathcal{O}_{2}^{n}\times G^{m}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ given by \begin{equation} ((E,\rho ),(a_{1},\ldots ,a_{n}),(g_{1},\ldots ,g_{m}))\mapsto \varphi ^{C^{\ast }(E,\rho )}(E(a_{1}),\ldots ,E(a_{n}),g_{1},\ldots ,g_{m}). \end{equation In other words, the $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-theory of a separable nuclear $G$-C-algebra can be computed in a Borel fashion in the parameterization $G$\textrm{-}$\mathrm{C}^{\ast }\mathrm{ALG}$ of $G -C-algebras. This allows one to conclude the following. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:smooth-classification} Separable nuclear $G$-C-algebras are smoothly classifiable, in the sense of Borel complexity, up to weak \mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}}$-equivalence and positive weak $\mathcal{L}_{G}^ \text{C}}$-equivalence. \end{theorem} An introduction to the theory of Borel complexity of equivalence relations can be found in \cite{gao_invariant_2009}. Similar conclusions hold for unital C-algebras and (positive) weak $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}} -equivalence. \subsection{Strongly self-absorbing \texorpdfstring{$G$}{G}-C-algebras} We continue to fix a compact group $G$. Let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras and let $\eta _{1},\eta _{2}\colon A\rightarrow B$ be unital $G$--homomorphisms. By $\mathcal{M}(B)$ we denote the multiplier algebra of $B$, which is endowed with a canonical \emph{strictly continuous }$G$-action. Then $\eta _{1}$ and $\eta _{2}$ are said to be $G$-\emph{unitarily equivalent }if there exists a unitary element $u$ in $\mathcal{M}(B)^G$ such that $\mathrm{Ad (u)\circ \eta _{1}=\eta _{2}$. Similarly, we say that $\eta _{1}$ and $\eta _{2}$ are \emph{approximately }$G$-\emph{unitarily equivalent }if there exists a net $(u_{i})_{i\in I}$ of unitaries in $\mathcal{M}(B)^G$ such that $ \mathrm{Ad}(u_{i})\circ \eta _{1})_{i\in I}$ converges pointwise to $\eta _{2}$ \begin{definition} The $G$-C-algebras $(A,\alpha)$ and $(B,\beta)$ are said to be: \begin{enumerate}\item \emph{conjugate (or $G$-isomorphic)}, if there exists an isomorphism $\eta\colon A\to B$ satisfying $\eta\circ\alpha_g=\beta_g\circ \eta$ for every $g\in G$; \emph{cocycle conjugate }if there exists a strictly continuous map $v\colon G\rightarrow U(\mathcal{M}(A))$ satisfying v_{gh}=v_{g}g^{B}v_{h}$ such that the action $g\mapsto \mathrm{Ad}(v_g)\circ\beta_g$ is conjugate to $\alpha$. \end{enumerate} We say that $A$ is $G$-\emph{equivariantly} $B$-\emph{absorbing }if $A\otimes B$ is cocycle conjugate to $B$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} A\emph{\ }$G$-C-algebra $D$ is said to have\emph{\ approximately }$G$-\emph inner half-flip,} if it is unital and the canonical $G$-equivariant injective unital -homomorphisms $\mathrm{id}_{D}\otimes 1_{D},1_{D}\otimes \mathrm{id}_{D}\colon D\rightarrow D\otimes D$ are approximately $G -unitarily equivalent. A\emph{\ }$G$-C-algebra $D$ is said to be a \emph strongly} \emph{self absorbing} $G$-C-algebra if it is unital and $\mathrm id}_{D}\otimes 1_{D}$ is approximately $G$-unitarily equivalent to a $G -equivariant -isomorphism. \end{definition} Observe that if $D$ has approximately $G$-inner half-flip, then it has approximately inner half-flip as a C-algebra. Similarly, if $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra, then $D$ is strongly self-absorbing as a C-algebra. Recall that any unital C-algebra $D$ with approximately inner half-flip is automatically simple, nuclear, and has at most one trace; see \cite{effros_c-algebras_1978}. The following remark will be used repeatedly and without further reference. \begin{remark}\label{rem:CocConjSSA} Suppose $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra, and let $A$ be a separable $G$-C-algebra. Then $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing if and only if $A\otimes D$ is \emph{conjugate} to $A$; see \cite[Theorem~4.7 and Proposition 4.8]{szabo_strongly_2015}. Thus, when working with strongly self-absorbing actions, we will mostly use conjugacy as the relevant equivalence relation, keeping in mind that it is equivalent to cocycle conjugacy. \end{remark} The proof of the following theorem follows closely arguments from \cite{farah_relative_2015}. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:commutant}Suppose that $D$ is a separable $G$-C-algebra with approximately $G$-inner half-flip, and that $C$ is a countably positively quantifier-free\ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}} -saturated unital $G$-C-algebra. Suppose that $D$ is commutant weakly contained in $C$. Fix a $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism $\theta \colon D\rightarrow C$. The following statements hold: \begin{enumerate} \item Any two $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphisms $D\to C$ are $G -unitarily equivalent; \item The inclusion $\theta (D) ^{\prime }\cap C\hookrightarrow C$ is an \mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-existential $G -equivariant unital -homomorphism; \item $\theta (D) ^{\prime }\cap C$ is an elementary $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{ \text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-substructure of $C$; \item If $C$ has density character $\aleph _{1}$, then the inclusion $\theta (D) ^{\prime }\cap C\hookrightarrow C$ is approximately $G$-unitarily equivalent to a $G$-isomorphism. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $\theta _{1}\colon D\rightarrow C$ be a $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism. Assume first that the ranges of $\theta $ and $\theta _{1}$ commute. Choose a sequence $(u_{n})_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ of unitaries in D\otimes D$ witnessing the fact that $\mathrm{id}_{D}\otimes 1_{D},1_{D}\otimes \mathrm{id}_{D}\colon D\rightarrow D\otimes D$ are approximately $G$-unitarily equivalent. Let $\Theta \colon D\otimes D\rightarrow C$ be the $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism given by d_{1}\otimes d_{2}\mapsto \theta (d_{1})\theta _{1}(d_{2})$. Considering the unitaries $\Theta (u_{n})$, for $n\in \mathbb{N}$, and applying the fact that $A$ is countably positively quantifier-free\ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text ,C}}$-saturated, we obtain a unitary $u\in C^{G}$ satisfying $\mathrm{Ad (u)\circ \theta =\theta _{1}$. In the general case, when the ranges of \theta $ and $\theta _{1}$ do not necessarily commute, we may find a unital G$-equivariant -homomorphism $\theta _{2}\colon D\rightarrow C$ whose range commutes with those of $\theta $ and $\theta _{1}$. By the argument above, it follows that $\theta _{2}$ is $G$-unitarily equivalent to both $\theta $ and $\theta _{1}$, so (1) follows. We prove (2) and (3) simultaneously. Let us identify $D$ with its image under $\theta $. Suppose that $\overline{a}$ is a tuple in $D^{\prime }\cap C $, $\overline{b}$ is a tuple in $C$, and $\varphi (\overline{x},\overline{ }) $ is an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-formula. Let $B$ be the $G -C-algebra generated by $D\cup \left\{ \overline{a},\overline{b}\right\} $ inside $C$. Observe that $B^{\prime }\cap C$ satisfies the same assumptions as $C$. Particularly, by (1) there exists a unitary $u\in B^{\prime }\cap C$ such that $g^{C}u=u$ for every $g\in G$ and $u^{\ast }\overline{b}u\in D^{\prime }\cap C$. Hence we have $\varphi ^{C}(\overline{a},\overline{b )=\varphi ^{D^{\prime }\cap C}(\overline{a},u^{\ast }\overline{b}u)$, as desired. The argument above shows that for any separable $G$-C-subalgebra $B$ of $C$ and finite tuple $\overline{b}$ in $C$ there exists a unitary $u$ in the fixed point algebra of $C$ such that $u\in B^{\prime }\cap C$ and $u^{\ast \overline{b}u\in D^{\prime }\cap C$. One can then apply the intertwining argument of~\cite[Theorem~2.11]{farah_relative_2015} to get (4). \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:commutant}Suppose that $D$ is a separable $G$-C-algebra with approximately $G$-inner half-flip, and $\mathcal{F}$ is a countably incomplete filter. Let $A$ be a separable unital $G$-C-algebra, and let \theta \colon D\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ be a $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item Any $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism $D\rightarrow \prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is $G$-unitarily equivalent to $\theta $; \item The inclusion $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F }^{G}A\hookrightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{ \text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-existential $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism; \item $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is an elementary \mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-substructure of \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$; \item If $\mathcal{F}$ is a filter over $\mathbb{N}$ and the Continuum Hypothesis holds, then $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is $G$-equivariantly -isomorphic to $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} \begin{remark} Theorem \ref{Theorem:commutant} and Corollary \ref{Corollary:commutant} generalize \cite[Theorem 1, Theorem 2, Corollary 2.12]{farah_relative_2015} in two ways: they extend them to the $G$-equivariant setting, and they remove the unnecessary assumption on the filter $\mathcal{F}$ that the corresponding reduced product be countably saturated. An example of a countable incomplete filter over $\mathbb{N}$ that does not satisfy such an assumption is provided in \cite[Example 3.2]{farah_relative_2015}. \end{remark} Suppose now that $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra. Observe that for any separable $G$-C-algebra $A$ and any countably incomplete filter $\mathcal{F}$, the following assertions are equivalent: \begin{enumerate} \item $D$ is commutant weakly contained in $A$ \item $D$ is positively commutant weakly contained in $A$, \item $D$ embeds equivariantly into $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A) $. \item[(4)] $A$ and $A\otimes D$ are (cocycle) conjugate; \item[(5)] $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing; \item[(6)] $D$ is weakly $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}}$-contained in $A$; \item[(7)] $D$ is positively weakly $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,C}} -contained in $A$. \end{enumerate} We deduce the following rigidity result for strongly self-absorbing $G -C-algebras. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:smooth-ssa} Let $D$ and $E$ be strongly self-absorbing $G -C-algebras. The following assertions are equivalent: \begin{enumerate} \item $D$ and $E$ are (cocycle) conjugate; \item $D$ and $E$ are weakly $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm \ast }}}$-equivalent; \item $D$ and $E$ are isomorphic as C-algebras to the same strongly self-absorbing C-algebra $B$, and the $\mathrm{Aut}(B)$-orbits of $D$ and E $ inside the Polish space $\mathrm{Act}_{G}(B)$ of continuous actions of G $ on $B$ have the same closure. \end{enumerate} In particular, the classification of strongly self-absorbing $G -C-algebras up to (cocycle) conjugacy is smooth. \end{proposition} The equivalence of (2) and (3) in Proposition \ref{Proposition:smooth-ssa} is due to the fact that if $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, then any injective -homomorphism $\eta \colon D\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{U}}D , where $\mathcal{U}$ is an ultrafilter over $\mathbb{N}$, admits a lift (\eta _{n})_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ consisting of automorphisms of $D$. Proposition \ref{Proposition:smooth-ssa} can be seen as the equivariant analogue of \cite[Theorem 2.16, Corollary 2.17]{farah_relative_2015}. We would like to remark, however, that Proposition \ref{Proposition:smooth-ssa} is in principle somewhat more surprising than its nonequivariant counterpart. Indeed, while there are only very few known strongly self-absorbing C-algebras (and it is indeed currently known to be complete under additional regularity assumptions on the algebra), there seem to exist a greater variety of strongly self-absorbing actions on C-algebras. For instance, for a fixed compact group $G$ and a fixed strongly self-absorbing C-algebra $D$, there may exist multiple (non cocycle equivalent) strongly self-absorbing actions on $D$. In fact, a complete list of all strongly self-absorbing actions is at the moment far out of reach. The following consequence of Corollary \ref{Corollary:commutant} seems worth isolating. \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:ssa} Let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra, let $A$ be a separable unital $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing $G -C-algebra, let $\mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete filter, let $\theta \colon D\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ be a $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{ }\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-embedding. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item Any two $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphisms of $D$ into $\prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ are $G$-unitarily equivalent; \item The inclusion $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F }^{G}A\hookrightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is an $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{ \text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-existential $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism; \item $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is a $G -elementary substructure of $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$; \item If $\mathcal{F}$ is a filter over $\mathbb{N}$ and the Continuum Hypothesis holds, then $\theta (D)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ is $G$-equivariantly -isomorphic to $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} Using the results above, one can provide the following model-theoretic characterization of strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebras, which in the nonequivariant setting is \cite[Theorem 2.14]{farah_relative_2015}. (Recall that when $G$ is compact, the notions of strongly self-absorbing $G -C-algebra and strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra coincide.) \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:characterization-ssa} Let $D$ be a separable unital $G -C-algebra, and let $\mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete filter. Then $D$ is a strongly self absorbing $G$-C-algebra if and only if $D$ is weakly \mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm{\ast }}}$-equivalent to D\otimes D$, and all the $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphisms D\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}D$ are $G$-unitarily equivalent. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The \textquotedblleft only if\textquotedblright\ implication is a consequence of the fact that $D$ is $G$-strongly cocycle conjugate to D\otimes D$, and part~(1) of Theorem~\ref{Theorem:commutant}. We prove the converse. Since $D$ is weakly $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{1\text{,}\mathrm{C}^{\mathrm \ast }}}$-equivalent to $D\otimes D$, we deduce that $D\otimes D$ is a $G -elementary substructure of $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}D$, say via an embedding $\rho $. In particular, the $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphisms $\rho _{1},\rho _{2}\colon D\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}D$, given by $\rho _{1}(d)=\rho (d\otimes 1_{D})$ and $\rho _{2}(d)=\rho (1_{D}\otimes d)$, for $d\in D$, are $G$-unitarily equivalent. It follows that $D$ has approximately $G$-inner half-flip. The conclusion now follows from the implication (ii)$\Rightarrow $(i) in \cite[Theorem 4.6]{szabo_strongly_2015}. \end{proof} \subsection{Limiting examples} We have shown in Proposition \ref{Proposition:smooth-ssa} that, for any second countable locally compact group $G$, the classification problem for strongly self-absorbing $G$-actions on C-algebras is smooth in the sense of Borel complexity theory. In this subsection, we observe that the same is not true for the broader class of $G$-actions with approximately $G$-inner half-flip, even if one only considers actions of $\mathbb{Z}_{2}:=\mathbb{Z /2\mathbb{Z}$ on the C-algebra $\mathcal{O}_{2}$. The notion of complete analytic set can be found in \cite[Section 22.9]{kechris_classical_1995}. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:nonclassification}The relations of conjugacy and cocycle conjugacy for approximately representable $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$-actions on \mathcal{O}_{2}$ with Rokhlin dimension $1$ and approximately $\mathbb{Z _{2} $-inner half-flip are complete analytic sets. Furthermore, the classification problem for such actions, up to conjugacy or cocycle conjugacy, is strictly more complicated than the classification problem for any class of countable structures with Borel isomorphism relation. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Recall that in \cite{izumi_finite_2004} Izumi constructed an action $\nu $ of $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ whose crossed product $D=\mathcal{O _{2}\rtimes _{\nu }\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ is a Kichrberg algebra satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, with trivial $K_{1}$-group, $K_{0}$-group isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}\left[ \frac{1}{2}\right] $, and zero element of K_{0}( D) $ corresponding to the unit of $D$; see \cite[Lemma 4.7 {izumi_finite_2004}. Such an action was used in \cite{gardella_conjugacy_2016} to prove that the relations of conjugacy and cocycle conjugacy of $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$-actions on \mathcal{O}_{2}$ are complete analytic sets, when regarded as subsets of \mathrm{Act}_{\mathbb{Z}_{2}}(\mathcal{O}_{2})\times \mathrm{Act}_{\mathbb{Z _{2}}(\mathcal{O}_{2})$. Precisely, it is proved in \cit {gardella_conjugacy_2016}, relying on a construction of R\o rdam from \cit {rordam_classification_1995}, that there exists a Borel map assigning to each uniquely $2$-divisible torsion-free countable abelian group $\Gamma $ a Kirchberg algebra $A_{\Gamma }$ satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, with trivial $K_{1}$-group, $K_{0}$-group isomorphic to $\Gamma $, and zero element of $K_{0}(A_{\Gamma })$ corresponding to the unit of A_{\Gamma }$. Denote by $\iota _{A_{\Gamma }}$ the trivial $\mathbb{Z}_{2} -action on $A_{\Gamma }$. Then the function $\Gamma \mapsto \alpha _{\Gamma }:=\nu \otimes \iota _{A_{\Gamma }}$ provides a Borel reduction from the relation $E$ of isomorphism of uniquely $2$-divisible torsion-free countable abelian groups to the relations of conjugacy and cocycle conjugacy of \mathbb{Z}_{2}$-actions on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$. It is furthermore shown in \cite{gardella_conjugacy_2016}, modifying an argument of Hjorth from \cit {hjorth_isomorphism_2002}, that $E$ is a complete analytic set. Furthermore, if $F$ is the relation of isomorphism within a class of countable structures, and if $F$ is Borel, then $F$ is Borel reducible to $E$ (but not vice versa). It was furthermore observed in \cite{gardella_conjugacy_2016} that, for any uniquely $2$-divisible torsion-free countable abelian group \Gamma $, the action $\alpha _{\Gamma }$ has Rokhlin dimension $1$, and is approximately representable. We claim that $\alpha _{\Gamma }$ has approximately $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$-inner half-flip. To see this, it is enough to observe that the $\mathbb{Z}_{2} -action $\nu $ on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ (corresponding to the case when $\Gamma $ is trivial) is strongly self-absorbing. This follows from the fact that $\nu $ is constructed as the infinite tensor product $\bigotimes_{n\in \mathbb{N} \mathrm{Ad}( u) $, where $u$ is a unitary element of $\mathcal{O}_{\infty }^ \mathrm{st}}$, using the identification $\mathcal{O}_{2}\cong \bigotimes_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\mathcal{O}_{\infty }^{\mathrm{st}}$; see \cite Section 4]{izumi_finite_2004}. Since $\mathcal{O}_{\infty }^{\mathrm{st}}$ is a C-algebra with approximately inner half-flip, one can deduce from \cit [Proposition 5.3]{szabo_strongly_2016} that $\nu $ is strongly self-absorbing. Since $\alpha_\Gamma$ is the tensor product of a strongly self-absorbing action (namely, $\nu$) with an action with approximately \mathbb{Z}_2$-inner half-flip (namely, $\iota_{A_\Gamma}$), it follows that \alpha_\Gamma$ has approximately $\mathbb{Z}_2$-inner half-flip. This proves the claim. Using these observations, and considering the fact that the set of $\mathbb{ }_{2}$-actions on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ with approximately $\mathbb{Z}_{2} -inner half-flip is analytic, the result follows. \end{proof} Clearly, similar conclusions hold for $G$-actions on $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ for any countable discrete group $G$ with a quotient of order $2$, such as the group of integers. This can be seen by regarding a $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$-action as a $G$-action in the canonical way. \section{Order zero dimension and Rokhlin dimension\label{Section:oz}} \subsection{Order zero dimension\label{Subsection:oz}} The notion of positive weak $\mathcal{L}$-containment between $\mathcal{L} -morphisms can be defined in the general setting of logic for metric structures; see Subsection \ref{Subsection:existential-embedding}. For $G -C-algebras, one has the following: a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism \theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is positively weakly $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C }}$-contained in another $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $f\colon A\rightarrow C$ if for any separable subalgebras $A_{0}\subset A$ and B_{0}\subset B$ such that $\theta (A_{0})\subset B_{0}$, and for some (equivalently, any) countably incomplete filter $\mathcal{F}$, there exists a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $\gamma \colon B_{0}\rightarrow \prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}C$ such that $(\gamma \circ \theta )\|_{A_{0}}=(\Delta _{C}\circ f)\|_{A_{0}}$, where $\Delta _{C}\colon C\rightarrow \prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}C$ is the diagonal -homomorphism. Various equivalent formulations of this notion can be found in Subsection \re {Subsection:existential-embedding}. We now present natural generalizations of positive weak $\mathcal{L}_{G}^ \text{C}}$-containment where instead of a single -ho\-momorphism one considers a tuple of completely positive contractive order zero maps. Whenever $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism, we will regard $B$ as a $G$-equivariant $A$-bimodule, as defined in Subsection \ref{Subsection:bimodules}. \begin{definition} \label{Definition:d-containment} Let $A$, $B$, and $C$ be $G$-C-algebras, and let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ and $f\colon A\rightarrow C$ be $G -equivariant -homomorphisms. We say that $\theta $ is \emph{$G -equivariantly $d$-contained} in $f$ if for any separable $G$-C-subalgebras $A_{0}\subset A$ and $B_{0}\subset B$ such that $\theta (A_{0})\subset B_{0} , and for some (equivalently, any) countably incomplete filter $\mathcal{F} , there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A -bimodule maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon B_{0}\rightarrow \prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}C$ whose sum $\psi =\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d}$ is contractive and such that $( \psi \circ \theta ) \|_{A_{0}}=( \Delta _{C}\circ f) \|_{A_{0}}$. \end{definition} The notion of $G$-equivariant $d$-containment from Definition \re {Definition:d-containment} admits a natural syntactic reformulation: $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is $G$-equivariantly $d$-contained in $f\colon A\rightarrow C$ if and only if for any tuples $\overline{a}$ in $A$, \overline{b}$ in $B$, and for any tuple $\overline{w}$ of elements of a finite dimensional C-algebra, for any positive quantifier-free\ $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\mathrm{oz,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas $\varphi (\overline{z},\overline{y}) , for any positive quantifier-free\ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{osos}\text{,} \text{-}A}$-formulas $\psi (\overline{x},\overline{z},\overline{y})$, where the variables $\overline{z}$ have finite-dimensional C-algebras as sorts, and for any $\varepsilon >0$, there exist tuples $\overline{c}_{0},\ldots \overline{c}_{d}$ in $C$ such that the following are satisfied for $j=0,\ldots ,d$ \begin{equation} \psi (f(\overline{a}),\overline{w},\overline{c}_{0}+\ldots +\overline{c _{d})\leq \psi (\theta (\overline{a}),\overline{w},\overline{b})+\varepsilon \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \varphi (\overline{w},\overline{c}_{j})\leq \varphi (\overline{w},\overline{ })+\varepsilon. \end{equation \begin{remark} \label{Remark:oz-nuclear}When $B$ is nuclear, in the syntactic characterization of $d$-containment, one can replace $\mathcal{L}_{G}^ \mathrm{osos}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas with $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm osos}\text{-}\mathrm{nuc}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas, and $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\mathrm{oz}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas with $\mathcal{L}_{G}^ \mathrm{oz}\text{-}\mathrm{nuc}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas. This follows from the characterization of $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{osos}\text{-}\mathrm nuc}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-morphisms from Lemma \ref{Lemma:completely positive contractive-morphism}. \end{remark} \begin{definition} \label{Definition:oz-dimension}The $G$\emph{-equivariant order zero dimension }$\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )$ of a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is the smallest integer $d\geq 0$ such that $\theta $ is $G$-equivariantly $d$-contained in the identity map $\mathrm{id}_{A}\colon A\rightarrow A$. If no such $d$ exists, we set \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )=\infty $. \end{definition} The proof of the following is an easy consequence of the syntactic characterization of $G$-equivariant $d$-containment. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:propertiesOzDim} Let $\Lambda $ be a directed set. \begin{enumerate} \item Let $\theta _{0}\colon A\rightarrow B$ and $\theta _{1}\colon B\rightarrow C$ be $G$-equivariant -homomorphisms between $G$-C-algebras. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta _{1}\circ \theta _{0})+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm oz}}^{G}(\theta _{1})+1)(\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta _{0})+1); \end{equation} \item Let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ be a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism, and let $C$ be a $G$-C-algebra. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta \otimes \mathrm{id}_{C})\leq \dim _{\mathrm{o }}^{G}(\theta ); \end{equation} \item Let $(\{A_{\lambda }\}_{\lambda \in \Lambda },\{\theta _{\lambda ,\mu }\}_{\lambda ,\mu \in \Lambda ,\lambda <\mu })$ be a direct system of $G -C-algebras (with $G$-equivariant -homomorphisms). For $\lambda \in \Lambda $, denote by \begin{equation} \theta _{\lambda ,\infty }\colon A_{\lambda }\rightarrow \varinjlim A_{\mu } \end{equation} denote the canonical equivariant -homomorphism. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta _{\lambda ,\infty })\leq \limsup_{\mu \in \Lambda }\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta _{\lambda ,\mu }). \end{equation} \item For $j=0,1$, let $(\{A_{\lambda }^{(j)}\}_{\lambda \in \Lambda },\{\theta _{\lambda \mu }^{(j)}\}_{\lambda ,\mu \in \Lambda ,\lambda <\mu }) $ be a direct system of $G$-C-algebras. Let $\left\{ \eta _{\lambda }\colon A_{\lambda }^{(0)}\rightarrow A_{\lambda }^{(1)}\right\} _{\lambda \in \Lambda }$ be a family of $G$-equivariant -homomorphisms. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\varinjlim_{\lambda \in \Lambda }\eta _{\lambda })\leq \limsup_{\mu \in \Lambda }\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\eta _{\mu }). \end{equation} \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} Let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero map. We recall that by \cite[Proposition~2.3 {gardella_regularity_?}, there is a naturally induced completely positive contractive order zero map $A\rtimes G\rightarrow B\rtimes G$ between the crossed products, which we will denote in the following by $\widehat{\theta } $. If $\theta $ is a -homomorphism, then $\widehat{\theta }$ is a -homomorphism as well. If $\theta $ is an $A$-$A$-bimodule morphism, then \widehat{\theta }$ is an $A$-$A$-bimodule morphism as well. \begin{lemma} \label{Lemma:crossed} Let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras and let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ be a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism. Then $\dim _ \mathrm{oz}}(\widehat{\theta })\leq \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )$ and \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\theta \|_{A^{G}})\leq \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Observe that if $A$ is a $G$-C-algebra and $\mathcal{F}$ is a countably incomplete filter, then there exists a canonical -homomorphism $\left( \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A\right) \rtimes G\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F }^{G}(A\rtimes G)$ in view of the universal property of the full crossed product; see \cite{gardella_compact_2015}. This, together with the remarks above, proves the first assertion. The second assertion can be proved similarly observing that $A^{G}$ is positively quantifier-free $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\text{C}}$-definable. \end{proof} We also consider the following strengthening of the notion of $d -containment. \begin{definition} \label{Definition:d-containment-commuting-towers} Let $A$, $B$, and $C$ be G $-C-algebras of density character less than $\kappa $, and let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ and $f\colon A\rightarrow C$ be $G$-equivariant -homomorphisms. We say that $\theta $ is $G$-equivariantly $d$-contained in $f$ \emph{with commuting towers} if for some (equivalently, any) $\kappa -good filter $\mathcal{F}$, there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A$-bimodule maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon B\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}C$ whose sum $\psi =\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d}$ is contractive, such that $\psi \circ \theta =\Delta _{C}\circ f$ and such that, for every $0\leq i<j\leq d$, the images of $\theta ( A) ^{\prime }\cap B$ under $\psi _{i}$ and $\psi _{j}$ commute. \end{definition} Observe that, in Definition \ref{Definition:d-containment-commuting-towers}, since the $\psi _{i}$'s are assumed to be $A$-bimodule maps, the image of A^{\prime }\cap B$ under $\psi _{i}$ is contained in $f(A)^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}C$. Similarly as $d$-containment, the notion of $G -equivariant $d$-containment with commuting towers from Definition \re {Definition:d-containment-commuting-towers} admits a natural syntactic reformulation: $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is $G$-equivariantly $d -contained in $f\colon A\rightarrow C$ if and only if for any tuples \overline{a}$ in $A$, $\overline{b}$ in $B$, and $\overline{b}^{\prime }\in \theta (A)^{\prime }\cap B$, and for any tuple $\overline{w}$ of elements of a finite dimensional C-algebra, for any positive quantifier-free\ $\mathcal L}_{G}^{\mathrm{oz,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas $\varphi (\overline{z},\overline{y ,\overline{y}^{\prime })$, for any positive quantifier-free\ $\mathcal{L _{G}^{\mathrm{osos}\text{,}A\text{-}A}$-formulas $\psi (\overline{x} \overline{z},\overline{y})$, where the variables $\overline{z}$ have finite-dimensional C-algebras as sorts, and for any $\varepsilon >0$, there exist tuples $\overline{c}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{c}_{d},\overline{c _{0}^{\prime },\ldots ,\overline{c}_{d}^{\prime }$ in $C$ such that $\left[ \overline{c}_{i}^{\prime },\overline{c}_{j}^{\prime }\right] =0$ for $0\leq i<j\leq d$, \begin{equation} \psi (f(\overline{a}),\overline{w},\overline{c}_{0}+\ldots +\overline{c}_{d} \overline{c}_{0}^{\prime }+\ldots +\overline{c}_{d}^{\prime })\leq \psi (\theta (\overline{a}),\overline{w},\overline{b},\overline{b}^{\prime })+\varepsilon \end{equation* an \begin{equation} \varphi (\overline{w},\overline{c}_{j})\leq \varphi (\overline{w},\overline{ },\overline{b}^{\prime })+\varepsilon \ \mbox { for }j=0,\ldots ,d\text{.} \end{equation} \begin{definition} \label{Definition:oz-dimension-commuting-towers}The $G$\emph{-}equivariant order zero dimension\emph{\ with commuting towers }$\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^ \mathrm{c},G}(\theta )$ of a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is the smallest integer $d\geq 0$ such that $\theta $ is $G -equivariantly $d$-contained with commuting towers in the identity map \mathrm{id}_{A}\colon A\rightarrow A$. If no such $d$ exists, we set $\dim _ \mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )=\infty $. \end{definition} \subsection{Commutant \texorpdfstring{$d$}{d}-containment\labe {Subsection:containment}} The notion of commutant positive existential $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}} -theory of a $G$-C-algebra has been introduced in Subsection \re {Subsection:commutant-theory}. In this section, we consider $d$-dimensional generalizations of such a notion. We will regard (not necessarily unital) C-algebras as structures in the Kirchberg language introduced in Subsection \ref{Subsection:general}. This will allow us to formulate a definition applicable in both the unital and the nonunital settings. \begin{definition} \label{Definition:commutant-containment} Let $d\in \mathbb{N}$, and let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras. Fix a cardinal $\kappa $ larger than the density character of $A\ $and $B$. We say that $A$ is \emph{$G$-equivariantly commutant $d$-contained} in $B$, and write $A\precsim _{d}B$, if for some (equivalently, any) countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter $\mathcal{F} , and for any separable unital $G$-C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{F }^{G}(A)$, there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F }^{G}(B)$ with unital sum. We say that $A$ is $G$-\emph{equivariantly commutant} $d$-\emph{contained} in $B$ \emph{with commuting towers}, and write $A\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}B , if one choose the maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$ as above to also have pairwise commuting ranges. \end{definition} Using Proposition \ref{Proposition:F} one can give a syntactic reformulation of Definition \ref{Definition:commutant-containment}, which in particular shows that the choice of the countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter \mathcal{F}$ is irrelevant. When $A,B$ are separable, one can take any countably incomplete filter. It is not difficult to see that if $A\precsim _{d-1}B$ and $B\precsim _{k-1}C$ then $A\precsim _{dk-1}C$. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:containment-ssa}Suppose that a separable unital $G$-C-algebra $A$ admits a $G$-equivariant unital -homomorphism into $A^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ for some (equivalently, any) countably incomplete filter. Then $A$ is $G$-equivariantly commutant $d$-contained (with commuting towers) in $B$ if and only if there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon A\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$ (with commuting ranges) such that $\eta _{0}+\cdots +\eta _{d}$ is unital. In particular, this applies when $A$ is commutative, or when $A$ is strongly self-absorbing; see \cite Theorem 4.6]{szabo_strongly_2015}. \end{remark} Let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra. By \cite[Theorem 4.7 ]{szabo_strongly_2015}, a separable $G$-C-algebra $B$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing if and only if $D$ is commutant $0 -contained in $B$. We will prove in Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption} that this is in turn equivalent to $D$ being commutant $d$-contained with commuting towers in $B$ for any $d\in \mathbb{N}$. \begin{remark} \label{Remark:bootstrap}Let $A$ and $B$ be separable $G$-C-algebras with $A$ $G$-equivariantly commutant $d$-contained (with commuting towers) in $B$. Let $C$ be a separable subalgebra of $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$. It is a consequence of Proposition~\ref{Proposition:F} that there exist completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon A\rightarrow C^{\prime }\cap F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(B)$ (with commuting ranges) such that $\eta _{0}+\cdots +\eta _{d}$ is unital. \end{remark} \subsection{Relationship between order zero dimension and \texorpdfstring{$d$}{d}-containment} The notion of\emph{\ Rokhlin dimension }(with commuting towers) for a $G -C-algebra---see \cite[Definition 1.1]{hirshberg_rokhlin_2015}, \cite Definition 3.2]{gardella_rokhlin_2014}---can be naturally presented in terms of $d$-containment. Precisely, a $G$-C-algebra $A$ has Rokhlin dimension (with commuting towers) at most $d$ if and only if the $G$-C-algebra $C(G)$ endowed with the canonical left translation action $\mathtt{Lt}$ is $G -equivariantly commutant $d$-contained (with commuting towers) in $A$. We will denote by $\mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)$ the Rokhlin dimension of a G $-C-algebra $A$, and by $\mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A)$ the Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers of $A$. We point out that Rokhlin dimension has recently been generalized to $\mathbb{R}$-actions (flows) in \cite{hirshberg_rokhlin_2016}. In Proposition~\ref{Proposition:dimension-implies-containment}, we will observe that there exists a relationship between the notion of $G -equivariant order zero dimension of a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism introduced in Subsection \ref{Subsection:oz}, and the notion of $G -equivariant commutant $d$-containment introduced in Subsection \re {Subsection:containment}. Precisely, if $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ has G $-equivariant order zero dimension (with commuting towers) at most $d$, then $B$ is commutant $d$-contained (with commuting towers) in $A$. \begin{lemma} \label{Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding}Let $C$ be a unital $G -C-algebra, let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras, let $\kappa $ be a cardinal larger than the density character of $A$ and $C$, and let $\mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter. Suppose that $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism, and let $1_{C}\otimes \theta \colon A\rightarrow C\otimes _{\max }B$ be the map $a\mapsto 1_{C}\otimes \theta (a)$. If $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(1_C\otimes \theta )\leq d<+\infty $, then there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ such that $\sum_{j=0}^{d}\eta _{j}$ is unital. The converse holds if $A=B$ and $\theta \colon A\rightarrow A$ is the identity. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Observe that $\theta $ is necessarily injective. We can therefore identify A $ with its image under $\theta $ inside $B$. Let $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon C\otimes _{\max }B\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$ be $G -equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A$-bimodule maps witnessing the fact that $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(1_{C}\otimes \theta )\leq d $. Fix $c_{0}=1,c_{1},\ldots ,c_{n}\in C$. Let $t(\overline{x})$ be a positive quantifier-free $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{oz}}$-type that is realized by $(c_{0},\ldots ,c_{n})$ in $C$. Consider the corresponding multiplier $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-type $t_{A}^{\mathrm{m}}$ defined as in Subsection \ref{Subsection:Kirchberg}. Let $t_{A}^{\mathrm{c}}(\overline{x})$ be the commutant type associated with $A$, and consider the $\mathcal{L _{G}^{K}(A)$-type $q_{A}(\overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d})$ consisting of conditions $\varphi (\overline{y}_{j})\leq r$ for any condition $\varphi (\overline{x})\leq r$ in $t_{A}^{\mathrm{m}}(\overline{x )\cup t_{A}^{\mathrm{c}}(\overline{x})$ and $j=0,1,\ldots ,d$, and \left\Vert a(y_{0,0}+\cdots +y_{0,d})-a\right\Vert =0$ for every $a\in A$. Fix an approximate unit $(a_{\lambda })_{\lambda \in \Lambda }$ for $A$. Considering the tuple $\overline{b}:=(c_{0}\otimes a_{\lambda },\ldots ,c_{n}\otimes a_{\lambda })$ in $C\otimes _{\max }B$, for large enough \lambda $, we conclude that the type $t_{A}^{\mathrm{m}}(\overline{x})\cup t_{A}^{\mathrm{c}}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $C\otimes _{\max }B$. Recall that, by definition of $G$-equivariant order zero dimension, $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}$ are completely contractive order zero $A$-bimodule maps with contractive sums such that $(\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d})\|_{A}$ is the canonical diagonal $G$-equivariant $\ast -homomorphism $A\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$. Therefore, by \L os' theorem, considering the elements $\psi _{0}(\overline{b}),\ldots ,\psi _{d} \overline{b})$ shows that the type $q_{A}(\overline{x})$ is approximately realized in $A$. The conclusion follows from quantifier-free positive \mathcal{L}_{G}^{K}(A)$-saturation of $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$; see Proposition \ref{Proposition:F}. Conversely, suppose that $A=B$, that $\theta \colon A\rightarrow A$ is the identity map $\mathrm{id}_{A}$ of $A$, and that there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ such that $\eta _{0}+\cdots +\eta _{d}$ is unital. Then the function $F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)\times A\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$, given by $([a_{i}]_{i\in I},b)\mapsto \lbrack a_{i}b]_{i\in I}$, induces a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $\Psi \colon F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)\otimes _{\max }A\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}A$, by the universal property of the maximal tensor product. One can then define $\psi _{j}=\Psi \circ (\eta _{j}\otimes \mathrm{id}_{A})\colon C\otimes _{\max }A\rightarrow \prod_ \mathcal{F}}^{G}A$, for $j=0,\ldots ,d$. These are well defined $G -equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A$-bimodule maps, which witness that $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )\leq d$. \end{proof} Recall that, if $A$ is a C-algebra and $C$ is a unital C-algebra, then the relative commutant of $1_{C}\otimes A$ inside $C\otimes _{\max }A$ is equal to $C\otimes Z(A) $, where $Z(A) $ is the center of $A$; see \cite[Theorem 4 {archbold_centre_1975}. Using this fact, the same proof as Lemma \re {Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding} shows the following. \begin{lemma} \label{Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding-commuting-towers}Let $C$ be a unital $G$-C-algebra, let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras, let $\kappa $ be a cardinal larger than the density character of $A$ and $C$, and let \mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete $\kappa $-good filter. Suppose that \theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism, and let 1_{C}\otimes \theta \colon A\rightarrow C\otimes _{\max }B$ be the map a\mapsto 1_{C}\otimes \theta (a)$. If $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{\text{c ,G}(1_C\otimes \theta )\leq d<+\infty $, then there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ with commuting ranges such that $\eta _{0}+\cdots +\eta _{d}$ is unital. The converse holds if $A=B$ and $\theta \colon A\rightarrow A$ is the identity map. \end{lemma} When $C=C(G)$, we deduce the following: \begin{lemma} \label{Lemma:rokhlin-and-oz} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra. Denote by $\theta \colon A\rightarrow C(G)\otimes A$ the second factor embedding. Then $\dim _ \mathrm{Rok}}(A)=\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )$ and $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }^{\mathrm{c}}(A)=\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{\mathrm{c},G}(\theta )$. \end{lemma} \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:dimension-implies-containment}Suppose that $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism. If $\dim _{\mathrm \mathrm{oz}}}^{G}(\theta )\leq d$, then $B\precsim _{d}A$. If $\dim _ \mathrm{oz}}^{\mathrm{c},G}( \theta ) \leq d$, then $B\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm c}}A$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Fix a countably incomplete filter $\mathcal{F}$. Suppose that $\dim _ \mathrm{\mathrm{oz}}}^{G}(\theta )\leq d$. Fix a separable unital $G -C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{F}}(B)$. Then by Lemma \re {Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding} the second factor embedding 1_{C}\otimes \mathrm{id}_{B}\colon B\rightarrow C\otimes _{\max }B$ has order zero dimension equal to zero. By Proposition \ref{prop:propertiesOzDim (2), the $G$-equivariant -homomorphism $(1_{C}\otimes \mathrm{id}_{B})\circ \theta \colon A\rightarrow C\otimes _{\max }B$ has order zero dimension at most $d$. Therefore by Lemma \ref{Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding} again there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ such that $\eta _{0}+\cdots +\eta _{d}$ is unital. By Lemma~\re {Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding}, this concludes the proof. The second assertion can be proved in the same way, by replacing Lemma \re {Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding} with Lemma \re {Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding-commuting-towers}. \end{proof} \subsection{Dimension functions\label{Subsection:dimension}} By a \emph{dimension function} for (nuclear) $G$-C-algebras we mean a function from the class of (nuclear) C-algebras to $\left\{ 0,1,2,\ldots ,\infty \right\} $. \begin{definition} \label{Definition:AE}A dimension function $\dim $ for $G$-C-algebras is said to be \emph{positively $\forall \exists $-axiomatizable} if there exists a collection $\mathcal{F}$ of formulas $\xi ( \overline{x},\overline{ }_{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d},\overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d}) $ of the for \begin{equation} \max \left\{ \eta ( \overline{x},\overline{z}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d}) ,\varphi _{0}( \overline{z}_{0},\overline{y}_{0}) ,\ldots ,\varphi _{d} \overline{z}_{d},\overline{y}_{d}),\psi ( \overline{x},\overline{z _{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d},\overline{y}_{0}+\cdots +\overline{y}_{d}) \right\}, \end{equation where \begin{enumerate} \item $\overline{z}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d}$ have finite-dimensional C-algebras as sorts, \item $\eta $ is a positive quantifier-free \ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C}} -formula, \item $\varphi $ is a positive quantifier-free \ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{o }}$-formula, \item $\psi $ is a positive quantifier-free \ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{osos }$-formula, \end{enumerate} such that the following holds: for a $G$-C-algebra $A$, $\dim (A)\leq d$ if and only i \begin{equation} A\models \sup\limits_{\overline{x}}\inf\limits_{\overline{z}_{0}}\cdots \inf\limits_{\overline{z}_{d}}\inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{0}}\cdots \inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{d}}\xi (\overline{x},\overline{z}_{0},\ldots \overline{z}_{d},\overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d})=0\text{.} \end{equation} \end{definition} \begin{definition} A dimension function for \emph{nuclear }$G$-C-algebras is said to be \emph nuclearly }positively $\forall \exists $-axiomatizable if in Definition \re {Definition:AE} we can simultaneously choose $\varphi $ and $\psi $ to be positive quantifier-free formulas in $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{oz}\text{- \mathrm{nuc}}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\text{C-}\mathrm{nuc}}$, respectively. \end{definition} \begin{example} \label{eg:NDimDr} The following are positively $\forall \exists -axiomatizable dimension functions for nuclear C-algebras: \begin{enumerate} \item Nuclear dimension. Indeed, one can consider variables $( \overline{z _{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d}) $ with sorts finite-dimensional C-algebras F_{0},\ldots ,F_{d}$ and then the formulas \begin{itemize} \item $\eta (\overline{x},\overline{z}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d})\equiv \max\limits_{j=0,\ldots ,d}\inf\limits_{s\in \mathrm{CPC}(A,F_{j})}\ma \limits_{k}\left\Vert s(x_{k})-z_{j,k}\right\Vert $; \item $\varphi _{j}(\overline{y}_{j},\overline{z}_{j})\equiv \inf\limits_{t\in \mathrm{CPC}(F_{j},A)}\max\limits_{k}\left\Vert t(z_{j,k})-y_{j,k}\right\Vert $, for a fixed $j=0,\ldots ,d$; \item $\psi (\overline{x},\overline{z}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{z}_{d} \overline{y})\equiv \max\nolimits_{k}\left\Vert x_{k}-y_{k}\right\Vert $. \end{itemize} \item Decomposition rank. In fact, one may just consider the same formulas \eta $ and $\psi $ as in (1), together with \begin{equation} \varphi _{j}(\overline{z}_{j},\overline{y}_{j})\equiv \inf\limits_{t\in \mathrm{CPC}(F_{j},A)}\max\limits_{k}\left\Vert t(z_{j,k})-y_{j,k}\right\Vert ,\ \mbox{ for }j=0,\ldots ,d. \end{equation} \end{enumerate} \end{example} If $\overline{x},\overline{y}$ are $n$-tuples of variables, we write $\delta (\overline{x},\overline{y})$ for the formula \begin{equation} \max\limits_{1\leq j,k\leq n}\left\Vert x_{j}y_{k}-y_{k}x_{j}\right\Vert \text{.} \end{equation} \begin{definition} \label{Definition:existentially-axiomatizable} A dimension function dim for (separable) $G$-C-algebras is said to be \emph{\ commutant positively existentially axiomatizable} if there exists a collection $\mathcal{F}$ of formulas $\xi (\overline{x},\overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d})$ of the for \begin{equation} \max_{\substack{ 0\leq j<k\leq d \\ 1\leq \ell \leq n}}\{\delta (\overline{ },\overline{y}_{j}),\varphi (\overline{y}_{j}),\left\Vert x_{\ell }(y_{0,j}+\cdots +y_{d,j})-x_{\ell }\right\Vert \}, \end{equation where $\varphi $ is a quantifier-free\ positive $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{oz }$-formula with parameters from finite-dimensional C-algebras, such that the following hods: for a (separable) $G$-C-algebra $A$, one has $\dim (A)\leq d$ if and only i \begin{equation} A\models \sup\limits_{\overline{x}}\inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{0}}\cdots \inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{d}}\xi (\overline{x},\overline{y}_{0},\ldots \overline{y}_{d})=0\text{.} \end{equation} \end{definition} \begin{definition} \label{Definition:commutant-commuting}Suppose that $\dim $ is a dimension function for (separable) $G$-C-algebras. We say that $\dim $ is\emph{\ commutant positively existentially axiomatizable with commuting towers} if there exists a collection $\mathcal{F}$ of formulas $\xi (\overline{x} \overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d})$ of the for \begin{equation} \max_{\substack{ 0\leq j<k\leq d \\ 1\leq \ell \leq n}}\{\delta (\overline{ },\overline{y}_{j}),\delta (\overline{y}_{j},\overline{y}_{k}),\varphi \overline{z}_{j},\overline{y}_{j}),\left\Vert x_{\ell }(y_{0,j}+\cdots +y_{d,j})-x_{\ell }\right\Vert \} \end{equation* where $\varphi $ is a positive quantifier-free \ $\mathcal{L}_{G}^{\mathrm{o }}$-formula with parameters from finite-dimensional C-algebras, such that the following hods: for a (separable) $G$-C-algebra $A$, one has $\dim (A)\leq d$ if and only i \begin{equation} A\models \sup\limits_{\overline{x}}\inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{0}}\cdots \inf\limits_{\overline{y}_{d}}\xi (\overline{x},\overline{z}_{0},\ldots \overline{z}_{d},\overline{y}_{0},\ldots ,\overline{y}_{d})=0\text{.} \end{equation} \end{definition} \begin{example} \label{Example:dim-Rok}Suppose that $C$ is a fixed $G$-C-algebra. Set $\dim ( A) \leq d$ if and only if $C$ is commutant $d$-contained in $C$ (with commuting towers). Then $\dim $ is a dimension function for $G$-C-algebras that is commutant positively existentially axiomatizable (with commuting towers). In the particular case when $C$ is the $G$-C-algebra $C(G)$ endowed with the canonical shift action of $G$, this says that Rokhlin dimension (with commuting towers) is a commutant positively existentially axiomatizable (with commuting towers) dimension function. \end{example} The following is a consequence of Definition \re {Definition:commutant-commuting} and the syntactic characterization of commutant $d$-containment. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:commuting} Let $\dim $ be a dimension function for separable $G$-C-algebras that is positively existentially axiomatizable (with commuting towers). Let $A$ and $B$ be separable $G$-C-algebras such that $A$ is commutant $d$-contained (with commuting towers) in $B$. Then \begin{equation} \dim (B)+1\leq (d+1)(\dim (A)+1)\text{.} \end{equation} \end{proposition} Similarly, the following fact is a consequence of the syntactic characterization of $G$-equivariant $d$-containment, Remark \re {Remark:oz-nuclear}, and Proposition \re {Proposition:dimension-implies-containment}. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:estimate-dimension} Let $A$ and $B$ be $G$-C-algebras, and let $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ be a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism. Suppose that $\dim $ is a dimension function for C-algebras. If $\dim $ is positively $\forall \exists $-axiomatizable dimension or commutant positively existentially axiomatizable, then \begin{equation} \dim (A)+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )+1)(\dim (B)+1). \end{equation} Moreover, if $B$ is nuclear and $\dim $ is nuclearly $\forall \exists -axiomatizable, then again \begin{equation} \dim (A)+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )+1)(\dim (B)+1). \end{equation} \end{proposition} In particular, Proposition \ref{Proposition:estimate-dimension} applies when $\dim $ is either nuclear dimension $\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}$, decomposition rank $\mathrm{dr}$, or Rokhlin dimension $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}$; see Example \ref{eg:NDimDr} and Example \ref{Example:dim-Rok}. More generally, one can define the nuclear dimension and decomposition rank of a -homomorphism f\colon A\rightarrow B$, and then show that if $\theta \colon A\rightarrow B$ is $d$-contained in $f$, then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(\theta )+1\leq (d+1)(\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(f)+1)\ \mbox{ and }\ \mathrm{dr}(\theta )+1\leq (d+1)(\mathrm{dr}(f)+1)\text{.} \end{equation} The following result relates the order zero dimension of the canonical inclusions $A^{G}\rightarrow A$ and $A\rtimes G\rightarrow A\otimes \mathcal K}(L^{2}(G))$ to the Rokhlin dimension of a $G$-C-algebra $A$. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:crossed-product} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra $A$, and denote by $\iota \colon A^{G}\hookrightarrow A$ and $\sigma \colon A\rtimes G\rightarrow A\otimes \mathcal{K}(L^{2}(G))$ the canonical inclusion maps. Then $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\iota )\leq \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)$ and $\dim _ \mathrm{oz}}(\sigma )\leq \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Denote by $\theta \colon A\rightarrow C(G)\otimes A$ the second factor embedding. Let $\mathtt{Lt}$ denote the action of $G$ on $C(G)$ by left translation, and denote by $\alpha $ the given action on $A$. Endow C(G)\otimes A$ with the tensor product action $\gamma =\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha $. Then $\theta $ is $G$-equivariant, and hence it induces a -homomorphism $A\rtimes G\rightarrow (C(G)\otimes A)\rtimes G$. Observe that $(C(G)\otimes A,\gamma )$ is canonically $G$-equivariantly isomorphic to $(C(G)\otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \iota _{A})$ by \cite[Proposition 2.3 {gardella_crossed_2014}. Then the crossed product $(C(G)\otimes A)\rtimes _{\gamma }G$ is canonically isomorphic to $A\otimes \mathcal{K}(L^{2}(G))$, and the fixed point algebra $(C(G)\otimes A)^{\gamma }$ is canonically isomorphic to $A$. It follows that the map $\widehat{\theta }$---defined right before Lemma \ref{Lemma:crossed}---is canonically conjugate to $\sigma $, and $\theta \|_{A^{G}}$ is canonically conjugate to $\iota $. Using Lemma~\ref{Lemma:rokhlin-and-oz} at the first step, Lemma \re {Lemma:crossed} at the second, and the above observations at the third, we get \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)=\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}^{G}(\theta )\geq \dim _{\mathrm oz}}(\widehat{\theta })=\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\widehat{\sigma }). \end{equation Similarly, we have $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)\geq \dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\iota ) , as desired. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:existential-crossed-product} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra $A , and let $\dim $ be a positively $\forall \exists $-axiomatizable dimension function for C-algebras. Then \begin{equation} \dim (A^{G})+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)+1)(\dim (A)+1)\text{,} \end{equation and \begin{equation} \dim (A\rtimes G)\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)+1)(\dim (A)+1)\text{.} \end{equation} \end{corollary} For separable unital $A$, the following first appeared as \cite[Theorem 3.3 {gardella_regularity_?}. The particular case of commuting towers has also been independently obtained in \cite{gardella_rokhlin_2016}, using completely different methods. \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:nuclear-esitmate-crossed} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra $A$. The \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A^{G})+1\leq \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A\rtimes G)+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A)+1)(\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A)+1) \end{equation* an \begin{equation} \mathrm{dr}(A^{G})+1\leq \mathrm{dr}(A\rtimes G)+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }(A)+1)(\mathrm{dr}(A)+1). \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} The first inequalities in Corollary \ref{Corollary:nuclear-esitmate-crossed} are due to the fact that the fixed point algebra $A^{G}$ of a $G$-C-algebra is a corner of the crossed product $A\rtimes G$---see \cite[Theorem {rosenberg_appendix_1979}---and the fact that decomposition rank and nuclear dimension are nonincreasing when passing to hereditary subalgebras; see \cit [Proposition 3.8]{kirchberg_covering_2004} and \cite[Proposition 2.5 {winter_nuclear_2010}. The second inequalities are an immediate consequence of Corollary~\ref{Corollary:existential-crossed-product} and Example~\re {eg:NDimDr}. \end{proof} \subsection{Bundles} In this subsection, we generalize the main result of \cit {dadarlat_trivialization_2008} to equivariant bundles; see Theorem~\re {thm:trivialBundle}. This result will be crucial in our applications to actions with finite Rokhlin dimension in Subsections~6.4 and~6.5. We will need the following equivariant version of the Choi-Effros lifting theorem for compact groups. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:CEequiv} Let $(A,\alpha )$ and $(B,\beta )$ be $G$-C-algebras, and let $\varphi \colon A\rightarrow B$ be a surjective, $G$-equivariant, nuclear -homomorphism. Then there exists a $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive lift $\sigma \colon B\rightarrow A$. If $\varphi $ is unital, then we can also choose $\sigma $ to be unital. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Use Choi-Effros to find a completely positive contractive lift $\rho\colon B\to A$ (which may be chosen to be unital if $\varphi$ is). If $\mu$ denotes the normalized Haar measure on $G$, then it is easy to check that the map \sigma\colon B\to A$ given by $\sigma(b)=\int_G \alpha_g(\rho(\beta_{g^{-1}}(b))) \ \mathrm{d}\mu$, for all $b\in B$, is as in the statement. \end{proof} Suppose that $X$ is a compact metrizable space. The definition of $C( X) -algebra can be found in \cite[Definition 2.1]{dadarlat_trivialization_2008 . We consider here the natural equivariant analog of a $C( X) $-algebra: \begin{definition} Let $A$ be a $C(X)$-algebra. For $x\in X$, denote by $U_{x}$ the open subset $X\setminus \{x\}$ of $X$, and denote by $A(U_{x})$ the corresponding ideal of $A$. We say that $A$ is a \emph{$G$-$C(X)$-algebra}, if $A$ is endowed with an action $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ satisfying $\alpha _{g}(A(U_{x}))\subset A(U_{x})$ for all $x\in X$ and all $g\in G$. \end{definition} In the context of the above definition, given $x\in X$, denote by $A_x$ the quotient $A/A(U_x)$ and by $\pi_x\colon A\to A_x$ the canonical quotient map. Then $\alpha$ induces actions $\alpha^{(x)}\colon G\to\mathrm{Aut}(A_x) , that make each $\pi_x$ equivariant. The definition of \emph{unitarily regular action} is given in~\cite Definition~1.18]{szabo_strongly_2016}. Observe that the trivial action on a strongly self-adsorbing C-algebra is unitarily regular. More generally, this applies to any strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra that $G -equivariantly absorbs the trivial action on the Jiang-Su algebra; see \cite Proposition 1.20]{szabo_strongly_2016}. The main theorem of this subsection is the following: \begin{theorem} \label{thm:trivialBundle} Let $X$ be a compact metrizable space of finite covering dimension. Let $(D,\delta )$ be a strongly self-absorbing, unitarily regular $G$-C-algebra, and let $(A,\alpha )$ be a separable, unital $G$-$C(X)$-algebra such that $A_{x}$ is $G$-equivariantly isomorphic to $D$, for all $x\in X$. Then there is a $G$-equivariant $C(X)$-linear isomorphism \[(A,\alpha )\cong (C(X)\otimes D,\iota _{C(X)}\otimes \delta ).\] \end{theorem} Our proof follows the lines of Dadarlat-Winter's proof of the nonequivariant version of Theorem \ref{thm:trivialBundle} from \cite[ Section~4 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. In fact, for the sake of succinctness, we only mention what changes are needed in said proof, and leave the smaller details to the reader. Similar results for general locally compact groups are explored in \cite{forough_preparation_2018}. Throughout the rest of the subsection, we fix a compact metrizable space $X , a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra $(D,\delta)$, and a separable unital $G$-$C(X)$-algebra $A$. \begin{definition} Let $(B,\beta)$ and $(C,\gamma)$ be $G$-C-algebras, let $\varepsilon>0$ and let $F\subset B$ be a compact set. We say that a linear map $\varphi\colon B\to C$ is \emph{$\varepsilon$-multiplicative} (respectively, \emph{ \varepsilon$-equivariant}) on $F$, if $\\|\varphi(b_1b_2)-\varphi(b_1 \varphi(b_2)\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $b_1,b_2\in F$ (respectively, \\|\gamma_g(\varphi(b))-\varphi(\beta_g(b))\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $g\in G$ and for all $b\in F$). \end{definition} The following is the analog of Proposition~4.1 of~\cit {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:Elliott} Denote by $\mu\colon C(X)\to A$ the structure map. Suppose that for any $\varepsilon>0$ and for any compact subsets $F\subset A , $H_1\subset C(X)$ and $H\subset D$, there are completely positive contractive maps $\psi\colon A\to C(X)\otimes D$ and $\varphi\colon C(X)\otimes D\to A$ satisfying \begin{enumerate} \item $\\|(\varphi\circ\psi)(a)-a\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $a\in F$; \item $\\|\varphi(f\otimes 1_D)-\mu(f)\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $f\in H_1$; \item $\\|(\psi\circ\mu)(f)-f\otimes 1_D\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $f\in H_1$; \item $\varphi$ is $\varepsilon$-multiplicative and $\varepsilon -equivariant on $(1_{C(X)}\otimes \mathrm{id}_D)(H_2)$; \item $\psi$ is $\varepsilon$-multiplicative and $\varepsilon$-equivariant on $F$. \end{enumerate} Then there is a $G$-equivariant $C(X)$-linear isomorphism $(A,\alpha)\cong (C(X)\otimes D,\iota_{C(X)}\otimes\delta)$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} The only thing that needs to be checked is that the isomorphisms $\overline \varphi }$ and $\overline{\psi }$ constructed in~\cit {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}, are equivariant, which is a routine computation. \end{proof} We need an equivariant version of \cite[Proposition~3.5 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}, in order to prove the analog of \cite Lemma~4.5]{dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. We note here that when \varepsilon >0$ is small enough, then any unitary in $A_{\varepsilon }^{G}$ can be perturbed to a nearby unitary in $A^{G}$. Moreover, if the original unitary can be connected to the unit within $A_{\varepsilon }^{G}$, then its perturbation can be connected to the unit by a path in $A^{G}$. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:3.5} Suppose that $D$ is unitarily regular. Then for any finite set $F\subset D$ and every $\varepsilon >0$, there exist a finite set H\subset D$ and $\delta >0$ with the following property: for any unital $D -absorbing $G$-C-algebra $A$, and any unital completely positive maps \varphi ,\psi \colon D\rightarrow A$ that are $\delta $-multiplicative and \delta $-equivariant on $H$, there is a unitary $u\in \mathcal{U}_{0}(A^{G})$ such that $\Vert \varphi (d)-u\psi (d)u^{\ast }\Vert <\varepsilon $ for all d\in F$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} The proof in~\cite{dadarlat_trivialization_2008} applies almost verbatim, with the following changes: the maps $\Phi $ and $\Psi $ are also equivariant. Instead of \cite[Corollary~1.12]{toms_strongly_2007}, use \cite Proposition~3.4(iii)]{szabo_strongly_2015}; the obtained unitary $V$ can be chosen to belongs to $(B\otimes D)^{G}$, and similarly with $V_{n}$. The equivariant analog of \cite[Proposition~1.9]{toms_strongly_2007} is straightforward to show for compact groups (choosing unitaries in the fixed point algebra). The unital homomorphisms $\theta _{n}$ can then be chosen to be equivariant, and the maps $\gamma _{n}$ are also equivariant. Finally, one must use \cite[Theorem~2.15 {szabo_strongly_2016} instead of \cite[Theorem~3.1 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008} (this is where unitary regularity of the action on $D$ is used). \end{proof} Lemma~4.2 in~\cite{dadarlat_trivialization_2008} goes through with only minor changes: \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.2} Adopt the notation from \cite[Lemma~4.2 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. Assume furthermore that $D$ is unitarily regular and that the maps $\sigma _{1}$ and $\sigma _{2}$ are $\delta (F,\gamma )$-equivariant on $\mathcal{E}(F,\gamma )$. Then there is a continuous path $(u_{t})_{t\in \lbrack 0,1]}$ of unitaries in $(C(K)\otimes D)^{G}$ satisfying $u_{0}=1_{C(K)}\otimes 1_{D}$ and $\Vert u_{1}\sigma _{1}(d)u_{1}^{\ast }-\sigma _{2}(d)\Vert <\gamma $ for all $d\in F\cdot F$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Replace every application of \cite[Proposition~3.5 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008} with an application of Proposition~\re {prop:3.5}. \end{proof} We need an equivariant analog of a local approximate trivialization; see \cite[Definition~4.3]{dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. Since our notation differs slightly from the one used in said paper, we reproduce the definition entirely. \begin{definition} \label{df:trivialization} For $n\in\mathbb{N}$, we write $p\colon [0,1]^n\to [0,1]$ for the first coordinate projection. Given a compact subset $X\subset [0,1]^n$, set $Y=p(X)$. If $C\subset Y$ is a closed subset, we write X_C=p^{-1}(C)$. Let $A$ be a unital $G$-$C(X)$-algebra $A$. We abbreviate A_{X_C}$ to $A_C$, and $A_{X_{\{s\}}}$ to $A_s$, for $s\in Y$, while the fiber maps are denoted $\pi_C$ and $\pi_s$, respectively. (We will not distinguish, as far as the notation is concerned, between fiber maps of different $C(X)$-algebras associated to the same closed subset of $X$.) Suppose that $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra, that each fiber of $A$ is $G$-equivariantly isomorphic to $D$, and that for each $s\in Y$, there is a $G$-$C(X_s)$-algebra isomorphism $A_s\cong C(X_s)\otimes D$. Let $\eta>0$, let $t\in Y$, and let $\theta\colon A_t\to C(X_t)\otimes D$ be a $G$-$C(X_t)$-algebra isomorphism. Fix compact subsets $F\subset A$ containing $1_A$, $H\subset C(X)\otimes D$, and $\widehat{H}\subset C(X_t)\otimes D$. Let $Y^{(t)}$ be a closed neighborhood of $t$ in $Y$. A \emph{$G -equivariant $(\theta ,F,H,\widehat{H},\eta )$-trivialization of $A$ over Y^{(t)}$} is a family of diagrams, indexed over $s\in Y^{(t)}$, as follows: \begin{equation} \xymatrix{ & & A\ar[d]^-{\pi_{Y^{(t)}}} & \\ & & A_{Y^{(t)}}\ar[r]^-{\pi_s} \ar[d]^-{\theta^{(t)}} & A_s\ar[d]^-{\theta_s^{(t)}}\\ C(X)\otimes D\ar[r]^-{\pi_{Y^{(t)}}} & C(Y^{(t)})\otimes D\ar[r]^-{\iota^{(t)}}\ar[ur]^-{\sigma^{(t)}} & \prod\limits_{r\in Y^{(t)}} C(X_r)\otimes D\ar[r]^-{\pi_s}\ar[d]^-{\pi_t} & C(X_s)\otimes D)\\ & & C(X_t)\otimes D\ar[ul]^-{\zeta^{(t)}}, & } \end{equation where all C-algebras are $G$-$C(X)$-algebras in the obvious way; each map is $G$-equivariant, unital and completely positive; and conditions (i) through (xii) in \cite[Definition~4.3]{dadarlat_trivialization_2008} are satisfied. \end{definition} Existence of equivariant local approximate trivializations, in the sense of the definition above, is established similarly as in the nonequivariant case: \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.5} Adopt the notation and assumptions of the first two paragraphs of Definition~\ref{df:trivialization}, and assume moreover that D $ is unitarily regular. Then there exist a closed neighborhood Y^{(t)}\subset Y$ of $t$ and a $G$-equivariant $(\theta, F, H, \widehat{H ,\eta)$-trivialization of $A$ over $Y^{(t)}$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Again, the proof given in \cite{dadarlat_trivialization_2008} requires only minor changes: the isomorphisms $\widetilde{\theta }_{s}^{(t)}\colon A_{s}\rightarrow C(X_{s})\otimes D$ are chosen to be $G$-equivariant. Also, the $G$-equivariant, unital completely positive lifts $\overline{\zeta ^{(t)}\colon C(X_{t})\rightarrow C(X_{\widetilde{Y}^{(t)}})$ and $\overline \sigma }^{(t)}\colon D\rightarrow A_{\widetilde{Y}^{(t)}}$ are obtained using Proposition~\ref{prop:CEequiv}. The applications of \cite[Lemma~4.2 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008} are replaced by applications of Lemma~\re {lemma:4.2}. In particular, $\widetilde{u}^{(s)}$ can be chosen to be $G -invariant. It follows that $\theta _{s}^{(t)}$ is equivariant, since so are $\widetilde{\pi }^{(s)}$ and $\widetilde{\theta }_{s}^{(t)}$. The verification of (xi) and (xii) in Definition~\ref{df:trivialization} is routine, and we omit it. \end{proof} Finally, we come to the proof of the main result of this section: \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\protect\ref{thm:trivialBundle}] Use Proposition~\ref{prop:Elliott} instead of \cite[Proposition~4.1 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. The basis of induction must also assume that $\theta _{t}\colon A_{t}\rightarrow C(X_{t})\otimes D$ is $G$-equivariant. Apply Lemma~\ref{lemma:4.5} in place of \cite[Lemma~4.5 {dadarlat_trivialization_2008}. The unital completely positive maps $\lambda ^{(i)},\varrho ^{(i)}\colon C(X_{y_{i}})\otimes D\rightarrow C(X_{t_{i}})\otimes D$ are $G$-equivariant because so are $\zeta ^{(y_{i})} , $\sigma ^{(y_{i})}$, $\pi _{t_{i}}$, $\theta _{t_{i}}^{(y_{i})}$, and \theta _{t_{i}}^{(y_{i+1})}$. The unitaries $u_{t}^{(i)}$, for $t\in \lbrack 0,1]$ and $i\in I$, can be chosen to be $G$-invariant by Lemma~\re {lemma:4.2}; in other words, the path $t\mapsto u_{t}^{(i)}$ determines a $G -invariant unitary in $C([0,1])\otimes C(X_{t_{1}})\otimes D$, where C([0,1])$ carries the trivial $G$-action. The unitaries defined in (31) and (32) are automatically $G$-invariant. Finally, the maps $\psi \colon A\rightarrow C(X)\otimes D$ and $\varphi \colon C(X)\otimes D\rightarrow A$ are readily checked to be equivariant (observe that the structure map of a G $-$C(X)$-algebra is equivariant when $C(X)$ is endowed with the trivial $G -action). This finishes the proof. \end{proof} \subsection{\texorpdfstring{$G$}{G}-equivariant \texorpdfstring{$D$}{D -absorption} We start by providing a new characterization of $G$-equivariant $D -absorption. The nonequivariant case (when the group is trivial), has recently been observed in \cite{hirshberg_rokhlin_2016}. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:D-absorption} Let $A$ be a separable $G$-C-algebra, let \mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete filter, and let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing, unitarily regular $G$-C-algebra. Fix $d\in \mathbb{N}$. Then $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing if and only if there exist $G -equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon D\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ with commuting ranges such that $\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d}$ is unital. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} By \cite[Theorem~3.7]{szabo_strongly_2015}, being $D$-absorbing is equivalent to the condition in Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption} with $d=0 . We now prove the converse implication. We let $C(D)=C_{0}((0,1])\otimes D$ denote the cone of $D$, and $C(D)^{\dagger }$ denote its minimal unitization, endowed with the canonical $G$-action. The tensor product C(D)^{\dagger }\otimes \cdots \otimes C(D)^{\dagger }$ of $d+1$ copies of C(D)^{\dagger }$ has a canonical $G$-equivariant character. We let $E$ be its the kernel, which is a $G$-invariant ideal. Observe that if $B$ is a unital C-algebra, then $(d+1)$-tuples of $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $D\rightarrow B$ with commuting ranges and unital sum, are into one-to-one correspondence with unital $G -equivariant -homomorphisms $E\rightarrow B$. This follows form the structure theorem for completely positive contractive order zero maps \cite Corollary 4.1]{winter_completely_2009}---or, more precisely, its equivariant counterpart \cite[Corollary 2.10]{gardella_rokhlin_2014}---and the universal properties of unitization and tensor products. Therefore, in order to conclude the proof, it is enough to show that $E$ is $G$-equivariantly $D -absorbing. Denote by $X$ the spectrum of the center of $E$, which is a subspace of the (d+1)$-dimensional cube $[0,1]^{d+1}$. Thus, $X$ is a compact metrizable space. Moreover, the $G$-C-algebra\ $E$ is easily seen to be a $G$-$C(X) -algebra with fibers isomorphic to $D$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:trivialBundle}, we conclude that $E$ is $G$-equivariantly isomorphic to $C(X)\otimes D$, and in particular is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing. This finishes the proof. \end{proof} In view of Remark \ref{Remark:containment-ssa}, one can reformulate Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption} by asserting that $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D -absorbing if and only if it is commutant $d$-contained in $D$ with commuting towers for some $d\in \mathbb{N}$. \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:D-absorption} Let $A$ be a separable $G$-C-algebra, let \mathcal{F}$ be a countably incomplete filter, and let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing, unitarily regular $G$-C-algebra. Then $A$ is $D$-absorbing if and only if there exist $d\in \mathbb{N}$ and completely positive contractive order zero maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon D\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ with commuting ranges such that $\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d}$ is unital. \end{corollary} Suppose that $D$ is a strongly self-absorbing $G$-C-algebra. Consider the \left\{ 0,\infty \right\} $-valued dimension function for separable $G -C-algebras obtained by setting $\dim _{D}(A)=0$ if and only if $A$ is $G -equivariantly $D$-absorbing. The following proposition is an immediate consequence of Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption}; see also Example \re {Example:dim-Rok}. \begin{proposition} \label{Proposition:dimDCommPosExisAxiom} Let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing, unitarily regular $G$-C-algebra. Then $\dim _{D}$, as defined above, is commutant positively existentially axiomatizable with commuting towers. \end{proposition} The following is the main result of this subsection. The conclusion is new even in the nonequivariant setting. Recall that $\mathcal{Z}$-absorbing strongly self-absorbing actions are automatically unitarily regular. \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:absorbption-containment} Let $A$ and $B$ be separable $G -C-algebras, and let $D$ be a unitarily regular, strongly self-absorbing $G -C-algebra. If $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing and $A\precsim _{d}^ \mathrm{c}}B$ for some $d\in \mathbb{N}$, then $B$ is $G$-equivariantly $D -absorbing. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} If $A$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing, then $D\precsim _{0}^{\mathrm{c }A $. If furthermore $A\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}B$, then we have $D\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}B$. Therefore $B$ is $G$-equivariantly $D$-absorbing by Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption} and Remark \ref{Remark:containment-ssa}. \end{proof} \subsection{Examples and applications to dimensional inequalities} In this section, we exhibit some examples of embeddings with finite order zero dimension, and use them to deduce some dimensional inequalities, particularly for nuclear dimension and decomposition rank. We need to extract a technical fact from Section~5 of \cite{matui_decomposition_2014}. If $a,b$ are elements of a C-algebra $A$, we write $a\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }b$ to denote that $\left\Vert a-b\right\Vert <\varepsilon $. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:matui-sato} Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$, and let $\varepsilon>0$. Then there exist completely positive contractive maps $\lambda_0,\lambda_1\colon M_n\to \mathcal{Z}$ such that $\lambda_0(1_{M_n})+\lambda_1(1_{M_n}) \approx_{\varepsilon} 1_{\mathcal{Z}}$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} See the first part of proof of Theorem~1.1 in Section~5 of \cit {matui_decomposition_2014}. \end{proof} \begin{theorem} \label{thm:InclZUHF} Let $U$ be a UHF-algebra, and let $\theta\colon \mathcal{Z}\to U$ be any unital embedding. Then $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}( \theta)= 1$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Since any two unital embeddings of $\mathcal{Z}$ into $U$ are approximately unitarily equivalent, and $\mathcal{Z}\otimes U$ is isomorphic to $U$, we may assume, without loss of generality, that $\theta $ is the first tensor factor embedding $\mathcal{Z}\rightarrow \mathcal{Z}\otimes U$. Let \mathcal{F}$ be the filter of cofinite subsets of $\mathbb{N}$. Write $U$ as an increasing union $U=\overline{\bigcup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}M_{k_{n}}}$ of matrix algebras $M_{k_{n}}$. Using injectivity of $M_{k_{n}}$, choose a conditional expectation $E_{n}\colon U\rightarrow M_{k_{n}}$. For $n,m\in \mathbb{N}$, let $\lambda _{0}^{(n,m)},\lambda _{1}^{(n,m)}\colon M_{k_{n}}\rightarrow \mathcal{Z}$ denote the order zero maps obtained from Lemma~\ref{lemma:matui-sato} for $\varepsilon =1/m$. For $j=0,1$, set \begin{equation} \lambda _{j}^{(n)}=(\lambda _{j}^{(n,m)})_{m\in \mathbb{N}}\colon M_{k_{n}}\rightarrow \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}, \end{equation which is an order zero map. Note that $\lambda _{0}^{(n)}(1_{M_{k_{n}}})+\lambda _{1}^{(n)}(1_{M_{k_{n}}})$ is equal to the identity of $\prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}$. For $j=0,1$, let $\psi _{j}\colon U\rightarrow \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}(\prod\nolimits_ \mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z})$ be given by $\psi _{j}(x)=(\lambda _{j}(E_{n}(x)))_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ for all $x\in U$. Then $\psi _{j}$ is order zero, and $\psi _{0}(1_{U})+\psi _{1}(1_{U})$ is equal to the identity of $\prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}(\prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z})$. We obtain a commutative diagram \begin{equation} \xymatrix{\mathbb{C} \ar[r]\ar[d] & U\ar[d]^-{\psi_j}\\ \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z} \ar[r] & \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}(\prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}),} \end{equation where the maps from $\mathbb{C}$ are the canonical unital homomorphisms, and the lower horizontal map is the canonical diagonal -homomorphism $\Delta _{\prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}}:\prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}(\prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z)}$. We claim that there are completely positive contractive order zero maps $\varphi _{0},\varphi _{1}\colon U\rightarrow \prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}$ such that $\psi _{j}=\Delta _{\prod_{\mathcal{F}}\mathcal{Z}}\circ \varphi _{j}$ for $j=0,1 . This (and in fact, a more general statement) can be proved along the lines of \cite[Lemma~4.18]{gardella_crossed_2014}, replacing condition (2) in its proof with the following: \begin{equation} \left\Vert (\psi _{j})_{m}^{(n_{r})}(b^{\ast })-(\psi _{j})_{m}^{(n_{r})}(b)^{\ast }\right\Vert <\frac{1}{r}\ \ \mbox{ and }\ \ \left\Vert (\psi _{j})_{m}^{(n_{r})}(cc^{\prime })\right\Vert <\frac{1}{r} \end{equation* whenever $b,c,c^{\prime }\in G_{r}$ satisfy $cc^{\prime \ast }c^{\prime }=c^{\prime \ast }=c^{\prime }c=0$. We omit the details. The fact that $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\theta )\leq 1$ now follows from Lemma \ref{Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding}. It remains to show that $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\theta )>0$. Since $\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(\mathcal{Z})=1$ and \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(U)=0$, the claim follows from Proposition~\re {Proposition:estimate-dimension} for $\dim =\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}$. \end{proof} In the proof of the next theorem, given C-algebras $A$ and $B$, given \varepsilon>0$ and given a finite subset $F\subset A$, we say that a linear map $\varphi\colon A\to B$ is \emph{$\varepsilon$-order zero} on $F$, if \\|\varphi(ab)\\|<\varepsilon$ for all $a,b\in F$ satisfying ab=a^b=ab^=a^b^=0$. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:InclKirO2} Let $A$ be a unital Kirchberg algebra, and let \theta\colon A\to \mathcal{O}_2$ be any unital embedding. Then $\dim _ \mathrm{oz}}( \theta)\leq 1$. Moreover, $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}( \theta)=1$ unless $A=\mathcal{O}_2$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Assume first that $A=\mathcal{O}_\infty$. As in the proof of Theorem~\re {thm:InclZUHF}, we may assume, without loss of generality, that $\theta$ is the first tensor factor embedding $\mathcal{O}_\infty\to\mathcal{O _\infty\otimes \mathcal{O}_2$. We will verify the finitary version of order zero dimension. To that effect, let $\varepsilon>0$, and let $F\subset \mathcal{O}_\infty$ and $H\subset \mathcal{O}_2$ be finite subsets consisting of positive contractions. Use \cite[Lemma~4.17]{gardella_rokhlin_2014}---see also the first part of the proof of Theorem~3.3 in~\cite{barlak_rokhlin_2015}---to find -homomorphisms $\varphi _{0},\varphi _{1}\colon \mathcal{O}_{2}\rightarrow \mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ and positive contractions $k_{0},k_{1}\in \mathcal{O _{2}$ such that $\Vert \varphi _{0}(k_{0})+\varphi _{1}(k_{1})-1_{\mathcal{O _{\infty }}\Vert <\varepsilon /5$. Since $\mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ is isomorphic to its infinite tensor product, we may choose $\varphi _{0}$ and \varphi _{1}$ to satisfy $\Vert \varphi _{j}(y)a-a\varphi _{j}(y)\Vert <\Vert y\Vert \varepsilon /5$ for $j=0,1$, for all $y\in \mathcal{O}_{2}$ and for all $a\in F$. (For instance, find $m\in \mathbb{N}$ and a finite subset $F^{\prime }\subset \otimes _{j=1}^{m}\mathcal{O}_{\infty }\subset \otimes _{j=1}^{\infty }\mathcal{O}_{\infty }$, such that for every $a\in F$ there exists $a^{\prime }\in F^{\prime }$ with $\Vert a-a^{\prime }\Vert <\varepsilon /5$. With $\iota _{m+1}\colon \mathcal{O}_{\infty }\rightarrow \otimes _{j=1}^{\infty }\mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ denoting the $(m+1)$-st tensor factor embedding, the maps $\varphi _{j}\circ \iota _{m+1}$, for j=0,1$, will satisfy the condition above.) Likewise, since $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ is isomorphic to its infinite tensor product, we may also assume that $\Vert k_{j}b-bk_{j}\Vert <\varepsilon /5$ for $j=0,1$ and for all $b\in H$. Define completely positive contractive maps $\gamma _{0},\gamma _{1}\colon \mathcal O}_{\infty }\otimes \mathcal{O}_{2}\rightarrow \mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ on simple tensors as follows: for $x\in \mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ and for positive $y\in \mathcal{O}_{2}$, set \begin{equation} \gamma _{j}(x\otimes y)=\varphi _{j}(k_{j})^{1/2}\varphi _{j}(y)^{1/2}x\varphi _{j}(y)^{1/2}\varphi _{j}(k_{j})^{1/2},\ \mbox{ for j=0,1. \end{equation} We claim that $\gamma _{0}$ and $\gamma _{1}$ are $\varepsilon $-order zero on $F\otimes H$, that $((\gamma _{0}+\gamma _{1})\circ \theta )(a)\approx _{\varepsilon }a$, and that $\gamma _{j}(a)\approx _{\varepsilon }\gamma _{j}(1)a$ for all $j=0,1$ and all $a\in F$. To show the first part of the claim, it is enough to observe that when $x\in F$ and $y\in H$, we have \gamma _{j}(x\otimes y)\approx _{4\varepsilon /5}\varphi _{j}(k_{j}y)x$ for j=0,1$. For the second one, a similar reasoning applies, since for $a\in F$ we have $\gamma _{j}(a\otimes 1_{\mathcal{O}_{2}})\approx _{2\varepsilon /5}\varphi _{j}(k_{j})a$, and hence \begin{equation} (\gamma _{0}+\gamma _{1})(a\otimes 1_{\mathcal{O}_{2}})\approx _{4\varepsilon /5}(\varphi _{0}(k_{0})+\varphi _{1}(k_{1}))a\approx _{\varepsilon /5}a, \end{equation as desired. The third part of the claim also follows, since we have $\gamma _{j}(a)\approx _{2\varepsilon /5}\varphi _{j}(k_{j})a=\gamma _{j}(1)a$ for j=0,1$ and for $a\in F$. This proves the result for $A=\mathcal{O}_{\infty } . When $A$ is an arbitrary Kirchberg algebra, the claim follows from the first part of the proof and part~(2) of Proposition~\ref{prop:propertiesOzDim}, together with Kirchberg's absorption theorems $A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{\infty }\cong A$ and $A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{\infty }\cong \mathcal{O}_{2}$. When $A=\mathcal{O}_{2}$, then any inclusion into $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ is approximately unitarily equivalent to the identity, which clearly has order zero dimension zero. Since having a positively existential embedding into \mathcal{O}_{2}$ implies absorbing $\mathcal{O}_{2}$, it follows that $\dim _{\mathrm{oz}}(\theta )=1$ whenever $A$ is not $\mathcal{O}_{2}$. \end{proof} In particular, we recover from Theorem \ref{thm:InclKirO2} the following dimensional estimate from \cite[Theorem~7.1]{matui_decomposition_2014}. The actual nuclear dimension of Kirchberg algebras has recently been computed in \cite[Theorem~G]{bosa_covering_?}: it is always 1. We nevertheless present this consequence to illustrate the applicability of our techniques. \begin{corollary} Let $A$ be a Kirchberg algebra. Then $\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{nuc}(A)\leq 3$. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} This follows immediately from Theorem~\ref{thm:InclKirO2}, Proposition~\re {Proposition:estimate-dimension}, and the fact that $\dim _{\mathrm{nuc}} \mathcal{O}_{2})=1$. \end{proof} In the next result, we endow $\mathcal{Z}, \mathcal{O}_2, \mathcal{O}_\infty$ and the UHF-algebra with the trivial $G$-action, and we endow all tensor products with the diagonal action. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:O2OIUHFDimIneq} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra, and let $\dim$ be a positively $\forall \exists $-axiomatizable dimension function for $G -C-algebra. Let $U$ be a UHF-algebra of infinite type. Then \begin{equation} \dim(A\otimes \mathcal{Z})\leq 2 \dim(A\otimes U)+1 \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \dim(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_\infty)\leq 2 \dim(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_2)+1. \end{equation} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} This is a consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:InclZUHF}, Theorem~\re {thm:InclKirO2}, part~(2) of Proposition~\ref{prop:propertiesOzDim}, and Proposition~\ref{Proposition:estimate-dimension}. \end{proof} We want to highlight two important consequences of Theorem~\re {thm:O2OIUHFDimIneq}. One of them is obtained by letting $\dim $ be the Rokhlin dimension. In this case, and again endowing $\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{O _{2},\mathcal{O}_{\infty }$ and the UHF-algebra with the trivial $G$-action, and all tensor products with the diagonal action, we deduce the following dimensional inequalities (compare with Section~4 of~\cit {gardella_rokhlin_2014}). \begin{corollary} \label{cor:RokDimIneq} Let $A$ be a $G$-C-algebra, and let $U$ be a UHF-algebra of infinite type. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A\otimes \mathcal{Z})\leq 2\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }(A\otimes U)+1, \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{\infty })\leq 2\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{2})+1. \end{equation} \end{corollary} The other consequence is obtained be letting $\dim $ be either the nuclear dimension or the decomposition rank. The estimates involving nuclear dimension have previously been observed in \cite[Section~3 {barlak_rokhlin_2015}, while the estimates for the decomposition rank are new. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:DimNucDRIneq} Let $A$ be a C-algebra, and let $U$ be any UHF-algebra of infinite type. Then \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A\otimes \mathcal{Z})\leq 2\dim _{\mathrm{nuc }(A\otimes U)+1, \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \dim _{\mathrm{nuc}}(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{\infty })\leq 2\dim _{\mathrm{nuc }(A\otimes \mathcal{O}_{2})+1\text{.} \end{equation Furthermore \begin{equation} \mathrm{dr}(A\otimes \mathcal{Z})\leq 2\mathrm{dr}(A\otimes U)+1\text{.} \end{equation} \end{corollary} \subsection{Rokhlin dimension and strongly self-absorbing \texorpdfstring{$G$}{G}-C-algebras} In this subsection, and since we consider different actions on the same C-algebra, we denote by $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )$ the Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers of the $G$-C-algebra $(A,\alpha )$. The following is one of our main technical results. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:fixed} Let $\alpha $ be a continuous action of $G$ on a C-algebra $A$. If $\mathrm{\dim }_{\mathrm{Rok}}(A,\alpha )\leq d$, then (A,\iota _{A})\precsim _{d}(A,\alpha )$. If $\mathrm{\dim }_{\mathrm{Rok}}^ \mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )\leq d$, then $(A,\iota _{A})\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c }(A,\alpha )$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We prove the first assertion. The proof of the second assertion is analogous. Fix a nonprincipal ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ over $\mathbb{N}$. We denote by $F_{\mathcal{U}}(A)$ the Kirchberg invariant of $(A,\iota _{A})$ (endowed with the trivial action), and by $F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A)$ the Kirchberg invariant of $(A,\alpha )$ (endowed with the canonical $G$-action obtained from $\alpha $). Since $\mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c }(\alpha )\leq d$, it follows from the reformulation of Rokhlin dimension in terms of commutant $d$-containment and Proposition \ref{Proposition:F} that for any separable C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{U}}(A) $ there exist $G -equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon C(G)\rightarrow C^{\prime }\cap F_{\mathcal{U }^{G}(A)$ such that $\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d}$ is unital. Fix a separable C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A)$ containing $A . When $G$ is finite, the maps witnessing that $(A,\alpha )\precsim _{d}(A,\iota _{A})$ can be constructed explicitly, so we outline this first. For $g\in G$, let $\delta _{g}\in C(G)$ be the characteristic function of \{g\}$. Define maps $\eta _{j}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A)$, for $j=0,\ldots ,d$, by $\eta _{j}(x)=\sum\nolimits_{g\in G}\psi _{j}(\delta _{g})\alpha _{g}(x)$. Then these maps witness the fact that $(A,\iota _{A})$ is $G$-equivariantly commutant $d$-contained in $(A,\alpha )$. Suppose now that $G$ is an arbitrary compact second countable group. Below, if $a$ and $b$ are elements of a C-algebra and $\varepsilon >0$, we write a\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }b$ to mean that $\left\Vert a-b\right\Vert <\varepsilon $. Let $\rho$ be a left invariant metric on $G$. Fix a finite subset $F $ of positive elements of $C$ and $\varepsilon >0$. The argument in \cite[Proposition 2.11]{gardella_crossed_2014} shows that there exist \delta >0$, a finite subset $K$ of $G$, and a partition of unity $( f_{g}) _{g\in K}$ of $G$ satisfying: \begin{enumerate} \item $f_{g}\in C( G) $ is a positive contraction for all $g\in G$; \item $f_{g}$ and $f_{h}$ are orthogonal whenever $g,h\in G$ satisfy $\rho( g,h) >\delta $; \item for every $a\in F$, we have $\alpha_g(a)\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }\alpha_h(a)$ whenever $g,h\in G$ satisfy $\rho( g,h) <\delta $; and \item $\alpha _{h}( \sum\nolimits_{g\in K}\psi _{j}(f_{g})a) \thickapprox _{\varepsilon }\sum_{g\in K}\psi _{j}(f_{g})a$ for all $h\in G$ and all a\in F$. \end{enumerate} Define now $\eta _{j}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A)$ by $\eta _{j}(x)=\sum_{g\in K}\psi _{j}(f_{g})\alpha _{g}(x)$ for $j=0,\ldots ,d$. Observe that $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}$ are completely positive contractive maps. Furthermore, for every $0\leq j\leq d$, if $a,b\in F$ satisfy $ab\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }0$, then (1) and (2) imply tha \begin{align} \eta _{j}(a)\eta _{j}(b) =&\sum\limits_{g,h\in K}\psi _{j}(f_{g})\psi _{j}(f_{h})\alpha _{g}(a)\alpha _{h}(b) \thickapprox_{\varepsilon }\sum\limits_{g,h\in K}\psi _{j}(f_{g})\psi _{j}(f_{h})\alpha _{g}(ab)\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }0\text{.} \end{align} By (3), we have $\alpha _{g}(\eta _{j}(a))\thickapprox _{\varepsilon }\eta _{j}(a)$ for every $g\in G$, every $j=0,\ldots ,d$, and every $a\in F$. Since $\varepsilon >0$ and $F\subset C_{+}$ are arbitrary, it follows from Proposition \ref{Proposition:F} that there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon C\rightarrow F_{\mathcal{F}}^{G}(A)$ with unital sum. Since this is true for every separable C-subalgebra $C$ of $F_{\mathcal{F}}(A)$, we conclude that (A,\iota _{A})\precsim _{d}(A,\alpha )$, as desired. \end{proof} The following corollary is then a consequence of Theorem \ref{Theorem:fixed} and Proposition \ref{Proposition:commuting}. \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:fixed} Let $\dim $ be a dimension function for $G -C-algebras, $A$ is a C-algebra, $\alpha $ is a continuous action of a $G$ on $A$, and $\iota _{A}$ is the trivial $G$-action on $A$. If $\dim $ is positively existentially axiomatizable, then \begin{equation} \dim (A,\alpha )+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A,\alpha )+1)(\dim (A,\iota _{A})+1)\text{.} \end{equation If $\dim $ is commutant positively existentially axiomatizable, then \begin{equation} \dim (A,\alpha )+1\leq (\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )+1)(\dim (A,\iota _{A})+1)\text{.} \end{equation} \end{corollary} We now arrive at one of the main results of this section. It asserts that, for a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, $G$-actions with finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers, on $D$-absorbing C-algebras, automatically absorb the trivial action on $D$. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:absorption} Let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, let $A$ be a separable $D$-absorbing C-algebra, and let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ be an action of $G$ with $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok }^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )<\infty $. Then $(A,\alpha )$ is $G$-equivariantly (D,\iota _{D})$-absorbing. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $\dim _{D}$ be the $\left\{ 0,\infty \right\} $-valued dimension function for $G$-C-algebras which is finite if and only if the given $G -C-algebra is $(D,\iota _{D})$-absorbing. The action $(D,\iota _{D})$ is unitarily regular since it absorbs $(\mathcal{Z},\iota _{\mathcal{Z}})$ tensorially; see \cite[Proposition 1.20]{szabo_strongly_2016}. It follows from this and Proposition~\ref{Proposition:dimDCommPosExisAxiom} that $\dim _{D}$ is commutant positively existentially axiomatizable with commuting towers. The result now follows from Corollary \ref{Corollary:fixed}. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{Corollary:crossed-commuting} Let $D$ be a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra, and let $(A,\alpha )$ be a separable $G$-C-algebra with $\dim _ \mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )<\infty $. If $A$ is (nonequivariantly) $D$-absorbing, then so are $A^{G}$ and $A\rtimes_{\alpha} G$. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} By Theorem~\ref{Theorem:absorption}, there is a $G$-equivariant isomorphism between $(A,\alpha)$ and $(A\otimes D,\alpha\otimes \iota_D)$. Upon taking crossed products, we deduce that \begin{equation} A\rtimes_{\alpha} G\cong (A\otimes D)\rtimes_{\alpha\otimes \iota_D}G\cong (A\rtimes_{\alpha} G)\otimes D, \end{equation} so $A\rtimes_{\alpha} G$ is $D$-absorbing. The same applies to the fixed point algebra, since we have $A^{\alpha}\cong (A\otimes D)^{\alpha\otimes\iota_D}=A^{\alpha}\otimes D$. \end{proof} Corollary \ref{Corollary:crossed-commuting} is a significant generalization of previously known results concerning Jiang-Su absorption: for finite groups this was shown by Hirshberg-Winter-Zacharias in \cite[Theorem 5.9 {hirshberg_rokhlin_2015}, and in \cite[Theorem 5.4.4]{gardella_compact_2015} by the first-named author for compact groups. Similar results have been independently obtained with different methods in \cite{gardella_rokhlin_2016 . Observe that in the next result we do not require the strongly self-absorbing action to be unitarily regular, unlike in Theorem~\re {thm:trivialBundle} or \ref{Corollary:absorbption-containment}. \begin{theorem} \label{Theorem:absorption+} Let $A$ be a separable C-algebra, and let \alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ be an action. Suppose that $A$ absorbs a strongly self-absorbing C-algebra $D$, and let $\delta \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(D)$ be any strongly self-absorbing action. \begin{enumerate} \item If $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}(A,\alpha )=d<\infty $, then $(D,\delta )\precsim _{d}(A,\alpha )$. \item If $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )=d<\infty $, then (D,\delta )\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )$. Moreover, $(A,\alpha )$ is $G$-equivariantly $(D,\delta )$-absorbing. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} (1). Suppose that $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}( A,\alpha ) =d<+\infty $. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:rokhlin-and-oz}, the second-factor embedding $\theta\colon ( A,\alpha ) \rightarrow ( C(G) \otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha ) $ has $G -equivariant order zero dimension at most $d$. Since $A\otimes D\cong D$, it follows from Proposition~2.3 in~\cite{gardella_crossed_2014} that $( C(G) \otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha ) $ is conjugate to $( C(G) \otimes A\otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \delta )$. In other words, $( C(G) \otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha ) $ is $G$-equivariantly $( D,\delta ) $-absorbing. By the implication (ii)$\Rightarrow $(iv) in \cite Theorem 4.29]{barlak_sequentially_2016} the first-factor embedding $\eta \colon ( C( G) \otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha ) \rightarrow ( C(G) \otimes A\otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \delta ) $ has $G -equivariant order zero dimension zero. By item (1) in Proposition \re {prop:propertiesOzDim}, the composition \begin{equation} \eta \circ \theta \colon( A,\alpha ) \rightarrow ( C(G) \otimes A\otimes D \mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \delta ) \end{equation} has dimension at most $d$. Observe that $( \eta \circ \theta ) (A) =1_{C(G) }\otimes a\otimes 1_{D}$ for all $a\in A$. It follows that the first-factor embedding $( A,\alpha ) \rightarrow ( A\otimes D,\alpha \otimes \delta ) $ has $G$-equivariant dimension at most $d$ (this embedding is really just \eta\circ\theta$, once its codomain is truncated). We conclude from Proposition~\ref{Proposition:dimension-implies-containment} that $( A\otimes D,\alpha \otimes \delta ) \precsim _{d}(A,\alpha )$, and in particular $( D,\delta ) \precsim _{d}(A,\alpha )$. (2). Fix a nonprincipal ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ over $\mathbb{N}$. Suppose that $\dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )\leq d$. We want to show that $(D,\delta )\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )$. In view of Remark \ref{Remark:containment-ssa}, it is enough to show that there exist $G -equivariant unital completely positive contractive maps $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon (D,\delta )\rightarrow (F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A),\alpha )$ with commuting ranges such that $\sum_{j=0}^d\eta _{j}$ is unital. In order to illustrate the ideas of the proof, we begin by considering the unital case, since the argument is easier to follow in this case. Assume that $A$ is unital, so that $F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(A)$ is equal to A^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A$. By assumption, there exist $G -equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A$-bimodule maps \psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon (C(G)\otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha )\rightarrow (\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha )$, such that $(\psi _{0}+\cdots +\psi _{d})\circ (1\otimes \mathrm{id}_{A})$ is the diagonal inclusion of $A$ into $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A$, and $\psi _{j}(C(G)\otimes 1)$ and $\psi _{k}(C(G)\otimes 1)$ commute for $0\leq j<k\leq d$. Define $C$ to be the separable C-subalgebra of $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A$ generated by $A$ together with the ranges of $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}$. By Theorem \ref{Theorem:absorption}, $(A,\alpha )$ is $(D,\iota _{D})$-absorbing. Use Theorem \ref{Theorem:D-absorption} to find a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism \theta :D\rightarrow C^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A$. For j=0,\ldots ,d$, define a $G$-equivariant completely positive contractive order zero $A$-bimodules map \begin{equation} \phi _{j}\colon (C(G)\otimes A\otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \iota _{D})\rightarrow (\prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha ) \end{equation by setting $\phi _{j}(f\otimes a\otimes d)=\psi _{j}(f\otimes a)\theta (d)$ for all $f\in C(G)$, all $a\in A$, and all $d\in D$. Observe that $\phi _{j}(C(G)\otimes 1_{A}\otimes D)$ commutes with $\phi _{k}(C(G)\otimes 1_{A}\otimes D)$ whenever $0\leq j<k\leq d$. Fix a $G$-equivariant isomorphism $( C( G) \otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \iota _{D}) \to ( C( G) \otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \delta ) $, and tensor it with the identity on $A$ to obtain a $G$-equivariant -isomorphism \begin{equation} \pi \colon ( C( G) \otimes A\otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \delta ) \rightarrow ( C( G) \otimes A\otimes D,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha \otimes \iota _{D}) \end{equation* satisfying $\pi ( 1_{C(G)}\otimes a\otimes 1_D) =1_{C(G)}\otimes a\otimes 1_D $ for every $a\in A$. For $j=0,\ldots,d$, let \begin{equation} \eta _{j}\colon ( D,\delta ) \rightarrow (A^{\prime }\cap \prod\nolimits_ \mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha ) \end{equation be the $G$-equivariant completely positive order zero map given by $\eta _{j}( d) =( \phi _{j}\circ \pi ) ( 1_{C(G)}\otimes 1_A\otimes d) $ for all d\in D$. Then $\eta_j(D)$ commutes with $\eta_k(D)$ whenever $0\leq j<k\leq d $, and $\sum_{j=0}^d\eta_j(1)=1$. We conclude that $( D,\delta ) \precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}( A,\alpha ) $. We consider now the general case when $A$ is not necessarily unital. Fix maps $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}\colon ( C( G) \otimes A,\mathtt{Lt}\otimes \alpha ) \rightarrow (\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha )$ as before. Let $C$ the separable C-subalgebra of $\prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A$ generated by the ranges of $\psi _{0},\ldots ,\psi _{d}$. As above, find a $G$-equivariant -homomorphism \begin{equation} \theta \colon ( D,\iota _{D}) \rightarrow \frac{C^{\prime }\cap \prod_ \mathcal{U}}^{G}A}{\mathrm{Ann}( A,C^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A) }\text{.} \end{equation Let $\pi $ be as before, and consider the canonical $G$-equivariant -homomorphism \begin{equation} \Psi \colon C\otimes _{\max }\frac{C^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A} \mathrm{Ann}\left( A,C^{\prime }\cap \prod_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A\right) \rightarrow \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A \end{equation* defined as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:oz-dimension-commutant-embedding . For $j=0,\ldots, d$, set \begin{equation} \phi_j=\Psi\circ(\psi_j\otimes\theta)\colon C(G)\otimes A\otimes D\to \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A. \end{equation} Then $\phi_j$ is a $G$-equivariant order zero $A$-bimodule map. Let $(u_{\lambda })_{\lambda \in \Lambda }$ be an increasing approximate identity for $A$. For every $\lambda \in \Lambda $ and $j=0,\ldots ,d$, define \begin{equation} \eta _{j,\lambda }\colon (D,\delta )\rightarrow (\prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U }^{G}A,\alpha ) \end{equation by $\eta _{j,\lambda }(d)=(\phi _{j}\circ \pi )(1_{C(G)}\otimes u_{\lambda }\otimes d)$. These maps satisfy are completely positive contractive order zero, have commuting ranges, and \begin{equation} \left\Vert \lbrack \eta _{j,\lambda }(d),a]\right\Vert \rightarrow 0\ \ \mbox{ and }\ \ \left\Vert a{}(\eta _{0,\lambda }+\cdots +\eta _{0,\lambda })(1)-a\right\Vert \rightarrow 0\text{,} \end{equation for every $d\in D$ and $a\in A$. By countable saturation of $\left( \prod_ \mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha \right) $, there exist $G$-equivariant completely positive order zero maps \begin{equation} \tilde{\eta}_{j}\colon (D,\delta )\rightarrow (A^{\prime }\cap \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A,\alpha ) \end{equation satisfying $a\left[ (\tilde{\eta}_{0,\lambda }+\cdots +\tilde{\eta _{0,\lambda })(1)\right] =a$ for every $a\in A$. Composing such maps with the canonical quotient mapping \begin{equation} A^{\prime }\cap \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A\rightarrow \frac{A^{\prime }\cap \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A}{\mathrm{Ann}\left( A,A^{\prime }\cap \prod\nolimits_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}A\right) }=F_{\mathcal{U}}^{G}(GA) \end{equation} gives $G$-equivariant completely positive order zero maps with commuting ranges $\eta _{0},\ldots ,\eta _{d}\colon (D,\delta )\rightarrow (F_ \mathcal{U}}^{G}(A),\alpha )$, which witness the fact that $(D,\delta )\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )$. We now justify the second claim. When $\delta $ is unitarily regular, the fact that $(D,\delta )\precsim _{d}^{\mathrm{c}}(A,\alpha )$ implies that (A,\alpha )$ is $G$-equivariantly $(D,\delta )$-absorbing is a consequence of Corollary \ref{Corollary:absorbption-containment}. Now suppose that \delta $ is an arbitrary strongly self-absorbing action, and consider \delta ^{\mathcal{Z}}=\delta \otimes \mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}}$, regarded as an action of $G$ on $D\otimes \mathcal{Z}\cong D$. Then $\delta ^{\mathcal{Z }$ is unitarily regular, and hence $\alpha $ absorbs $\delta ^{\mathcal{Z}}$ by the above paragraph. Since $\mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}}$ is unitarily regular and $A$ is $\mathcal{Z}$-absorbing (because it is $D$-absorbing), we also deduce that $\alpha $ absorbs $\mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}}$. Putting these things together, we deduce that \begin{equation} \alpha \cong \alpha \otimes \delta ^{\mathcal{Z}}=\alpha \otimes \mathrm{id _{\mathcal{Z}}\otimes \delta \cong \alpha \otimes \delta . \end{equation In other words, $\alpha $ absorbs $\delta $, and the proof is finished. \end{proof} Theorem \ref{Theorem:absorption+} has a number of new and strong consequences, as already the case of the trivial action on $D$ is new. For example, we derive now some dimension reduction type results. Roughly speaking, these statements say that, in some contexts, the Rokhlin property is \emph{equivalent} to finite Rokhlin dimension with commuting towers. (By definition, a compact group action has the Rokhlin property if it has Rokhlin dimension zero.) These are useful results, since proving directly that an action has the Rokhlin property is often challenging, and there are not many tools available. On the other hand, Rokhlin dimensional estimates are much easier to come by, particularly for finite groups. It follows from our results that, in some cases, knowing that the Rokhlin dimension is finite is enough to deduce the Rokhlin property. Having access to the Rokhlin property is extremely valuable, since it entails classifiability (of the action), and the structure of the crossed product is extremely well-understood; see \cit {gardella_crossed_2014}. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:DimReductionO2} Let $A$ be an $\mathcal{O}_{2}$-absorbing C-algebra, and let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ be an action with $\mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(\alpha )<\infty $. Then $\alpha $ has the Rokhlin property. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Let $\delta\colon G\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{O}_2)$ be any action with the Rokhlin property; one such action is constructed in \cit {gardella_compact_2015}. By the classification theorem in \cit {gardella_classification_2016}, the action $\delta$ is strongly self-absorbing. It follows from Theorem~\ref{Theorem:absorption+} that \alpha$ absorbs $\delta$, so $\alpha$ has the Rokhlin property. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{cor:DimReductionUHF} Let $G$ be a finite group, let $A$ be an M_{\|G\|^\infty}$-absorbing C-algebra, and let $\alpha\colon G\to\mathrm{Aut (A)$ be an action with $\mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c }(\alpha)<\infty$. Then $\alpha$ has the Rokhlin property. This in particular applies to Cuntz algebras of the form $\mathcal{O}_{n\|G\|}$. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Let $\delta\colon G\to\mathrm{Aut}(M_{\|G\|^\infty})$ be the infinite tensor product of conjugation by the left regular representation of $G$ on \ell^2(G)$. This action is well-known to have the Rokhlin property, since C(G)$ embeds equivariantly into $B(\ell ^{2}(G))\cong M_{\|G\|}$ as multiplication operators. It is elementary to show that such an action is strongly self-absorbing. It follows from Theorem~\ref{Theorem:absorption+} that $\alpha$ absorbs $\delta$, so $\alpha$ has the Rokhlin property. \end{proof} Finally, we obtain some new Rokhlin-dimensional estimates. The following one represents a satisfactory parallel with the $\{0,1,\infty\}$-type behaviour that nuclear dimension and decomposition rank tend to have in the noncommutative setting. It is also particularly satisfactory, since proving finiteness of the Rokhlin dimension is a far easier task than proving that it is (at most) 1. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:estimate} Let $G$ be a finite group, let $A$ be a C-algebra, and let $\alpha \colon G\rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(A)$ satisfy $\mathrm{dim}_ \mathrm{Rok}}^{\mathrm{c}}(\alpha )<\infty $. Then \begin{equation} \mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}(\alpha \otimes \mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}})\leq 1. \end{equation* If $A$ is $\mathcal{Z}$-absorbing, the \begin{equation} \dim _{\mathrm{Rok}}\left( \alpha \right) \leq 1\text{.} \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} We apply Corollary~\ref{cor:RokDimIneq} with $U=M_{\|G\|^{\infty }}$, so that \mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}(\alpha \otimes \mathrm{id}_{U})=0$ by Corollary \ref{cor:DimReductionUHF}. The second assertion follows from the first one and Theorem \ref{Theorem:absorption+}. \end{proof} The next result is a dynamical version of the main result of~\cit {tikuisis_decomposition_2014}, which states that dr$(C(X)\otimes\mathcal{Z )\leq 2$. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:estimateCommutative} Let $G$ be a finite group, let $X$ be a compact Hausdorff space, and let $\alpha\colon G\to\mathrm{Aut}(C(X))$ be induced by a free action of $G$ on $X$. Then \begin{equation} \mathrm{dim}_{\mathrm{Rok}}(\alpha\otimes\mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{Z}})\leq 1. \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} This is an immediate consequence of Corollary~\ref{cor:estimate}, since \alpha $ has finite Rokhlin dimension (with commuting towers) by Theorem~4.2 in~\cite{gardella_rokhlin_2014}. \end{proof}
\section{Introduction} For a random vector $X$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with absolutely continuous density $f$, the entropy of $X$ is given by \begin{align} h(X) = -\int f \log f, \end{align} provided the integral exists, and the entropy power of $X$ is defined according to \begin{align} N(X) = \frac{1}{2\pi e} e^{\tfrac{2}{d} h(X)}. \end{align} The Fisher information of $X$ is defined by \begin{align} J(X) = \int f \left\| \nabla \log f \right\|^2, \end{align} with $J(X)=\infty$ if the integral does not exist. The entropy and Fisher information functionals play a fundamental role in information theory and related fields, and enjoy many useful properties. Standing out among these properties is their behavior under convolution of densities. In particular, Stam \cite{stam1959some} and Blachman \cite{blachman1965convolution} proved that if $X,Y$ are independent random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$, then \begin{align} N(X+Y) \geq N(X)+N(Y)\label{EPI} \end{align} and \begin{align} \frac{1}{J(X+Y)}\geq \frac{1}{J(X)}+\frac{1}{J(Y)}.\label{FII} \end{align} These inequalities may also be stated in terms of relative entropies and Fisher informations, which will be useful for our purposes. Toward this end, the entropy of $X$ relative to the standard normal $N(0,\mathrm{I})$ is \begin{align} D(X) := D(f \\| \phi) =\int f \log \frac{f}{\phi}, \end{align} where $\phi (x) = {(2\pi)^{-d/2}}e^{-\|x\|^2/2}$ denotes the Gaussian density on $\mathbb{R}^d$. By Jensen's inequality, $D(X)\geq 0$, with equality iff $X\sim N(0,\mathrm{I})$. Similarly, the Fisher information of $X$ relative to $N(0,\mathrm{I})$ is defined according to \begin{align} I(X) := I(f\\|\phi) = \int f \left\| \nabla \log \frac{f}{\phi} \right\|^2. \end{align} As with $D(X)$, the quantity $I(X)$ is nonnegative, and zero only if $X\sim N(0,\mathrm{I})$. Completely equivalent to \eqref{EPI} and \eqref{FII}, respectively, are the inequalities \begin{align} \theta D(X) + \bar\theta D(Y) &\geq D(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y)\label{relEPI}\\ \theta I(X) + ~\bar\theta I(Y) &\geq I(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y),\label{relFII} \end{align} where $X,Y$ are independent zero-mean random vectors, $\theta\in[0,1]$ and $\bar{\theta}:=1-\theta$. Given their equivalence, we shall refer to inequalities \eqref{EPI} and \eqref{relEPI} collectively as the {entropy power inequality} (EPI), and inequalities \eqref{FII} and \eqref{relFII} collectively as the Fisher information inequality (FII). Evidently, the EPI and FII apply separately to the entropy and Fisher information functionals. However, in 1975, Gross established a remarkable inequality directly relating relative Fisher information to relative entropy \cite{gross1975logarithmic}. Namely, \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) := \frac{1}{2}I(X) - D(X)\geq 0, \label{GrossLSI} \end{align} which is known as the logarithmic Sobolev inequality (LSI) for standard Gaussian measure. The quantity $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X)$ is the deficit in the LSI associated to $X$, and is zero iff $X$ is a translate of the standard normal \cite{carlen1991superadditivity}. The LSI has a variety of important consequences including Talagrand's quadratic transportation cost inequality \cite{talagrand1996transportation}, the Gaussian concentration inequality for Lipschitz functions (e.g., \cite{ledoux2005concentration}), and the Gaussian Poincar\'e inequality. An interesting feature of the LSI (and many of its corollaries) is the fact that it has no effective dependence on dimension. The convolution inequalities satisfied by Fisher information and relative entropy also enjoy this dimension-free property. Although it was not recognized until the 1990s by Carlen \cite{carlen1991superadditivity}, Gross' LSI is in fact mathematically equivalent to the uncertainty principle \begin{align} \mathsf{p}(X) := \frac{1}{d}N(X) J(X) \geq 1,\label{stamIneq} \end{align} which was observed by Stam in his 1959 proof of \eqref{EPI} and \eqref{FII}. We refer to the quantity $\mathsf{p}(X)$ as the \emph{Stam defect} associated to $X$, and remark here that $\mathsf{p}(X)=1$ iff $X \sim N(0,\sigma^2 \mathrm{I})$ for some $\sigma^2>0$. In fact, \eqref{stamIneq} is a direct consequence of the EPI and the so-called de Bruijn identity, which suggests a quantitative relationship between the LSI and the EPI. Unfortunately, the derivation of the LSI from the EPI does not propagate any deficit terms, so only conditions for equality are carried through. In this paper, we fill this gap by proving a general inequality that interpolates between the LSI, the EPI and the FII. \subsection{Organization} The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:mainResults} contains our two main results, which are ultimately shown to be equivalent. In particular, Section \ref{sec:InterpLSI} gives a general interpolation inequality for the LSI and EPI, followed by a brief discussion. Section \label{sec:REPI} gives new reverse EPI and FII, and contains proofs of all main results. Section \ref{sec:Apps} provides applications of the main results, including consequences for information-theoretic central limit theorems, stability of the LSI with respect to HWI jumps, and a sharp form of Nelson's hypercontractive inequality. In Section \ref{sec:Conc}, we conclude by speculating on the possibility of geometric analogues of our main results. \section{Main Results}\label{sec:mainResults} \subsection{An Interpolation Inequality for the LSI and EPI}\label{sec:InterpLSI} \begin{theorem}\label{thm:main} Let $X,Y$ be independent, centered random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$. For any $\theta \in[0,1]$ \begin{align} D(X) + D(Y) \leq \frac{\bar \theta}{2}I(X) + \frac{ \theta}{2}I(Y) + D(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y). \label{mainInequality} \end{align} \end{theorem} Let us briefly discuss a few observations. If we adopt the convention that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) = \infty$ when $I(X)=\infty$, and $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) =\tfrac{1}{2}I(X)-D(X)$ otherwise, then \eqref{mainInequality} may be rewritten as \begin{align} \theta D(X) + \bar \theta D(Y) \leq \bar \theta \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \theta \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y)+ D(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y), \end{align} from which it is plain that \eqref{mainInequality} interpolates between the LSI for $X$, the LSI for $Y$ and the EPI. However, Theorem \ref{thm:main} also directly connects the LSI to the FII. Indeed, definitions and algebra yield the following equivalent form: \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y)+ \frac{ \theta}{2}I(X) + \frac{\bar \theta}{2}I(Y) \leq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y) + \frac{1}{2} I(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y),\label{mainFII} \end{align} which interpolates between the FII and the LSIs for $X$, $Y$ and the sum $\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y$. Although it is a weakening of \eqref{mainFII}, we may apply the FII to find that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} $ satisfies its own convolution inequality which remains an improvement of Gross' LSI: \begin{corollary}[Convolution inequality for the LSI]\label{cor:convLSI} Let $X,Y$ be independent random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$. For all $\theta\in[0,1]$ \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} Y) \leq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y).\label{convLSIineq} \end{align} \end{corollary} \begin{remark}The assumption of centered random vectors is not needed for \eqref{convLSIineq} due to the fact that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (\cdot)$ is translation invariant. In fact, the centering assumption is not needed in Theorem \ref{thm:main} either, and can be dealt with by incorporating the inner product $\langle \mathbb{E} X, \mathbb{E} Y\rangle$ into \eqref{mainInequality}. Details are straightforward and are left to the reader. \end{remark} Theorem \ref{thm:main} is essentially best possible for any choice of $X,Y$. Indeed, observe that definitions and the EPI imply \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y) % % &\leq 2 \left( \frac{1}{4} I(X) +\frac{1}{4}I(Y)-\frac{1}{2}I\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+Y)\right) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} \left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+Y)\right) \right).\label{sumDLSI_LB} \end{align} However, Theorem \ref{thm:main} implies via \eqref{mainFII} that \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y) &\geq \sup_{\theta\in[0,1]} \left( \frac{\theta}{2} I(X) +\frac{\bar \theta}{2}I(Y)-\frac{1}{2}I\left(\sqrt{\theta}X+\sqrt{\bar\theta}Y\right) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} \left(\sqrt{\theta}X+\sqrt{\bar\theta}Y\right) \right) \\ &\geq \frac{1}{4} I(X) +\frac{1}{4}I(Y)-\frac{1}{2}I\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+Y)\right) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} \left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+Y)\right), \label{sumDLSI_UB} \end{align} which differs from corresponding the upper bound \eqref{sumDLSI_LB} by precisely a factor of 2. Loosely speaking, the conjunction of \eqref{sumDLSI_LB} and \eqref{sumDLSI_UB} suggests that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X)+\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y)$ can be roughly decomposed into two nonnegative parts that depend jointly on $X,Y$: (i) the dissipation of Fisher information $\tfrac{1}{2}\left( I(X) + I(Y) \right) - I (\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X + Y ) )$; and (ii) the deficit in the LSI associated to the rescaled sum $\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+Y)$. On this note, we remark that neither of these quantities control one another in general. To see this, let $\rho \in (0,1)$ and consider Gaussian random vectors $X,Y$ with distributions: \begin{align} X\sim N\left(0 ,\begin{bmatrix} 1 & \rho \\ \rho & 1\end{bmatrix}\right) ~~~~~~ Y\sim N\left(0 ,\begin{bmatrix} 1 & -\rho \\ -\rho & 1\end{bmatrix}\right). \end{align} In this case, $\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X+Y) \sim N(0,I)$ so $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X+ Y)\right)=0$. However, \begin{align} \tfrac{1}{2}\left( I(X) + I(Y) \right) - I\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X + Y )\right) = \frac{2}{1-\rho^2} - 2 = \frac{2 \rho^2}{1-\rho^2}. \end{align} On the other hand, consider $X_$ to be an independent copy of $X$. In this case, $\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X + X_* )$ is equal to $X$ in distribution, so \begin{align} \tfrac{1}{2}\left( I(X) + I(X_) \right) - I\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}(X + X_ )\right) = 0. \end{align} However, we may readily compute that \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}( X+ X_)\right)=\frac{\rho^2}{1-\rho^2} + \frac{1}{2}\log (1-\rho^2) >\frac{\rho^2}{2}. \end{align} Another simple consequence of the above discussion is that, if $X,X_$ are independent and identically distributed, then \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) \asymp \frac{1}{2}\left( I(X) -I\left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)\right) \right) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} \left(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)\right), \label{decomposeDeficit} \end{align} where `$\asymp$' denotes equality up to an absolute constant factor. This suggests that the Fisher information jump $I(X) -I(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_))$ can be used to quantify the stability of the LSI, a topic we will return to in Section \ref{sec:HWIjumps}. Finally, we note that Theorem \ref{thm:main} allows us to easily deduce the (well-known) equality conditions for the LSI from those for the EPI. Indeed, since $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (\cdot)$ and $D(\cdot)$ are invariant to unitary transformations, it follows from Theorem \ref{thm:main} that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X)=\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y)=0$ only if \begin{align} \theta D(X) + \bar \theta D(Y) = D(\sqrt{\theta}X + \sqrt{\bar\theta} \mathbf{U}Y), \label{EPIeq} \end{align} for all $\theta\in[0,1]$ and unitary matrices $\mathbf{U}: \mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$. From conditions for equality in the EPI, this implies $\operatorname{Cov}(X)$ and $\operatorname{Cov}(Y)$ are proportional to $\mathrm{I}$; in fact, direct computation shows they must be equal to satisfy \eqref{EPIeq}. Thus, evaluation of $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X)$ for $X\sim N(\mu,\sigma^2\mathrm{I})$ allows us to conclude that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X)=0$ if and only if $X\sim N(\mu,\mathrm{I})$. \subsection{Reverse Entropy Power and Fisher Information Inequalities} \label{sec:REPI} Due to its fundamental role in information theory, there has been sustained interest in obtaining reverse forms of the entropy power inequality \eqref{EPI}. As shown by Bobkov and Chistyakov \cite{bobkov2015entropy}, the EPI cannot be reversed in general, at least not up to a constant factor. Nevertheless, progress has been made. A notable example of a reverse EPI is due to Bobkov and Madiman \cite{bobkov2012reverse}, who show that for independent random vectors $X,Y$ with log-concave densities, there exist linear volume preserving maps $u,v$ such that \begin{align} N(u(X) + v(Y)) \leq C (N(X) + N(Y)), \end{align} where $C$ is an absolute constant. Bobkov and Madiman's result mirrors Milman's reverse Brunn-Minkowski inequality \cite{milman1986inegalite}, which is pleasant since the EPI itself mirrors the Brunn-Minkowski inequality. A similar statement holds for a more general class of convex measures. See also the recent survey by Madiman, Melbourne and Xu \cite{madiman2016forward} for related results. Another example of a reverse EPI is due to Ball, Nayar and Tkocz \cite{ball2015reverse}, who restrict attention to the class of log-concave densities. They show that, for a symmetric log-concave vector $(X,Y)$ in $\mathbb{R}^2$, there is an absolute constant $\kappa$ such that \begin{align} N(X+Y)^{\kappa} \leq N(X)^{\kappa} + N(Y)^{\kappa}. \end{align} We show below that both the entropy power inequality \eqref{EPI} and the Fisher information inequality \eqref{FII} can be precisely reversed, up to factors that depend only on the Stam defects associated to $X$ and $Y$. In particular, if both $X$ and $Y$ each nearly saturate Stam's inequality \eqref{stamIneq}, then the EPI and FII will also be nearly saturated. Notably, strong regularity assumptions are not imposed. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:REPI} Let $X,Y$ be independent random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with finite second moment, and choose $\lambda$ to satisfy $\lambda/(1-\lambda) = N(Y)/N(X)$. Then \begin{align} N(X+Y) \leq \left( N(X)+N(Y) \right) \left( \lambda \mathsf{p}(X) + (1-\lambda) \mathsf{p}(Y)\right).\label{REPI} \end{align} Furthermore, if $J(X),J(Y)<\infty$, then \begin{align} \frac{1}{J(X+Y)}\leq \left(\frac{1}{J(X)}+\frac{1}{J(Y)} \right) \mathsf{p} (X) \mathsf{p} (Y) .\label{RFII} \end{align} \end{theorem} Since \eqref{REPI} does not immediately resemble either of the reverse inequalities mentioned above, let us briefly comment on how it may be understood in the context of known results. In particular, it is well known that entropy power is concave under the action of the heat semigroup \cite{costa1985new, dembo1989simple, villani2000short}. That is, if $G\sim N(0,\mathrm{I})$, then \begin{align} \frac{\d^2}{\d t^2}N(X+ \sqrt{t} G) \leq 0,\label{concaveEP} \end{align} which is the same as $N(X+ \sqrt{t} G)$ lying below its tangents lines. By the semigroup property, it suffices to consider the tangent line at $t=0$, so \eqref{concaveEP} is equivalent to \begin{align} N(X+\sqrt{t}G) &\leq N(X) + t \left(\frac{\d}{\d t}N(X+\sqrt{t}G) \Big\|_{t=0}\right)\\ &= N(X) + t\, \mathsf{p}(X), \end{align} where the equality follows by de Bruijn's identity (e.g., \cite{stam1959some, bakry2013analysis, carlen1991entropy}). This coincides exactly with \eqref{REPI} particularized to the case where $Y = \sqrt{t} G$. Thus, we may think of \eqref{REPI} as a generalization of `concavity of entropy power' beyond the heat semigroup. Inequality \eqref{REPI} may also be viewed as a strengthening of Stam's uncertainty principle \eqref{stamIneq}. Indeed, letting $X,X_$ be IID, \eqref{REPI} reduces to \begin{align} \mathsf{p}(X) \geq \frac{N(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2} (X+X_))}{N(X)}. \end{align} By the EPI, the term on the RHS is strictly greater than 1 unless $X$ is Gaussian. On this note, we mention that Carlen and Soffer \cite{carlen1991entropy} have shown that for $X$ centered with $\operatorname{Cov}(X)=\mathrm{I}$, there exists a nonnegative function $\Theta$ on $[0,\infty)$, strictly increasing from $0$ and depending only on certain decay and smoothness properties of $X$ such that \begin{align} \frac{N(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2} (X+X_))}{N(X)}\geq \exp\left(\frac{2}{d} \Theta (D(X)) \right). \end{align} Finally, we note that an equivalent version of Corollary \ref{cor:convLSI} for the Stam defect follows directly from \eqref{REPI} and the FII: \begin{corollary}[Convolution inequality for the Stam defect] For $X,Y$ be independent random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with finite second moment, \begin{align} \mathsf{p}(X+Y) \leq \mathsf{p}(X)\mathsf{p}(Y). \label{subStamDefect} \end{align} \end{corollary} The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:REPI} follows rather directly from a strengthening of the entropy power inequality proved recently by the author. To state it, we first recall some notation familiar to information theorists: Let $U,V$ have joint distribution $P_{UV}$ on the space $\mathcal{U}\times \mathcal{V}$ and let the respective marginals be denoted by $P_U,P_V$. The mutual information $I(U;V)$ between $U$ and $V$ is given by \begin{align} I(U;V) := \mathbb{E} \log \left( \frac{\d P_{UV}}{\d P_U \!\times \!P_V} \right) = \int_{\mathcal{U}\times \mathcal{V}} \log \left( \frac{\d P_{UV}}{\d P_U \!\times \!P_V} \right) \d P_{UV}. \end{align} \begin{theorem} \cite{courtade2016strengthening} Let $X,W$ be independent random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$, with $W$ Gaussian. Define $Z=X+W$. For any random variable $V$ such that $X,V$ are conditionally independent given $Z$, it holds that \begin{align} e^{-\tfrac{2}{d} I(X;V)}N(Z) \geq e^{-\tfrac{2}{d} I(Z;V)} N(X) + N(W).\label{sEPI} \end{align} \end{theorem} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:REPI}] Let $Y$ be any random vector on $\mathbb{R}^d$, independent of $X,W$, and suppose $X,Y$ have finite second moments. Then, $V = Z+Y$ is such that $X,V$ are conditionally independent given $Z$. By the definition of mutual information, \begin{align} I(X;V) &= h(X+Y+W) - h(Y+W)\\ I(Z;V) &= h(X+Y+W) - h(Y). \end{align} Thus, rearranging exponents in \eqref{sEPI} gives the following \begin{align} N(X+W)N(Y+W) \geq N(X)N(Y) + N(X+Y+W) N(W).\label{3EPI} \end{align} Now, let $W = \sqrt{t}G$, where $G\sim N(0,\mathrm{I})$, in which case \eqref{3EPI} particularizes to \begin{align} \frac{N(X+\sqrt{t}G)N(Y+\sqrt{t}G) - N(X)N(Y)}{t}\geq N(X+Y+\sqrt{t}G) \geq N(X+Y). \end{align} An application of de Bruijn's identity $\frac{\d}{\d t}N(X+\sqrt{t}G) \Big\|_{t=0}= \mathsf{p}(X)$ and the chain rule for derivatives proves \begin{align} N(X+Y) &\leq N(X) \mathsf{p}(Y) + N(Y) \mathsf{p}(X), \end{align} which is the same as \eqref{REPI}. Stam's inequality $\mathsf{p}(X+Y)\geq1$ and algebra (valid when $J(X),J(Y)<\infty$) shows that \eqref{RFII} is a corollary of \eqref{REPI}. \end{proof} Theorem \ref{thm:main} now follows from Theorem \ref{thm:REPI}. In fact: \begin{proposition} Theorems \ref{thm:main} and \ref{thm:REPI} are equivalent. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} For convenience, we recall the scaling properties $N(t Z) = t^2 N(Z)$ and $t^2 J(t Z) = J(Z)$. Also, if $G_s\sim N(0, s\mathrm{I})$, the relative entropy $D(Z\\|G_s)$ and Fisher information $I(Z\\|G_s)$ are related to $h(Z)$ and $J(Z)$ via \begin{align} h\left( Z\right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e s) &= -D(Z\\|G_s) + \frac{1}{2 s}\mathbb{E}\|Z\|^2-\frac{d}{2}\label{relEnt_s}\\ J(Z) &= I(Z\\|G_s) +\frac{2}{s}d - \frac{1}{s^2}\mathbb{E}\|Z\|^2,\label{relFI_s} \end{align} holding for any random vector $Z$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with $\mathbb{E}\|Z\|^2<\infty$. Further, $N(\cdot),J(\cdot)$ are translation invariant, so we may assume without loss of generality that all random vectors are centered. $\bullet$ Proof of \eqref{REPI} $\Rightarrow$ \eqref{mainInequality}: We assume $I(X),I(Y)<\infty$, else \eqref{mainInequality} is a tautology. Now, finiteness of $I(X)$ implies $\mathbb{E}\|X\|^2<\infty$, and similarly for $Y$ (see, e.g., \cite[Proof of Thm.~5]{carlen1991superadditivity}). Using the scaling properties of $N(\cdot)$ and $J(\cdot)$, \eqref{REPI} implies \begin{align} N\left( \sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y \right) \leq N(X) N(Y) \left( \frac{\bar \theta J( X) + \theta J(Y)}{d}\right), \end{align} Now, taking logarithms, multiplying through by $d/2$ and recalling $\log x\leq x-1$, we have: \begin{align} h\left( \sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y \right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e) &\leq h\left( X\right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e)+h\left( Y \right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e) \\ &\phantom{=}+ \frac{d}{2} \log\left( \frac{\bar \theta J( X) + \theta J(Y)}{d}\right)\notag \\ &\leq h\left( X\right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e)+h\left( Y \right) -\frac{d}{2}\log(2 \pi e) \\ &\phantom{\leq}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\bar \theta J(X)+\theta J(Y) \right) -\frac{d}{2}.\notag \end{align} Now, \eqref{mainInequality} follows from the identities \eqref{relEnt_s} and \eqref{relFI_s} for $s=1$. $\bullet$ Proof of \eqref{mainInequality} $\Rightarrow$ \eqref{REPI}: We may assume $X,Y$ have finite Fisher information and second moments. With this assumption in place, consider any $s>0$ and observe via straightforward manipulation using the identities \eqref{relEnt_s}-\eqref{relFI_s} that \eqref{mainInequality} is equivalent to \begin{align} D(X\\|G_s) + D(Y\\|G_s) \leq s \left( \frac{\bar\theta}{2} I(X\\|G_s)+ \frac{\theta}{2}I(Y\\|G_s)\right) + D\left( \sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y \big \\|G_s\right). \label{convLSIs} \end{align} Hence, using \eqref{relEnt_s}-\eqref{relFI_s} again and rearranging, we find that this is the same as \begin{align} \log N\left( \sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y \right) \leq \log N(X) N(Y) + s \frac{\bar \theta J(X) + \theta J(Y)}{d} - \log s - 1. \end{align} Recalling $1 + \log a = \inf_{s>0} \left( as - \log s\right)$, we may minimize the RHS over $s>0$ to obtain \begin{align} d N\left( \sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y \right) &\leq N(X)N(Y) \left( \bar \theta J(X) + \theta J(Y)\right)\\ &= N(\sqrt{\theta}X)N(\sqrt{\bar \theta}Y) \left( J(\sqrt{\theta} X) + J(\sqrt{\bar\theta} Y)\right), \end{align} where the last equality follows via the scaling properties of $N(\cdot)$ and $J(\cdot)$. A simple rescaling recovers \eqref{REPI} and completes the proof. \end{proof} \section{Applications} \label{sec:Apps} \subsection{Short-term convergence rates in information-theoretic CLTs} Let $Z$ be a centered random vector on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with $\operatorname{Cov}(Z)=\mathrm{I}$, and define the normalized sums $U_n = \tfrac{1}{\sqrt n} \sum_{k=1}^n Z_k$, where $Z_1, Z_2, \dots, Z_n$ are independent copies of $Z$. The entropic central limit theorem due to Barron \cite{barron1986entropy} asserts that $D(U_n)\to 0$, provided $D(U_{n_0})<\infty$ for some $n_0$. Likewise, the CLT for Fisher information, due to Barron and Johnson \cite{johnson2004fisher}, asserts that $I(U_n)\to 0$, provided $I(U_{n_0})<\infty$ for some $n_0$. In 2004, Artstein, Ball, Barthe and Naor established that each of these limit theorems enjoy monotone convergence \cite{artstein2004solution}. However, optimal estimates on the convergence rate remained open until recently. On this front, Bobkov, Chistyakov, Gennadiy and G{\"o}tze \cite{bobkov2013rate, bobkov2014berry} have settled a longstanding conjecture and shown that under moment conditions \begin{align} D(U_n) = O(1/n), \label{Bobkov} \end{align} which is consistent with the convergence rates predicted by the Berry-Esseen theorem. Although explicit constants are given for the $O(1/n)$ term as a function of the moments and $D(Z)$, the proof invokes local limit theorems for Edgeworth expansions, so the $o(1/n)$ terms are not explicitly quantified for finite $n$. Hence, although \eqref{Bobkov} provides good long-term estimates on convergence in the entropic CLT, it does not immediately provide any information about the short-term behavior of $D(U_n)$. The next result partially addresses this issue by establishing a \emph{lower} bound on $D(U_n)$ in terms of $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Z)$ and $n$. Roughly speaking, if $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Z) \ll D(Z)$, then $D(U_n)$ is assured to decay slowly on short time scales. A similar result holds for Fisher information. That is, if $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Z) \ll I(Z)$, then $I(U_n)$ will decay slowly on short time scales. More precisely, each of these quantities decay at most linearly in $n$, with slope $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Z)$. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:CLT} Let $Z$ be a centered random vector on $\mathbb{R}^d$ and define the normalized sums $U_n = \tfrac{1}{\sqrt n} \sum_{k=1}^n Z_k$, where $Z_1, Z_2, \dots, Z_n$ are independent copies of $Z$. The sequence $\{ \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_n) , n\geq 1\}$ is subadditive. Moreover, the following hold for all $n\geq 1$: \begin{align} D(U_n ) &\geq D(Z) - (n-1) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z) \label{entCLT}\\ \frac{1}{2} I(U_n ) &\geq \frac{1}{2} I(Z) - n\, \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z) + \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_n) .\label{fiCLT} \end{align} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We apply Theorem \ref{thm:main} with $\theta=\frac{n}{n+m}$, $X = U_n$ and $Y = U_m$. In this case, $\sqrt{\theta}X+ \sqrt{\bar\theta}Y$ is equal to $U_{n+m}$ in distribution, so we obtain the inequality \begin{align} D(U_{n+m}) \geq D(U_n) + D(U_m) - \frac{m}{2(m+n)} I(U_n) - \frac{n}{2(m+n)} I(U_m),\label{entBase} \end{align} or, equivalently \begin{align} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{m}) +\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{n}) \geq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{m+n}) + \frac{n}{2(m+n)} I(U_n) + \frac{m}{2(m+n)} I(U_m)-\frac{1}{2}I(U_{m+n}).\label{fiBase} \end{align} Subadditivity of $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{n})$ follows from applying \eqref{relFII}. Now, the proof of \eqref{entCLT} and \eqref{fiCLT} will follow by induction on $n+m$. We first prove \eqref{entCLT}. The base case for $n+m=2$ is immediate from \eqref{entBase} with $n=m=1$. So, by induction, we have \begin{align} D(U_{n+m}) % &\geq D(Z) - (n-1) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z) + D(Z) - (m-1) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z) \\ &\phantom{\geq}- \frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{m}{m+n} I(U_n) + \frac{n}{m+n} I(U_m)\right)\notag \\ &= D(Z) - (n+m-1) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z) +\frac{1}{2}I(Z) - \frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{m}{m+n} I(U_n) + \frac{n}{m+n} I(U_m)\right)\\ &\geq D(Z) - (n+m-1) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z), \end{align} where the final inequality is due to $I(Z) \geq I(U_m)$ for $m\geq 1$, a consequence of \eqref{relFII}. Now, we aim to prove \eqref{fiCLT}. The base case $n+m=2$ is immediate from \eqref{entBase} with $n=m=1$. Thus, by the inductive hypothesis, we have \begin{align} &(m+n) \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(Z)\notag\\ &\geq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{m}) + \frac{1}{2}\left( I(Z\|G)- I(U_{m}\|G)\right)\\ &\phantom{\geq}+\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{n}) + \frac{1}{2}\left( I(Z\|G)- I(U_{n}\|G)\right)\notag\\ &\geq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{m+n}) + I(Z\|G) -\left( \frac{m}{2(m+n)} I(U_n\|G) + \frac{n}{2(m+n)} I(U_m\|G)+\frac{1}{2}I(U_{m+n}\|G)\right)\label{fiIntermed}\\ &\geq \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(U_{m+n}) + \frac{1}{2}\left( I(Z\|G)- I(U_{m+n}\|G)\right), \end{align} where \eqref{fiIntermed} is \eqref{fiBase} and, as before, the final inequality follows due to $I(Z) \geq I(U_m)$ for $m\geq 1$. \end{proof} \subsection{The LSI is stable with respect to HWI jumps}\label{sec:HWIjumps} Recall the quadratic Wasserstein distance between random vectors $X,Y$ is defined according to \begin{align} W_2^2(X,Y) = \inf_{Q_{XY}\in \pi(X,Y)} \mathbb{E}\|X-Y\|^2, \end{align} where the infimum is over all couplings between $X,Y$ that preserve their given marginals $X\sim P_X,Y\sim P_Y$. In the case where $G\sim N(0,\mathrm{I})$, Talagrand's quadratic transportation cost inequality asserts that \begin{align} W_2^2(X) := W_2^2(X,G) \leq 2D(X).\label{talagrand} \end{align} Talagrand's inequality is closely related to Gross' LSI. Indeed, Otto and Villani \cite{otto2000generalization} proved a remarkable inequality that interpolates between \eqref{talagrand} and \eqref{GrossLSI}: \begin{align} D(X) \leq \sqrt{I(X)} W_2(X) - \frac{1}{2}W_2^2(X). \label{HWI} \end{align} This inequality is referred to as the HWI inequality, since it simultaneously relates the relative entropy (H), Wasserstein distance (W), and Fisher information (I) functionals. As with relative entropy and Fisher information, $W_2^2$ satisfies a convolution inequality (e.g., \cite{villani2003topics}). That is, if $X,Y$ are independent, centered random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$ \begin{align} W_2^2(\sqrt{\theta}X+\sqrt{\bar\theta} Y)\leq \theta W_2^2(X)+\bar\theta W_2^2(Y). \end{align} So, if $X,X^$ are centered i.i.d.~random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$, then we have the following inequalities: \begin{align} D(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) &\leq D(X)\\ W_2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) &\leq W_2(X)\\ I(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) &\leq I(X). \end{align} We shall use the term \emph{HWI jump} to refer to a deficit in any of the three inequalities above. An immediate consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:main} and \eqref{HWI} is that the LSI is stable with respect to HWI jumps. That is, if $X$ exhibits a jump under convolution with respect to any of the HWI functionals, then we can plainly lower bound the deficit in the LSI in terms of $I(X)$. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:HWIjump} Let $X,X^$ be centered i.i.d.~random vectors on $\mathbb{R}^d$. If any of the following hold: \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item $D(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_))\leq (1-\varepsilon)D(X)$, or \item $W_2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_))\leq (1-\varepsilon^{1/2})W_2(X)$, or \item $I(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_))\leq (1-\varepsilon)I(X)$, \end{enumerate} then $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(X)\geq \tfrac{\varepsilon}{4}I(X).$ \end{theorem} Before proving Theorem \ref{thm:HWIjump}, we remark that there have been a number of recent attempts to give quantitative stability estimates for the LSI. However, such stability estimates are generally dimension dependent \cite{bobkov2014bounds} or impose strong regularity conditions such as presence of a spectral gap \cite{fathi2014quantitative, indrei2013quantitative}. In contrast, Theorem \ref{thm:HWIjump} shows that HWI jumps give a dimension-free estimate of the deficit in the LSI that holds without stringent regularity assumptions. However, HWI jumps do not directly bound the distance of $X$ from normal except under regularity conditions such as presence of a spectral gap ($d=1$) \cite{ball2003entropy} and log-concave density ($d\geq 2$) \cite{ball2012entropy}, or a radial symmetry assumption ($d\geq 2$) \cite{courtade2016jumps}. Of course, one cannot hope that $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}}(X)\geq \varepsilon I(X)$ in general for some absolute constant $\varepsilon$, else it would contradict optimality of the constant in Gross' LSI. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:HWIjump}] The proof is an immediate consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:main} and the HWI inequality, but we include it for completeness. In all cases, we shall apply Theorem \ref{thm:main} with $Y=X_$ and $\theta=1/2$. In view of this, if (i) holds, then Theorem \ref{thm:main} implies \begin{align} D(X) \leq \frac{1}{2(1+\varepsilon)}I(X) = \frac{1}{2(1+\varepsilon)}I(X)\leq \frac{1}{2}I(X) - \frac{\varepsilon}{4}I(X). \end{align} Next, if (ii) holds, then using the HWI inequality and the convolution inequality for Fisher information, we have: \begin{align} 2 D(X) &\leq \frac{1}{2} I(X)+ D\left( \tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_) \right)\\ &\leq \frac{1}{2} I(X) + \sqrt{ I(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) } W_2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) - \frac{1}{2}W_2^2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_))\\ &\leq \frac{1}{2} I(X) + \sqrt{ I(X) } W_2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) - \frac{1}{2}W_2^2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)). \end{align} Equivalently, \begin{align} \frac{1}{2} I(X) \leq 2\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) + \sqrt{ I(X) } W_2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) - \frac{1}{2}W_2^2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)). \end{align} By the conjunction of Talagrand's inequality and the LSI, (ii) and the quadratic formula, we can conclude: \begin{align} (1-\varepsilon^{1/2})^2 I(X) &\geq (1-\varepsilon^{1/2})^2 \theta W_2^2(X) \\ &\geq W_2^2(\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+X_)) \\%&\geq &\geq \left( \sqrt{ I(X) } - 2 \sqrt{ \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) } \right)^2. \end{align} Taking square roots, rearranging and squaring again, we obtain the desired inequality. Finally, if (iii) holds, then the claim is immediate from \eqref{mainFII}. \end{proof} \subsection{A sharp form of Nelson's hypercontractivity estimate} It is well known that Gross' LSI is equivalent to Nelson's hypercontractivity estimate for the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup \cite{gross1975logarithmic}. To state Nelson's result, let us first introduce the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup $(P_t)_{t\geq 0}$ defined on functions $f: \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ as follows: \begin{align} P_t f(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} f( e^{-t} x + (1-e^{-2t})^{1/2}y) \d \gamma(y), \end{align} where $\gamma$ denotes the standard Gaussian measure on $\mathbb{R}^d$. Nelson's result is as follows: \begin{theorem} \cite{nelson1973free} For $f\in L^p(\gamma)$ \begin{align} \\|P_t f\\|_{L^q(\gamma)} \leq \\| f\\|_{L^p(\gamma)} \label{NelsonHC} \end{align} for all $q \geq p >1$ such that $q\leq 1 + (p-1)e^{2t}$. \end{theorem} The essential idea behind Gross' proof of \eqref{NelsonHC} from the LSI is as follows: Let $q(t) = 1 + (p-1)e^{2t}$. If $f\geq 0$ is a smooth function, then $\\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)}$ is differentiable on $t\in[0,\infty)$ with derivative \begin{align} \frac{\d}{\d t} \log \left( \\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \right) % &=\frac{q'(t)}{q^2(t)} D(X_t) - \frac{2(q(t) - 1)}{q^2(t) } \frac{1}{2}I(X_t), \end{align} where $X_t$ is the random variable having density (with respect to $\gamma$) proportional to $(P_t f)^{q(t)}$. On account of the fact that $q'(t) = 2(q(t)-1)$, Gross' LSI implies \begin{align} \frac{\d}{\d t} \\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \leq 0. \end{align} Since $\left. \\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \right\|_{t=0} = \\| f\\|_{L^p(\gamma)}$, Nelson's result follows for smooth $f$. The extension to $f \in L^p(\gamma)$ follows by a density argument. The reverse implication is also apparent. That is, in order for \eqref{NelsonHC} to hold for smooth $f\geq 0$, we must have $ \frac{\d}{\d t} \\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \leq 0$ at $t=0$, which is precisely Gross' LSI for the random variable $X$ having density (with respect to $\gamma$) proportional to $f^p$. Indeed, by the semigroup property, Nelson's inequality is completely characterized by the behavior of $\\| P_t f\\|_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)}$ in a neighborhood of $t=0$. Extending this to the setting of Theorem \ref{thm:main} is straightforward. Before we state the extension, let us introduce some notation. For $f,g\in L^p(\gamma)$, let $X$ be the random vector having density (with respect to $\gamma$) proportional to $\|f\|^p$, and let $Y$ be the random vector having density (with respect to $\gamma$) proportional to $\|g\|^p$. Further, define their centered counterparts $\hat X = X-\mathbb{E} X$ and $\hat Y =Y-\mathbb{E} Y$, and the associated entropy production functional: \begin{align} E_{p,\theta}(f,g) := \theta D(\hat X) + \bar\theta D(\hat Y) - D(\sqrt{\theta} \hat X + \sqrt{\bar \theta } \hat Y). \end{align} We have the following improvement to Nelson's result, which interpolates between the hypercontractive estimates for two functions $f,g\in L^p(\gamma)$: \begin{theorem} \label{thm:NelsonNew} Let $p'$ denote the H\"older conjugate of $p$. For smooth functions $f,g\in L^p(\gamma)$, \begin{align} \\| P_t f\\|^{\bar \theta }_{L^{q}(\gamma)} \\| P_t g\\|^{ \theta }_{L^{q}(\gamma)} \leq \exp\left( - \frac{2\, t }{p \,p'\,} E_{p,\theta}(f,g) + o(t) \right) \\| f\\|_{L^p(\gamma)}^{\bar \theta} \\| g\\|_{L^p(\gamma)}^{ \theta} \end{align} for all $q \geq p >1\geq \theta \geq 0$ such that $q\leq 1 + (p-1)e^{2t}$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We proceed in a manner identical to Gross' argument outlined above. In particular, we may assume $f,g\geq 0$. Then, using the definitions of $X,Y$ implicit in the definition of $E_{p,\theta}(f,g)$, we have \begin{align} \left. \frac{\d}{\d t} \log \left( \\| P_t f\\|^{\bar \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \\| P_t g\\|^{ \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \right) \right\|_{t=0} &=- \bar \theta \frac{q'(0)}{q^2(0)} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (X) - \theta \frac{q'(0)}{q^2(0)} \delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (Y)\\ &\leq - \frac{2(p-1)}{p^2} \left( \theta D(\hat X) + \bar\theta D(\hat Y) - D(\sqrt{\theta} \hat X + \sqrt{\bar \theta } \hat Y) \right)\\ &= - \frac{2(p-1)}{p^2} E_{p,\theta}(f,g). \end{align} where the inequality follows from Theorem \ref{thm:main}, translation invariance of $\delta_{\mathsf{LSI}} (\cdot)$ and definition of $q(t)$. Thus, since $\\| P_t f\\|^{\bar \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \\| P_t g\\|^{ \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)}$ is differentiable in $t\in[0,\infty)$ by the smoothness assumption, it follows that \begin{align} \log \left( \\| P_t f\\|^{\bar \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \\| P_t g\\|^{ \theta }_{L^{q(t)}(\gamma)} \right) \leq \log\left( \\| f\\|_{L^p(\gamma)}^{\bar \theta} \\| g\\|_{L^p(\gamma)}^{ \theta}\right) - t \frac{2(p-1)}{p^2} E_{p,\theta}(f,g) + o(t) \end{align} as desired. \end{proof} \begin{remark} The smoothness assumption on $f,g$ cannot be immediately eliminated in Theorem \ref{thm:NelsonNew} by a density argument. Indeed, smooth functions may be dense in $L^p(\gamma)$, but the functional $E_{p,\theta}(f,g)$ is not necessarily (semi-)continuous in its arguments with respect to the $L^p(\gamma)$-norm, since relative entropy is only weakly lower semicontinuous in general. % \end{remark} \section{Concluding Remarks}\label{sec:Conc} To close, we briefly speculate on the potential for geometric analogues of Theorem \ref{thm:REPI}. The EPI is often compared to the Brunn-Minkowski inequality, which states that for two nonempty compact subsets $A,B$ of $\mathbb{R}^d$, \begin{align} \operatorname{Vol} (A+B)^{1/d}\geq \operatorname{Vol} (A)^{1/d}+ \operatorname{Vol} (B)^{1/d}, \end{align} where $A + B$ denotes the Minkowski sum $A+B:=\{\,a+b\in \mathbb {R} ^{d}\mid a\in A,\ b\in B\,\}$. Indeed, if $X$ is uniformly distributed on $A$, then $2\pi e \,N(X) = \operatorname{Vol} (A)^{2/d}$. As already seen in Section \ref{sec:REPI}, the reverse EPI due to Bobkov and Madiman compares similarly with Milman's reverse {B}runn--{M}inkowski inequality, which holds when $A,B$ are convex. The classical isoperimetric inequality states that, for a sufficiently regular subset $A $ of $\mathbb{R}^d$, the surface area $\|\partial A\|$ exceeds that of $\mathcal{B}_A$, a ball in $\mathbb{R}^d$ with the same volume as $A$. Notably, the isoperimetric inequality can be derived from the Brunn-Minkowski inequality in a manner very similar to how Stam's inequality \eqref{stamIneq} follows from the EPI (e.g., \cite{costa1984similarity}). Thus, there is a strong analogy between these information-theoretic inequalities and their geometric counterparts. In light of this, we are moved to speculate that a geometric analogue to Theorem \ref{thm:main} may hold. For example, it seems reasonable to posit the following for sufficiently regular $A,B\subset\mathbb{R}^d$: \begin{align} \operatorname{Vol} (A+B)^{1/d} \leq \left( \operatorname{Vol} (A)^{1/d}+ \operatorname{Vol} (B)^{1/d}\right) \left( \lambda \frac{\|\partial A \|}{\|\partial \mathcal{B}_A \|} + \bar{\lambda} \frac{\|\partial B \|}{\|\partial \mathcal{B}_B \|} \right), \end{align} where $\lambda$ is chosen to satisfy $\lambda/(1-\lambda) = \operatorname{Vol} (B)^{1/d} / \operatorname{Vol} (A)^{1/d}$. As of now, we have made no attempt to prove or disprove this inequality. Finally, analogous to \eqref{subStamDefect}, we might expect to find that, for sufficiently regular $A,B\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ \begin{align} \frac{\|\partial (A+B) \|}{\|\partial \mathcal{B}_{A+B} \|} \leq \frac{\|\partial A \|}{\|\partial \mathcal{B}_A \|} \frac{\|\partial B \|}{\|\partial \mathcal{B}_B \|} . \end{align} Again, we have made no attempt to prove or disprove this inequality. \subsection*{Acknowledgment} This work was supported in part by NSF grants CCF-1528132 and CCF-0939370 (Center for Science of Information). \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} In modern engineering, computational simulations (\emph{e.g. } finite element-based simulations) have become a popular tool for predicting and analysing the behaviour of mechanical systems or engineering structures. The increasing knowledge in science and engineering leads to models of larger complexity, which requires increasing computational resources. At the same time, awareness on quantitative reliability, robustness, and design optimization is growing. Engineers are more and more concerned with the quantification of uncertainties \citep{SudretHDR,Derocquigny2012,Forrester2008}. In this context, a typical workflow consists of defining a computational model, determining a model for the uncertain input parameters, then propagating and analysing the uncertainty in the quantities of interest (QoI). The uncertainty in input parameters is traditionally quantified by probability theory, which describes the variability of a parameter by a single measure. However, in many situations probability theory is not appropriate to quantify completely uncertainty in the parameters. Indeed, aleatory uncertainty corresponds to the natural variability of an input parameter (non-reducible), whereas epistemic uncertainty is related to lack of knowledge which, in principle, could be reduced by gathering more information (\emph{e.g. } data points, measurements) \citep{Kiureghian2009}. A number of methods have been proposed to capture the characteristics of so-called \emph{imprecise probabilities} which include aleatory as well as epistemic uncertainties. Amongst those methods are Dempster-Shafer structures \citep{Dempster1967,Shafer1976}, possibility theory \citep{Dubois1988}, Bayesian hierarchical models \citep{Gelman2009}, fuzzy sets \citep{Moller2004}, probability-boxes (p-boxes) \citep{Ferson1996}, clouds \citep{Neumaier2004,Destercke2008}, and random sets \citep{Matheron1975,Molchanov2005}. The focus of this paper lies on p-boxes, which are defined by lower and upper boundary curves to the cumulative distribution function of an input variable. In the context of probabilistic input, uncertainty propagation methods have been widely studied in the last decades through Monte Carlo simulation. However, when considering p-boxes in the input space, uncertainty propagation is more complex. A much lower number of methods have been developed for propagating p-boxes, amongst which are nested Monte Carlo algorithms \citep{Eldred2009,He2015} and interval-analysis-based algorithms \citep{Helton2004,Helton2004a}. These algorithms require a large number of model evaluations to ensure an accurate estimate of the uncertainty in the QoIs. Then, in the general case of expensive-to-evaluate models, these types of algorithms may become intractable. A popular strategy to reduce computational costs in uncertainty propagation is the use of meta-models in order to surrogate the exact model by an approximative, inexpensive-to-evaluate function \citep{SudretBookPhoon2015}. Common meta-modelling techniques are Gaussian process models (a.k.a Kriging) \citep{Santner2003,Krige1951}, Polynomial Chaos Expansions (PCE) \citep{GhanemBook2003} and support vector machines \citep{Gunn1998}. Traditionally, meta-modelling techniques have been used in the context of probabilistic input in a variety of problems such as uncertainty propagation \citep{BlatmanPEM2010,SchobiSudretIJ4UQ2015}, sensitivity analysis \citep{Sudret2008c}, structural reliability analysis \citep{Echard2011,Balesdent2013,SchobiASCE2015} and design optimization \citep{Dubourg2011a,MalikiSMO2016}. In contrast, meta-modelling techniques have only been used in few occasions to propagate uncertainties modelled by imprecise probabilities. Recent contributions include \cite{Chen2015b}, where fuzzy sets are propagated using generalized polynomial chaos meta-models, \cite{Hu2015}, where Kriging is used to estimate failure probabilities, and \cite{Li2012}, where epistemic uncertainty is propagated using polynomial surrogate models. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach to propagate uncertainties modelled by p-boxes through complex computational models using sparse non-intrusive polynomial chaos expansions. The paper is structured as follows: Section~\ref{sec:impre} introduces the definition of p-boxes followed by the definition of two case studies inspired by engineering practice. Uncertainty propagation and related algorithms are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:free}. Section~\ref{sec:2meta} introduces the proposed approach, which makes use of meta-models at two levels of the uncertainty propagation workflow. Three applications (Section~\ref{sec:appl}) are used to illustrate and discuss the proposed method. The paper terminates with conclusions in Section~\ref{sec:conc}. \section{Imprecise probability} \label{sec:impre} \subsection{Probability-boxes} \label{sec:pbox} {Consider the probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{F},\mathbb{P})$, where $\Omega$ denotes the outcome space equipped with the $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{F}$ and a probability measure $\mathbb{P}$. Let us denote by $X$ a random variable defined by the mapping $X:\, \omega\in\Omega \mapsto X(\omega)\in\mathcal{D}_X\subset \mathbb{R}$, where $\omega\in\Omega$ is an elementary event and $\mathcal{D}_X$ is the support domain of $X$. A random variable $X$ is typically characterized by its \emph{cumulative distribution function} (CDF) $F_X(x) \overset{\rm def}{=} \Prob{X\leq x}$ or, in case of continuous variables, by its \emph{probability distribution function} (PDF) $f_X(x) = \text{d}F_{X}(x) / \text{d}x$. } {As seen in the definitions above, probability theory provides a single measure to quantify uncertainty in $X$. In other words, it is assumed that the uncertainty is known and quantifiable by a probability distribution through its CDF (and related PDF). In many cases, however, knowledge on $X$ is incomplete and probability theory is not sufficient to describe the uncertainty. This motivates the introduction of so-called \emph{probability-boxes} (p-boxes) which account for aleatory (natural variability) as well as for epistemic uncertainty in the description of variable $X$.} Mathematically speaking, a \emph{p-box} is defined by lower and upper bounds to the CDF of $X$, denoted by $\underline{F}_X$ and $\overline{F}_X$ respectively \citep{Ferson1996,Ferson2004}. For any value $x\in \mathcal{D}_X$ the true but unknown CDF lies within these bounds, \emph{i.e. } $\underline{F}_X(x)\leq F_X(x) \leq \overline{F}_X(x), \ \forall x\in \mathcal{D}_X$. The boundary curves of the p-box mark extremes of the CDF and are thus themselves CDFs by definition. Note that this type of p-boxes is called \emph{free} p-boxes in the literature as opposed to parametric p-boxes, which are defined as a distribution the parameters of which are modelled by intervals \cite{Ferson2003,SchoebiICASP2015}. In this paper, only free p-boxes are discussed, because they are a generalization of parametric p-boxes. Hence in the remainder of the paper, the adjective \emph{free} will be omitted in the context of free p-boxes for the sake of simplicity. The name probability-\emph{box} comes from the fact that $\underline{F}$ and $\overline{F}$ define an intermediate space which resembles a box, as it can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:pbox}. When the bounds of the p-box coincide for every $x\in X$, \emph{i.e. } $\underline{F}_X(x)=\overline{F}_X(x)$, the corresponding p-box degenerates into a single CDF, as it is usual in standard probability theory. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_pbox_free.pdf} \caption{{Free probability-box -- boundary curves and realizations of the true but unknown CDF} \label{fig:pbox}} \end{figure} The framework of probability-boxes is strongly connected to Dempster-Shafer's theory of evidence \citep{Dempster1967,Shafer1976}, as previously discussed in \emph{e.g. } \cite{Walley2000,Ferson2004a}. The bounds $\underline{F}_X$ and $\overline{F}_X$ can be interpreted as belief and plausibility measures for the event $\{X\leq x\}$ (see also Figure~\ref{fig:pbox}). The \emph{belief} describes the minimum amount of probability that \emph{must} be associated with the event $\{X\leq x\}$ whereas the \emph{plausibility} describes the maximum amount of probability that \emph{might} be associated to the same event. \subsection{Determination of p-box bounds} A number of methods exist for determining the boundary curves of the p-box depending on the type of information accessible \citep{Ferson2003}. These methods include robust Bayesian analysis \citep{Berger1985,Zhang2013}, Chebyshev's inequalities \citep{Oberguggenberger2008,Chebyshev1874}, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov confidence limits \citep{Kolmogoroff1941,Smirnov1939,Zhang2013}. Additionally, the type of information can be diverse: precise or imprecise data from measurements, expert opinions obtained in a survey, or a mixture of both. Hence in the sequel, two cases are distinguished for defining a p-box by aggregation of data in the main part of this paper. These cases lead us to define two scenarios inspired by the engineering practice. \subsubsection{Case \#1 -- interval-valued expert opinions} \label{sec:pbox:case1} Consider the case where different experts are asked to name an interval for describing the possible values of a variable. Expert $i=1,\ldots,n_E$ provides an interval $x^{(i)}\in\bra{\underline{x}^{(i)},\overline{x}^{(i)}}$. Additionally, a mass of credibility $w^{(i)}$ is assigned to each expert accounting for the expert's knowledge. Note that the credibility is defined here as a relative value so that $\sum_{i=1}^{n_E} w^{(i)} = 1$. Figure~\ref{fig:case1:1} displays a set of seven expert opinions (horizontal intervals) and their credibility (number next to intervals). A large variety of methods for aggregating multiple sources of information have been proposed in the literature \citep{Ferson2003,Ayyub2001,Ayyub2006}. In this paper, the \emph{mixture method} described in \cite{Ferson2003} is applied under the assumption that the disagreement between the various estimates of the variable represents actual variability (\emph{i.e. } aleatory uncertainty). According to the mixture method, the lower and upper boundary of the p-box are defined as the CDF of the lower bounds $\underline{x}^{(i)}$ and the upper bounds $\overline{x}^{(i)}$ of the intervals taking into consideration their weights: \begin{equation} \label{eq:case1} \underline{F}_X(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{n_E} w^{(i)}\cdot \mathbb{I}_{\underline{x}^{(i)}\leq x}(x), \qquad \overline{F}_X(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{n_E} w^{(i)}\cdot \mathbb{I}_{\overline{x}^{(i)}\leq x}(x), \end{equation} where $\mathbb{I}_{(\cdot)}$ is the indicator function with $\mathbb{I} = 1$ for a true subscript statement and $\mathbb{I} = 0$ otherwise. The resulting p-box corresponding to the expert opinions in Fig.~\ref{fig:case1:1} is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:case1:2}. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \subfigure[Expert intervals \label{fig:case1:1}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.4\linewidth]{expertopinions.pdf} } \subfigure[Aggregated p-box \label{fig:case1:2}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.4\linewidth]{expertCDF.pdf} } \caption{Case \#1 -- p-box as a combination of expert intervals and credibility measures \label{fig:case1}} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Case \#2 -- CDF-shaped expert opinions} \label{sec:pbox:case2} \paragraph{Case \#2(a)} Experts are asked to give their opinion on the behaviour of a variable in the form of a CDF. Each expert provides a formulation for the CDF denoted by $F_X^{(i)}, i=1,\ldots,n_E$, where the support of $X$ is possibly unbounded. An example of seven expert CDFs is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:case2:1}. Assuming that these seven CDFs describe the uncertainty in the system (epistemic and aleatory) the p-box can be generated by the envelope of the experts' CDFs \citep{Ferson2003,Fu2011}: \begin{equation} \underline{F}_X(x) = \min_{i=1,\ldots,n_E} F_X^{(i)}(x), \qquad \overline{F}_X(x) = \max_{i=1,\ldots,n_E} F_X^{(i)}(x), \qquad \forall x\in\mathcal{D}_X. \end{equation} Note that contrary to Case \#1, the credibility of the experts is not considered in Case \#2. Assuming that the true CDF lies between the experts' CDF, the envelope of all opinions includes the true CDF, thus forming a valid p-box. The resulting p-box for the CDFs in Fig.~\ref{fig:case2:1} can be found in Fig.~\ref{fig:case2:2}. The boundary curves of the p-box consist of sections of different input CDFs. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \subfigure[Expert CDFs \label{fig:case2:1}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.4\linewidth]{expertopinionCDF.pdf} } \subfigure[Aggregated p-box \label{fig:case2:2}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.4\linewidth]{expertopinionCDFaggregated.pdf} } \caption{Case \#2 -- p-box as a combination of expert CDFs \label{fig:case2}} \end{figure} \paragraph{Case \#2(b)} An alternative way to define a p-box is to choose a distribution family and set interval-valued distribution parameters. The p-box is defined by the envelope of the set of distributions as in Case~\#2(a). The p-box bounds are then found by: \begin{equation} \label{eq:3} \underline{F}_X(x) = \min_{\ve{\theta}\in\mathcal{D}_{\ve{\Theta}}} F_X(x\|\ve{\theta}), \quad \overline{F}_X(x) = \max_{\ve{\theta}\in\mathcal{D}_{\ve{\Theta}}} F_X(x\|\ve{\theta}), \quad \forall x\in\mathcal{D}_X, \end{equation} where $\ve{\theta}$ is a vector of distribution parameters which are defined in a domain $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{\Theta}}$ \citep{Ferson2003,Zhang2010}. Note that in this case, only the bounds are used for further analyses. The information about the distribution family is ignored (as opposed to so-called parametric p-boxes) once $\underline{F}_X$ and $\overline{F}_X$ are defined by Eq.~(\ref{eq:3}). \section{Propagation of p-boxes} \label{sec:free} \subsection{Computational model} A \emph{computational model} is defined as a deterministic mapping of the $M$-dimensional input vector $\ve{x}$ to the QoI $y$ (considered scalar here for the sake of simplicity): \begin{equation} \mathcal{M}: \ve{x}\in\mathcal{D}_X\subset\mathbb{R}^M \rightarrow y=\mathcal{M}(\ve{x})\in\mathbb{R}, \end{equation} where $\ve{x} = \prt{ x_1,\ldots,x_M }^{\textsf T}$. The computational model is considered a \emph{black box} of which only the input vector $\ve{x}$ and the QoI $y$ are accessible, as it is usual for legacy computer codes that cannot be modified internally for the sake of uncertainty quantification. Due to uncertainties in the input vector $\ve{x}$, the latter is represented by an imprecise random vector $\ve{X}=\prt{ X_1,\ldots,X_M }^{\textsf T}$ whose components are assumed statistically independent throughout this paper. Each component $X_i$ is modelled by a p-box, which is propagated through the computational model to an output p-box $Y$: \begin{equation} Y = \mathcal{M}\prt{\ve{X}}. \end{equation} In the context of p-boxes, the uncertainty propagation boils down to the estimation of the bounds on the CDF of the QoI $Y$, namely $\underline{F}_Y$ and $\overline{F}_Y$. In the following sections, new algorithms for propagating p-boxes are proposed and discussed. \subsection{Slicing algorithm} \label{sec:free:slice} The \emph{slicing algorithm} transforms the propagation of p-boxes into the propagation of a large number of intervals, the propagation of which is a well-established field of research related to constraint optimization algorithms \citep{Moore1966,Stolfi2003,Dong1987}. The main steps for applying this algorithm are described in the following: \begin{enumerate} \item \emph{Discretization}: Discretization methods approximate the p-box by a set of intervals and corresponding probability masses in order to facilitate the uncertainty propagation task. A number of discretization schemes are available in the literature \citep{Tonon2004,Zhang2010}. The \emph{outer discretization method} is now briefly reviewed here. Each input p-box is discretized into a number of interval and associated probability masses. For variable $X_i$, the interval $[0,1]$ is divided into $n_{X_i}$ subintervals with corresponding thickness $m_{i}^{(j)}$ where $j=1,\ldots,n_{X_i}$ and $\sum_j m_{i}^{(j)}=1$ (Figure~\ref{fig:slicing:2}). Let us denote the lower and upper boundary of these intervals by $\underline{c}_{i}^{(j)}$ and $\overline{c}_{i}^{(j)}$, respectively. Given the bounds of the p-box $[\underline{F}_{X_i},\overline{F}_{X_i}]$, the corresponding intervals in $X_i$ are: \begin{equation} \label{eq:xinterval} \underline{x}_{i}^{(j)} = \overline{F}_{X_i}^{-1} \prt{ \underline{c}_{i}^{(j)} }, \qquad \overline{x}_{i}^{(j)} = \underline{F}_{X_i}^{-1} \prt{ \overline{c}_{i}^{(j)} }, \end{equation} for $j=1,\ldots,n_{X_i}$ and $i = 1,\ldots,M$. The intervals of interest are then $\bra{\underline{x}_{i}^{(j)},\overline{x}_{i}^{(j)}}$ and the associated probability masses are $m_{X_i}^{(j)}$, which together characterize the p-boxes of the input $X_i$. \item \emph{Interval propagation}: Let $\mathcal{K}$ be a set of multi-indices defining a combination of intervals of each input parameter $X_i$: \begin{equation} \mathcal{K}=\acc{\ve{k}=(k_1,\ldots,k_M), \ k_i\in[1,\ldots,n_{X_i}, \ i=1,\ldots,M] }. \end{equation} Let $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}}$ be the hyperrectangle defined by: \begin{equation} \mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}} = \bra{\underline{x}_1^{(k_1)},\overline{x}_1^{(k_1)} } \times \ldots \times \bra{\underline{x}_M^{(k_M)},\overline{x}_M^{(k_M)} }. \end{equation} For each hyperrectangle $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}}$, two optimization problems are solved to define the associated bounds of the QoI: \begin{equation} \label{eq:ymin} \underline{y}^{(\ve{k})} = \min_{\ve{x} \in\mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}}} \mathcal{M}\prt{\ve{x}}, \qquad \overline{y}^{(\ve{k})} = \max_{\ve{x} \in\mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}}} \mathcal{M}\prt{\ve{x}}. \end{equation} The probability mass associated to $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{k}}$ can be computed by: \begin{equation} \label{eq:m} m^{(\ve{k})}_Y = m_{X_1}^{(k_1)} \cdot m_{X_2}^{(k_2)} \cdot\ldots\cdot m_{X_M}^{(k_M)}. \end{equation} Correspondingly, the p-box of the QoI is eventually characterized by $n_Y = n_{X_1}\cdot n_{X_2}\cdot\ldots\cdot n_{X_M}$ intervals $\bra{\underline{y}^{(\ve{k})},\overline{y}^{(\ve{k})}}$ with associated probability masses given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:m}). Hence, $2\cdot n_Y$ optimization algorithms (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:ymin})) are required in the $M$-dimensional optimization domain in order to propagate the input p-boxes. When $M$ and $n_{X_i}$ become large, this quickly becomes intractable due to the large number of optimizations. This problem is often referred to as the \emph{curse of dimensionality}. A number of methodologies can be found in the literature to simplify the optimizations, amongst which are the classical interval analysis \citep{Moore1966}, affine arithmetic \citep{Stolfi2003} and the vertex method \citep{Dong1987,Dubois2004}. However, these simplifications require restrictive assumptions, such as monotonicity in the computational model, to ensure accuracy. Other optimization algorithms can be applied such as local, derivative-based methods (\emph{e.g. } BFGS algorithm \citep{Byrd1999}), global methods (\emph{e.g. } genetic algorithms \citep{Goldberg1989} and differential evolution algorithms \citep{Storn1997,Deng2013}) and hybrid methods (\emph{i.e. } with a global and local component) for solving directly Eq.~(\ref{eq:ymin}). They are more accurate in the general case but require extensive computational resources. \item \emph{Merging}: The result of the previous step is a set of $n_Y=\|\mathcal{K}\|$ intervals $\bra{\underline{y}^{(\ve{k})},\overline{y}^{(\ve{k})}}$ and the corresponding probability masses $m_y^{(\ve{k})}$. The response p-box is then obtained by converting $\acc{\overline{y}^{(\ve{k})},m_y^{(\ve{k})}}$ and $\acc{\underline{y}^{(\ve{k})},m_y^{(\ve{k})}}$ to weighted empirical CDFs $\underline{F}_Y$ and $\overline{F}_Y$ as explained in Eq.~(\ref{eq:case1}). \end{enumerate} Figure~\ref{fig:slicing} illustrates the main steps of the slicing algorithm on a one-dimensional problem. The bounds of the input p-box are defined by two Gaussian distributions with $\mu_X = \bra{1.5,\, 2}$ and $\sigma_X = [0.7,\ 1.0]$ (Case~\#2(b)) (Figure~\ref{fig:slicing:1}). The p-box is discretized with $n_X=20$ equally spaced subintervals, \emph{i.e. } $m^{(j)}=1/20$ (Figure~\ref{fig:slicing:2}). The computational model is $y = x/2+4$ (Figure~\ref{fig:slicing:3}). Figure~\ref{fig:slicing:4} illustrates the influence of $n_X$ on the accuracy of the response p-box. It can be seen from this simple example already that the number of discretization points $n_{X_i}$ is crucial to the accuracy of the response p-box: the approximated response p-box is conservative in the sense that it is wider than the exact response p-box obtained analytically. The larger $n_{X_i}$ the more accurate the approximated p-box, and at the same time the larger the computational costs. This effect is more pronounced when the input vector is multi-dimensional, as discussed later in Section~\ref{sec:appl:nd}. Note that in Case \#1, the intervals might be chosen to represent each expert's opinion. Then, the expert's credibility is equal to the probability mass in uncertainty propagation, \emph{i.e. } $m^{(j)} = w^{(j)}, \ j=1,\ldots,n_{X_i}$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[Input p-box \label{fig:slicing:1}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_ia_pbox.pdf} } \subfigure[Discretization ($n_X=20$) \label{fig:slicing:2}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_ia_probint.pdf} }\\ \subfigure[Interval propagation ($y=\mathcal{M}(x)=x/2+4$) \label{fig:slicing:3}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_ia_propa.pdf} } \subfigure[Merging \label{fig:slicing:4}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_ia_end2.pdf} } \caption{Illustration of the slicing algorithm. The bounds of the input p-box are defined from Gaussian CDFs with interval-valued mean value and standard deviation. $n_X=20$ intervals are used. \label{fig:slicing}} \end{figure} \subsection{Problem conversion} \label{sec:free:problem} A disadvantage of the slicing algorithm is the full-factorial design, which leads to an {exponentially} large number of optimizations for high-dimensional problems, namely $n_Y=\|\mathcal{K}\|=n_{X_1}\cdot n_{X_2}\cdot \ldots\cdot n_{X_M}$. In order to circumvent the effects of the full factorial approach, the imprecise problem setting is reformulated in this section, as originally proposed by \cite{Zhang2010,SchoebiESREL2015}. {They replace the full factorial design of the slicing algorithm with a random sampling-based approach as follows. Consider the slicing algorithm with a large number of subintervals $n_{X_i}\rightarrow\infty$ (and $\|\mathcal{K}\|\rightarrow\infty$) in order to accurately estimate the response p-box $Y$. The corresponding number of response intervals will be $n_Y\rightarrow\infty$, too. Then, $Y$ can be approximated by propagating a random subset of $\mathcal{K}'\subset\mathcal{K}$ instead of the entire set $\mathcal{K}$ to reduce the computational costs. This approximation allows to estimate $Y$ more efficiently than the full-factorial design.} {Instead of creating an infinite set $\mathcal{K}$, the same problem can be interpreted with probabilistic variables.} Consider the random vector $\ve{C}$ made of independent, uniformly distributed variables in the unit-hypercube domain $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{C}} = [0,1]^M$. The random variable $C_i$ shall describe the CDF value of input variable $X_i$, \emph{i.e. } $C_i = F_{X_i}(X_i)$. {In other words, $C_i$ describes the index of one of the $n_{X_i}\rightarrow\infty$ subintervals in $\mathcal{K}$.} Given a p-box in $X_i$, each $c_i\in [0,1]$ corresponds then to an interval $\bra{\underline{x}_i,\overline{x}_i}$ in $\mathcal{D}_{X_i}$ through the inverse CDF of the bounds of the p-box: \begin{equation} \label{eq:xsample} \underline{x}_i(c_i) = \overline{F}^{-1}_{X_i}(c_i), \qquad \overline{x}_i(c_i) = \underline{F}^{-1}_{X_i}(c_i). \end{equation} Note that compared to the previous definition in Eq.~(\ref{eq:xinterval}) where the interval $\bra{\underline{c}_i,\overline{c}_i}$ is the input argument, Eq.~(\ref{eq:xsample}) uses a single value $c_i$. Eq.~(\ref{eq:xsample}) can be interpreted from Eq.~(\ref{eq:xinterval}) when setting $n_{X_i}\rightarrow \infty$ and thus $m^{(j)}_i\rightarrow0$ and $\underline{c}_i\approx\overline{c}_i$. For a given realization $\ve{c}\in\mathcal{D}_{\ve{C}}$, let us denote by: $\mathcal{D}_{\ve{c}}=\bra{\underline{x}_1(c_1),\overline{x}_1(c_1)}\times \ldots \times \bra{\underline{x}_M(c_M),\overline{x}_M(c_M)}$. As a consequence, two computational models can then be formulated as a function of $\ve{c}$, equivalent to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ymin}) \citep{SchoebiESREL2015,AlvarezICVRAM2014}: \begin{equation} \label{eq:lcm} \underline{y}=\underline{\cm}(\ve{c}) = \min_{\ve{x} \in \mathcal{D}_{\ve{c}}} \mathcal{M}(\ve{x}), \qquad \overline{y}=\overline{\cm}(\ve{c}) = \max_{\ve{x} \in \mathcal{D}_{\ve{c}}} \mathcal{M}(\ve{x}). \end{equation} These equations lead to intervals $\bra{\underline{y},\overline{y}}$ of the QoI $Y$. In analogy with the slicing algorithm (see also Figure~\ref{fig:slicing}), the lower bounds of the intervals model the upper boundary curve of $Y$ (and vice versa). Hence, the lower bound model $\underline{\cm}$ maps $\ve{C}$ to the upper bound $\overline{Y}$ and the upper bound model $\overline{\cm}$ maps $\ve{C}$ to the lower bound response $\underline{Y}$: \begin{equation} \label{eq:Ymin} \underline{Y} = \overline{\cm}\prt{\ve{C}}, \qquad \overline{Y} = \underline{\cm}\prt{\ve{C}}, \end{equation} where $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ are characterized by the CDF $\underline{F}_Y$ and $\overline{F}_Y$ respectively. Eq.~(\ref{eq:Ymin}) splits the propagation of p-boxes into two standard uncertainty propagation problems associated with input random vector $\ve{C}$. The probabilistic description of the auxiliary input vector allows for conventional methods of uncertainty propagation such as random sampling (Monte Carlo simulation, Latin-hypercube sampling \citep{McKay1979}) and low-discrepancy sequences (Sobol' sequence \citep{sobol1967}, Halton sequence \citep{Halton1960}). These methods are more efficient than the full factorial design approach in Section~\ref{sec:free:slice}, but they are not conservative with respect to the p-box due to the nature of sampling methods, as opposed to the previously discussed slicing algorithm. Large sample sets must then be used to ensure proper accuracy. \section{Two-level meta-modelling}\label{sec:2meta} \subsection{Basic idea} \label{sec:2meta:idea} Considering the main steps of the uncertainty propagation of p-boxes presented in Section~\ref{sec:free:problem}, there are three main factors contributing to the total computational effort. Firstly, the computational model is evaluated a large number of times due to the optimization methods, in particular when using global optimization methods in the general case when model monotonicity does not hold. Secondly, the number of optimization operations is large considering the sampling-based approach for estimating the bounds of the response p-box, \emph{i.e. } $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$. Last but not least, the cost of a single evaluation of the computational model may affect the total costs considerably. In order to address these three factors, it is proposed in this paper to surrogate the computational model at two levels by polynomial chaos expansions. More specifically, the first-level meta-model approximates the response of $\mathcal{M}$, whereas the second-level one approximates the response of the lower and upper model denoted by $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$. \subsection{Meta-modelling $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$} \label{sec:2meta:pce} \subsubsection{Polynomial Chaos Expansions} Assume the output $Y=\mathcal{M}\prt{\ve{C}}$ of a computational model $\mathcal{M}$ with input random vector $\ve{C}\sim f_{\ve{C}}$ has a finite second moment, \emph{i.e. } $\mathbb{E}\bra{Y^2}<+\infty$. According to \citep{GhanemBook2003}, $Y$ may be cast as the following polynomial chaos expansion: \begin{equation} \label{eq:pce0} Y= \mathcal{M}\prt{\ve{C}} = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathbb{N}^M} a_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\ve{C}}, \end{equation} where $\acc{\psi_{\ve{\alpha}}(\ve{C}), \ \ve{\alpha}\in\mathbb{N}^M}$ are multivariate orthonormal polynomials in $\ve{C}$ and $a_{\ve{\alpha}}$ are coefficients to be computed. Due to the assumption of independence, the joint CDF of $\ve{C}$ is the product of its marginals. Then, for each marginal distribution $f_{C_i}$ a functional inner product is defined as: \begin{equation} \langle \phi_1,\phi_2\rangle_i = \int_{\mathcal{D}_{i}} \phi_1(c_i)\, \phi_2(c_i) \, f_{C_i}(c_i)\,\text{d}c. \end{equation} Then, a family of orthonormal polynomials $\acc{\psi_j^{(i)}, \, j\in\mathbb{N}}$ can be built for each input variable $C_i$ that satisfies: \begin{equation} \langle \psi_j^{(i)}, \psi_k^{(i)} \rangle = \int_{\mathcal{D}_{C_i}} \psi_j^{(i)}(c) \, \psi_k^{(i)}(c)\, f_{C_i}(c_i) \, \text{d}c = \delta_{jk}, \end{equation} where $\delta_{jk} = 1$ for $j=k$ and $\delta_{jk} = 0$ otherwise. In the present case of uniform random variables in $C_i$, Legendre polynomials forms the family of orthonormal polynomials. For other orthogonal polynomial function families, the reader is referred to \emph{e.g. } {\cite{SudretHDR,Xiu2002}}. The multivariate polynomials (used in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pce0})) are finally composed of the univariate polynomials by tensor product: \begin{equation} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}(\ve{C})=\prod_{i=1}^{M} \psi_{\alpha_i}^{(i)}\prt{C_i}. \end{equation} \subsubsection{Non-intrusive PCE} In practice, it is not feasible to handle infinite series as presented in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pce0}). Hence, the infinite set of multivariate orthonormal polynomials is truncated, such that Eq.~(\ref{eq:pce0}) transforms to: \begin{equation} \label{eq:pcetrunc} Y\approx Y^{(P)} \overset{\rm def}{=} \mathcal{M}^{(P)}(\ve{C}) = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}} \ve{a}_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}(\ve{C}), \end{equation} where $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{N}^M$ is a finite set of multi-indices and $P$ denotes its cardinality ($P=\|\mathcal{A}\|$). A number of truncation schemes have been proposed in the literature, amongst which is the \emph{hyperbolic truncation set} \cite{BlatmanPEM2010}, which is based on the q-norm: \begin{equation} \mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q = \acc{ \ve{\alpha}\in\mathbb{N}^M: \ \|\|\ve{\alpha}\|\|_q\leq p}, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \|\|\ve{\alpha}\|\|_q = \prt{\sum_{i=1}^{M}\alpha_i^q}^{1/q}, \end{equation} where $0<q\leq 1$ is a user-defined parameter and $p$ is the maximal total degree of the polynomials. A small value of $q$ leads to a smaller number of high-rank polynomials. When $q$ tends to zero, only univariate polynomials are left in the set of polynomials. Using $\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q$ then, Eq.~(\ref{eq:pcetrunc}) transforms to: \begin{equation} \label{eq:pce} Y\approx Y^{(P)} \overset{\rm def}{=} \mathcal{M}^{(P)}(\ve{C}) = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}_q^{M,p}} a_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}(\ve{C}), \quad P=\|\mathcal{A}_q^{M,p}\|. \end{equation} Finally, the coefficients $a_{\ve{\alpha}}$ are computed. Assume that the variable $Y$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pce}) is replaced by $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ for the two computational models in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lcm}). Due to interpreting $\mathcal{M}$ and thus $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$ as black-box models, only \emph{non-intrusive} training algorithms are presented here to compute the PCE coefficients. One strategy is least-square analysis, as originally introduced by {\cite{Tatang97,Berveiller2006}}. Consider a set of $N$ samples of the input vector $\ve{\mathfrak{C}} = \acc{ \ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(1)},\ldots,\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(N)} }$, called \emph{experimental design}, and the corresponding responses of the two computational models: $$\underline{\mathcal{Y}} = \acc{ \underline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(1)} = \overline{\cm}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(1)}},\ldots,\underline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(N)} = \overline{\cm}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(N)}} },$$ $$\overline{\mathcal{Y}} = \acc{ \overline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(1)} = \underline{\cm}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(1)}},\ldots,\overline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(N)} = \underline{\cm}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(N)}} }.$$ The set of coefficients can be computed through the solution of the least squares problem: \begin{equation} \overline{\ve{a}}^* = \arg\min_{\ve{a}\in\mathbb{R}^{P}} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N} \prt{\underline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(i)}-\sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q} a_{\ve{\alpha}}\psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(i)}} }^2, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \underline{\ve{a}}^* = \arg\min_{\ve{a}\in\mathbb{R}^{P}} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N} \prt{\overline{\mathcal{Y}}^{(i)}-\sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q} a_{\ve{\alpha}}\psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\ve{\mathfrak{c}}^{(i)}} }^2. \end{equation} Finally, the two PCE models for the bounds of the response p-box are: \begin{equation} \underline{Y}\approx \overline{\cm}^{(\text{P})}\prt{\ve{C}} = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q} \overline{a}^_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\ve{C}}, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \overline{Y}\approx \underline{\cm}^{(\text{P})}\prt{\ve{C}} = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q} \underline{a}^_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\ve{C}}. \end{equation} \subsubsection{Sparse PCE} The efficiency of the meta-modelling algorithm depends on the choice of the set of polynomials $\mathcal{A}^{M,p}$ or the hyperbolic truncation set $\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q$, which decrease drastically the number of unknowns of the problem while ensuring that polynomials up to degree $p$ in each variable are considered. In high-dimensional problems, however, such truncation schemes are not efficient enough. A complementary approach is to select the polynomials out of a candidate set which are most influential to the system response. Different selection algorithms have been presented in the literature, such as \emph{least absolute shrinkage operator} (LASSO) \citep{Tibshirani1996}, \emph{least angle regression} (LAR) \citep{Efron2004,BlatmanJCP2011}, and \emph{compressive sensing} {\citep{Sargsyan2014a,Doostan2011}}. In this paper, sparse PCE meta-models are trained with LAR which has also been applied previously in \cite{SchobiSudretIJ4UQ2015,SchobiASCE2015}. Note that the resulting $\mathcal{A}$ is likely to be different for $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$, because of the selection algorithm. \subsection{Meta-modelling $\mathcal{M}$} \label{sec:2meta:first} \subsubsection{Condensation of p-boxes} The expensive-to-evaluate computational model $\mathcal{M}$ may itself be approximated with a sparse PCE model in view of solving the global optimization problems defining $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$. The input of $\mathcal{M}$ is a p-box in $M$ dimensions in the problems on consideration. However, in order to apply a sparse PCE model, a probabilistic input vector is required. Hence, auxiliary input variables $\widetilde{X}_i$ are defined for the sole purpose of meta-modelling $\mathcal{M}$. The auxiliary input variables should represent the probability mass in the input p-boxes in an appropriate manner. In other words, the auxiliary distributions aim at ''summarizing'' the p-box, such as fulfilling $\underline{F}_X(x)<F_{\widetilde{X}}(x)<\overline{F}_X(x), \, \forall x\in\mathcal{D}_X$. This is the so-called \emph{condensation} phase. As p-boxes are defined on interval-valued CDFs, a number of distributions can be proposed, \emph{i.e. } there is no unique choice. Generally speaking, for Case \#1 (Section~\ref{sec:pbox:case1}) and bounded p-boxes, it is proposed to use a uniform distribution between the minimum and maximum value of the p-boxes, \emph{i.e. }: \begin{equation} \label{eq:auxU} \widetilde{X}_i \sim \mathcal{U}\prt{\min_{j=1\ldots,n_E}\prt{\underline{x}_i^{(j)}},\max_{j=1,\ldots,n_E}\prt{\overline{x}_i^{(j)}}}, \end{equation} where $\bra{\underline{x}_i^{(j)},\overline{x}_i^{(j)}}$ is the interval on variable $i$ corresponding to the $j$-th expert. For Case \#2 (Section~\ref{sec:pbox:case2}) and generally for unbounded p-boxes, it is proposed to define the CDF of $\widetilde{X}_i$ as an average curve of its input p-boxes: \begin{equation} \label{eq:tilder} \widetilde{F}_{X_i}(x_i) = \frac{1}{2} \prt{\underline{F}_{X_i}(x_i)+\overline{F}_{X_i}(x_i)}. \end{equation} In both cases, the proposed auxiliary input distribution covers the p-box in the areas where most of the probability mass is located and is therefore suitable to represent the p-box in a sparse PCE model. However, in terms of accuracy of the meta-model, different distributions might be more suitable than the one in Eq.~(\ref{eq:tilder}) (see also Section~\ref{sec:appl} for a detailed discussion on this aspect). \subsubsection{Arbitrary input PCE} Having defined an auxiliary input vector $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$, it can be propagated through the computational model. The corresponding uncertainty propagation problem then reads: \begin{equation} \widetilde{Y} = \mathcal{M}\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}, \end{equation} and the corresponding approximation with PCE: \begin{equation} \widetilde{Y}\approx \mathcal{M}^{(\text{P})}(\widetilde{\ve{X}}) = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q} \widetilde{a}_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}. \end{equation} This PCE model can be trained by pure vanilla least-square analysis, least-angle regression or any other non-intrusive technique (see Section~\ref{sec:2meta:pce}). An important aspect here is when $\widetilde{X}_i$ has an arbitrary CDF shape for which it might not be trivial to define a set of orthogonal polynomials \citep{Gautschi2004}. \cite{Ahlfeld2016,Dey2016} discuss the use of so-called \emph{arbitrary PCE}, which are based on arbitrarily shaped input distributions. An alternative way is to formalize an isoprobabilistic transform from variables $\widetilde{X}_i$ to $Z_i$ for which a suitable set of orthogonal polynomials is known already. The mapping from one distribution to the other is denoted by $T: Z_i = T\prt{{\widetilde{X}_i}}$. A point $x_i\sim \widetilde{X}_i$ can be mapped to $Z_i$ as $z_i = F_{Z_i}^{-1}\prt{F_{\widetilde{X}_i}\prt{x_i}}$. When $\widetilde{X}_i$ and $Z_i$ are chosen in a smart way, the transform $T$ shall be nearly linear. The PCE model can then be written as: \begin{equation} \widetilde{Y} \approx \mathcal{M}^{(\text{P})}(\widetilde{\ve{X}}) = \sum_{\ve{\alpha}\in\mathcal{A}^{M,p}} \widetilde{a}_{\ve{\alpha}} \psi_{\ve{\alpha}}\prt{T\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}}, \end{equation} where the set of $\psi_{\ve{\alpha}}$'s are orthogonal with respect to the vector $\ve{Z}=T\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}$. \subsection{Aggregation of two levels of meta-modelling} \label{sec:free:discussion} \subsubsection{Framework of meta-models} Figure~\ref{fig:2meta} summarizes the two levels of meta-modelling presented previously. A first level of sparse PCE approximates the computational model $\mathcal{M}$ on the basis of the auxiliary input vector $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$, which is itself defined according to the type of input p-box considered. This results in the meta-model $\mathcal{M}^{(\text{P})}$. Then, the problem is divided into the estimation of $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ by Eq.~(\ref{eq:Ymin}). They are obtained by approximating $\overline{\cm}$ and $\underline{\cm}$, respectively, via sparse PCE and the probabilistic input vector $\ve{C}$, which defines the second level of the two-level approach. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{M_33261_028x_OverallScheme2.pdf} \caption{Two-level meta-modelling for the propagation of p-boxes -- definition and connection of the two levels \label{fig:2meta}} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Case \#1} In the case of bounded p-boxes, \emph{i.e. } when the support of the boundary CDFs $\underline{F}_{X_i}$ and $\overline{F}_{X_i}$ are compact, the methods can be applied as described in the previous sections. For the first level of meta-modelling, bounded variables $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$ are used so that the response $\widetilde{Y}$ may be approximated efficiently. On the second-level meta-model however, the response $\underline{Y} = \overline{\cm}(\ve{C})$ and $\overline{Y} = \underline{\cm}(\ve{C})$ are non-smooth due to the stairs-like input p-boxes $X_i$ originating in a finite set of expert intervals. The effect of this non-smoothness is investigated further in the example in Section~\ref{sec:appl:2d}. However, when the number of expert intervals and the number of variables are small, the second-level meta-model may be redundant, as the full factorial design approach is tractable (\emph{i.e. } $n_Y$ small). In the other extreme case of large number of variables and intervals, the response boundary curves loose the stairs-shaped nature of the CDF curves due to the large number of response intervals (\emph{i.e. } $n_Y$ large). \subsubsection{Case \#2} In the case of unbounded p-boxes, the uncertainty propagation analysis, as proposed above, may become inefficient due to the usage of a bounded $\ve{C}$ on the second-level meta-model. In general, it is not advised to model an unbounded variable $X$ by a bounded variable $Y$ and the corresponding isoprobabilistic transform, due to the highly non-linear functional form of this transform \citep{SchobiAPSSRA2016,SchoebiESREL2015}. In order to reduce the effect of the non-linear transform and to ensure fast convergence, the second-level meta-model is trained in the auxiliary input domain $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$ as previously discussed in \cite{SchoebiESREL2015}. An isoprobabilistic transform can be formulated such that $\ve{C} = T\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}$. The corresponding models are: \begin{equation} \underline{Y} = \overline{\cm}\prt{T\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}}, \qquad \overline{Y} = \underline{\cm}\prt{T\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}}. \end{equation} These two computational models can be approximated using sparse PCE meta-models. \subsubsection{Special case: monotone computational models} When the computational model $\mathcal{M}$ is known to be monotonic with respect to all variables $X_i$, then the constraint optimization in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lcm}) reduces to the analysis of the corners of the search domain. Hence, uncertainty propagation of p-boxes simplifies to the propagation of the bounds of the input p-boxes. It follows that the meta-modelling of $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$ becomes out of scope. $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ can be directly estimated based on $\mathcal{M}^{(\text{P})}$ and the bounds of each $X_i$. \subsubsection{{Convergence behaviour}} {The two-level meta-modelling algorithm consists of three main components that contribute to its overall performance. Each of those components is a potential source of inaccuracies. The two levels of meta-modelling introduce approximation errors due to the finite size of the experimental design and the use of regression-based meta-modelling techniques. Moreover, the accuracy of the extreme values resulting in the optimization algorithm depends on the optimization algorithm itself. Hence, it is crucial to monitor the accuracy of all three components in an uncertainty quantification analysis in order to ensure convergent results.} {The following examples highlight the performance of the two-level meta-modelling algorithm on a benchmark analytical function as well as two engineering problem settings. The general convergence behaviour is analysed empirically by numerically experiments and convergence issues are pointed out.} \section{Applications} \label{sec:appl} \subsection{Reference solution} In the following application examples, the proposed two-level meta-modelling algorithm is compared to a reference solution. The reference solution is obtained by (i) using the original computational model $\mathcal{M}$ (no first-level meta-model $\mathcal{M}^{(P)}\prt{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}$) and by (ii) using a large number of points ($n=10^6$) in the prediction of $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$. \subsection{Rosenbrock function} \label{sec:appl:2d} \subsubsection{Problem definition} The Rosenbrock function is a benchmark analytical (polynomial) function with two input variables used for optimization \citep{Rosenbrock1960}: \begin{equation} y = f_1(\ve{x}) = 100\prt{x_2-x_1^2}^2 + (1-x_1)^2. \end{equation} Here, we model parameters $x_1 $ and $x_2$ by two independent p-boxes $X_1$ and $X_2$. Figure~\ref{fig:four:c} shows the response surface of $f_1$ as a function of $x_1$ and $x_2$. The response is non-monotone around the origin of the input space and has a global minimum of $y=0$ at $\acc{x_1=1,\,x_2=1}$. Thus, the QoI $Y$ is bounded on one side to the domain $\mathcal{D}_Y = [0,\infty]$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[3D visualization of $f_1$\label{fig:four:c}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{JCP_rosen_3D.pdf} } \subfigure[Case \#1 -- p-box boundary curves for $X_i$ \label{fig:four:a}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{JCP_rosen_input_case1.pdf} } \subfigure[Case \#2 -- p-box boundary curves for $X_i$ \label{fig:four:b}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{JCP_rosen_input.pdf} } \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Problem setup \label{fig:four}} \end{figure} \paragraph{Case \#1} The p-boxes based on the opinions of seven experts are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:four:a}. The solid lines mark the p-box for $X_1$, whereas the dashed lines mark the p-box for $X_2$. It can be seen that the credibility of the experts is uniform due to the constant vertical step size between the vertical plateaus of the boundary CDFs, and that the p-boxes are bounded on both sides. \paragraph{Case \#2} The bounds of the two input variables $X_i$ are defined as follows (Case \#2(b)): $$\underline{F}_{X_i}(x_i) = \min_{\mu\in[\underline{\mu},\overline{\mu}],\sigma\in[\underline{\sigma},\overline{\sigma}]}F_{\mathcal{N}}\prt{x_i\middle\|\mu,\sigma},$$ $$\overline{F}_{X_i}(x_i) = \max_{\mu\in[\underline{\mu},\overline{\mu}],\sigma\in[\underline{\sigma},\overline{\sigma}]}F_{\mathcal{N}}\prt{x_i\middle\|\mu,\sigma},$$ where $F_{\mathcal{N}}(x\|\mu,\sigma)$ is a Gaussian CDF with mean value $\mu$ and standard deviation $\sigma$. In order to generate a p-box, the distribution parameters are given in intervals: $\mu\in\bra{\underline{\mu},\overline{\mu}}=\bra{-0.5,0.5}$ and $\sigma\in\bra{\underline{\sigma},\overline{\sigma}}=\bra{0.7, 1.0}$. Figure~\ref{fig:four:b} shows the boundary curves of the p-boxes for $X_i$, $i=1,2$. \subsubsection{Analysis} The two-level meta-modelling approach has been implemented taking advantage of the \textsc{Matlab}-based uncertainty quantification framework \textsc{UQLab} \citep{MarelliICVRAM2014,UQdoc_09_104}. The sparse PCE meta-models were calibrated with Latin-hypercube experimental designs \citep{McKay1979} and appropriate sets of orthonormal polynomials (Legendre polynomials for bounded variables and Hermite polynomials for unbounded variables). The set of polynomials is determined by a degree-adaptive LAR of which the maximum total polynomial degree is set to $30$ and the parameter for the hyperbolic truncation set $\mathcal{A}^{M,p}_q$ is set to $q=0.75$. The number of samples in the experimental design is denoted by $N_1$ and $N_2$ for constructing the meta-models of $\mathcal{M}$ and $\acc{\underline{\cm},\overline{\cm}}$, respectively. In order to achieve a statistical significance, the uncertainty propagation analyses are replicated 50 times with different LHS experimental designs. For Case \#1, the auxiliary input variables are defined as in Eq.~(\ref{eq:auxU}), whereas for Case \#2, the auxiliary input variables are defined as $F_{\widetilde{X}_i} = F_{\mathcal{N}}(x\|0,1)$. Note that for Case \#2, both levels of meta-models are trained in the same auxiliary domain, \emph{i.e. } $\mathcal{D}_{\widetilde{\ve{X}}}$. The performance of the proposed two-level meta-modelling approach is measured in terms of the goodness-of-fit of the meta-models in the two levels of the approach. The accuracy of the meta-models is measured by the \emph{relative generalization error}, which is defined as follows: \begin{equation} err_{\text{gen}}\bra{Y} = \frac{\mathbb{E}\bra{\prt{Y-Y^{(P)}}^2}}{\rm{Var}\bra{Y}}, \end{equation} where $Y$ is the true response variable and $Y^{(P)}$ is its meta-model response value. An estimate of the relative generalization error is computed by a large sample set $\acc{\ve{x}_i, \ i=1,\ldots,10^6}$, called validation set, as follows: \begin{equation} \widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{Y} \overset{\rm def}{=} \frac{\sum_i\prt{{y}_i - {y}_i^{(P)} }^2}{\sum_i\prt{{y}_i - \mu_{{Y}}}^2}, \end{equation} where $y_i$ is the exact value of response of the computational model, $y_i^{(P)}$ is the prediction value based on the meta-model, and $\mu_Y$ is the estimated mean value of the response variable $Y$. A second measure for the accuracy of the proposed two-level approach is the comparison of the true and the meta-modelled p-boxes for the QoI $Y$. In particular, the graphical comparison of the boundary CDFs $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ is made in the typical variable-CDF plot and shows the quality of the proposed approximations. {To numerically quantify the convergence of the results, the following p-box area is defined:} { \begin{equation} A_Y = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \prt{\overline{F}_Y(y) - \underline{F}_Y(y)} \, \text{d}y. \end{equation} } {Then, the approximated p-box area is compared to the true p-box area. Additionally, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance of the bounds and their approximations is computed and combined to:} {\begin{equation} D = \left\|D_{\underline{Y}}\right\| + \left\|D_{\overline{Y}}\right\|, \end{equation}} {where $D_{\underline{Y}}$ and $D_{\overline{Y}}$ are the KS distances between the reference solution and the approximate solutions for $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$, respectively, defined as:} {\begin{equation} D_{\underline{Y}} = \max_{y\in\mathcal{D}_Y} \left\| \underline{F}_{Y,ref}(y)-\underline{F}_Y^{(\text{P})}(y) \right\|, \qquad D_{\overline{Y}} = \max_{y\in\mathcal{D}_Y} \left\|\overline{F}_{Y,ref}(y)-\overline{F}_Y^{(\text{P})}(y) \right\|, \end{equation}} {where $\underline{F}_{Y,ref}$ (resp. $\overline{F}_{Y,ref}$) is the CDF of the reference solution and $\underline{F}_Y^{(\text{P})}$ (resp. $\overline{F}_Y^{(\text{P})}$) is its approximation.} \subsubsection{Results} \paragraph{Case \#1} The polynomial form of the Rosenbrock function can be modelled exactly with the polynomial-based PCE models. Hence, the first-level meta-model does not introduce any approximation in this application example. The reference solution for the second-level models $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$ is obtained by propagating all possible combinations of input intervals, \emph{i.e. } $n_{E,X_1} \cdot n_{E,X_2} = 7\cdot 7 = 49$ intervals. This results in stairs-shaped boundary curves for the response p-box. These shapes are difficult to model with polynomials, which generally define smooth functions. Hence, the accuracy of the second-level meta-models is low, as see in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results1}, which summarizes the relative generalization error for the two second-level meta-models: $\overline{\cm}^{(P)}$ and $\underline{\cm}^{(P)}$. In fact, it requires $N_2=1,000$ samples to achieve an accuracy of $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\approx 0.05$ due to the shape of the input p-boxes. In other words, the continuous input vector $\ve{C}$ is mapped onto $49$ values in the response variables $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[Response $\underline{Y}$ (\emph{i.e. } based on $\overline{\cm}$) for $N_1 = 30$ \label{fig:four:results1:b}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Errgen1_N2_max_log10_rev.pdf} } \hspace{1cm} \subfigure[Response $\overline{Y}$ (\emph{i.e. } based on $\underline{\cm}$) for $N_1 = 30$ \label{fig:four:results1:c}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Errgen1_N2_min_log10_rev.pdf} } \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#1 -- relative generalization error as a function of $N_1,\,N_2$ and based on $50$ replications of the same analysis \label{fig:four:results1}} \end{figure} The explanation for this convergence behaviour is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:rosen:response}, which shows the response surface of the computational models as a function of the input random variables. The computational model $\mathcal{M}$, which is the basis for the first-level meta-model, shows smooth contour lines (see Figure~\ref{fig:rosen:response:1}), whereas $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$ show plateau-shaped response surfaces (see Figure~\ref{fig:rosen:response:2} and \ref{fig:rosen:response:3}) with constant response values within each plateau. A total of $7\times 7 = 49$ distinct plateaus can be identified corresponding to the $49$~possible combinations of input intervals defined by the expert opinions. Instead of training second-level meta-models, the original (small) number of input intervals, \emph{i.e. } the intervals given by the experts, may be propagated directly to estimate the bounds of the response p-box. In other words, the slicing algorithm may be applied of the second-level of the uncertainty analysis, due to the low number of response intervals, \emph{i.e. } $\|\mathcal{K}\|=49$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[ $\mathcal{M}$ \label{fig:rosen:response:1}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{Contours1_Y.pdf} } \subfigure[ $\overline{\cm}$ \label{fig:rosen:response:2}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{Contours1_Yu.pdf} } \subfigure[ $\underline{\cm}$ \label{fig:rosen:response:3}]{ \includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{Contours1_Yl.pdf} } \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#1 -- shape of the response surfaces \label{fig:rosen:response}} \end{figure} When comparing the boundary curves of the response p-box, however, results show that the proposed approach provides accurate (although smooth) approximations of the response p-box boundaries. The exact boundary curves of the p-box of $Y$ are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:1:a}, where the distinct values are clearly visible in the stairs-shaped CDF curves. For comparison, the boundary curves of the two-level approach are presented for a single run with $N_1 = 50$ and $N_2 = 200$. For this run, the relative generalization error are $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{Y}} = 1.14\cdot 10^{-1}$ and $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{Y}} = 8.76\cdot 10^{-2}$. The PCE-based CDFs are not capable of reproducing the stairs-like functions but still follow the exact boundary curves sufficiently accurately for visual comparison. This explains the large relative generalization errors in the second-level meta-models. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_Rosenbrock_2Level_case1.pdf} \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#1 -- Response p-boxes $Y\in\bra{\underline{Y}, \overline{Y}}$: reference solution ($n=7\cdot 7=49$) versus two-level approach ($N_1 = 50$, $N_2 = 200$) \label{fig:four:results:1:a}} \end{figure} {The quantitative values of $A_Y^{(\text{P})}/A_Y$ are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:ai} together with the KS distances in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:ks}. The two figures nicely illustrate that the increase of samples in the experimental design improves the accuracy of the two-level meta-modelling algorithm. As the number of samples increases, the response p-box area is modelled more and more accurately. The KS distance measure, however, does not converge as rapidly. The reason for the low convergence rate lies in the shape of the response p-box seen in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:1:a}, in particular the shape of $\overline{F}_Y$. } \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[\label{fig:four:results:ai}{P-box area}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{A_1_N2_rev.pdf} } \subfigure[\label{fig:four:results:ks}{KS distance}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{D_1_N2_rev.pdf} } \caption{{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#1 -- Convergence of response p-box as a function of $N_2$ and based on 50 replications of the same analysis}} \end{figure} \paragraph{Case \#2} Analogously to Case \#1, the performance of the second-level meta-models is shown in the two Figures~\ref{fig:four:results2:b} and \ref{fig:four:results2:c} for $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$, respectively, using $N_1 = 100$ and {$N_2=\acc{50,\ldots, 10^4}$}. As expected, the relative generalization error becomes smaller with larger experimental design, \emph{i.e. } larger $N_2$. Interestingly however, the values are considerably different for $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$, due to the shape of the response function $\overline{\cm}$ and $\underline{\cm}$, respectively. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[Response $\underline{Y}$ (\emph{i.e. } based on $\overline{\cm}$) \label{fig:four:results2:b} with $N_1 = 100$]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Errgen_N2_maxt_log10_rev.pdf} }\hspace{1cm} \subfigure[Response $\overline{Y}$ (\emph{i.e. } based on $\underline{\cm}$) \label{fig:four:results2:c} with $N_1 = 100$]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Errgen_N2_mint_log10_rev.pdf} } \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#2 -- relative generalization error as a function of $N_1,\,N_2$ and based on $50$ replications of the same analysis \label{fig:four:results2}} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:rosen} shows the response surface for $\mathcal{M}$, $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$, respectively, as a function of the auxiliary input variables $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$. Comparing the three sets of contour lines in Figure~\ref{fig:rosen}, the response surface of $\underline{\cm}$ has a large plateau around the origin and steep value increases around the plateau. This behaviour is difficult to model with polynomials, which results in a lower accuracy seen in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results2:c}. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[$\mathcal{M}$ \label{fig:four:d}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{JCP_rosen_pbocscheme.pdf} } \subfigure[$\overline{\cm}$ \label{fig:rosen:ucm}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Contours_YmaxX.pdf} } \subfigure[$\underline{\cm}$ \label{fig:rosen:lcm}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{Contours_YminX.pdf} } \caption{Rosenbrock function -- shape of the response surfaces of $\underline{\cm}$ and $\overline{\cm}$ as a function of $\widetilde{\ve{X}}$ \label{fig:rosen}} \end{figure} Finally, the resulting boundary curves of the p-box of $Y$ are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:2}. The reference solution was computed with the exact computational model on the first level of the algorithm and $n=10^6$ samples on the second level. The effect of the identified plateau in $\underline{\cm}$ in Figure~\ref{fig:rosen:lcm} is that a large quantile of $\overline{Y}$ is close to $y=0$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:2}). Additionally, a single realization of those boundary curves is drawn in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:2} for the case of $N_1 = 100$ and $N_2 = 200$. The corresponding relative generalization error for $\underline{Y}$ and $\overline{Y}$ are $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{Y}} = 3.43\cdot 10^{-1}$ and $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{Y}} = 5.66\cdot 10^{-3}$, respectively. Despite the relatively large values of the relative generalization error of the second-level meta-model, the bounds of the response p-box are modelled accurately. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{JCP_Rosenbrock_2Level_case2.pdf} \caption{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#2 -- Response p-boxes $Y\in\bra{\underline{Y}, \overline{Y}}$: reference solution ($n=10^6$) versus two-level approach ($N_1 = 100$, $N_2 = 200$) \label{fig:four:results:2}} \end{figure} {Figures~\ref{fig:rosen:results:case2:ai} and \ref{fig:rosen:results:case2:ks} illustrate the corresponding p-box area comparison and KS distance estimates, respectively. As in Case~\#1, they nicely show the convergence of the measures when increasing the number of samples in the experimental design of the second-level meta-model. Again, the p-box area converges nicely, whereas the KS distance converges more slowly, due to the shape of $\overline{F}_Y$ seen in Figure~\ref{fig:four:results:2}.} \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure[\label{fig:rosen:results:case2:ai}{P-box area}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{A_2_N2_rev.pdf} } \subfigure[\label{fig:rosen:results:case2:ks}{KS distance}]{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{D_2_N2_rev.pdf} } \caption{{Rosenbrock function -- Case \#2 -- Convergence of response p-box as a function of $N_2$ and based on 50 replications of the same analysis}} \end{figure} \subsection{Two-degree-of-freedom damped oscillator} \label{sec:appl:nd} \subsubsection{Problem definition} Consider the two-degree-of-freedom (2-dof) damped oscillator subjected to white noise excitation $S(t)$, sketched in Figure~\ref{fig:damp:sketch}. The subscripts $p$ and $s$ refer to the primary and secondary mass, respectively. The QoI is the force acting on the secondary spring. According to \cite{DK1990,Dubourg2013}, the peak force $P_s$ in the secondary spring can be computed by: \begin{equation} P_s = 3\, k_s \sqrt{\mathbb{E}_S\bra{x_s^2}}, \qquad \text{where} \qquad \mathbb{E}_S\bra{x_s^2} = \pi \frac{S_0}{4\zeta_s\omega_s^3}\, \frac{\zeta_a\zeta_s}{\zeta_p\zeta_s\prt{4\zeta_a^2+\xi^2}+\gamma\zeta_a^2} \, \frac{\prt{\zeta_p\omega_p^3+\zeta_s\omega_s^3}\omega_p}{4\zeta_a\omega_a^4}, \end{equation} where $\omega_p = \sqrt{k_p/m_p}$ and $\omega_s = \sqrt{k_s/m_s}$ are the natural frequencies, $\gamma = m_s/m_p$, $\omega_a = \prt{\omega_p+\omega_s}/2$, $\zeta_a = \prt{\zeta_p+\zeta_s}/2$, $\xi = \prt{\omega_p-\omega_s}/\omega_a$, $m$ is the mass, $k_p$ and $k_s$ are the spring stiffnesses, and $\zeta$ is the damping ratio. The set of input parameters $\ve{x} = \acc{m_p, m_s, k_p, k_s, \zeta_p, \zeta_s, S_0}$ are considered statistically independent. The parameters $\acc{m_p,m_s,k_p,k_s,S_0}$ are well-known (\emph{i.e. } negligible epistemic uncertainty) and defined as independent lognormal variables, with properties summarized in Table~\ref{tab:damp:init}. Each lognormal variable is characterized by a mean value and a coefficient of variation (CoV). Assume that the properties of the damping ratios $\acc{\zeta_p,\zeta_s}$ are investigated through a survey among experts because of the highly uncertain nature of damping in dynamic systems. Analogously to Case \#1, each expert provides an interval of values for the two damping ratios. Eleven and ten intervals have been collected for $\zeta_p$ and $\zeta_s$, respectively. The aggregated p-boxes are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:2dof:experts} assuming equal credibility among the experts. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{2dof} \caption{\label{fig:damp:sketch} Sketch of the 2-dof damped oscillator} \end{figure} \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \caption{\label{tab:damp:init} 2-dof damped oscillator -- probabilistic input variables} \begin{tabular}{llll} \hline Variable & Distribution & Mean & CoV \\ \hline $m_p$ & Lognormal & $1.50$ & $10\%$ \\ $m_s$ & Lognormal & $0.01$ & $10\%$ \\ $k_p$ & Lognormal & $1.00$ & $20\%$\\ $k_s$ & Lognormal & $0.05$ & $20\%$ \\ \hline $S_0$ & Lognormal & $100$ & $10\%$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{TwoDof_Input_pbox.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:2dof:experts} 2-dof damped oscillator -- aggregated p-boxes of the damping ratio (10 expert opinions of equal credibility)} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Analysis} The settings for the two-level meta-modelling approach are kept the same as in the Rosenbrock function example in Section~\ref{sec:appl:2d}. Sparse PCE is trained with a candidate basis of maximum total polynomial degree equal to $20$ and hyperbolic truncation sets with $q=0.75$. The auxiliary variables $\widetilde{X}_i$ for $\zeta_p$ and $\zeta_s$ are defined as in Eq.~(\ref{eq:auxU}). In order to analyse the influence of the sample size, $N_1$ and $N_2$ are varied in $\acc{100, 200, 300, \rightarrow\infty}$ and $\acc{100,200,300,1000}$, respectively. Note that $N_1\rightarrow\infty$ denotes a case where the first-level meta-model is not applied; instead, the true model $\mathcal{M}$ is used. 50 independent analyses with different experimental designs are conducted to assess the statistical significance of the QoI. \subsubsection{Results} The results for the relative generalization error are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:2dof:free:results}. As expected, increasing $N_1$ reduces the relative generalization error of the first-level meta-model (see $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\widetilde{P}_s}$). However, the accuracy of the second-level meta-model is lower than the first-level meta-model, and does not depend significantly on the accuracy of the first-level meta-model. Thus, the error is dominated by the second-level meta-modelling operation. The explanation lies in the p-boxes of the damping coefficients $\zeta_p$ and $\zeta_s$, which have stairs-shaped boundary CDF curves. Analogously to Case \#1 in the Rosenbrock function (Section~\ref{sec:appl:2d}), this shape reduces the accuracy of the meta-model on the second level. \begin{table}[!ht] \centering \caption{2-dof damped oscillator -- resulting relative generalization error $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}$ based on a Monte Carlo simulation with $n=10^5$ samples -- mean value of 50 repetitions \label{tab:2dof:free:results}} \begin{tabular}{lllll} \hline $N_1$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\widetilde{P}_s}$ & $N_2$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{P}_s}$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{P}_s}$ \\ \hline $100$ & $1.59\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $100$ & $5.85\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $9.46\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ & & $200$ & $4.59\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $7.32\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ & & $300$ & $4.18\cdot 10^{-2}$& $6.76\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ & & $1000$ & $3.19\cdot 10^{-2}$& $5.17\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ \hline $200$ & $5.24\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $100$ & $5.20\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $7.99\cdot10^{-2}$\\ & & $200$ & $3.41\cdot 10^{-2}$& $6.08\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ & & $300$ & $2.97\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $5.21\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ & &$1000$ & $1.87\cdot 10^{-2}$& $3.57\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ \hline $300$ & $2.85\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $100$ & $5.12\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $8.09\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ & & $200$ & $3.13\cdot10^{-2}$ & $5.93\cdot10^{-2}$ \\ & & $300$ & $2.75\cdot10^{-2}$& $4.99\cdot10^{-2}$\\ & & $1000$ & $1.71\cdot 10^{-2}$& $3.30\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ \hline $\rightarrow\infty$ & $0$ & $100$ & $5.44\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $8.49\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ & & $200$ & $3.07\cdot10^{-2}$& $6.11\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ & & $300$ & $2.71\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $4.96\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ & & $1000$ & $1.52\cdot 10^{-2}$& $3.07\cdot 10^{-2}$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} Although the two-level meta-models are fairly accurate, as discussed previously, the bounds of the resulting p-box is computed accurately, as seen in Figure~\ref{fig:2dof}. A reference solution based on $n=10^5$ Monte Carlo samples is compared to the two-level meta-modelling approach with $N_1 = 300$ and $N_2=100$. The boundary curves ($\underline{F}_{P_s}$ and $\overline{F}_{P_s}$) obtained from the proposed approach are almost superimposed with the reference ones. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{JCP_Rosenbrock_2dof_pbox.pdf} \caption{2-dof damped oscillator -- QoI $P_s$: reference solution ($n=10^5$) versus two-level approximation approach ($N_1 = 300$, $N_2 = 100$, $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\widetilde{P}_s} = 2.57\cdot 10^{-3}$, $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{P}_s} = 7.50\cdot 10^{-2}$, $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{P}_s} = 3.89\cdot 10^{-2}$) and slicing algorithm with $n_{X_i}=3$ \label{fig:2dof}} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Comparison to slicing algorithm} In order to illustrate the curse of dimensionality, the slicing algorithm is applied on the second level of the two-level approach replacing the calibration of the meta-models $\underline{\cm}^{(\text{P})}$ and $\overline{\cm}^{(\text{P})}$. Note that in order to apply the slicing algorithm consistently, each probabilistic input variable is interpreted as p-box too. These continuous random variables are bounded within their 1\% and 99\% quantiles in order to obtain finite intervals for the interval analysis. The number of intervals is chosen as $n_{X_1} = 3$ in order to obtain a similar number of optimization operations as the proposed two-level approach, \emph{i.e. } $\|\mathcal{K}\|=3^7=2187$. Figure~\ref{fig:2dof:slice} illustrates the discretization for $m_p$ and $\zeta_p$. The boundary curves of the discretized p-boxes are wider than the original input p-boxes. This effect is pronounced probabilistic input variables, as seen in the left part of Figure~\ref{fig:2dof:slice}. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \subfigure{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{TwoDof_Input_pbox_mp_disc.pdf} } \subfigure{ \includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{TwoDof_Input_pbox_zetap_disc.pdf} } \caption{\label{fig:2dof:slice} 2-dof damped oscillator -- discretization of $m_p$ and $\zeta_p$ with $n_{X_i}=3$} \end{figure} The discretization algorithm leads to conservative approximations of the true input p-boxes. The propagation of the discretized intervals results in a p-box that is much wider (\emph{i.e. } more conservative) compared to the proposed two-level approach, as indicated in Figure~\ref{fig:2dof}, despite the fact that more model evaluations were computed. The conservative estimate of the response p-box originate mainly in the coarse approximation of the five probabilistic input variables. \subsection{Two-dimensional truss structure} \label{sec:appl:truss} \subsubsection{Problem definition} The third application example is a two-dimensional truss structure, which has been discussed previously in the context of reliability analysis \citep{Lee:Kwak:2006,BlatmanPEM2010,SchobiASCE2015}. Figure~\ref{fig:truss:sketch} shows the truss which is composed of 13 nodes and 23 bars. The geometry of the nodes is given deterministically, whereas the loading and material properties are given by p-boxes. The upper chord of the truss is subjected to loads $P_i$, $i=1,\ldots,6$. The horizontal bars are described by the cross-sectional area $A_1$ and the Young's modulus $E_1$ whereas the diagonal bars are described by $A_2$ and $E_2$, respectively. The 10-dimensional input vector then reads: \begin{equation} \ve{X} = \bra{ A_1,\,A_2,\,E_1,\,E_2,\,P_1,\,P_2,\,P_3,\,P_4,\,P_5,\,P_6}. \end{equation} Analogously to Case \#2(b), the input variables are modelled by p-boxes defined by the envelope of a set of curves. The distribution function and its interval-valued parameters are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:truss:input}. The variables are assumed to be statistically independent. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{blatmantruss_largeletters_jcp.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:truss:sketch} Two-dimensional truss -- geometry, loading and QoI} \end{figure} \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \caption{\label{tab:truss:input} Two-dimensional truss -- input p-boxes} \begin{tabular}{lllll} \hline Variable & & Distribution & Mean & CoV \\ \hline $A_1$ & [m$^2$] & Lognormal & $[1.9,\,2.1]\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $[8,\,12]\%$\\ $A_2$ & [m$^2$] & Lognormal & $[0.9,\,1.1]\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $[8,\,12]\%$\\ $E_1$, $E_2$ & [Pa] & Lognormal & $[2.0,\,2.2]\cdot 10^{11}$ & $[9,\,11]\%$\\ $P_1,\ldots,P_6$ & [N] & Gumbel & $[4.0,\,6.0]\cdot 10^4$& $[10,\,15]\%$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} The QoI is the deflection $u$ at mid-span as a function of the loading and the material parameters. The arrow in Figure~\ref{fig:truss:sketch} indicates positive values for $u$. \subsubsection{Analysis} For the truss structure, the auxiliary variable $\widetilde{X}_i$ is defined as follows. The mean value $\mu_{\widetilde{X}_i}$ is the mid-range of the mean value of $X_i$, and the coefficient of variation $CoV_{\widetilde{X}_i}$ is set to the maximum value of the the coefficient of variation of $X_i$. The auxiliary variables are used on both levels of meta-models to ensure a good convergence behaviour. Similar to the previous examples, the number of samples in varied in both levels of meta-models, \emph{i.e. } $N_1=\acc{100,300, \rightarrow\infty}$ and $N_2=\acc{100,300}$. The sparse PCE meta-models are built with Hermite polynomials with a candidate basis of maximal total degree of 20 and hyperbolic truncation scheme with $q=0.75$. To ensure statistical significance of the results, 50 independent runs of the analysis are performed with different LHS experimental designs. \subsubsection{Results} A summary of the relative generalization error is given in Table~\ref{tab:truss:free:results}. As expected, increasing the number of samples in the experimental design decreases the error of the meta-model on both meta-modelling levels. In particular, the influence of a larger experimental design on the first-level meta-model is visible. For the second-level meta-model, the absolute value of the relative generalization error is larger than for the first level due to the larger complexity of the analysis. In fact, the accuracy of $\underline{u}$ and $\overline{u}$ depends on the quality of (i) the first-level meta-model, (ii) the optimization algorithm, and (iii) the second-level meta-model. \begin{table}[!ht] \centering \caption{Two-dimensional truss -- resulting relative generalization error based on a Monte Carlo simulation with $n=10^5$ samples -- mean value of 50 repetitions \label{tab:truss:free:results}} \begin{tabular}{lllll} \hline $N_{1}$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\widetilde{u}}$ & $N_{2}$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{u}}$ & $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{u}}$ \\ \hline $100$ & $1.96\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $100$ & $8.30\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $4.85\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ && $300$ & $2.39\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $2.50\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ \hline $300$ & $1.44\cdot 10^{-4}$& $100$ & $9.10\cdot 10^{-2}$& $4.66\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ && $300$ & $2.09\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $2.01\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ \hline $\rightarrow\infty$ &$0$& $100$ & $1.24\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $2.18\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ && $300$ & $7.05\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $1.65\cdot 10^{-2}$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} Another aspect of the modelling is the shape of the response p-box, which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:truss}. The reference solution is obtained by a Monte Carlo simulation ($n=10^5$) and by taking advantage of the monotonicity of the truss model. A two-level approximation with $N_1=300$ is able to reproduce the boundary curves of the response p-box accurately: the two curves for $\overline{u}$ coincide, whereas the two curves for $\underline{u}$ are remarkably close to each other, too. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{JCP_Rosenbrock_truss_pbox.pdf} \caption{Two-dimensional truss -- p-box of the deflection $u$: reference solution ($n=10^5$) versus two-level meta-modelling approach ($N_1 = 300$, $N_2 = 300$) ($\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\widetilde{u}} = 9.82\cdot 10^{-5}$, $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\overline{u}} = 3.70\cdot 10^{-2}$, and $\widehat{err}_{\text{gen}}\bra{\underline{u}} = 2.64\cdot 10^{-2}$) \label{fig:truss}} \end{figure} \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conc} This paper deals with the propagation of uncertainty in the input parameters of a deterministic, black-box computational model. Traditionally, the uncertainty of the input variables is described using probability theory, \emph{i.e. } by probability distributions. In engineering practice however, data may be too limited to allow for an accurate, purely probabilistic modelling. This can be accounted for by modelling the input parameters using imprecise probability theory, which accounts for both aleatory (natural variability) and epistemic uncertainty (lack of knowledge). The use of probability-boxes (p-boxes) is one way to capture this mixed uncertainty by providing lower and upper bounds for the cumulative distribution function of variables. In the context of p-boxes modelling, uncertainty propagation analyses are not straightforward. Using a simple problem conversion, the problem is recast as two independent uncertainty propagation problems based on standard probabilistic modelling of the inputs. This problem conversion allows for traditional sampling-based methods, such as Monte Carlo simulation. However, due to the repeated evaluation of the computational model in sampling-based methods, the computational costs may become intractable. In this paper, a two-level meta-modelling approach is proposed to reduce the overall computational cost considerably. Sparse non-intrusive Polynomial Chaos Expansions (PCE) are used to surrogate the computational model. Sparse PCE allows for an efficient (accurate and inexpensive) modelling of the bounds of the response p-box. The capabilities of the two-level approach are illustrated by a benchmark analytical function and two realistic engineering problems. In all examples, the proposed approach is capable of estimating the bounds of the response p-box accurately with only a small number of runs of the exact computational model. This is of major significance in practice where computational resources are typically limited and at the same time expensive-to-evaluate models are analysed. \section*{References} \bibliographystyle{chicago}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} Galaxy evolution takes place through the build-up over time of stellar mass (M$_{}$) through various episodes of star formation. As stars evolve, metals are produced, so that metallicity and its relation with M$_{}$\ and star-formation rate (SFR) are important gauges of star-formation history. Thus, metal content, typically measured through the gas-phase oxygen abundance (O/H), the most abundant heavy element produced by massive stars, can be used to assess a galaxy's evolutionary state. The integrated star-formation activity over the lifetime of the galaxy is measured by stellar mass, while the star-formation rate (SFR) measures how much gas is being converted into stars over the time scale of the SFR indicator. The gas-phase metallicity ($Z$) quantifies the production of metals from high-mass stars, but also indicates the degree to which galaxies interact with their environment through gas accretion and outflows in the form of galactic winds. Several well-established scaling relations reflect the intimate link between M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H. A mass-metallicity relation (MZR) connecting stellar mass and $Z$ is clearly present in the Local Universe \citep[e.g.,][]{tremonti04}, and it apparently extends to the highest redshifts examined so far \citep[e.g.,][]{erb06a,maiolino08,mannucci09,cresci12,xia12,yabe12,henry13,cullen14,zahid14,troncoso14,steidel14,wuyts14,ly15,delosreyes15,onodera16}. Stellar mass and SFR are also related in a SF ``main sequence'' (SFMS) both locally \citep{brinchmann04,salim07} and at high redshift \citep[e.g.,][]{noeske07,elbaz11,karim11,wuyts11,speagle14}. It is generally agreed that the high-redshift relations of both the MZR and the SFMS are similar in form to the local ones, but they show different normalizations: at a given M$_{}$, SFR (and sSFR) increases with increasing redshift while metallicity decreases. Moreover, both relations show an inflection at high M$_{}$, with a decrease in O/H and SFR \citep{tremonti04,wyder07,noeske07,whitaker14,lee15,gavazzi15}. In order to observationally constrain the evolution of metallicity with redshift, we have compiled a new dataset of $\sim 1000$ star-forming galaxies from $z\simeq 0$ to $z\sim3.7$ with nebular oxygen abundance measurements; we have dubbed this compilation the ``MEGA'' dataset, corresponding to {\it Metallicity Evolution and Galaxy Assembly}. This dataset presents a marked improvement over the dataset used by \citet{hunt12} because of the inclusion of several more high$-z$ samples and, more importantly, because of a common metallicity calibration. The coevolution of SFR and O/H with redshift in the MEGA dataset is presented in a companion paper (Hunt et al. 2016, hereafter Paper I), and summarized in Section \ref{sec:coevo}. Here, we describe a physical model for understanding the coevolution of M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H. This is an extension of the model presented by \citet{dayal13}, and also a re-assessment of the model parameters with different O/H calibrations, different stellar yields, and a different Initial Mass Function (IMF). Section \ref{sec:theory} describes this analytical approach to physically interpret the scaling relations locally, and Section \ref{sec:fmrhighz} extends the analytical formulation to quantify evolution of the scaling relations with redshift. We discuss the results of our modeling in Sect. \ref{sec:discussion}, and summarize our conclusions in Sect. \ref{sec:conclusions}. As in Paper I, we use a \citet{chabrier03} IMF throughout. \section{Metallicity and SFR coevolution} \label{sec:coevo} Paper I presents common O/H calibrations for 990 galaxies from $z\sim0$ to $z\sim3.7$ culled from 19 different samples. The MEGA dataset spans a range of $10^5$ in M$_{}$, $10^6$ in SFR, and almost two orders of magnitude in O/H. The conversion to common metallicity calibrations was performed according to the transformations given by \citet{kewley08}. We chose three O/H calibrations, because of their similarity to electron-temperature or ``direct'' methods \citep[e.g.,][]{andrews13}: \citet[][hereafter D02]{denicolo02} and the nitrogen and oxygen$+$nitrogen-based abundances by \citet[][hereafter PP04N2 and PP04O3N2, respectively]{pettini04}. We hypothesized that the inflections in the MZR and SFMS at high M$_{}$\ were compensating one another, and also that the {\it decrease} in O/H at high redshift was somehow quantitatively associated with the {\it increase} in SFR. This hypothesis was essentially aimed at assessing the possibility that the mutual correlations among M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H could be expressed as a planar relation, i.e., with only two of the three pseudo-observables being required to describe the variation. From a Principal Component Analysis (PCA), we showed that this was indeed possible, and found a 2-dimensional relation, namely the Fundamental Plane of Metallicity (FPZ): \begin{equation} 12+\log(O/H) = -0.14\,{\rm log(SFR)} + 0.37\,{\rm log(M_)} + 4.82 \ \ \label{eqn:fpzall} \end{equation} \noindent The FPZ is an accurate reflection of the relations among M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H at least to within 0.16\,dex in O/H \citep[Eqn. (\ref{eqn:fpzall}) represents the best-behaved O/H calibration, PP04N2,][]{pettini04}. As described in Paper I, such a level of residuals is comparable to trends found in other galaxy samples but with a smaller range in M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H. We also analyzed whether or not the FPZ varied over time, and found a significant correlation of the residuals with redshift, but with a residual standard error of 0.16\,dex, the same as the 0.16\,dex uncertainty of the FPZ itself. Thus, we concluded that the FPZ is approximately redshift invariant, since any redshift variation of the FPZ is within the noise of the current data. As a comparison to the MEGA dataset, here and in Paper I we also analyze the emission-line galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) defined by \citet[][hereafter the SDSS10 sample]{mannucci10}. Although its parameter-space coverage is relatively limited, because of its large size this sample adds superb statistical power to our analysis, and also enables a comparison with \citet{dayal13} who analyzed the same galaxies. As for the MEGA dataset, we have converted the \citep[][KD02]{kewley02} metallicities reported by \citet{mannucci10} to the D02, PP04N2, and PP04O3N2 calibrations, as described in Paper I. \section{Coevolution: physical insights} \label{sec:theory} Much theoretical effort has been devoted to understand the evolution of the MZR and its dependence, if any, on SFR and the surrounding environment \citep[e.g.,][]{peng10,peeples11,dave11,yates12,hopkins12,krumholzdekel12,dayal13,lilly13,schaye15}. Here, following the analytical formalism of \citet{dayal13}, we present a physical basis for the observed coevolution of SFR and O/H. With a nebular oxygen abundance $X\equiv M_O/M_g$ where $M_O$ and $M_g$ are the galaxy oxygen and total gas mass, respectively, SFR, O/H, and M$_{}$\ are related through a set of evolutionary differential equations \citep[see][]{dayal13}: \begin{equation} \frac{{\rm d}M_{\rm star}}{{\rm d}t}\,\equiv\,\psi\,=\,\epsilon_\,M_g \label{eqn:sfr} \end{equation} \begin{equation} \frac{{\rm d}M_g}{{\rm d}t}\,=\,-(1-R) \psi + (a-w) \psi \label{eqn:gas} \end{equation} \begin{equation} M_g\,\frac{{\rm d}X}{{\rm d}t}\,=\,y(1-R)\psi - a X \psi \label{eqn:metals} \end{equation} \noindent Here $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\ is the star-formation timescale and we have renamed SFR as $\psi$; we assume that the SFR is proportional to the gas mass, and that the infalling gas is much less metal enriched than the ambient ISM, $X_i\,\ll\,X$. The two constants, $R$ and $y$, represent the returned fraction from stars and the yield per stellar generation, respectively, and depend on the IMF; we have adopted $(R,y)\,=\,(0.46, 0.05)$, taken from \citet{vincenzo16} using the stellar yields from \citet{nomoto13} assuming a \citet{chabrier03} IMF\footnote{The stellar yields from \citet{romano10} are similar, with $(R,y)\,=\,(0.45,0.06)$. Our values for $(R,y)$ are roughly the mean values of the yields over the range of metallicities given by \citet{vincenzo16} since our model does not contemplate time variation of the yields.}. The lower (upper) mass limit for these yields is 0.1\,$M_\odot$\ (100\,$M_\odot$). Like \citet{dayal13}, we further assume that gas outflow through winds, $w(M)\psi$ is proportional to the SFR, where $M$ is the total (dark$+$baryonic) galaxy mass. There is some observational evidence of such a proportionality, at least in the hot and/or ionized gas components of galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{martin05,veilleux05}. For convenience in the analytical formulation, we also take gas accretion, $a(M)\psi$, to be proportional to SFR. Although there is little evidence to directly support such a proportionality, it may be that gas is replenished in galaxies by cooling of pre-existing ionized gas in expanding supershells or galactic fountains \citep[e.g.,][]{hopkins08,fraternali08,fraternali12}. The solution of these equations can be written as: \begin{equation} X = \frac{y(1-R)}{a} \left( 1 - \mu^{-\alpha} \right) \label{eqn:X} \end{equation} \noindent where $\mu\,\equiv\,{M_g}/{M_{g0}}\,=\,\psi [\epsilon_ M_{g0}]^{-1}$, and $\alpha\equiv a\,(R-1+a-w)^{-1}$. The initial gas mass can be expressed as: \begin{equation} M_{g0}\,\simeq\,M_{\rm star}\,(1 + w -a) + M_g\,=\,(\Omega_b/\Omega_M)\,M \label{eqn:mgas} \end{equation} Altogether, there are five free parameters in the ($z \simeq 0$) model: the inverse of the star-formation timescale, $\epsilon_{}$; and the coefficients and power-law indices describing the mass dependence of infall through gas accretion ($a$), $a(M_{\rm star})\,=\,a_{\rm coeff}\,(M_{\rm star}/M_0)^{a_{\rm pow}}$; and of outflow by galactic winds ($w$), $w(M_{\rm star})\,=\,w_{\rm coeff}\,(M_{\rm star}/M_0)^{w_{\rm pow}}$. The solution to these equations results in an implicit star-formation history (SFH) assumed by our models, namely an exponentially declining one. Such a SFH is observationally supported by some studies \citep[e.g.,][]{eyles07,stark09}, but contested by others \citep[e.g.,][]{pacifici15,salmon15}. In our case, the exponential time scale depends on halo mass (here assumed to be proportional to M$_{}$). As described by \citet{dayal13}, this means that galaxies of different masses build up their metal contents at different rates: galaxies start from low $X$, low M$_{}$, and high $\psi$ values and then move towards higher metallicities as their M$_{}$\ increases. However, depending on their mass, they move at different velocities along the track: the most massive observed galaxies are very evolved with a large specific age (i.e., in units of the star formation timescale) and move essentially along constant metallicity curves; smaller objects are younger and are still gently building up their metal content. We can accommodate this model (hereafter the FPZ model) to the MEGA dataset and the SDSS10 sample for the three O/H calibrations considered here by fitting for these five parameters. Fig. \ref{fig:fmrsdss} illustrates the resulting best-fit FPZ model overplotted on the binned SDSS10 data for all three O/H calibrations (D02, PP04N2, PP04O3N2). Since this is a local calibration, the FPZ model fit to the MEGA dataset included only galaxies with $z\leq 0.1$; Fig. \ref{fig:fmrmega} shows this best fit to the MEGA data set of the FPZ model. Table \ref{tab:models} reports the best-fit parameters. The model is an excellent representation of the SDSS10 data \citep[see also][]{dayal13}; over $\sim$80\,000 individual data points, the best-fit model with only five free parameters gives a residual error in 12$+$log(O/H)\ predicted vs. observed of 0.05--0.07\,dex, according to the O/H calibration. The model is somewhat less successful at fitting the MEGA dataset, with mean O/H residuals of predicted vs. observed of $\sim 0.24-0.26$\,dex, larger than the FPZ residuals of $\sim 0.16$\,dex (see Paper I). However, these galaxies are only a subset of the entire MEGA sample (because of the redshift limitation), and the best-fit MEGA parameters are generally consistent, within the errors, to SDSS (see below for more details). \begin{figure} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{SDSS_FPZModelData_d02_ppn2_ppo3_new-crop.pdf} } \caption{SDSS10 galaxies: 12$+$log(O/H)\ plotted against (log of) SFR; the data points correspond to the average 12$+$log(O/H)\ (with the three O/H calibrations) for SDSS galaxies in a given SFR bin, and the error bars to the $1\sigma$ spread of the data. The curves show three FPZ models with different O/H calibrations (D02, PP04N2, PP04O3N2) as discussed in the text. The color coding is by (log) M$_{}$: 7.5-8 (magenta), 8-8.5 (purple), 8.5-9 (blue), 9-9.5 (cyan), 9.5-10 (green), 10-10.5 (orange), 10.5-11 (red), 11-11.5 (brown). The model and the data are in excellent agreement with a residual scatter of 0.05$-$0.07\,dex, according to the O/H calibration (see Table \ref{tab:models}). } \label{fig:fmrsdss} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{MEGA_MEGAFPZModelData_d02_ppn2_ppo3_new-crop.pdf} } \caption{MEGA galaxies: 12$+$log(O/H)\ plotted against (log of) SFR; the data points correspond to the average 12$+$log(O/H)\ (with the three O/H calibrations) for galaxies in a given SFR bin, and the error bars to the $1\sigma$ spread of the data. The curves show three FPZ models with different O/H calibrations (D02, PP04N2, PP04O3N2) as discussed in the text; here we show the FPZ best-fit MEGA model, rather than the FPZ best-fit SDSS model given in Fig. \ref{fig:fmrsdss}. As in Fig. \ref{fig:fmrsdss}, the color coding is by (log) M$_{}$: 7.5-8 (magenta), 8-8.5 (purple), 8.5-9 (blue), 9-9.5 (cyan), 9.5-10 (green), 10-10.5 (orange), 10.5-11 (red), 11-11.5 (brown). Only bins with more than 2 galaxies are shown; in some cases the standard deviations within the bins are smaller than the data point. The residual scatter of the model is 0.24$-$0.26\,dex, according to the O/H calibration (see Table \ref{tab:models}). } \label{fig:fmrmega} \end{figure} \begin{table} \setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt} \begin{center} \caption {FPZ model best-fit parameters$^{\mathrm a}$} {\scriptsize \begin{tabular}{lrcccccccccc} \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{Sample} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Degrees of} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma_{\rm fit}^{\mathrm b}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{O/H} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$a_{\rm coeff}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$a_{\rm pow}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$w_{\rm coeff}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$w_{\rm pow}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\epsilon_{}$} \\ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{freedom} & &\multicolumn{1}{c}{calibration$^{\mathrm c}$} & &&&& (Gyr$^{-1}$)\\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{(1)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(2)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(3)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(7)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(8)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(9)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(11)} \\ \hline \multicolumn{11}{c}{Local Universe} \\ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm d}$ & 252 & 0.264 & D02 & $0.47\,\pm\,0.45$ & ~~$0.22\pm0.60$ & $15.55\,\pm\,4.0$ & $-0.34\pm0.04$ & $2.0\,\pm\,1.3$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm d}$ & 252 & 0.243 & PP04N2 & $0.88\,\pm\,0.32$ & $-0.27\pm0.06$ & $9.9\,\pm\,4.7$ & $-0.29\pm0.06$ & $1.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm d}$ & 252 & 0.251 & PP04O3N2 & $0.73\,\pm\,0.29$ & $-0.30\pm0.06$ & $8.6\,\pm\,3.9$ & $-0.32\pm0.06$ & $0.9\,\pm\,0.6$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ \\ SDSS10 & 78536 & 0.052 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ SDSS10 & 78536 & 0.063 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ SDSS10 & 78536 & 0.068 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ \\ \hline \multicolumn{11}{c}{$z>0$: $\epsilon_{}(z)\,=\epsilon_{}(0)\,({\rm M}_{\rm star}/{10^{9.5}})^{\gamma(\epsilon_)} \ (1+z)^{\delta(\epsilon_)}$} \\ & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\gamma(\epsilon_)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\delta(\epsilon_)$} \\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{(1)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(2)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(3)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(7)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(8)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(9)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(11)} \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.060 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $-0.23\pm0.07$ & $-0.16\pm0.09$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.038 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-0.49\pm0.05$ & $-0.17\pm0.08$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.046 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $-0.44\pm0.05$ & $-0.10\pm0.08$ \\ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.079 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $-0.40\pm0.06$ & $-0.68\pm0.10$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.025 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-0.54\pm0.03$ & $-0.23\pm0.05$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.025 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $-0.56\pm0.03$ & $-0.18\pm0.05$ \\ \hline \multicolumn{11}{c}{$z>0$: $a(z)\,=\,a(0)\,(1+z)^{\gamma(a)}$, $w(z)\,=\,w(0)\,(1+z)^{\delta(w)}$} \\ & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\gamma(a)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\delta(w)$} \\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{(1)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(2)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(3)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(7)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(8)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(9)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(11)} \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.046 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $0.46\pm0.06$ & ~$0.05\pm0.06$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.039 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $0.68\pm0.04$ & $-0.07\pm0.04$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.049 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $0.71\pm0.05$ & $-0.08\pm0.06$ \\ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.035 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $0.48\pm0.04$ & ~$0.00\pm0.04$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.042 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $0.73\pm0.04$ & $-0.19\pm0.04$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.049 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $0.75\pm0.05$ & $-0.19\pm0.05$ \\ \\ \hline \multicolumn{11}{c}{$z>0$: $\mu(z)\,=\mu(0)\,[\,({\rm M}_{\rm star}/{10^{9.5}})^{\gamma(\mu)} \ (1+z)^{\delta(\mu)}$\,]$^{-1}$} \\ & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\gamma(\mu)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\delta(\mu)$} \\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{(1)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(2)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(3)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(7)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(8)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(9)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(11)} \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.062 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $-0.16\pm0.05$ & $-0.10\pm0.08$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.039 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-0.44\pm0.05$ & $-0.14\pm0.08$ \\ MEGA$^{\mathrm e}$ & 25 & 0.048 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $-0.36\pm0.05$ & $-0.05\pm0.08$ \\ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.035 & D02 & $0.994\,\pm\,0.001$ & $0.036\pm0.002$ & $11.25\,\pm\,0.11$ & $-0.449\pm0.002$ & ~$6.3\,\pm\,0.2$ & $-0.19\pm0.03$ & $-0.25\pm0.04$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.026 & PP04N2 & $1.136\,\pm\,0.005$ & $0.104\pm0.005$ & $20.55\,\pm\,0.26$ & $-0.413\pm0.003$ & $13.1\,\pm\,0.8$ & $-0.50\pm0.03$ & $-0.20\pm0.05$ \\ Schechter$^{\mathrm f}$ & 28 & 0.032 & PP04O3N2 & $1.020\,\pm\,0.004$ & $0.096\pm0.005$ & $18.09\,\pm\,0.21$ & $-0.451\pm0.003$ & ~$8.2\,\pm\,0.4$ & $-0.42\pm0.03$ & $-0.13\pm0.05$ \\ \hline \label{tab:models} \end{tabular} } \begin{flushleft} $^{\mathrm a}$~The free parameters in the $z\sim0$ FPZ models are: $a\,=\,a_{\rm coeff}\,({M_{\rm star}}/{10^{10.75}})^{a_{\rm pow}}$; $w\,=\,w_{\rm coeff}\,({M_{\rm star}}/{10^{9.0}})^{w_{\rm pow}}$; $\epsilon_{}$. At $z>0$, there are three classes of best-fit models as described in the text: one that depends on the variation of the inverse of the SF timescale ($\epsilon_{}$); one that depends on the variations of the inflow ($a$) and outflow ($w$) amplitudes; and one that depends on $\mu$, the relative gas content. \\ $^{\mathrm b}$~Residual standard error of global fit. \\ $^{\mathrm c}$~D02 corresponds to \citet{denicolo02}; PP04N2 and PP04O3N2 to nitrogen-based and oxygen+nitrogen based calibrations by \citet{pettini04}. \\ $^{\mathrm d}$~These fits were obtained for the MEGA galaxies with $z< 0.1$.\\ $^{\mathrm e}$~We have adopted the SDSS10 $z\sim0$ best-fit model parameters at $z\sim0$ in order to fit FPZ($z>0$); only galaxies with $z>0.1$ are included in the binned data. \\ $^{\mathrm f}$~These are fits of the model to mean M$_{}$\ and mean SFR using integrals of double Schechter functions taken from \citet{ilbert13}, and assuming that sSFR varies with redshift as the star-forming galaxies observed by \citet{karim11}; there are 28 dof in these fits (6 redshift bins $\times$ 5 mass bins, since we do not use the lowest-mass bin, and two of the mass bins are empty at the given redshift bin). The redshifts bins and the metallicity behavior with redshift to emulate are taken from mean trends of the MEGA dataset. We have adopted the SDSS10 $z\sim0$ best-fit model parameters at $z\sim0$ in order to fit FPZ($z>0$). See text for more details. \\ \end{flushleft} \end{center} \end{table} Despite the differences (O/H calibrations, stellar yields, IMF), our new best-fit FPZ model parameters are generally similar to those of \citet{dayal13}. The small M$_{}$\ dependence of the accretion term, and its small amplitude are consistent with previous values; for the galactic winds, however, we find however a slightly larger coefficient and a slightly steeper M$_{}$\ dependence ($\sim -0.4$ vs. $\sim -0.33$). The inverse SF timescales $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\ are also smaller than in \citet{dayal13}, corresponding to $\sim 100$\,Myr vs. $\sim 600$\,Myr previously. Part of the differences in the best-fit parameters may be due to the choice of the model IMF and our assumptions for the O/H calibration; here we use the \citet{asplund09} values of 12$+$log(O/H)\,=\,8.69 for solar oxygen abundance, and a metal mass fraction Z/H of 0.0198\footnote{This corresponds to an oxygen abundance of $4.9\times10^{-4}$ while \citet{dayal13} used $7.9\times10^{-4}$.}. Nevertheless, despite this and the difference in the fitting methods, the results are in reasonably good agreement. The mass loading factor for galactic winds, $w$, found by the SDSS10 best-fit model is roughly consistent with those found by the cosmological hydrodynamic simulations of \citet{dave11}, despite their different underlying assumptions about the relation of SFR, gas accretion, and galactic winds. They assume an ``equilibrium'' model (further described below, Sect. \ref{sec:comparison}) in which the infall rate $a$ is balanced by the sum of the SFR $\psi$ and the outflow $w$. The results of their simulations show a trend with stellar mass of $w$ $\propto {\rm M}_{\rm star}^{-0.33}$, or momentum-driven winds, consistent with the MEGA best fit, and only slightly flatter than the power-law index $a_{\rm pow}\sim-0.4$ given by the SDSS10 best fit. This power-law M$_{}$\ dependence of $\sim -0.4$ corresponds roughly to the low-mass linear portion of SDSS10 MZR with a slope of $\sim 0.38$ (Paper I). In contrast, the accretion or infall parameter $a$ is significantly different from what is found in some equilibrium models. While the infall amplitude $a$ is required to be larger than the outflow $w$ in such models, $a\,=\,(w+1)\,\psi$ \citep[see, e.g.,][]{dave11}, we find a much smaller $a$ value, roughly a factor of 10 smaller than $w$, and with a much shallower M$_{}$\ dependence. These differences will be discussed further in Sect. \ref{sec:comparison}. In any case, our model is able to reproduce O/H of the $\sim$80\,000 SDSS10 galaxies to within $\sim 0.05-0.07$\,dex, lending credibility to our approach. The quantity $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\ corresponds approximately to a gas depletion time, with some caveats. Observationally, gas depletion times, $\tau_{\rm depl}$, are inferred from the measured ratio of SFR and gas mass, $\tau_{\rm depl}$\,=\,$\psi$/$M_{g}$, either locally as surface densities, or globally integrated over the entire galaxy \citep[e.g.,][]{bigiel11,saintonge11,huang14,genzel15,hunt15}. For spiral galaxies, typical depletion times $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ for the H$_2$\ component are $\sim$2.4\,Gyr \citep[e.g.,][]{bigiel11} but can be as small as 50\,Myr in metal-poor starbursts \citep{hunt15} or as large as $\sim$10\,Gyr in more quiescent systems \citep[e.g.,][]{saintonge11,bothwell14}. On the other hand, atomic gas H{\sc i}\ depletion times are relatively constant, $\sim$3.4\,Gyr \citep{schiminovich10}. The values we find for $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\ ($\sim 100-200$\,Myr for SDSS10, $\sim 400-700$\,Myr for MEGA) are shorter than either of these. The reason for this disagreement can be understood as follows: the constant of proportionality $\epsilon_{}$\ relating gas mass and SFR (see Eqn. (\ref{eqn:sfr})) is in reality the ratio of a (dimensionless) star-formation efficiency $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$\ and a SF timescale, $t_{\rm ff}$\ \citep[e.g.,][]{krumholz09,krumholz12}, where the subscript ``ff'' refers to a free-fall or dynamical timescale. Physically, $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$\ gives the fraction of gas converted into stars over a dynamical timescale, in a process that is usually highly inefficient with $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$$\sim 0.01-0.05$ \citep[e.g.,][]{krumholz07}. With such efficiencies and assuming that $\epsilon_{}$\,=\,$\epsilon_{\rm ff}$/$t_{\rm ff}$\, the SDSS10 fitted values of $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\ would give $t_{\rm ff}$$\sim 1-8$\,Myr. These times are unrealistically small for typical giant molecular clouds or spiral disks, which instead have typical dynamical times $t_{\rm ff}$$\sim$15-20\,Myr \citep{krumholz12}. However, what we call $M_{g}$\ is in fact only the gas that enriches the ISM with metals as it is recycled through star formation; it is not the total gas available that would be observed. In other words, $M_{g}$(model)\,=\,$M_{g}$(observed)\,$\epsilon_{\rm ff}$, or from Eqn. (\ref{eqn:sfr}): \begin{equation} \epsilon_{}\,=\,\frac{\psi}{M_g}\,=\frac{\psi}{M_g{\rm (observed)}\,\epsilon_{\rm ff}}\,=\,\frac{1}{\tau_{\rm depl}\,\epsilon_{\rm ff}}. \label{eqn:epsilon} \end{equation} \noindent We can use this equation to calculate typical gas depletion times as estimated from our fits of the SDSS10 galaxies. Assuming $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$$\sim$0.03, we find $t_{\rm ff}$$\sim$3\,Gyr, similar to typical gas depletion times for both the molecular and the atomic component\footnote{To explore the molecular gas fraction necessary to form stars would be an important addition to this discussion, but is beyond the scope of this work.}. Comparison of the MEGA results with those of SDSS10 shows that the amplitude and power-law index for the wind parameters are consistent with SDSS10, but the accretion parameters and the inverse SF timescales, $\epsilon_{}$, differ. As can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:fmrmega}, the high-mass end of the SFR dependency of O/H falls off more steeply for the MEGA galaxies than for SDSS10. For the PP04N2 and PP04O3N2 calibrations, gas accretion for the MEGA galaxies seems to increase with decreasing M$_{}$, in contrast to the behavior of the SDSS10 sample; because of the highly star-forming nature of the MEGA dataset, this could be telling us that the lower-mass galaxies are more gas rich than higher-mass ones. On the other hand, the SF timescales implied by the FPZ model fit to the MEGA galaxies are longer than for SDSS10, although with relatively large uncertainties. More generally, the SDSS10 best-fit parameters are in all cases much better determined than those for the MEGA dataset, probably because of the much larger number of galaxies in the former. Therefore, in what follows, we will adopt the best-fit FPZ parameters for the SDSS10 $z\,\simeq\,0$ galaxies to extend the model to high redshift. Table \ref{tab:models} gives the best-fit FPZ model parameters for the SDSS10 and MEGA datasets. \begin{figure} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRSDSSFit_OHvsz_PP04N2_newnew-crop} \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRSDSSFit_OHSchechtervsz_PP04N2_Speagle_nolabyaxis_newnew-crop} } \caption{Binned measurements of 12$+$log(O/H)\ estimated from SFR and the FPZ model at $z\,\simeq\,0$ as a function of redshift for the MEGA dataset (left panel) and the simulated dataset (right). In both panels, the symbols correspond to the values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ that would be inferred using the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model applied to the median SFR and M$_{}$\ within each redshift bin (according to binned M$_{}$\ values); the curves show the average behavior of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. See text for a description of the simulated galaxy populations shown in the right panel. } \label{fig:nofmrvsz} \end{figure} \subsection{Comparison with previous work at $z\simeq 0$} \label{sec:comparison} As discussed in Paper I, the intention of the FPZ is similar to that of the ``Fundamental Metallicity Relation'' \citep[``FMR'', ][]{mannucci10}, namely to relate the metal content of galaxies to their star-formation activity. Nevertheless, the two formulations are different; the planar formulation of the FPZ, accurate to $\sim$0.16\,dex, extends to galaxies with M$_{}$\ as low as $\sim 10^6$\,$M_\odot$\ and to redshifts $\la 3.7$ (see Sect. \ref{sec:coevo} and Paper I). In contrast, the extension to lower stellar masses of the FMR is quadratic \citep{mannucci11}, and, as shown in Paper I, has a larger mean dispersion than the FPZ and a significant offset for the MEGA sample which spans a much broader parameter space than the original SDSS dataset at $z\sim 0$ for which the FMR was developed. Due to its success, which by including SFR reduced significantly the dispersion for 12$+$log(O/H)\ of the original dataset relative to only stellar mass, many models have focused on reproducing the FMR at $z\simeq 0$ by \citet{mannucci10}. Because of the underlying notion that metallicity is somehow connected to SFR, common to both the FPZ and the FMR formulations, before pursuing our model for the FPZ, here we discuss previous attempts to theoretically understand the FMR. Despite using simulation runs calibrated to a number $z \simeq 0$ observables (stellar mass function, stellar mass-size relation and the stellar mass-black hole relation) the current gold-standard EAGLE simulations are unable to reproduce the local FMR; whilst reproducing observations to within 0.15\,dex for high mass (M$_{}$$\la 10^{10}$\,$M_\odot$) galaxies, they severely over-estimate the metal content of lower mass halos by as much as 0.4\,dex \citep{lagos16}. Given the sub-grid limitations of simulation, most effort has thus been diverted to developing an analytic understanding of the $z \simeq 0$ FMR. We briefly discuss the two previous works most close in spirit to ours. The \citet{dave12} model assumes every galaxy to be in ``equilibrium" with the infall rate exactly balancing the gas lost in outflows and star formation. While this model correctly yields a metallicity that is independent of star formation for high-mass galaxies, it fails to capture the metallicity downturn observed at low mass. Interestingly, however, this model finds outflows to be momentum driven with a mass power-law dependence of $\sim -0.33$, which however we obtain only for the MEGA sample; the SDSS10 slopes are slightly steeper than this, $\sim -0.4$. \citet{peeples11} find that reproducing the local mass-metallicity relation requires a high metal-expulsion efficiency (compared to expelled gas, ``preferentially metal-enriched winds") that scales steeply with increasing M$_{}$. Although this might yield the observed FMR (or FPZ) for low-mass galaxies, it is doubtful if such an assumption could reproduce the constant metallicity observed for the most massive systems, independently of SFRs ranging over five orders of magnitude presented in the MEGA sample. \citet{lilly13} use the ``gas-regulator" model wherein stars are embedded in a gas reservoir whose mass is increased by infall, and the SFR being proportional to the gas mass available at any time. Assuming both the star formation efficiency and outflow rate to be independent of the halo mass (the ``ideal regulator"), these authors find the metallicity to be largely independent of the evolutionary path because of gas continually ``flushing" the system. This is quite contrary to our model that requires outflows to scale with the halo mass, and finds the metallicity to explicitly depend on the gas evolution history. \begin{figure} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRMEGA_SDSSFitTimeScale_OHvsz_PP04N2_newnew-crop} \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRSDSSFitTimeScale_OHSchechtervsz_Speagle_PP04N2_nolabyaxis_newnew-crop} } \caption{Binned measurements of 12$+$log(O/H)\ estimated from SFR and the FPZ($z$) model with $\epsilon_{}$($z$) added to the FMZ($z=0$) model as a function of redshift for the MEGA dataset (left panel) and the simulated dataset (right). In both panels, the symbols correspond to the (PP04N2) values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ that would be inferred using the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model applied to the median SFR and M$_{}$\ within each redshift bin (according to binned M$_{}$\ values); the curves show the average behavior of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. See text for a description of the simulated galaxy populations shown in the right panel. } \label{fig:timescalefmrvsz} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRMEGA_SDSSFitCoeff_OHvsz_PP04N2_newnew-crop} \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRSDSSFitCoeff_OHSchechtervsz_Speagle_PP04N2_nolabyaxis_newnew-crop} } \caption{Binned measurements of 12$+$log(O/H)\ estimated from SFR and the FPZ($z$) model with $a(z)$, $w(z)$ added to the FMZ($z=0$) model as a function of redshift for the MEGA dataset (left panel) and the simulated dataset (right). In both panels, the symbols correspond to the (PP04N2) values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ that would be inferred using the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model applied to the median SFR and M$_{}$\ within each redshift bin (according to binned M$_{}$\ values); the curves show the average behavior of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. See text for a description of the simulated galaxy populations shown in the right panel. } \label{fig:coefffmrvsz} \setcounter{figure}{5} \vspace{\baselineskip} \hbox{ \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRMEGA_SDSSFitMgasz_OHvsz_PP04N2_newnew-crop} \includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{FMRSDSSFitMgasz_OHSchechtervsz_PP04N2_nolabyaxis_newnew-crop} } \caption{Binned measurements of 12$+$log(O/H)\ estimated from SFR and the FPZ($z$) model with $M_{g}$($z$) added to the FMZ($z=0$) model as a function of redshift for the MEGA dataset (left panel) and the simulated dataset (right). In both panels, the symbols correspond to the (PP04N2) values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ that would be inferred using the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model applied to the median SFR and M$_{}$\ within each redshift bin (according to binned M$_{}$\ values); the curves show the average behavior of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. See text for a description of the simulated galaxy populations shown in the right panel. } \label{fig:mgasfmrvsz} \end{figure} \subsection{Testing the $z \simeq 0$ model at higher redshift} \label{sec:testfmrhighz} In order to extend the FPZ model to $z>0$, we first test whether the SDSS10 best-fit $z\simeq 0$ parameters apply to the data at higher redshift. Such behavior would be expected if the lower metallicities at high redshift were compensated for merely by the more intense star-formation activity, which could power larger outflow of metals through stronger galactic winds. The left panel of Fig. \ref{fig:nofmrvsz} shows the behavior of the MEGA sample if we infer metallicity through the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model parameters. The curves are the fits to the observed O/H of the MEGA dataset as a function of redshift as reported in Paper I; the symbols correspond to the values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ that would be inferred from the FPZ $z\,=\,0$ model applied to the median SFR and M$_{}$\ in each redshift bin. In all M$_{}$\ bins, up to $z \sim 0.7$ the FPZ correctly predicts the observed O/H. However, for higher redshifts, given the observed (median) SFRs, the FPZ model overpredicts the observed O/H, in particular for the highest M$_{}$\ mass bins where the discrepancy is $\ga$0.4\,dex. On the other hand, in the lowest mass bin (log(M$_{}$/$M_\odot$)\,=8.5-9.0) O/H is underestimated by $\sim$0.1\,dex. Similar tensions relative to the $z=0$ model by \citet{dayal13} are seen also in the sample of $z\sim 2$ galaxies by \citet{grasshorn16} where they find that galaxies with M$_{}$$\ga 10^9$\,$M_\odot$\ have higher O/H relative to their local counterparts, while lower-mass systems have lower abundances. Because the high SFRs of the MEGA dataset may not be fully representative of typical high-$z$ ``main-sequence'' galaxy populations (see Paper I), as a check, we have simulated truly main-sequence galaxy populations as a function of redshift using the Galaxy Stellar Mass Functions (GSMFs) by \citet{ilbert13} for $z>0$ and for $z \simeq 0$ the GSMF from \citet{baldry12}. For a given M$_{}$, the SFR has been inferred by using the SFMS formulation of \citet{speagle14} as a function of cosmic time. For each redshift bin, integration over the appropriate weighted GSMFs was performed to obtain the mean M$_{}$\ and the mean SFR at that redshift for main-sequence populations. Using these values of M$_{}$\ and SFR, we then calculated O/H using the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model parameters as for the MEGA data. The result is shown in the right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:nofmrvsz}, where the metallicities predicted from the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model are compared to the mean observed O/H behavior (shown by curves) of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. As in the left panel, symbols correspond to the metallicities that would be inferred for the simulated galaxies of a given M$_{}$\ and SFR(M$_{}$,$z$) from the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model within each M$_{}$\ and redshift bin. Despite the two very different approaches, both the simulated galaxies (right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:nofmrvsz}) and the MEGA galaxies (left panel) show similar behavior. The FPZ($z\simeq 0$) parameters are successful to $z \sim 0.7$, but fail in the same way as for the MEGA dataset at higher $z$. The consistency of the simulations and the MEGA galaxies is encouraging, and in the next section we use both methods to extend the FPZ model to high redshift. \section{Extending the model to higher redshift} \label{sec:fmrhighz} As illustrated in the previous section, the higher SFRs at $z>0$ are insufficient by themselves through the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model to lower the metallicities to the levels observed. We have thus investigated three avenues of adapting the FPZ model to $z>0$: (a) changes in $\epsilon_{}$, since timescales and/or star-formation efficiencies might be expected to change with redshift (Sect. \ref{sec:epsilon_z}); (b) redshift variations of accretion and wind parameters ($a$ and $w$) (Sect. \ref{sec:aw_z}); and (c) higher gas fractions through possible changes in the $\mu$ parameter ( Sect. \ref{sec:mgas_z}, see Eqn. (\ref{eqn:X})). Since the discrepancies in Fig. \ref{fig:nofmrvsz} seem to depend on M$_{}$, we considered separate dependencies on M$_{}$\ and redshift (or cosmic time). Thus, for each approach to establish the $z$-dependent FPZ model, we fix FPZ($z\simeq 0$) to the SDSS10 parameters and introduce a scaling factor for either $\epsilon_{}$, ($a$, $w$), or $\mu$. Thus only two parameters are to be fit: one for a possible M$_{}$\ scaling for $z>0$ ($\epsilon_{}$, $\mu$) and one for a scaling with redshift ($\epsilon_{}$, $\mu$, $a$, $w$). Although these are only a few of the many possible adaptations of the FPZ model to high $z$, we have limited the possibilities for simplicity. To constrain the model, we have assumed that the true metallicities of high-$z$ galaxy populations are approximated by the mean behavior of the MEGA dataset as reported in Paper I. The best-fitting model parameters for $z>0$ are obtained by minimizing the residuals of the observed mean behavior of 12$+$log(O/H)\ relative to the model over the various mass and redshift bins, not including $z\simeq 0$; because of small numbers at high redshift, we also do not consider the lowest mass bin (log(M$_{}$/$M_\odot$)$<$8.5). The resulting degrees of freedom in the fits are 25 for the MEGA dataset (since some M$_{}$\ bins are missing at $z>0$), and 28 for the simulated galaxies (5 M$_{}$\ bins over 6 redshift bins, 2 free parameters). As mentioned above, in all high-$z$ FPZ models, we adopted the $z\simeq 0$ SDSS10 parameters and adjusted $\epsilon_{}$\ (first approach), $a$ and $w$, the accretion and wind coefficients (second), or $\mu$ (third). Table \ref{tab:models} gives the best-fit FPZ($z$) (D02, PP04N2, PP04O3N2) model parameters for the three approaches which are described in the following sections. \subsection{Redshift variation of star-formation timescales and/or efficiencies} \label{sec:epsilon_z} We first investigated whether scaling $\epsilon_{}$\ with M$_{}$\ and $z$ could have the desired effect of lowering O/H at high redshift. Several methods were explored for introducing a scaling factor $e_{\rm scale}$\ applied as a multiplicative factor to $\epsilon_{}$\ in the FPZ models. Although we studied numerous ways to scale $\epsilon_{}$, including a mass-quenching scenario as formulated by \citet{peng10}, only two gave reasonably low mean O/H residuals, $\sim 0.03-0.04$\,dex for both MEGA and simulated galaxies. These correspond to $\epsilon_{}$($z$)\,=\,$e_{\rm scale}$\,$\epsilon_{}$(0) where $e_{\rm scale}$\ is given by: \begin{enumerate}[(a)] \item (M$_{}$/$10^{9.5})^{\gamma(\epsilon_)}$\ $(1+z)^{\delta(\epsilon_)}$ \item (M$_{}$/$10^{9.5})^{\gamma(\epsilon_)}$\ $({\rm age}_z/{\rm age}_H)^{\delta(\epsilon_)}$ \end{enumerate} where $\epsilon_{}$(0) gives the value of $\epsilon_{}$\ at $z\,=\,0$, age$_z$ and age$_H$ are the ages of the universe at redshift $z$ and $z=0$, respectively, and $\gamma(\epsilon_)$ and $\delta(\epsilon_)$ are the parameters to be fit. Since the two fits are equivalent in terms of quality (low residuals), we chose (a) since it is generally easier to formulate numerically. The values of 12$+$log(O/H)\ predicted by this model as a function of redshift are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:timescalefmrvsz}; as in Fig. \ref{fig:nofmrvsz} the left panel gives the MEGA dataset and the right panel the simulated galaxies. The fit is excellent for the simulated galaxies, with a mean residual $\sigma\,\sim\,0.025$\,dex (except for D02), but for the MEGA dataset is slightly worse, $\sigma\,=\,0.04 - 0.06$\,dex. There are some problems in the intermediate-$z$ regime where the metallicities inferred from the FPZ model by varying $\epsilon_{}$\ with mass and $z$ tend to be overestimated. The predictions for low-mass galaxies also tend to be overestimated at low redshift. \subsection{Redshift variation of gas accretion and galactic winds} \label{sec:aw_z} The second avenue of investigation relied on simultaneously scaling the gas accretion coefficient $a$ and the galactic wind coefficient $w$, in order to quantify whether the scaling with SFR changes with redshift. For simplicity, we used one coefficient $\gamma(a)$ to define the redshift variation of $a$, and another $\delta(w)$ for that of $w$: \begin{eqnarray} a(z)&=&a(0)\,(1+z)^{\gamma(a)} \nonumber \\ w(z)&=&w(0)\,(1+z)^{\delta(w)} \nonumber \end{eqnarray} where $a(0)$ and $w(0)$ are the values of $a_{\rm coeff}$ and $w_{\rm coeff}$ at $z\,=\,0$. The implicit assumption is that the M$_{}$\ dependence of $a(0)$ and $w(0)$ given by the SDSS10 fit in Table \ref{tab:models} holds also at $z>0$. Figure \ref{fig:coefffmrvsz} gives the results of this fit, where, as before, the left panel shows the MEGA dataset and the right the simulated galaxies. The fit for the MEGA dataset is good, with a mean residual between data and predicted O/H of $\sigma\,=\,0.04 - 0.05$\,dex, similar to the previous $\epsilon_{}$\ approach described above. For the simulated galaxies, the fit is still good ($\sigma\,=\,0.04 - 0.05$\,dex), although slightly worse than the $\epsilon_{}$\ model (except for D02 where it is better). \subsection{Redshift variation of gas fraction} \label{sec:mgas_z} The last successful formulation involved scaling the model parameter $\mu$ which basically defines the gas-mass fraction relative to its initial value in the galaxy's evolution (see Eqns. (\ref{eqn:X}) and (\ref{eqn:mgas})). For computational reasons, the scaling factor was introduced in the denominator of $\mu$: \begin{equation} \mu(z)\,=\,\mu(0)\ [\,({\rm M}_{\rm star}/10^{9.5})^{\gamma(\mu)}\,(1+z)^{\delta(\mu)})\,]^{-1} \nonumber \end{equation} The FPZ($z$) model predictions of O/H with this approach are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mgasfmrvsz} where the MEGA dataset is shown in the left panel and the simulated galaxies in the right. Again, the fit for the MEGA dataset is good, with mean residuals $\sigma\,=\,0.04 - 0.06$\,dex, consistent with the previous two formulations. The behavior of the MEGA galaxies is similar to the $\epsilon_{}$\ approach described in Sect. \ref{sec:epsilon_z} where O/H is over-predicted by the model in the intermediate-$z$ redshift range, although the discrepancies at the low-mass end are slightly less pronounced. On the other hand, this formulation of the FPZ($z$) model for the simulated populations is excellent, with a mean residual of $\sigma\,\sim\,0.03$\,dex. \section{Discussion} \label{sec:discussion} This is one of the first works that aims to study the physics governing the redshift-evolution of the FPZ (or FMR). \citet{lilly13} predicted an un-evolving FPZ unless the parameters governing inflow/outflow/star formation evolve with redshift; our approach suggests that indeed these parameters evolve. \citet{yates12} study the evolution of the MZR from $z\sim 3$ to $z\simeq 0$ by comparing the semi-analytic models of \citet{guo11} with an SDSS-selected sample similar to SDSS10. However, their models were unable to predict the observed decrease of metallicity for a fixed M$_{}$, and they concluded that ``chemical enrichment in the model galaxies proceeded too rapidly at early times". Here we have shown that to correctly reproduce the coevolution of SFR and O/H, i.e., correctly fit the observations, that the {\it model describing the co-dependence of M$_{}$, SFR, and metallicity must change with redshift}. All three FPZ($z$) fits to both the MEGA dataset and the simulated galaxies as described above successfully predict the O/H trends with redshift to within $0.03-0.05$\,dex. Although the three formulations are apparently describing different physical manifestations of the coevolution of metallicity and SFR, they are generally painting a similar picture, namely an increase of gas content with redshift. \subsection{Redshift variation of the model} \label{sec:discussion_z} According to Table \ref{tab:models}, the scaling of the FPZ($z$) model with $\epsilon_{}$\ suggests that: \begin{equation} \epsilon_(z)\,\approx\,\epsilon_(0)\,({\rm M}_{\rm star}/10^{9.5})^{-0.5}\,(1+z)^{-0.2} \label{eqn:epsilon_z} \end{equation} The above $\gamma$($\epsilon_{}$), $\delta$($\epsilon_{}$) coefficients are approximate, taken as a rough average of the (PP04N2) simulated and MEGA datasets. Eqn. (\ref{eqn:epsilon_z}) would imply that at a given M$_{}$, $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$, roughly the product of gas depletion time $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ and SF efficiency $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$, is increasing slightly with redshift (roughly 30\% larger at $z\sim3$). Assuming that $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$\ remains constant, this would be contrary to observational evidence that suggests that molecular depletion times are shorter at higher redshift \citep[e.g.,][]{genzel10,genzel15,silverman15}. Galaxies are also more gas-rich at higher redshift, with as much as 40$-$60\% of their dynamical mass in H$_2$\ \citep[e.g.,][]{tacconi10,daddi10}, a fraction $\sim$5$-$10 times higher than typical spiral disks at $z\simeq 0$. However, as discussed in Sect. \ref{sec:theory}, depletion times are defined observationally as the ratio of observed gas mass to SFR. Our models do not know about {\it observed} gas mass; they only consider the gas that is enriching the ISM with metals, i.e., the gas that is effectively converted into stars. Thus, of necessity, our models cannot distinguish between the observationally defined $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ and the product of $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ and $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$, or equivalently the ratio of $t_{\rm ff}$\ and $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$. Given that $\epsilon_{}^{-1}$\,=\,$M_{g}$(observed)\,$\epsilon_{\rm ff}$/$\psi$ (see Eqn. (\ref{eqn:epsilon})) it is likely that the $\epsilon_{}$\ FPZ model scaling is pointing to increasing gas content with $z$, rather than longer depletion times. The FPZ($z$) formulation with the accretion and wind coefficients is consistent with this. As shown in Table \ref{tab:models}, the scaling of the model with $a$ and $w$: \begin{eqnarray} a(z)&\approx&a(0)\,(1+z)^{0.7}, \nonumber \\ w(z)&\approx&w(0)\,(1+z)^{0.0} \label{eqn:aw_z} \end{eqnarray} indicates that the mass loading relative to SFR in the galactic outflows powered by star formation is roughly the same at high $z$ as at $z\simeq 0$. In contrast, the mass loading in accretion is significantly increased, almost 3 times higher at $z\sim 3.5$ than locally. Thus, to explain the drop in metallicity at high redshift, more (pristine) gas is needed, in the model acquired through accretion. Our result is roughly consistent with \citet{papovich11} who find that gas fractions increase roughly as $(1+z)^{0.9}$ from $z\sim 3$ to $z\sim 8$, and after this ``accretion epoch'', at lower redshifts both accretion and SFR are reduced. A similar indication is given by the FPZ($z$) model based on the redshift variation of $\mu$, equal to the ratio of $M_{g}$\ and the initial gas mass (see Eqn. (\ref{eqn:X})). The coefficients in Table \ref{tab:models} indicate that: \begin{equation} \mu(z)\,\approx\,\mu(0)\,\frac{1}{({\rm M}_{\rm star}/10^{9.5})^{-0.4}\,(1+z)^{-0.15}}\quad . \label{eqn:mu_z} \end{equation} Both the M$_{}$\ and redshift dependencies are similar to (although slightly smaller than) those for the $\epsilon_{}$\ formulation; this is not unexpected given that $\mu\,=\,M_g/M_{g0}\,\propto \epsilon_^{-1}$. The $\mu$ approach is perhaps more direct, but is essentially indicating, as above, that more gas is needed with increasing redshift, in order to form stars at the necessary levels, recycle the ISM, and achieve the observed reduced metallicities. The increase in gas content with redshift roughly $\propto (1+z)^{0.2}$ given by Eqns. (\ref{eqn:epsilon_z}) and (\ref{eqn:mu_z}) is similar to (the inverse of) that found observationally for molecular depletion times $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ of main-sequence galaxies by \citet{genzel15}. Since, as discussed above, our models are unable to separate gas content from $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ and $\epsilon_{\rm ff}$, this is an encouraging consistency. Moreover, for massive galaxies with M$_{}$\,$\approx 10^{11}$\,$M_\odot$, we would predict gas fractions 7 times higher at $z\sim 2$ than at $z\simeq 0$, roughly consistent with the CO observations by \citet{geach11}, and only slightly lower then the increase of a factor of 10 found by \citet{bothwell13b} for luminous sub-millimeter galaxies. Nevertheless, a limitation of our model is that it does not explicitly distinguish between accreted gas, presumably H{\sc i}, and the gas which forms stars that, at these high SFRs, must be molecular. Indeed, the changes with redshift of relative gas content predicted by the FPZ($z$) model are slightly lower than the results derived observationally for H$_2$; \citet{tacconi13} and \citet{saintonge13} find that, as $z$ goes from 2 to 1, gas fractions decrease by a factor of $\sim$1.4, while we would predict a change of only $\sim$1.1-1.2 (for a galaxy of fixed stellar mass). The gas content of our model comprises not only the molecular component but also H{\sc i}; although it is not yet possible to observe H{\sc i}\ at high $z$, it is likely that H{\sc i}\ content shows a smaller redshift variation than H$_2$\ \citep[e.g.,][]{lagos11,popping12,lagos16}. Thus, total gas fractions are expected to increase less rapidly with redshift than H$_2$\ alone. More detailed comparisons with observations will require observations of atomic gas to cosmological redshifts which should be possible with the Square Kilometer Array (SKA). \subsection{Redshift variation of the stellar mass scaling} \label{sec:discussion_mstar} It is well established that at a given redshift the gas fraction in massive galaxies is lower than in less massive ones \citep[e.g.,][]{saintonge11,popping12,huang12,boselli14,bothwell14,popping15}. Moreover, as discussed above, it is clear that gas fraction increases with redshift. The FPZ($z$) model with the $\epsilon_{}$\ and $\mu$ approaches also predicts that the amount of increase in gas content with redshift varies with stellar mass. In particular, the M$_{}$\ scaling of the FPZ($z$) models (see Eqns. (\ref{eqn:epsilon_z}) and (\ref{eqn:mu_z})) suggests that the gas content of high-mass galaxies relative to less massive ones {\it increases} with increasing redshift. For a galaxy with M$_{}$\,=\,$10^{10}$\,$M_\odot$\ at $z\,=\,2$, the growth in gas content is predicted to be $\sim 2.2$ times that at $z\,=\,0$; a more massive galaxy, M$_{}$\,=\,$10^{11}$\,$M_\odot$\ at the same redshift the increase would be $\sim 7$ times the gas content of a galaxy of the same mass at $z\,=\,0$. A less massive galaxy, with M$_{}$\,=\,$10^{9}$\,$M_\odot$, would be expected to have roughly the same gas content at $z\,=\,2$ as at $z\,=\,0$. Such a result would be consistent with ``downsizing'' in which massive galaxies evolve more rapidly than lower-mass ones, thus consuming their gas at earlier epochs \citep[e.g.,][]{cowie96,delucia06,bundy06,thomas10}. Specifically, \citet{thomas10} found that SF activity in galaxies with M$_{}$\ $\sim 10^{11}-4\times10^{11}$\,$M_\odot$\ peaked at increasingly higher redshifts, $z\sim 1.5-2$, well within the redshift and mass ranges probed by the MEGA and simulated galaxies. Such a trend of gas fraction with stellar mass and redshift is also in accord with some observational estimates of the mass variations of gas fraction with redshift, either through indirect determinations of gas content by inverting gas-SFR scaling relations \citep[e.g.,][]{popping12,popping15}, or with gas masses inferred from measured dust masses up to $z\sim 2.5$ after correcting for metallicity \citep{santini14}. \citet{santini14} find that from $z\sim 2.5$ to $z \sim 1$, the gas fraction in massive galaxies decreases more sharply than in lower-mass ones; less massive galaxies show a shallower decrease in the gas content. However, observations of H$_2$\ alone are in disagreement with this. \citet{morokuma15} estimated redshift variations of H$_2$\ fraction through a compilation of CO observations and find that more massive galaxies show {\it less} evolution in H$_2$\ fraction than lower-mass ones, in direct contrast to our results. The same contradiction emerges in the study by \citet{dessauges15} who studied five lensed galaxies and compared them with CO observations from the literature. \citet{genel14} Illustris simulations also find that less massive galaxies at higher redshift have a larger change in gas fraction with redshift. Observationally, our result for galaxies with masses $\la 10^{10}$\,$M_\odot$\ is very difficult to verify given that virtually all observational studies so far of gas content at high redshift are limited to M$_{}$$\ga\ 10^{10}$\,$M_\odot$\ \citep[although see][who studied lensed galaxies]{saintonge13,dessauges15}. Nevertheless, the results of the FPZ($z$) models suggest that massive galaxies at $z\sim 3$ relative to $z\simeq 0$ must have a higher gas content in order to achieve the relatively lower metallicities. Incorporating a multi-phase approach as in \citet{magrini12} might help interpret the different gas components in our models. One limitation of the FPZ model was discussed above, namely the inability to distinguish between H$_2$, H{\sc i}, and total gas content. At least one other possible limitation to the model is the lack of mass scaling of $\epsilon_{}$, or equivalently the SF timescale. Such as omission can be justified for the SDSS10 galaxies because, as discussed in Sect. \ref{sec:theory}, in typical spiral disks both molecular depletion times $\tau_{\rm depl}$\ and H{\sc i}\ depletion time are roughly constant, $2-3$\,Gyr \citep{bigiel11,catinella10,schiminovich10}. Nevertheless, this could be a problem for the MEGA dataset because of its highly star-forming nature, and large variation in M$_{}$. It could also be troublesome for the high-$z$ main-sequence simulated galaxies because of their relatively higher SFRs compared to local ones. It is possible that the M$_{}$\ scaling we find for the $\epsilon_{}$\ and $\mu$ adaptations of the FPZ model to $z>0$ is a consequence of neglecting such a treatment at $z\,=\,0$. Our treatment of trends of FPZ parameters with $z$ and M$_{}$\ as simple power laws is also highly over-simplified. As found by \citet{lagos11,lagos14,morokuma15}, the redshift and M$_{}$\ dependence of gas-mass fractions is more complicated than this, as there are inflections and slight curvatures in the behavior of both quantities. Thus, our models are almost certainly not exact, but rather a simplified scaling aimed at a general representation of the trends necessary to explain the coevolution of SFR and metallicity. Recently it has been proposed that scaling laws based on gas fraction, SFR, and M$_{}$\ are more fundamental than those based on metallicity \citep[e.g.,][]{bothwell13a,santini14,lagos16,bothwell16}. The physical basis of such a scaling is clear, since gas provides the fuel for star formation and the reservoir of gas-phase metals. However, the role of H{\sc i}\ vs. H$_2$\ is still under debate, and the possibility of verifying through observations the amount of total gas in H{\sc i}\ is currently not possible, although SKA will be able to help shed light on this problem. \section{Summary} \label{sec:conclusions} In a companion paper, we constructed a new MEGA dataset for studying the coevolution of metallicity and SFR; the data are compiled from 19 different samples up to $z \simeq 3.7$, spanning a factor of $\sim 10^5$ in M$_{}$, $\sim 10^6$ in SFR, and almost two orders of magnitude in O/H. As a comparison sample, we include the SDSS10 galaxies studied by \citet{mannucci10}. \noindent \hangindent=0.05\linewidth \hangafter=1 $\bullet$\ \ Here we update the model of \citet{dayal13} for the $z\simeq 0$ behavior of M$_{}$, SFR, and O/H and apply it to the SDSS10 and MEGA datasets; the new model relies on the stellar yields from \citet{vincenzo16} and \citet{nomoto13} assuming a \citet{chabrier03} IMF. With only 5 free parameters, the FPZ model at $z\simeq 0$ is able to reproduce the observed oxygen abundance of the $\sim$80\,000 SDSS10 galaxies to within 0.05$-$0.06\,dex, and of the $\sim 250\ z\simeq 0$ MEGA galaxies to within $0.24-0.26$\,dex. \noindent \hangindent=0.05\linewidth \hangafter=1 $\bullet$\ \ We have extended the FPZ($z\simeq 0$) model to higher redshift by exploring three possibilities: (1) a redshift (and mass) scaling of SF timescale $\epsilon_{}$\ (Sect. \ref{sec:epsilon_z}); (2) a redshift scaling of accretion and galactic wind mass loading (Sect. \ref{sec:aw_z}); and (3) a redshift (and mass) scaling of gas fraction (Sect. \ref{sec:mgas_z}). These approaches give similar results, and are able to reproduce the observed metallicity trends in the MEGA sample to within $\sim 0.03-0.05$\,dex. \noindent \hangindent=0.05\linewidth \hangafter=1 $\bullet$\ \ The extension of the FPZ($z$) model allows us to quantify how gas accretion and outflow depend on redshift. Although the specific mass loading of outflows does not change measurably during the evolution, the accretion rate and gas content of galaxies increase significantly with redshift. These two effects explain, either separately or possibly in tandem, the observed lower metal abundance of high-$z$ galaxies. \section*{Acknowledgments} We thank Filippo Fraternali for interesting discussion and insightful comments. This work has benefited from the DAVID network ({\it http://wiki.arcetri.astro.it/DAVID/WebHome}) for fostering a fruitful collaborative environment. PD gladly acknowledges funding from the EU COFUND Rosalind Franklin program, and LH from a national research grant, PRIN-INAF/2012.
\section{Introduction} The propagation of acoustic nonlinear surface waves of the stable profile (solitons, breathers and vector solitons) is one of the most interesting demonstration of the acoustic nonlinearity in layered structures and in a variety of nanostructures. Depending of the character of the acoustic nonlinearity, the non-resonance and resonance mechanism of the formation of acoustic nonlinear waves is considered. In the case of non-resonance nonlinearity, which is expressed by means of anharmonically interacting phonons its competition with the dispersion leads to the formation of non-resonance acoustic nonlinear waves \cite{Maradudin::1989,Adamashvili:Semiconductors:06,Sakuma::1984,Stevenson::03}. Resonance acoustic nonlinear waves can be arise with the help of the resonance McCall-Hahn mechanism of the formation of nonlinear waves, i.e., when a nonlinear coherent interaction of an acoustic pulse with small concentration of paramagnetic impurities or quantum dots takes place and the conditions of acoustic self-induced transparency (ASIT) $\;\om T >> 1 $ and $ T<<T_{1,2}$ are fulfilled. Here, $\;\om$ and $T$ are the acoustic pulse frequency and width, respectively, while $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$ are the longitudinal and transverse relaxation times of the resonance impurity atoms or quantum dots. When the area of the acoustic pulse $\theta>\pi$, a soliton ($2\pi$ pulse) is formed, and for $\theta<<\pi$, small-area acoustic pulses ($0\pi$ pulses), for instance, breather can be propagated \cite{Shiren:PhysRev:70, Adamashvili:PhysLettA:12}. The acoustic soliton (or breather) is a single acoustic pulse propagates in such a way that it maintains its state. When these conditions are not fulfilled, we must to consider interaction between of two acoustic wave components at different frequencies as a bound state. Under this condition an acoustic vector soliton can be formed \cite{Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12}. Nonlinear resonance acoustic waves have been studied theoretically, as well as experimentally in various materials. Experimental considerations of acoustic resonance nonlinear waves have been carried out on paramagnetic crystals and in doped nanostructures, for instance $CaF_{2}:U^{4+},\; MgO:Fe^{2+},\; MgO:Ni^{2+},\;$ $KCl:OH^{-},\;$ $LiNbO_{3}:Fe^{2+}$ and $Mn$-doped $ZnS$ nanocrystals (see, for instance, Ref.\cite{Adamashvili:PhysLettA:12,Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12} and references therein). The plane acoustic nonlinear wave can be excited and propagates into the material perpendicular to the surface into the bulk \cite{Adamashvili:PhysLettA:12,Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12}, but on the surface or interface of the materials the surface acoustic nonlinear wave can be generated \cite{Adamashvili:Semiconductors:06,Kolomenskii::03,Hess:Ultrasonics:10}. The most commonly used surface acoustic waves are Rayleigh and Love waves. The nonlinear surface acoustic waves have attracted much interest in the nano-acoustic systems and applications \cite{Kolomenskii::03,Capel::15,Devos::15,Kozhushko::08,Fu::2010}. The shear horizontal (SH) polarized surface acoustic Love wave propagate in a layered structure consisting of a substrate and a layer on top of it \cite{Luthi::2004}. The following layered structures $ZnO/Quartz,\;ZnO/LiTaO_{3}, \; SiO_{2}/Quartz,\;SiO_{2}/LiTaO_{3}$ \cite{Ren-Chuan Chang::06}, $ZnO/LiNbO_{3}$ \cite{Shiou-Jen Jian::04} are most often used in experimental studies of the Love-modes. The basic peculiarities of the surface Love waves are strong enhancement and spatial confinement of the energy of the elastic deformation of the waves inside of a thin guiding layer, while they decay evanescently in the substrate. The condition for the generate of Love modes is that the acoustic shear velocity in the layer is smaller than that of the substrate. The surface acoustic solitons and breathers have been studied in many works \cite{Maradudin::1989, Adamashvili:Semiconductors:06,Kolomenskii::03,Hess:Ultrasonics:10,Adamashvili:PhysLettA:88,Sakuma::1984,Adamashvili:Sol.State. comm.:83,Capel::15,Devos::15,Kozhushko::08}. Recently, resonance vector soliton of the Rayleigh wave have been investigated in Ref.\cite{Adamashvili:PhysRevE:16}, but resonance vector soliton of the Love wave have not been considered up to now. The main goal of the present work is to theoretically investigate the formation of acoustic vector soliton of ASIT of the Love wave and the determination of the parameters and profile of the Love vector pulse. Numerical illustration is considered for a Love nonlinear wave with parameters of the layered structure $ZnO/LiNbO_{3}$ which can be reached in current experiments. \vskip+0.5cm \section{Basic equations} We study the formation of vector soliton of ASIT for a surface Love mode propagating along the interface between of a plane surface layer acting as a guide (index \emph{l}) and the elastic substrate (index \emph{s}). We assume that semi-space corresponding region $z\leqslant0$, and layer region $0< z\leqslant h$. A thin resonance transition layer of thickness $d << \lambda$ containing a small concentration $n_{0}$ paramagnetic impurity atoms or semiconductor quantum dots with electron spin $S=\frac{1}{2}$ sandwiched between these two connected media (at $z=0$), where $\lambda$ is the length of the Love wave. We assume that an external constant magnetic field $H_{0}$ is applied along the $z$-axis. We shall consider a surface acoustic Love wave with width $T<<T_{1,2}$, frequency $\omega >>T^{-1}$, and wave vector $\vec{k}$, propagating along the positive $y$-axis. The Love wave is capable of cause excitations of the electron $S$ spins of the paramagnetic impurities or quantum dots \cite{Adamashvili:PhysLettA:87, Urbaszek:Rev.Mod.Phys.:2013}. To take into account the magnetization caused by the presence of the resonance transition layer, the boundary conditions for Love modes at $z=h$, \begin{equation}\label{Boun} \sigma^{(l)}_{xz}=0, \end{equation} and at $z=0$, \begin{equation}\label{Boun2} \sigma^{(l)}_{xz}=\sigma^{(s)}_{xz}+ \sigma'_{xz},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;u^{(l)}_{x}=u^{(s)}_{x}, \end{equation} where $\sigma^{(l)}_{xz}$ and $\sigma^{(s)}_{xz}$ are the stress tensor components in the layer and substrate, respectively. $\sigma'_{xz}$ is the contribution to the quantity $\sigma^{(s)}_{xz}$ caused by the presence of the transition layer with electron $S$ spins, $u^{(l)}_{x}$ and $u^{(s)}_{x}$ are the x-components of the deformation vector $\vec{u} (u_{x}, u_y, u_z)$ in connected media. We will consider a Fourier-decomposition of the x-component of the deformation vector $u_{x}$ in connected media which is given by \begin{equation}\label{Fu} u_{x}(y,z,t)= \int \tilde{u} (\Omega,Q) f(\Omega,Q,z) e^{i(Qy-\Om t)} d\Om dQ. \end{equation} The Fourier amplitude which defines the transverse profile of the Love-mode has the following form: \begin{equation}\label{kappa} f(\Om,Q,z)= \left \ \begin{array}{ccc} \tan [\kappa_{l}(\Om,Q)h] \sin[ \kappa_{l}(\Om,Q)z] +\cos [\kappa_{l}(\Om,Q)z],& \;\;\;\;\;0<z<h\\ e^{\kappa_{s}z}, &\;\;\;\; z<0, \end{array} \right \\| \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{kapa}\nonumber\\ \kappa_{l}^{2}= \frac{\Om^{2}}{c_{l}^{2}}-Q^{2},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\kappa_{s}^{2}=Q^{2}- \frac{\Om^{2}}{c_{s}^{2}}, \end{equation} $c_{s}$ and $c_{l}$ are the transverse polarized sound velocities in the substrate and layer, respectively \cite{Landau:Theory of elasticity:80}. The function $\tilde{u}(\Omega,Q)$ has to be determined. The component of the deformation tensor at $z=0$ is given by \begin{equation}\label{eps} \varepsilon_{xz}(y,t)=\frac{1}{2}(\varepsilon^{+}+\varepsilon^{-})= \int \tilde{\varepsilon}_{xz}(\Omega,Q)e^{i(Qy-\Om t)}d\Om dQ. \end{equation} We assume translational invariance in the $x$-direction, so that all field quantities do not depend from the coordinate $x$, i.e. $\frac{\pa }{\pa x} \rightarrow 0.$ Substituting Eqs. \eqref{Fu} and \eqref{eps} into boundary conditions \eqref{Boun} and \eqref{Boun2}, we obtain the following nonlinear wave equation for $\varepsilon_{xz}$ component of the deformation tensor at $z=0$: \begin{equation}\label{epsw} \int \tilde{\varepsilon}_{xz}(\Omega,Q) F(\Omega,Q) e^{i(Qy-\Om t)}d\Om dQ=-\frac{\sigma'_{xz}}{4\rho_{s} c^{2}_{s}}, \end{equation} where $$ F(\Omega,Q)=1-\frac{\rho_{l}c^{2}_{l}\kappa_{l}(\Omega,Q)}{\rho_{s}c^{2}_{s}\kappa_{s}(\Omega,Q)} \tan{[\kappa_{l}(\Omega,Q)h]}, $$ $$ \tilde{\varepsilon}_{xz}(\Omega,Q)=\frac{1}{2}\tilde{u} (\Omega,Q)\kappa_{s}(\Omega,Q), $$ $\rho_{l}$ and $\rho_{s}$ are the densities of the substrate and layer, respectively. The Hamiltonian of the spin system of the paramagnetic impurities or quantum dots have the following form \cite{Adamashvili:PhysLettA:87, Weil :Electron Paramagnetic Resonance:2001, Landau:Quantum Mechanics:80}: \begin{equation}\label{ham} \hat{H}=\hat{H}_{Z}+\hat{H}_{sp}, \end{equation} where $\hat{H}_{Z}=\hbar \omega_{0} \hat{S}^{z}$ is the Hamiltonian of the Zeeman interaction, $\hat{H}_{sp}=L \; \varepsilon_{xz} \hat{S}^{x} $ is the Hamiltonian of the interaction of the spin system with the phonons of the Love-mode, $L=\beta_{0} H_{0} F_{xzxz},\;$$\omega_{0}$ is the Zeeman frequency of the electron spin, $\hbar$ is Planck's constant, $\beta_{0}$ is the Bohr magneton, $F_{xzxz}$ is component of the spin-phonon coupling tensor, $\varepsilon_{xz}= \frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial u_{x}}{\partial z}$. The function $\sigma'_{xz}=\frac{\partial <\hat{H}>}{\partial \varepsilon_{xz}}=L\; S^{x}$ is defined from the Bloch equations, where quantities $S^{x,y,z}$ are the average values of the spin operators $\hat{S}^{x,y,z}$. In the rotating-wave approximation the Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{sp}$ can be transformed into the following form $$\hat{H}_{sp}=\frac{L}{4} (\varepsilon^{+}\hat{S}^{-}+\varepsilon^{-}\hat{S}^{+} ).$$ From the Hamiltonian \eqref{ham} we obtain the system of the Bloch equations \cite{Weil :Electron Paramagnetic Resonance:2001,Landau:Quantum Mechanics:80}: \begin{equation}\label{bloch} \frac{\partial {S}^{+}}{\partial t}=i \omega_{0} {S}^{+} -i\frac{L}{2 \hbar} {S}^{z}\varepsilon^{+}, $$$$ \frac{\partial {S}^{z}}{\partial t}=i\frac{L}{4 \hbar}({S}^{-}\varepsilon^{+}-{S}^{+}\varepsilon^{-}), \end{equation} where $$ S^{\pm}=S^{x}\pm i S^{y}. $$ The system of equations \eqref{bloch} we can transform to the slowly variables using the equations \begin{equation}\label{spu} \varepsilon_{xz}=\frac{1}{2} \sum_{l=\pm 1}\hat{E}_{l}Z_{l},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; {S}^{\pm}=\pm i\rho^{\pm}Z_{\mp 1}, $$$$ \varepsilon^{\pm}=\hat{E}_{\mp 1}Z_{\mp 1},\;\;\;\;\;\;\; Z_{l}= e^{il(ky -\om t)}. \end{equation} Substituting Eqs. \eqref{spu} into \eqref{bloch} we obtain the Bloch equations for slowly envelope functions $\hat{E}_{\pm 1}$ and $\rho^{\pm}$: \begin{equation}\label{blochsw} \frac{\partial \rho^{+}}{\partial t}=i \Delta \rho^{+} - \frac{L}{2 \hbar} {S}^{z}\hat{E}_{-1}, $$$$ \frac{\partial {S}^{z}}{\partial t}=\frac{L}{4 \hbar} (\rho^{-}\hat{E}_{-1}+\rho^{+} \hat{E}_{+1}), \end{equation} where $\Delta=\omega_{0}-\omega$. The system of Eqs. \eqref{epsw} and \eqref{blochsw} are the equations for ASIT for Love wave and is the main object of our investigations. This system of equations can describe wide class of nonlinear resonance phenomena for surface Love mode. For the solution of these equations, we will use the perturbation theory to study the evolution of the surface acoustic vector soliton with two different frequency of oscillations for Love wave. \vskip+0.5cm \section{ Solution of the wave equation} For the solution of the wave equation \eqref{epsw}, we present the function $F(\Om,Q)$ in the form of the series \begin{equation}\label{Gser} F(\Om,Q)=F(\om,k)+(\Om-\om) \frac{\pa F}{\pa \Om}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}+(Q-k) \frac{\pa F}{\pa Q}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}+ $$$$+\frac{1}{2}[(\Om-\om)^{2} \frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa \Om^{2}}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k} +2(\Om-\om)(Q-k)\frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa \Om \pa Q}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}+(Q-k)^{2} \frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa Q^{2}}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}]...... \end{equation} where $\om$ and $k$ are the frequency and wave number of the carrier wave, respectively. Substituting Eqs. \eqref{Gser} into the equation \eqref{epsw}, we obtain the equation \begin{equation}\label{Gserx} \int [F(\om,k)+(\Om-\om) F'_{\Om}+(Q-k) F'_{Q}+ (\frac{\Om^{2}}{2} -\om \Om +\frac{\om^{2}}{2}) F''_{\Om}+$$$$ +(\Om Q -\om Q- k \Om +k \om )F''_{\Omega,Q}+(\frac{Q^{2}}{2} -kQ +\frac{k^{2}}{2}) F''_{Q}]\tilde{\ve}_{xx}(\Om,Q)e^{i(Qy-\Om t)} d\Om dQ=-\frac{\sigma'_{xz}}{4 c^{2}_{s} \rho_{s}}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\nonumber\\ F'_{\Om}=\frac{\pa F}{\pa \Om}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;F'_{Q}=\frac{\pa F}{\pa Q}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}, $$$$ F''_{\Om}=\frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa \Om^{2}}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;F''_{Q}=\frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa Q^{2}}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;F''_{\Omega,Q}=\frac{\pa^{2} F}{\pa Q \pa \Om}\|_{\Om=\om,Q=k}. \end{equation} Using the denotation \eqref{eps} the Eq.\eqref{Gserx} will be transformed to the following form \begin{equation}\label{Gak} (A+ iB \frac{\pa }{\pa t}-iC \frac{\pa }{\pa y}-\frac{F''_{\Om}}{2} \frac{\pa^2 }{\pa t^2} +F''_{\Omega,Q}\frac{\pa^2 }{\pa t \pa y} -\frac{F''_{Q}}{2} \frac{\pa^2 }{\pa y^2})\ve_{xz} =-\frac{\sigma'_{xz}}{4 c^{2}_{s} \rho_{s}}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\nonumber\\ A=F(\om,k)-\om F'_{\Om} -k F'_{Q} +\frac{\om^{2}}{2}F''_{\Om} + k \om F''_{\Omega,Q} +\frac{k^{2}}{2} F''_{Q}, $$$$ B=F'_{\Om} -\om F''_{\Om} - k F''_{\Omega,Q},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; C=F'_{Q} -\om F''_{\Omega,Q} -k F''_{Q}. \end{equation} Substituting Eqs. \eqref{spu} into the equation \eqref{Gak}, we obtain \begin{equation}\label{Ga} \sum_{l=\pm 1} Z_{l} \{ a \frac{\pa }{\pa t} + ib \frac{\pa^{2} }{\pa t^2} -i d \frac{\pa^{2} }{{\pa t}{\pa y}} +F''_{\Omega,Q} \frac{\pa^{3} }{{\pa t^2}{\pa y}} - \frac{ F''_{\Om}}{2} \frac{\pa^{3}}{\pa t^{3}} -\frac{F''_{Q}}{2} \frac{\pa^{3} }{{\pa y^2} {\pa t}} \}{{\Theta}_{l}} =-\frac{\sigma'_{xz}}{4 c^{2}_{s} \rho_{s}}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\nonumber\\ a=A + l(B \om + C k ) +\frac{1}{2} F''_{\Om} \om^{2} + F''_{\Omega,Q} \om k + \frac{1}{2} F''_{Q} k^2, $$$$ b=B +l( F''_{\Om} \om + F''_{\Omega,Q} k),\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; d =C + l( F''_{\Omega,Q} \om + F''_{Q} k), $$$$ {\hat{E}_{l}}=\frac{\pa {{\Theta}_{l}}}{\pa t}. \end{equation} To further analyze of the Eq. \eqref{Ga} we make use of the multiple scale perturbative reduction method \cite{Taniuti::1973}, in the limit that $\Theta_{l}$ is of order $\epsilon $. This is the typical scaling for the coupled nonlinear Schrodinger equations and consequently, would be the scaling for acoustic vector soliton. In this situation the function $\Theta_{l}(y,t)$ can be represented as in Refs. \cite{Adamashvili:Result:11, Adamashvili:Optics and spectroscopy:2012, Adamashvili:Physica B:12, Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12, Adamashvili:PhysLettA:2015}: \begin{equation}\label{ttp} \Theta_{l}= \sum_{\alpha=1} \varepsilon^\alpha {{\Theta}_{l}}^{(\alpha)}=\sum_{\alpha=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+\infty}\varepsilon^\alpha Y_{l,n} f_{l,n}^ {(\alpha)}(\zeta,\tau), \end{equation} where $$ Y_{l,n}=e^{in(Q_{l,n}y-\Omega_{l,n} t)},\;\;\;\zeta_{l,n}=\varepsilon Q_{l,n}(y-{v_g}_{l,n} t),\;\;\;\tau=\varepsilon^2 t,\;\;\; {v_g}_{l,n}=\frac{d\Omega_{l,n}}{dQ_{l,n}}, $$ At this it is assumed that the quantities $\Omega_{l,n}$, $Q_{l,n}$, and $f_{l,n}^{(\alpha)}$ satisfy the inequalities for any $l$ and $n$: \begin{equation}\label{rtyp}\nonumber\\ \omega\gg \Omega_{l,n},\;\;k\gg Q_{l,n},\;\;\; \end{equation} $$ \left\|\frac{\partial f_{l,n}^{(\alpha )}}{ \partial t}\right\|\ll \Omega_{l,n} \left\|f_{l,n}^{(\alpha )}\right\|,\;\;\left\|\frac{\partial f_{l,n}^{(\alpha )}}{\partial y }\right\|\ll Q_{l,n}\left\|f_{l,n}^{(\alpha )}\right\|. $$ The quantities $Q$, $\Omega$, $\zeta$ and $v_g$ depends from $l$ and $n$, but for simplicity, we omit these indexes in equations where this will not bring about mess. Substituting Eq.\eqref{ttp} into the Bloch equations \eqref{bloch}, we can determine the stress tensor component \begin{equation}\label{sigma} \sigma'_{xz}=i \frac{ L^{2}n_{0}}{8 \hbar} \int \frac{g(\Delta) d\Delta}{1+T^2 \Delta^2} \sum_{l=\pm 1} l Z_{l}(\ve^{1}{{\Theta}_{l}}^{(1)}+\ve^{2} {{\Theta}_{l}}^{(2)}+\ve^{3}{{\Theta}_{l}}^{(3)}- \ve^{3} \frac{ L^2}{8\hbar^2 }\int \frac{\pa {{\Theta}_{l}}^{(1)}}{\pa t} {{\Theta}_{-l}}^{(1)}{{\Theta}_{l}}^{(1)}dt) +O(\ve^4), \end{equation} where $g(\Delta)$ is the inhomogeneous broadening function of the spectral line of the paramagnetic impurities or quantum dots. After substitution of the expansion \eqref{ttp} into the equation \eqref{Ga}, and taking into account the explicit form of the envelope of the $\sigma'_{xz}$ component of the stress tensor \eqref{sigma}, we obtain dispersion law for the Love wave \cite{Landau:Theory of elasticity:80}: \begin{equation}\label{dis} \tan{[\kappa_{l}(\Omega,Q)h]}=\frac{\rho_{s}c^{2}_{s}\kappa_{s}(\Omega,Q)}{\rho_{l}c^{2}_{l}\kappa_{l}(\Omega,Q)} \end{equation} and nonlinear wave equation \begin{equation}\label{eq 18} \sum_{\alpha=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+\infty}\varepsilon^\al Z_{+1} Y_{+1,n} \{ {W}_{+1,n} +\varepsilon J_{+1,n} \frac{\partial }{\partial \zeta} +\varepsilon^2 h_{+1,n}\frac{\partial }{\partial \tau} +i\varepsilon^{2}H_{+1,n} \frac{\partial^{2} }{\partial \zeta^{2}}\}f_{+1,n}^{(\alpha)} =$$$$i \ve^{3} Z_{+1} \frac{\alpha_{0} L^2}{8\hbar^2 }\int \frac{\pa {{\Theta}_{+1}}^{(1)}}{\pa t} {{\Theta}_{-1}}^{(1)}{{\Theta}_{+1}}^{(1)}dt) +O(\ve^4), \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{eq 19}\nonumber\\ W_{+1,n}=-in(n G'_{\Om}{\Omega}^{2} +G''_{\Omega,Q} {\Omega}^{2}Q + \frac{G''_{\Om}}{2} {\Omega}^{3}+\frac{G''_{Q}}{2} Q^{2} \Omega+ G'_{Q}n Q \Omega - \frac{1}{n} \alpha_{0}), $$$$ J_{+1,n}=-Q[ 2 G'_{\Om} n \Omega v_g + G'_{Q}n(Q v_g +\Omega)+ G''_{\Omega,Q} \Omega ({\Omega} + 2 Q v_g )+ \frac{3 G''_{\Om}}{2} {\Omega}^{2} v_g + \frac{G''_{Q}}{2} Q(Q v_g + 2 \Omega)], $$$$ h_{+1,n}=2G'_{\Om}n\Omega + G'_{Q}nQ + 2 G''_{\Omega,Q} Q \Omega + \frac{3 G''_{\Om}}{2} {\Omega}^{2}+ \frac{G''_{Q}}{2} Q^{2}, $$$$ H_{+1,n}= Q^{2}[ G'_{\Om} v_g^{2}+ G'_{Q} v_g + n G''_{\Omega,Q} v_g ( 2 \Omega + Q v_g )+ n \frac{3 G''_{\Om}}{2}\Omega {v_g}^{2} +n \frac{G''_{Q}}{2} ( 2Q v_g +\Omega)], $$$$ \alpha_{0}=\frac{n_{0} L^{2}}{16 \hbar \rho_{s} c^{2}_{s}} \int \frac{g(\Delta)}{1+T^2 \Delta^2}d\Delta. \end{equation} To determine the values of $f_{l,n}^{(\alpha)}$, we equate to zero the various terms corresponding to the same orders of $\varepsilon$. Following the standard procedure (see, for instance \cite{Taniuti::1973, Adamashvili:Result:11, Adamashvili:Optics and spectroscopy:2012, Adamashvili:Physica B:12, Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12, Adamashvili:PhysLettA:2015}), we determine that, only the following components of $f_{l,n}^{(1)}$ can differ from zero: $f _{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{(1)}$ or $f_{\pm 1,\mp 1}^{(1)}$ and the following relation holds $J_{\pm 1,\pm 1}=J_{\pm 1,\mp 1}=0$. The connections between the parameters $\Omega $ and $Q$ at $l=+1$ and $n^2=1$ has the following form \begin{equation}\label{eq 20} n (G'_{\Om}{\Omega}^{2}+ G'_{Q} Q \Omega - \alpha_{0}) +G''_{\Omega,Q} {\Omega}^{2}Q + \frac{G''_{\Om}}{2} {\Omega}^{3}+\frac{G''_{Q}}{2} Q^{2} \Omega=0 \end{equation} and the equation for the quantity \begin{equation}\label{eqq 21} v_{g}=\frac{- n G'_{Q}\Omega - G''_{Q} Q \Omega-G''_{\Omega,Q} {\Omega}^{2}}{n G'_{Q} Q +2 n G'_{\Om}\Omega +2 G''_{\Omega,Q} {\Omega}Q + \frac{3}{2} G''_{\Om} {\Omega}^{2} + \frac{G''_{Q}}{2} Q^{2} }. \end{equation} Substituting Eqs.\eqref{eq 20} and \eqref{eqq 21} into Eq. \eqref{eq 18}, we obtain the coupled nonlinear Schrodinger equations for functions $\lambda_{\pm}= \varepsilon f_{+1,\pm 1}^ {(1)}$ that describe the connection between two components of the acoustic nonlinear Love pulse \begin{equation}\label{nses} i (\frac{\partial \lambda_{\pm}}{\partial t}+ v_{\pm }\frac{\partial \lambda_{\pm}}{\partial y})+ p_{\pm} \frac{\partial^{2} \lambda_{\pm} }{\partial y^2} + g_{\pm}\|\lambda_{\pm}\|^{2} \lambda_{\pm} + r_{\pm}\|\lambda_{\mp}\|^{2} \lambda_{\pm}=0, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{nses1} v_{\pm}=v_{g;+1,\pm 1},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; p_{\pm}= \frac{H_{+1,\pm 1}}{- h_{+1,\pm 1}Q^{2}},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;g_{\pm}=\frac{\alpha_{0} L^2}{16\hbar^{2} h_{+1,\pm 1}},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;r_{\pm}=g_{\pm}(1-\frac{\Omega_{\mp}}{\Omega_{\pm}}), $$ $$ \Omega_{+}=\Omega_{l=\pm1,n=\pm1},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\Omega_{-}=\Omega_{l=\pm1,n=\mp1}. \end{equation} The coupled nonlinear Schrodinger equations \eqref{nses} describes the functions $\lambda_{+}$ oscillating with the frequency $\om+\Om_{+}$ and $\lambda_{-}$ describes the wave oscillating with frequency $\om-\Om_{-}$. The nonlinear connection between these two waves is governed by the terms $r_{+}\|\lambda_{-}\|^{2}\lambda_{+}$ and $r_{-}\|\lambda_{+}\|^{2}\lambda_{-}$. A stable profile solution of the equations \eqref{nses} is an acoustic vector soliton of the Love mode. The simplest way to ensure the steady-state solution is to consider the envelope functions to depend on the time and space coordinate only through the coordinate $ \xi = t- \frac{y}{V_{0}}$, where $V_{0}$ is the constant vector pulse velocity. We will search the steady-state solutions of the Eqs.\eqref{nses} for the envelope function of the Love mode in the following form \cite{Adamashvili:Result:11, Adamashvili:Optics and spectroscopy:2012, Adamashvili:Physica B:12, Adamashvili:PhysRevE:12}: \begin{equation}\label{eq12q} \lambda_{\pm}(y,t)=A_{\pm}\; S( \xi )e^{i\phi_{\pm}}, \end{equation} where $\phi_{\pm}=k_{\pm} y- \omega_{\pm} t$ are the phase functions, $A_{\pm},\;$$\;k_{\pm}$ and $\omega_{\pm}$ are all real constants. The functions $ e^{i\phi_{\pm}}$ are slow in comparison with oscillations of the pulse and consequently, the inequalities \begin{equation}\label{eq12a}\nonumber\\ k_{\pm}<<Q_{\pm },\;\;\;\;\omega_{\pm}<<{\Omega}_{\pm } \end{equation} are satisfied. Substituting Eqs.\eqref{eq12q} into Eqs.\eqref{nses} after integration we obtain the steady-state solutions: \begin{equation}\label{eq12t} \lambda_{\pm}= \frac{A_{\pm}}{b T} sech (\frac{t- \frac{y}{V_{0}}}{T}) e^{i\phi_{\pm }}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{rt16} b^{2}=V_{0}^{2} \frac{A_{+}^{2}g_{+}+A_{-}^{2}r_{+}}{2p_{+}},\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; T^{-2}=V_{0}^{2}\frac{v_{+}k_{+}+k_{+}^{2}p_{+}-\omega_{+}}{p_{+}}. \end{equation} Substituting Eq.\eqref{eq12t} into Eqs. \eqref{spu} and \eqref{ttp}, we obtain for the $\varepsilon_{xz}$ component of the deformation tensor at $z=0$: \begin{equation}\label{eq17} \varepsilon_{xz}(y,t) = \frac{1}{b T} sech(\frac{t-\frac{y}{V_{0}}}{T})\{ (\Omega_{+}+\omega_{+}) A_{+} \sin[(k+Q_{+}+k_{+})y -(\om +\Omega_{+}+\omega_{+}) t]$$$$ - (\Omega_{-}-\omega_{-})A_{-} \sin[(k-Q_{-}+k_{-})y -(\om -\Omega_{-}+\omega_{-})t]\}, \end{equation} where the relations between the parameters $A_{\pm},\;$$\omega_{\pm}$ and $k_{\pm}$ have the form \begin{equation}\label{rt16a} A_{+}^{2}=\frac{p_{+}g_{-}- p_{-}r_{+}}{p_{-}g_{+}-p_{+}r_{-}}A_{-}^{2}, $$ $$ \omega_{+}=\frac{p_{+}}{p_{-}}\omega_{-}+\frac{V^{2}_{0}(p_{-}^{2}-p_{+}^{2})+v_{-}^{2}p_{+}^{2}-v_{+}^{2}p_{-}^{2} }{4p_{+}p_{-}^{2}}, $$ $$ k_{\pm}=\frac{V_{0}-v_{\pm}}{2p_{\pm}}. \end{equation} \begin{widetext} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.88\textwidth]{figure1.eps} \caption{(Color online) Plot of the $\varepsilon_{xz}$ (in arbitrary units) component of the deformation tensor at a fixed value of the $y$ coordinate showing the two-dimensional vector soliton of the Love wave in $ZnO/LiNbO_{3}$ layered structure. At $z=0$, the profile of the vector soliton corresponds to the solution of Eq. \eqref{eq17}.} \label{fig1} \end{figure} \end{widetext} The Eq.\eqref{eq17} is two-component vector soliton solution for the $\varepsilon_{xz}$ component of the deformation tensor of the acoustic Love pulse. In expression \eqref{eq17} the functions $ \sin[(k+Q_{+}+k_{+})y -(\om +\Omega_{+}+\omega_{+}) t]$ and $\sin[(k-Q_{-}+k_{-})y -(\om -\Omega_{-}+\omega_{-})t]$ indicates of the two different frequencies of oscillations. \vskip+0.5cm \section{Conclusion} In summary we have shown that in the propagation of the Love wave on the interface of the two elastic media with transition resonance monolayer containing an impurity atoms or quantum dots under the condition of ASIT the vector soliton of the Love wave can arise. The explicit analytical expressions for the profile and parameters of the acoustic two-component vector soliton of the Love wave are given by Eqs.\eqref{eq17}, \eqref{eqq 21}, \eqref{nses1}, \eqref{rt16} and \eqref{rt16a}. The dispersion equation and the relations between quantities $\Omega_{\pm }$ and $Q_{\pm }$ are given by Eqs.\eqref{dis} and \eqref{eq 20}, respectively. The transverse profile of the Love-mode is given by Eq.\eqref{kappa}. From these equations we can see that the properties of the nonlinear Love wave depends on the parameters of the transition resonance layer, the connected elastic media and the transverse structure of the Love mode. In the present work we have used the reduction perturbation expansion for the Love wave under the condition of the ASIT to obtain the resonance Love-mode vector soliton with two different (sum $\om +\Omega_{+}$ and difference $\om -\Omega_{-}$ ) frequencies of oscillations. Using typical parameters for the pulse, $ZnO/LiNbO_{3}$ layered structure, and the paramagnetic impurities $Fe^{2+}$ \footnote {Parameters for the numerical simulation: $\omega =2\pi \times 10^{10} {\rm Hz}$, $T=2.35 \times 10^{-6}$ s, $n_0 = 10^{22} \, {\rm cm^{-3}},\;$ $h=6\times 10^{-7}\; cm,\;$ $c_{s}=4.478\times 10^{5}$ cm/s, $c_{l}=2.57 \times 10^{5}$ cm/s, $H_{0}=2050 \;F,\;$ $\rho_{s}=4.65\;g/cm^{3},$ $\rho_{l}=3.58\;g/cm^{3},\;$ $F_{xzxz}=725 \, {\rm cm^{-1}}$, full-width half-maximum inhomogeneous broadening $T_{2}^* =\pi g(0)=3\times 10^{-9} \, s.$}, we can construct a plot of the $\varepsilon_{xz}$ component of the deformation tensor for a two-component acoustic vector soliton of the Love wave (shown in Fig.1 for a fixed value of the $y$ coordinate). We have to note that zinc oxide ($ZnO$) is suitable material for the guiding layer of the Love-modes\cite{Fu::2010} and lithium niobate ($LiNbO_{3}$) is very convenient substrate material for surface acoustic waves, as well as often used for experimental investigations of the nonlinear acoustic waves \cite{Samartsev:JETP Lett.:1974, Ilinskii::2014}. The results of this theoretical study of resonance two-component acoustic vector soliton of the Love wave, together with those obtained in Refs.\cite{Adamashvili:Sol.State. comm.:83, Adamashvili:PhysLettA:87} for one-component solitons and breathers provide a more complete physical description of the propagation of resonance nonlinear surface acoustic Love waves of ASIT in layered structure. The presented analytical and numerical results give grounds to hope that the two-component vector soliton of the Love mode can be observed experimentally. Such investigation will be informative not only for the study of resonance vector solitons of the Love waves, but also will be important for applications in acoustic devices based on the surface acoustic Love waves.
\section{Introduction} The twisted Alexander polynomial was introduced by Lin \cite{Lin} and Wada \cite{Wada94}. It is a generalization of the classical Alexander polynomial by a linear representation of a knot group. The classical Alexander polynomial contains important topological features of knots. It has been shown that the twisted Alexander polynomial gives refinements of results derived from the Alexander polynomial. On the other hand, the linear representations of a group are closely related to the geometric structures of a low--dimensional manifold. In particular, the $SL_2(\BC)$-representations of the fundamental group of a $3$-manifold can be thought of as descriptions of the geometric structures, especially the hyperbolic structures, of the manifold. We are interested in finding the relationship between the twisted Alexander polynomial and the hyperbolic structures of knot exteriors. It was shown in~\cite{FerrerPorti:HigherDimReidemeister, Muller:AsymptoticsAnalyticTorsion, tranYam:RtosionTroidal} that the asymptotic behavior of the Reidemeister torsion is related to hyperbolic structures. The twisted Alexander polynomial can be regarded as a kind of Reidemeister torsion by~\cite{KL, Kitano}. It is natural to try to relate the asymptotic behavior of the twisted Alexander polynomial to some features of hyperbolic structures as in~\cite{goda:TAP_hyp_vol}. For a metabelian representation of a knot group, its twisted Alexander polynomial has been studied in terms of the factorization of this invariant~\cite{BodenFriedl:IV, HirasawaMurasugi:TAP_meta, yamaguchi:TAPmeta}. In this paper, using such a factorization property, we wish to investigate the limit of the twisted Alexander polynomial for a sequence of $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations induced by an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of a knot group and study a relation to degeneration of hyperbolic structures. Our purpose is to provide the asymptotic behavior of {\it the higher dimensional twisted Alexander polynomial} for irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representations (see Definition~\ref{def:higher_dim_TAP}). Then we will study a relation to degeneration of hyperbolic structures from the viewpoint of the Reidemeister torsion. Let $E_K$ be the knot exterior $S^3 \setminus N(K)$ of a knot $K$. Here $N(K)$ is an open tubular neighbourhood of $K$. Upon choosing a homomorphism $\rho$ from $\pi_1(E_K)$ into $SL_2(\BC)$, we have a sequence of homomorphisms $\sigma_n \circ \rho$ from $\pi_1(E_K)$ into $SL_2(\BC)[n]$ by the composition with $\sigma_n \colon\thinspace SL_2(\BC) \to SL_2(\BC)[n]$ which is called {\it the $n$-dimensional irreducible representation} of $SL_2(\BC)$. We can also consider the sequence of twisted Alexander polynomials corresponding to the sequence $\rho_n = \sigma_n \circ \rho$. Our main results are stated as follows: \begin{Theorem}[Theorem~\ref{thm:main_I}] Let $\rho$ be an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_K)$. Then there exists a sequence of metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representations $\psi_1, \ldots, \psi_p$ which gives the limit of the leading coefficient of $\,\log \TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)$ as \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2p} \sum_{j=1}^p \log \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t). \] \end{Theorem} \begin{remark} The number $p$ is a divisor of $\|\Delta_K(-1)\|$ where $\Delta_K(t)$ is the Alexander polynomial of $K$. \end{remark} Under the assumption that $\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(1) \not = 0$ for all $j=1, \ldots, p$ in the above theorem, the Reidemeister torsion $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}$ is defined for all $N$. Then we relate the asymptotic behavior of the twisted Alexander polynomial to that of the Reidemeister torsion. The limit of the leading coefficient in $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}$ is expressed as follows. \begin{Corollary}[Corollary~\ref{cor:main_I}] Taking $t=1$, we can express the limit of the leading coefficient of $\,\log \|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|$ as \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|}{2N} = \frac{1}{2p} \sum_{j=1}^p \log \|\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(1)\|. \] In particular, the growth order of $\, \log \|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|$ is the same as $2N$. \end{Corollary} For a hyperbolic knot $K$ and its holonomy representation $\rho_{\mathrm{hol}} \colon\thinspace \pi_1(E_K) \to SL_2(\BC)$, it was shown in~\cite{FerrerPorti:HigherDimReidemeister, goda:TAP_hyp_vol} that the growth order of $\log \|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \sigma_n \circ \rho_{\mathrm{hol}}}\|$ or $\log \|\TAP{K}{\sigma_n \circ \rho_{\mathrm{hol}}}(1)\|$ is the same as $n^2$ and the leading coefficient converges to the hyperbolic volume of $E_K$ divided by $4\pi$. The set of $SL_2(\BC)$-representations of $\pi_1(E_K)$ can be regarded as a deformation space of hyperbolic structures of $E_K$. From the difference in the growth order of the Reidemeister torsion, we can say that every irreducible metabelian representation corresponds to a degenerate hyperbolic structure for any hyperbolic knot. For examples of this phenomenon, we refer to~\cite{tranYam:RtosionTroidal}. We also give an explicit description of the asymptotic behavior of the twisted Alexander polynomial for metabelian representations of genus one two--bridge knot groups. Note that all genus one two--bridge knots are given by $J(2m, \pm 2n)$ illustrated as in Fig.~\ref{fig:doubletwistknot}, where $m$ and $n$ are positive integers. \begin{Theorem}[Theorem~\ref{thm:TAP_positive}, \ref{thm:TAP_negative} and Corollary~\ref{cor:Rtorsion_positive}, \ref{cor:Rtorsion_negative}] Let $\rho$ be an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_{J(2m, \pm 2n)})$. Then there exists a divisor $q$ of $\|\Delta_{J(2m, \pm 2n)}(-1)\|$ such that \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{J(2m, \pm 2n)}{\rho_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2q} \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 \mp 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{(t^2+1)^2} + \frac{1}{2} \log (t^2 + 1). \] Moreover, the leading coefficient of the logarithm of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion converges as \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \|\mathbb{T}_{{J(2m, \pm 2n)}, \, \rho_{2N}}\|}{2N} = \frac{1}{q} \log \frac{2mn \mp 1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2. \] \end{Theorem} This paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries} provides expositions of the twisted Alexander polynomial for a linear representation and for a sequence of $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations induced from an $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of a knot group. We will also touch a relation between the twisted Alexander polynomial and the Reidemeister torsion in Subsection~\ref{subsec:relation_TAP_Rtorsion}. In Section~\ref{sec:general_formula}, our main results are stated and proved. Section~\ref{sec:twobridge} is devoted to the study of asymptotic behaviors of the twisted Alexander polynomial and the Reidemeister torsion for genus one two--bridge knots. \section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:preliminaries} We will review the twisted Alexander polynomial and a Lin presentation of a knot group. Then we will also see a relation between the twisted Alexander polynomial and the Reidemeister torsion for a knot exterior. \subsection{Twisted Alexander polynomial} Throughout the paper, $K$ denotes a knot in $S^3$ and $E_K$ denotes the knot exterior $S^3 \setminus N(K)$ where $N(K)$ is an open tubular neighbourhood of $K$. We use the symbol $\alpha$ to denote the abelianization homomorphism from a knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$ onto $\langle t \rangle \simeq H_1(E_K;\mathbb{Z})$. Here $t$ is the homology class of a meridian of the knot $K$. We follow the definition of the twisted Alexander polynomial in~\cite{Wada94}. We need a homomorphism $\rho$ from the knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$ into $\mathrm{GL}_n(\C)$, which is called {\it a $\mathrm{GL}_n(\C)$-representation}, to define the twisted Alexander polynomial for $K$. For a $\mathrm{GL}_n(\C)$-representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(E_K)$, we denote by $\Phi_\rho$ the $\mathbb{Z}$-linear extension of the tensor product $\alpha \otimes \rho$ defined as \begin{align} \Phi_\rho \colon\thinspace \mathbb{Z}[\pi_1(E_K)] & \to M_n(\mathbb{C}[t^{\pm 1}]) \\ \sum_{i} a_i \gamma_i & \mapsto \sum_i a_i \alpha(\gamma_i) \otimes \rho(\gamma_i). \end{align} Here $M_n(\mathbb{C}[t^{\pm 1}])$ is the set of $n \times n$ matrices whose entries are Laurent polynomials in $\mathbb{C}[t^{\pm 1}]$ and we identify $M_n(\mathbb{C}[t^{\pm 1}])$ with the tensor product $\mathbb{C}[t^{\pm 1}] \otimes M_n(\mathbb{C})$ , where $M_n(\mathbb{C})$ denotes the set of $n \times n$ complex matrices. \begin{definition} \label{def:TAP_SL2} Choose a presentation $\pi_1(E_K) = \langle g_1, \cdots, g_k \,\|\, r_1, \ldots, r_{k-1} \rangle$ of deficiency $1$ and let $\rho$ be a $\mathrm{GL}_n(\C)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_K)$. Suppose that $\Phi_\rho(g_\ell -1) \not = 0$. Then the twisted Alexander polynomial is defined as \[ \Delta_{K, \, \rho}(t) = \frac{ \det \left( \Phi_\rho(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j}) \right)_{ \substack{ 1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell}} }{ \det (\Phi_\rho(g_\ell - 1)) } \] where $\partial r_i / \partial g_j$ is the Fox differential of $r_i$ by $g_j$. \end{definition} \begin{remark} We mention the well-definedness of the twisted Alexander polynomial without proofs. For the details, see~\cite[Theorem~$1$, Corollary~$4$]{Wada94}. \begin{itemize} \item The twisted Alexander polynomial is independent of the choice of the presentation. \item If $\Phi_\rho(g_\ell -1) \not = 0$ and $\Phi_\rho(g_{\ell'} -1) \not = 0$, then it holds that \[ \frac{ \det \left( \Phi_\rho(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j}) \right)_{ \substack{ 1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell}} }{ \det (\Phi_\rho(g_\ell - 1)) } = \pm \frac{ \det \left( \Phi_\rho(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j}) \right)_{ \substack{ 1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell'}} }{ \det (\Phi_\rho(g_{\ell'} - 1)) }. \] \end{itemize} \end{remark} We will mainly consider the twisted Alexander polynomial for $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations of a knot group. In particular, we deal with the situation that the $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations $\rho_n$ are induced from an $SL_2(\BC)$-representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(E_K)$. There exists a sequence of homomorphisms $\sigma_{n}$ from $SL_2(\BC)$ into $SL_2(\BC)[n]$, which is referred as the $n$-dimensional irreducible representations of $SL_2(\BC)$. This homomorphism $\sigma_n$ is given by the action of $SL_2(\BC)$ on the vector space $V_n$ consisting of homogeneous polynomials $p(x, y)$ with degree $n-1$ as follows: \[ A \cdot p(x, y) = p(x', y') \quad \hbox{where} \quad \begin{pmatrix}x' \\ y' \end{pmatrix} =A^{-1}\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \end{pmatrix}. \] Hence, given an $SL_2(\BC)$-representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(E_K)$, there exists the sequence of $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations $\sigma_n \circ \rho$. \begin{remark} If the eigenvalues of $A \in SL_2(\BC)$ are $\xi^{\pm 1}$, then $\sigma_n (A)$ has the eigenvalues $\xi^{\mp(2j-1)}$ $(j=1, \ldots, n)$. One can see this fact from the image by $\sigma_n$ of a diagonal matrix with respect to the standard basis $\{x^{n-1}, x^{n-2}y, \ldots, xy^{n-2}, y^{n-1}\}$ of $V_n$. \end{remark} \begin{definition} \label{def:higher_dim_TAP} Under the assumptions of Definition~\ref{def:TAP_SL2}, set $\rho_n = \sigma_n \circ \rho$. Suppose that $\det (\Phi_{\rho_n}(g_\ell - 1)) \not = 0$. Then the twisted Alexander polynomial for $\rho_n$ is defined as \[ \TAP{K}{\rho_n}(t) = \frac{ \det \left( \Phi_{\rho_n}(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j}) \right)_{ \substack{1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell}} }{ \det (\Phi_{\rho_n}(g_\ell - 1)) }. \] We call $\TAP{K}{\rho_n}(t)$ {\it the $n$-dimensional twisted Alexander polynomial for $\rho$}. \end{definition} When some $\ell$ satisfies $\det (\Phi_{\rho_n}(g_\ell - 1)) \not = 0$ for all $n$, we have the sequence of the twisted Alexander polynomial $\TAP{K}{\rho_n}(t)$. By definition, the twisted Alexander polynomial could be a rational function. There exists a sufficient condition for it to be a Laurent polynomial. \begin{proposition}[Proposition~8 in~\cite{Wada94}] If a $\mathrm{GL}_n(\C)$-representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(E_K)$ satisfies that there exists an element $\gamma$ in $[\pi_1(E_K), \pi_1(E_K)]$ such that $\rho(\gamma)$ does not have the eigenvalue $1$, then the twisted Alexander polynomial $\Delta_{K, \rho}(t)$ is a Laurent polynomial. \end{proposition} Moreover it was shown by~\cite[Theorem~$3$]{KitanoMorifuji:divisibility} that $\TAP{K}{\rho}(t)$ is a Laurent polynomial for all non--abelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representations $\rho$. Here the terminology ``non--abelian'' means that the image $\rho(\pi_1(E_K))$ is not contained in an abelian subgroup in $SL_2(\BC)$. We will find rational functions in the sequence of $\TAP{K}{\rho_n}(t)$ in Section~\ref{sec:twobridge}. \subsection{Lin presentation} In~\cite{Lin}, X.-S. Lin introduced a special presentation of a knot group by using {\it a free Seifert surface}. A Seifert surface is called {\it free} if its exterior $S^3 \setminus N(S)$ is a handlebody where $N(S)$ is an open tubular neighbourhood. This means that $\pi_1(S^3 \setminus N(S))$ is a free group if a Seifert surface $S$ is free and the number of generators in $\pi_1(S^3 \setminus N(S))$ coincides with twice of the genus of $S$. It is known that every knot $K$ has free Seifert surfaces. \begin{definition} Suppose that $S$ is a free Seifert surface with genus $g$ and $\pi_1(S^3 \setminus N(S))$ is generated by $x_1, \ldots x_{2g}$ which are the homotopy classes corresponding to the cores of $1$-handles in $S^3 \setminus N(S)$. We denote by $\mu$ a meridian of $K$. Then the knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$ is presented as \begin{equation} \label{eqn:Linpresen} \pi_1(E_K) = \langle x_1, \ldots, x_{2g}, \mu \,\|\, \mu a_i^+ \mu^{-1} = a_i^{-}, i=1, \ldots, 2g \rangle \end{equation} where $a_i^{\pm}$ correspond to loops given by pushing up or down the spine $\vee_{i=1}^{2g} a_i$ of $S$ along the normal direction in $N(S)$. We call the presentation~\eqref{eqn:Linpresen} {\it the Lin presentation} of $\pi_1(E_K)$ associated with $S$. \end{definition} \begin{remark} We have the linking number $\mathop{\mathrm{\ell k}}\nolimits(x_i, K) = 0$ for every $x_i$ in~\eqref{eqn:Linpresen}. This is due to that the representative loop of $x_i$ lies in the outside of $S$. This means that each $x_i$ is a commutator in $\pi_1(E_K)$. \end{remark} \begin{example} \label{dtk} The double twist knot $J(2m ,2n)$ in Hoste-Shanahan's notation~\cite{HosteShanahan} is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:doubletwistknot}. Here both $m$ and $n$ are positive integers. The knot $J(2m, 2n)$ corresponds to $K_{-m,\,-n}$ in~\cite{Lin}. The right side in Figure~\ref{fig:doubletwistknot} shows a free Seifert surface $S$ of $J(2m, 2n)$. We can choose the loops $x_1$ and $x_2$ as generators of $\pi_1(S^3 \setminus N(S))$. The spine of $S$ is $a_1 \vee a_2$. The loop $a_1^+$ obtained by pushing up $a_1$ is homotopic to $x_1^m$. The loops $a_1^-$, $a_2^+$ and $a_2^-$ are homotopic to $x_1^mx_2^{-1}$, $x_2^{-n}x_1$ and $x_2^{-n}$ respectively. Thus we have the following Lin presentation of $\pi_1(E_{J(2m ,2n)})$: \[ \pi_1(E_{J(2m, 2n)}) = \langle x_1, x_2, \mu \mid \mu x_1^m \mu^{-1} = x_1^m x_2^{-1}, \, \mu x_2^{-n} x_1 \mu^{-1} = x_2^{-n} \rangle. \] \end{example} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=.45]{twistknot.eps} \caption{a diagram (left) and a free Seifert surface (right) of $J(2m, 2n)$} \label{fig:doubletwistknot} \end{figure} \begin{definition} Let $\rho$ be an $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_K)$. We say that $\rho$ is {\it metabelian} if $\rho$ sends the commutator subgroup $[\pi_1(E_K), \pi_1(E_K)]$ to an abelian subgroup in $SL_2(\BC)$. An $SL_2(\BC)$-representation $\rho$ is called {\it irreducible} if the action of $\rho(\pi_1(E_K))$ on $\mathbb{C}^2$ does not have any invariant subspaces except for $\{\bm{0}\}$ and $\mathbb{C}^2$. \end{definition} \begin{proposition}[Proposition~1.1 in~\cite{Nagasato07} and Proposition~2.8 in~\cite{yamaguchi:TAPmeta}] \label{prop:metabelianSLII} Let $\rho$ be an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of a knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$. For any Lin presentation $\pi_1(E_K) = \langle x_1, \ldots, x_{2g}, \mu \,\|\, \mu a_i^{+} \mu^{-} = a_i^-, i=1,\ldots, 2g\rangle$, there exists a matrix $C \in SL_2(\BC)$ such that \[ C \rho(x_i) C^{-1} = \begin{bmatrix} z_i & 0 \\ 0 & z_i^{-1} \end{bmatrix}\, (\forall i = 1, \ldots, 2g) \quad \hbox{and} \quad C\rho(\mu)C^{-1} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \] Here each $z_i$ is a root of unity whose order is a divisor of $\Delta_K(-1)$. \end{proposition} \begin{remark} It is known that the number of irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representations of $\pi_1(E_K)$ is equal to $(\|\Delta_K(-1)\| - 1)/2$. \end{remark} \subsection{Relation to the Reidemeister torsion} \label{subsec:relation_TAP_Rtorsion} We refer to~\cite{KL, Kitano} for the details on the relation between the twisted Alexander polynomial and the Reidemeister torsion. Here we review the Reidemeister torsion from Fox differential and restrict our attention to the Reidemeister torsion for $E_K$ and $SL_2(\BC)[n]$-representations $\rho_{n} = \sigma_n \circ \rho$ of $\pi_1(E_K)$. Choose a presentation $\pi_1(E_K) = \langle g_1, \ldots, g_k ,\|\, r_1, \ldots, r_{k-1} \rangle$ of deficiency $1$. Let $\widetilde{\rho_n}$ be the linear extension of $\rho_n$ to the group ring $\mathbb{Z}[\pi_1(E_K)]$. By a similar argument to~\cite[Proposition~3.1]{Kitano}, one can show the following relation between the twisted Alexander polynomial and the Reidemeister torsion of a knot exterior. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:Rtorsion_TAP} Suppose that $1 \leq \exists \ell \leq k$ such that \[\det(\widetilde{\rho_n}(g_\ell - 1)) \not = 0 \quad \hbox{and}\quad \det \left( \widetilde{\rho_n} \Big(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j} \Big) \right)_{\substack{1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell}} \not = 0 \] where $\partial r_i / \partial g_j$ is the Fox differential of $r_i$ by $g_j$. Then the Reidemeister torsion of $\,\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho}$ is expressed, up to sign, as \begin{equation} \label{eqn:def_Rtorsion} \mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_n} = \frac{ \det \left( \widetilde{\rho_n} \Big(\frac{\partial r_i}{\partial g_j} \Big) \right)_{\substack{1 \leq i \leq k-1 \\ 1 \leq j \leq k, j \not =\ell}} }{ \det \widetilde{\rho}(g_\ell - 1) }. \end{equation} \end{proposition} \begin{remark} We will use~\eqref{eqn:def_Rtorsion} instead of the definition of $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_n}$. We touch the well-definedness of $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_n}$ without proofs. \begin{itemize} \item The right hand side of~\eqref{eqn:def_Rtorsion} is equal to $\TAP{K}{\rho_n}(1)$. Hence it is independent of the choice of $\ell$. In the case of $n=2N$, the right hand side of~\eqref{eqn:def_Rtorsion} is determined within sign. \item The assumption in Proposition~\ref{prop:Rtorsion_TAP} means that the twisted chain complex used to define the Reidemeister torsion is acyclic. For details on the definition of $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_n}$, see the review in~\cite{tranYam:RtosionTroidal}. \end{itemize} \end{remark} \section{Asymptotic behavior for metabelian representations} \label{sec:general_formula} Here and subsequently, $\rho$ denotes an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of a knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$. Choose a Lin presentation of $\pi_1(E_K)$: \[ \pi_1(E_K) = \langle x_1, \dots, x_{2g}, \mu \mid \mu a_i^+ \mu^{-1} = a_i^-, \, i=1, \dots, 2g\rangle. \] By Proposition~\ref{prop:metabelianSLII}, up to conjugation, we may assume that $\rho$ has the following form \[ \rho(x_i) = \begin{bmatrix} z_i & 0 \\ 0 & z_i^{-1} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \] where each $z_i$ is a root of unity whose order is a divisor of $\Delta_K(-1)$. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:rep_decompo} The induced $SL_2(\BC)[2N]$-representation $\rho_{2N}$ is conjugate to the direct sum of metabelian representations as \[\rho_{2N} \underset{\mathrm{conj.}}{\sim} \oplus_{j=1}^N \psi_j\] where every $\psi_j$ is a metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_K)$, given by \begin{equation} \label{eqn:psi} \psi_j (x_i) = \begin{bmatrix} z_i^{1-2j} & 0 \\ 0 & z_i^{2j-1} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_j (\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \end{equation} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Set $W_j = \mathrm{span}_{\mathbb{C}}\langle x^{N+j-1}y^{N-j}, x^{N-j}y^{N+j-1}\rangle$ in $V_{2N}$ as the $2$-dimensional subspace spanned by $x^{N+j-1}y^{N-j}$ and $x^{N-j}y^{N+j-1}$. It follows from a direct computation that the restriction of $\rho_{2N}$ to $W_j$ is expressed as \[ \rho_{2N}\big\|_{W_j} (x_i) = \begin{bmatrix} z_i^{1-2j} & 0 \\ 0 & z_i^{2j-1} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho_{2N}\big\|_{W_j} (\mu) = (-1)^{N-j} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \] Taking conjugation by $\left(\begin{smallmatrix} \sqrt{-1} & 0\\ 0 & -\sqrt{-1} \end{smallmatrix}\right)$ if necessary, the restriction $\rho_{2N}\big\|_{W_j}$ is conjugate to $\psi_j$ given by~\eqref{eqn:psi}. \end{proof} By Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_decompo}, one can see that $\rho_{2N}$ has a periodicity in the direct sum decomposition. The asymptotic behavior of $\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)$ is derived from this periodicity. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:main_I} Let $\rho$ be an irreducible metabelian $SL_2(\BC)$-representation of $\pi_1(E_K)$. Then there exists metabelian representations $\psi_1, \ldots, \psi_p$ such that $\psi_1 = \rho$ and the limit of the leading coefficient of $\,\log \TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)$ is expressed as \begin{equation} \label{eqn:main_I} \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} \log \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t). \end{equation} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The twisted Alexander polynomial has the invariance under conjugation of representations. We can consider the twisted Alexander polynomials $\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)$ for $SL_2(\BC)[2N]$-representations $\rho_{2N}$ up to conjugation. Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_decompo} shows that $\rho_{2N}$ turns into the direct sum of metabelian representations $\psi_j$. Under this decomposition of $\rho_{2N}$, it holds that \[\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t) = \prod_{j=1}^N \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t).\] Let $p$ be the l.c.m of orders of the roots of unity $z_1, \ldots, z_{2g}$. Note that the l.c.m $p$ is odd since the order of $z_i$ is a divisor of the odd integer $\Delta_K(-1)$. It is easy seen that $\psi_{j+p} = \psi_j$ for all $j$. This implies that $\{\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t)\}_{j=1, 2, \ldots}$ is a periodic sequence of rational functions in $t$ with period $p$. Hence it follows from~\cite[Lemma~3.11]{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion} that \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{ \sum_{j=1}^N \log \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} \log \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t). \] \end{proof} \begin{remark} The period $p$ is the l.c.m. of divisors of $\Delta_K(-1)$. Hence $p$ is also a divisor of $\Delta_K(-1)$. \end{remark} Assume that $\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(1) \not = 0$ for all $j=1, \ldots, p$. Under this assumption, we can also consider the asymptotic behavior of the Reidemeister torsion from that of the twisted Alexander polynomial. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:main_I} Suppose that $\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(1) \not = 0$ for $1 \leq \forall j \leq p$. Then we can define the Reidemeister torsion $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}$ for all $N$. The growth order of $\,\log\|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|$ is the same as $2N$. The limit of the leading coefficient of $\,\log\|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|$ is expressed as \begin{equation} \label{eqn:Rtorsion_general} \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \|\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}\|}{2N} = \frac{1}{2p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} \log \|\TAP{K}{\psi_j}(1)\|. \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_decompo} shows that $\rho_{2N}$ is conjugate to the direct sum $\oplus_{j=1}^N \psi_j$ of $\psi_j$ given by~\eqref{eqn:psi}. The twisted Alexander polynomial $\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(t)$ turns into the product $\prod_{j=1}^N \TAP{K}{\psi_j}(t)$. Since $\psi_{j+p} = \psi_j$ for any $j$, the assumption $\TAP{K}{\psi_{j}}(1) \not = 0$ implies that $\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(1) \not = 0$ for all $N$. The eigenvalues of $\rho(\mu)$ are $\pm \sqrt{-1}$. One can see that $\det(\rho_{2N}(\mu) - \mathbf{1}) = 2^N$. By definition, it holds for all $N$ that \[ \det \left( \widetilde{\rho_{2N}} \Big(\frac{\partial r_k}{\partial x_l} \Big) \right)_{\substack{1 \leq k \leq 2g \\ 1 \leq l \leq 2g}} \not = 0 \] where $r_k = \mu a_k^+ \mu^{-1} (a_k^-)^{-1}$ in a Lin presentation. It follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Rtorsion_TAP} that $\mathbb{T}_{K, \, \rho_{2N}}=\TAP{K}{\rho_{2N}}(1)$ for any $N$. Taking $t=1$, our claim~\eqref{eqn:Rtorsion_general} follows from the equality~\eqref{eqn:main_I}. \end{proof} \section{Genus one two--bridge knots} \label{sec:twobridge} Genus one two--bridge knots are double twist knots $J(2m, \pm 2n)$ in Hoste-Shanahan's notation \cite{HosteShanahan}, see also \cite{Lin}. Here $m$ and $n$ are positive integers. The Alexander polynomial of $K = J(2m, \pm 2n)$ is $$\Delta_K(t) = mn t^2 + (1 \mp 2mn)t +mn.$$ \subsection{The case of \boldmath$K=J(2m,2n)$} Then $(\|\Delta_K(-1)\|-1)/2 = 2mn -1$ and hence there are $2mn-1$ irreducible metabelian representations $\rho_i \colon\thinspace \pi_1(E_K) \to SL_2(\BC)$, where $1 \le i \le 2mn-1$. By Example \ref{dtk} a Lin presentation of $K = J(2m,2n)$ is \[\pi_1(E_{K}) = \langle x_1, x_2, \mu \mid \mu x_1^m \mu^{-1} = x_1^m x_2^{-1}, \, \mu x_2^{-n} x_1 \mu^{-1} = x_2^{-n} \rangle.\] Up to conjugation, we may assume that \[ \rho_i(x_1) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^i & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{-i} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho_i(x_2) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{2mi} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{-2mi} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho_i(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}, \] where $\xi=e^{2\pi \sqrt{-1}/(4mn-1)}$ and $1 \le i \le 2mn-1$. By Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_decompo}, we have \[ (\rho_i)_{2N} = \sigma_{2N} \circ \rho_i \underset{\mathrm{conj.}}{\sim} \bigoplus_{j=1}^{N} \psi_{i,j} \] where \[ \psi_{i,j}(x_1) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{i(1-2j)} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{i(2j-1)} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(x_2) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{2mi(1-2j)} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{2mi(2j-1)} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \] Let $r_1 = \mu x_1^m \mu^{-1} x_2 x_1^{-m}$ and $r_2 = \mu x_2^{-n} x_1 \mu^{-1} x_2^{n}$. We have \[ \Delta_{{K}, \, \psi_{i,j}}(t) = \det \begin{bmatrix} \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(\frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_1}) & \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(\frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_2}) \\ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(\frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_1}) & \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(\frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_2}) \end{bmatrix} \Big/ \det \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(1-\mu), \] where \begin{align} \frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_1} &= \mu(1-x_1^m \mu^{-1}x_2 x_1^{-m}) (1 + x_1 + \cdots + x_1^{m-1}) \\ &= \mu (1 - \mu^{-1})(1 + x_1 + \cdots + x_1^{m-1}),\\ \frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_2} &= \mu x_1^m \mu^{-1},\\ \frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_1} &= \mu x_2^{-n},\\ \frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_2} &= \mu (-1 + x_2^{-n} x_1 \mu^{-1} x_2^{n})(1+x_2^{-1}+ \cdots+ x_2^{-(n-1)}) x_2^{-1} \\ &= \mu (-1 + \mu^{-1})(1+x_2^{-1}+ \cdots+ x_2^{-(n-1)})x_2^{-1}. \end{align} For $k \ge 0$ and $b \in \mathbb{C}$ let $\delta_k(b) = 1 + b + \cdots + b^k$. Note that $(1+b^{k+1}) \delta_k(b) = \delta_{2k+1}(b)$. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:main} The twisted Alexander polynomial $\TAP{K}{\psi_{i, j}}(t)$ is expressed as follows. \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] If $\xi^{i(2j-1)} \not= 1$, then \[ \Delta_{{K}, \, \psi_{i,j}}(t) = ( \xi^{i(2j-1)} )^{1+m-2mn} \left( \delta_{m-1}(\xi^{i(2j-1)}) \delta_{n-1}(\xi^{2m i(2j-1)}) \right)^2 (t^2+1). \] \item[(b)] If $\xi^{i(2j-1)} = 1$, then \[ \Delta_{{K},\psi_{i,j}}(t) = \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 - 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{t^2+1}. \] \end{itemize} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} For brevity, we set $a = \xi^{i(1-2j)}$. Then $\psi_{i, j}$ is written as \[ \psi_{i,j}(x_1) = \begin{bmatrix} a & 0 \\ 0 & a^{-1} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(x_2) = \begin{bmatrix} a^{2m} & 0 \\ 0 & a^{-2m} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \] It follows that \begin{align} \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}} \left( \frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_1} \right) &= \delta_{m-1}(a) \begin{bmatrix} -1 & t a^{1-m} \\ - t & - a^{1-m} \end{bmatrix},\\ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}} \left( \frac{\partial r_1}{\partial x_2} \right) &= \begin{bmatrix} a^{-m} & 0 \\ 0 & a^m \end{bmatrix},\\ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}} \left( \frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_1} \right) &= \begin{bmatrix} 0 & t a^{2mn} \\ -t a^{-2mn} & 0 \end{bmatrix},\\ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}} \left( \frac{\partial r_2}{\partial x_2} \right) &= \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) \begin{bmatrix} a^{-2mn} & - t a^{2m} \\ t a^{-2mn} & a^{2m} \end{bmatrix}. \end{align} Hence, by a direct calculation, we have \begin{align} \det \left[ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}\Big(\frac{\partial r_k}{\partial x_l} \Big) \right]_{1 \le k, l \le 2} &= t^2 - (a^m + a^{1-4mn} ) (a^{2mn} + 1) \delta_{m-1}(a) \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) t^2 \\ & + \, a^{1+m-2mn} \left( \delta_{m-1}(a) \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) \right)^2 (t^2+1)^2. \end{align} Since $\xi^{4mn-1}=1$, we have $a^{4mn-1} = 1$. This implies that \begin{align} (a^m + a^{1-4mn} ) (a^{2mn} + 1) \delta_{m-1}(a) \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) &= (a^m + 1 ) \delta_{m-1}(a) (a^{2mn} + 1) \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) \\ &= \delta_{2m-1}(a) \delta_{2n-1}(a^{2m}) \\ &= \delta_{4mn-1}(a) \\ &= \begin{cases} \frac{a^{4mn}-1}{a-1} = 1 &\mbox{if } a \not= 1 \\ 4mn & \mbox{if } a=1 \end{cases}. \end{align} Hence, we obtain \[ \det \left[ \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}} \left(\frac{\partial r_k}{\partial x_l} \right) \right]_{1 \le k,l \le 2} = \begin{cases} a^{1+m-2mn} \left( \delta_{m-1}(a) \delta_{n-1}(a^{2m}) \right)^2 (t^2+1)^2 &\mbox{if $a \not= 1$} \\ m^2 n^2 (t^2+1)^2 - (4mn-1)t^2 & \mbox{if $a=1$}. \end{cases} \] The lemma follows, since $\det \Phi_{\psi_{i,j}}(1-\mu) = t^2 +1$. \end{proof} \begin{remark} Note that $a=1$ corresponds to an abelian representation and $m^2 n^2 (t^2+1)^2 - (4mn-1)t^2 = \Delta_{J(2m, 2n)}(\sqrt{-1} \, t)\Delta_{J(2m, 2n)}(-\sqrt{-1} \, t)$. \end{remark} \begin{lemma} \label{lem:main} Suppose $\lambda$ is a root of unity whose order is an odd integer $q$. Let $k$ be an positive integer coprime with $q$. Then $$\prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q, \\ j \not= (q+1)/2}} \delta_{k-1}(\lambda^{2j-1}) =1.$$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Consider $1 \le j \le q$. Note that $\lambda^{2j-1} = 1$ if and only if $j=\frac{q+1}{2}$. We have \[ \prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q, \\ j \not= (q+1)/2}} \delta_{k-1}(\lambda^{2j-1}) = \prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q, \\ j \not= (q+1)/2}} \frac{\lambda^{k(2j-1)} - 1}{\lambda^{2j-1} - 1}. \] Since $q = \text{order}(\lambda)$ is an odd integer, for any integer $l$ co-prime with $q$ we have that the map $j \mapsto l(2j-1) \pmod{q}$ gives an bijection from the set $\{1 \le j \le q \mid j \not= (q+1)/2\}$ to $\{1, 2, \cdots, q-1\}$. In particular, we have \[\prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q, \\ j \not= (q+1)/2}} (\lambda^{l(2j-1)} - 1) = (\lambda -1) (\lambda^2 -1) \cdots (\lambda^{q-1} -1).\] Since $k$ is coprime with $q$, the denominator coincides with the numerator in the product of $\delta_{k-1}(\lambda^{2j-1}) = \frac{\lambda^{k(2j-1)} - 1}{\lambda^{2j-1} - 1}$. This is our claim. \end{proof} Let $q_i = \frac{4mn-1}{\gcd(4mn-1,i)}$. Note that $\xi^{i}$ is a root of unity whose order equals to $q_i$. Moreover, for $1 \le j \le q_i$ we have $\xi^{i(2j-1)} = 1$ if and only if $j=\frac{q_i+1}{2}$. Since the orders of $\xi^i$ and $\xi^{2mi}$ are equal to $q_i$ which is coprime with both $m$ and $n$, Lemma~\ref{lem:main} implies that \[ \prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q_i, \\ j \not= (q_i+1)/2}} \delta_{m-1}(\xi^{i(2j-1)}) =1 \qquad \text{and} \qquad \prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q_i, \\ j \not= (q_i+1)/2}} \delta_{n-1}(\xi^{2m i(2j-1)}) =1. \] Note that \[ \prod_{\substack{1 \le j \le q_i, \\ j \not= (q_i+1)/2}} \xi^{i(2j-1)} = \prod_{1 \le j \le q_i} \xi^{i(2j-1)} = 1. \] We obtain the following theorem from the above computations. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:TAP_positive} Set $q_i = \frac{4mn-1}{\gcd(4mn-1,i)}$. The limit of $(\log \TAP{J(2m ,2n)}{(\rho_i)_{2N}}(t) )/(2N)$ is expressed as \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{J(2m, 2n)}{(\rho_i)_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2q_i} \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 - 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{(t^2+1)^2} + \frac{1}{2} \log (t^2 + 1). \] \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Since $\Delta_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}(t) = \prod_{j=1}^N \Delta_{{K}, \, \psi_{i,j}}(t)$, Proposition \ref{prop:main} implies \begin{align} &\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \TAP{J(2m, 2n)}{(\rho_i)_{2N}}(t)}{2N}\\ &= \frac{1}{2q_i} \sum_{j=1}^{q_i} \log \TAP{J(2m ,2n)}{\psi_{i,j}}(t) \\ &= \frac{1}{2q_i} \left( \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 - 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{t^2+1} + (q_i - 1) \log (t^2+1) \right)\\ &= \frac{1}{2q_i} \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 - 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{(t^2+1)^2} + \frac{1}{2} \log (t^2 + 1). \end{align} \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{cor:Rtorsion_positive} The leading coefficient of $\,\log \|\mathbb{T}_{J(2m, 2n), \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}\|$ converges as follows: \begin{align} \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \mathbb{T}_{J(2m, 2n), \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}}{2N} &= \frac{1}{q_i} \log \frac{2mn-1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2 \\ &= \frac{\gcd(4mn-1,i)}{4mn-1} \log \frac{2mn-1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2. \end{align} In particular, the growth order of $\,\log \|\mathbb{T}_{J(2m, 2n), \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}\|$ is the same as $2N$. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Since $\TAP{J(2m, 2n)}{\psi_{i, j}}(1) \not = 0$ for $1 \leq \forall j \leq q_i$, we can apply Corollary~\ref{cor:main_I} to this situation. \end{proof} \subsection{The case of \boldmath$K = J(2m,-2n)$} Since $(\|\Delta_K(-1)\|-1)/2 = 2mn$, there are $2mn$ irreducible metabelian representations $\rho_i \colon\thinspace \pi_1(E_K) \to SL_2(\BC)$, where $1 \le i \le 2mn$. A Lin presentation of $K = J(2m,2n)$ is \[ \pi_1(E_{K}) = \langle x_1, x_2, \mu \mid \mu x_1^m \mu^{-1} = x_1^m x_2^{-1}, \, \mu x_2^{n} x_1 \mu^{-1} = x_2^{n} \rangle.\] Up to conjugation, we may assume that \[ \rho_i(x_1) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^i & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{-i} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho_i(x_2) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{2mi} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{-2mi} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \rho_i(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}, \] where $\xi=e^{2\pi \sqrt{-1}/(4mn+1)}$ and $1 \le i \le 2mn$. Then By Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_decompo} shows that \begin{gather} (\rho_i)_{2N} \underset{\mathrm{conj.}}{\sim} \bigoplus_{j=1}^{N} \psi_{i,j}, \\ \psi_{i,j}(x_1) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{i(1-2j)} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{i(2j-1)} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(x_2) = \begin{bmatrix} \xi^{2mi(1-2j)} & 0 \\ 0 & \xi^{2mi(2j-1)} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \psi_{i,j}(\mu) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \end{gather} By a similar argument to the case of $J(2m ,2n)$, we obtain the asymptotic behavior of the twisted Alexander polynomial for $J(2m, -2n)$. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:TAP_negative} Let $q_i = \frac{4mn+1}{\gcd(4mn+1,i)}$. For $1 \le i \le 2mn$, it holds that \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \Delta_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}(t)}{2N} = \frac{1}{2q_i} \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 +4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{(t^2+1)^2} + \frac{1}{2} \log (t^2 + 1). \] \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The sequence of $\Delta_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}(t)$ has the period $q_i$. The limit of $\frac{\log \Delta_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}(t)}{2N}$ turns into \begin{align} & \frac{1}{2q_i} \sum_{j=1}^{q_i} \log \Delta_{{K}, \, \psi_{i,j}}(t) \\ &= \frac{1}{2q_i} \left( \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 + 4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{t^2+1} + (q_i - 1) \log (t^2+1) \right)\\ &= \frac{1}{2q_i} \log \frac{m^2n^2t^4 + (2m^2n^2 +4mn +1)t^2 + m^2n^2}{(t^2+1)^2} + \frac{1}{2} \log (t^2 + 1). \end{align} \end{proof} We also have the similar corollary to the case of $J(2m, 2n)$. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:Rtorsion_negative} The leading coefficient of $\,\log \|\mathbb{T}_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}\|$ converges as follows: \begin{align} \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \mathbb{T}_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}}{2N} &= \frac{1}{q_i} \log \frac{2mn+1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2 \\ &= \frac{\gcd(4mn+1,i)}{4mn+1} \log \frac{2mn+1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2. \end{align} In particular, the growth order of $\,\log \|\mathbb{T}_{{K}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}\|$ is the same as $2N$. \end{corollary} \begin{remark} Since the twist knot $K_n$ in \cite{tranYam:RtosionTroidal} is the mirror image of $J(2, -2n)$, we have \[ \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log \mathbb{T}_{{K_n}, \, (\rho_i)_{2N}}}{2N} = \frac{\gcd(4n+1,i)}{4n+1} \log \frac{2n+1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \log 2. \] Together with \cite[Theorem~3.7]{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion} and $\mathrm{order}(\rho_i(\mu)) = 4$, one can also obtain the asymptotic behavior of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion for the graph manifold obtained by $4$-surgery along $K_n$ as in \cite{tranYam:RtosionTroidal}. Compared with~\cite[Theorem~4.4]{tranYam:RtosionTroidal}, it can be seen that the coefficient $\gcd(4n+1,i)/(4n+1)$ is determined by the torus knot exterior in the graph manifold obtained by $4$-surgery along $K_n$. \end{remark} \section*{Acknowledgments} The first author was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation (\#354595 to AT). The second author was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number $26800030$. \newcommand{\noop}[1]{} \providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace} \providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR } \providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{% \href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2} } \providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
\section{Introduction} This year marks the $20^{\textnormal{th}}$ anniversary of the first demonstration of light guidance in photonic crystal fibre (PCF) formed by an array of air holes in a solid silica glass matrix~\cite{Knight1996All_Silica_Single_Mode}. PCF has revolutionised the field of nonlinear fibre optics, enabling the development of light sources ranging from ultra-broad and bright supercontinuum~\cite{Wadsworth2002Supercontinuum_generation_in,Hooper2011Coherent-Supercontinuum-Generation} to sources of single photons~\cite{Sharping2004Quantum-correlated-twin-photons}. The success of PCF is primarily due to its capacity for engineering group-velocity dispersion (GVD) through changing the diameter, $d$, and pitch, $\Lambda$, of the air holes that form the cladding ~\cite{Knight2003Photonic-Crystal-Fibres}. This enables the transition between normal and anomalous GVD, known as the zero-dispersion wavelength (ZDW), to be tuned over a much wider range than in conventional fibre, yielding control over both linear propagation and nonlinear processes. However, this flexibility also brings a high degree of sensitivity to fluctuations in the dimensions of the PCF structure. Some level of variation inevitably arises during the fabrication process, either due to imperfections in the fibre preform or small changes in the draw parameters. For some applications of PCF, such as supercontinuum generation pumped in the anomalous dispersion regime, these variations are insignificant and can be ignored. However for tasks that are more critically dependent on GVD, for example the fabrication of a PCF with all-normal dispersion or in applications of four-wave mixing (FWM), even small changes in the fibre structure can have highly detrimental effects. As an example, we focus on the impact of structural variation on the use of spontaneous FWM in PCF for the generation of heralded single photons in pure quantum states\cite{Cohen2009Tailored-Photon-Pair-Generation, Halder2009Nonclassical-2-photon-interference, Soller2010Bridging-Visible-and-Telecom}. High-quality sources of single photons are a critical resource for developing photonic quantum technologies for information processing, communications, and metrology~\cite{OBrien2009Photonic-quantum-technologies}. Spontaneous FWM in fibre is a powerful technique for creating single photons using heralding: photon pairs created through FWM can be split up and one photon detected to herald the presence of its twin~\cite{McMillan2009Narrowband-High-Fidelity}. The dispersion-engineering capabilities of PCF give control over the properties of these photon pairs, critical to produce the high-purity states required for quantum-information processing \cite{Grice2001Eliminating-Frequency-and-Space-Time, Garay-Palmett2007Photon-Pair-State-Preparation, Cui2012Minimizing-the-Frequency-Correlation}. However, we show in this work, even small variations in PCF structure and dispersion can ruin these delicate quantum states. To understand and mitigate the impact of such variation, we have used seeded FWM to probe the level of variation in PCF dispersion, followed by numerical reconstruction of likely dispersion profiles to relate our data to the structural parameters, $d$ and $\Lambda$. Our measurement is based on a process known as stimulated emission tomography (SET) conceived by Liscidini and Sipe to find efficiently the spectral probability distribution of photon pairs generated by parametric downconversion (PDC)~\cite{Liscidini2013Stimulated_Emission_Tomography}. A number of research groups have since used stimulated processes to determine the spectral properties of photon-pair sources based on both PDC~\cite{Eckstein2014High-resolution-spectral-characterization} and FWM ~\cite{Fang2014Fast_and_Highly_Resolved, Jizan2015Bi_Photon_Spectral, Fang2016Multidimensional-characterization-of-an-entangled}. When compared to methods of determining the two-photon probability distribution by photon counting~\cite{Mosley2008Heralded-Generation-of-Ultrafast,Avenhaus2009Fibre_Assisted_Single_Photon,Soller2010Bridging-Visible-and-Telecom}, SET-based techniques typically achieve higher resolution and are significantly faster. We describe how this enabled us to measure rapidly a large number of PCF segments and hence determine the length scale of the structural variation. \section{Four-wave mixing in uniform PCF} The structure of a length of PCF dictates the wavelengths of light that can be generated by FWM because the process is parametric and requires perfect phasematching to operate efficiently. The wavelengths that can achieve phase matching are set by the dispersion, which is in turn controlled by the PCF structure. Hence FWM can be used to probe the structure of PCF. We consider only FWM with a single (degenerate) pump pulse. As it propagates, the frequencies that can be generated, known as the signal and idler, are determined by energy and momentum conversation: \begin{eqnarray} 2\omega_{p} & = & \omega_{s} + \omega_{i}\label{eq:ECon},\\ \Delta\beta & = & 2\beta_{p}(\omega_{p}) - \beta_{s}(\omega_{s}) - \beta_{i}(\omega_{i}) - 2\gamma P\label{eq:Phasemismatch}. \end{eqnarray} where $\omega_{j}$ and $\beta_{j}(\omega_j)$ are the frequency and propagation constant of pump, signal and idler, $j = p, s, i$, respectively and the final term on the right hand-side accounts for phase modulation by the pump pulse. We calculate the frequency-dependence of the propagation constants $\beta_{j}(\omega_j)$ from empirical relationships for standard PCF structures \cite{Saitoh2005Empirical-relations-for-simple} and assume that all fields propagate in the fundamental guided mode. Only pairs of signal and idler frequencies that satisfy Eq.~\ref{eq:ECon} and are phasematched ($\Delta\beta \approx 0$) will experience growth as the pump travels along the fibre. The ability to control the dispersion of the PCF through changes to the cladding structure provides a means by which specific signal and idler frequencies can be produced. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.99\textwidth]{Homo_PEF_PMF_JSI_Multi_Panel} \caption{(a) Pump envelope function of an 800\,fs transform limited pulse with a Gaussian spectrum centered at 1064\,nm. (b) Real part of the phasematching function of a PCF with $\Lambda = 1.49 \mu m, d/\Lambda = 0.41$ designed to produce FWM at 805\,nm and 1545\,nm. (c) The resulting joint spectral intensity.} \label{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI} \end{figure} The relationship between the generated signal and idler frequencies can be visualised through the joint spectral intensity (JSI) distribution, $F(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})$. When FWM is used as a source of photon pairs, the JSI shows the probability of generating an idler photon with frequency $\omega_{i}$ given a signal photon with frequency $\omega_{s}$. The JSI is determined by the product of two functions: the pump envelope function $\alpha(\omega_{s} + \omega_{i})$ resulting from energy conservation and the phasematching function $\phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})$ that embodies momentum matching: \begin{equation} F(\omega_{s},\omega_{i}) = \|f(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})\|^{2} = \|\alpha(\omega_{s} + \omega_{i})\cdot\phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})\|^{2}. \label{eq:JSI_eq} \end{equation} When pumped by an ultrafast laser pulse, the bandwidth of the pump yields a range of potential solutions of Eq.~\ref{eq:ECon}. Therefore, $\alpha(\omega_{s}+\omega_{i})$ describes the variation in the signal and idler frequencies that are possible due to the finite bandwidth of the pump. For a pulse with a gaussian spectrum the pump envelope function is given by \begin{equation} \alpha(\omega_{s} + \omega_{i}) = \exp{\left( - \frac{(\omega_{s} + \omega_{i} - 2\omega_{p0})^{2}}{4\sigma_{p}^2}\right)}, \end{equation} where $\omega_{p0}$ is the central frequency of the pump and $\sigma_{p}$ is the $1/e$ bandwidth of the pump, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI}a. We assume throughout that $\alpha(\omega_{s}+\omega_{i})$ remains constant along the length of the fibre, that is to say that the pump power is sufficiently low that the effects of self-phase modulation can be ignored, and that fibre attenuation and pump depletion are negligible. The phasematching function, $\phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})$, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI}b describes the variations in the signal and idler frequencies that are possible given the phase mismatch that arises over a length $L$ of the PCF. For a homogeneous PCF, the propagation constants of the four fields do not vary longitudinally and $\phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})$ is given by the integral of the phase mismatch over the interaction length~\cite{Garay-Palmett2007Photon-Pair-State-Preparation}: \begin{eqnarray} \phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i}) & = & \chi^{(3)}\int_{0}^{L}e^{i\Delta\beta z}dz\label{eq:PMF_Int}.\\ & = & 2\chi^{(3)} L\textnormal{sinc}\left(\frac{\Delta\beta L}{2}\right)\exp{\left(\frac{i\Delta\beta L}{2}\right)}. \label{eq:PMF_Homog} \end{eqnarray} A typical JSI for FWM in a homogeneous PCF is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI}c; it can be seen that the function has a single peak with small side-lobes as a result of the sinc function in $\phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i})$. Note that, in this case, the frequencies of signal and idler are almost uncorrelated. \section{The effect of structural variation on FWM} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{Inhomo_Fibre_Schematic} \caption{Schematic of a non-uniform PCF composed of $m$ homogeneous sections. Each of the $m$ sections is described by three parameters: $d$, $\Lambda$ and $L$.} \label{fig:Inhomo_PCF_Schem} \end{figure} Structural variations in PCF result in fluctuations in GVD and changes in the rate at which phase mismatch is accumulated along the fibre. The phasematching function of a non-uniform PCF can be modelled by dividing it into a series of $m$ segments each of which is homogeneous. Each segment is described by a set of parameters $\{d_{n},\Lambda_{n},L_{n}\}$ corresponding to the hole size, pitch and length of the $n$'th segment, giving rise to a phasemismatch of $\Delta \beta_{n}L_{n}$ with $\sum_{n}^{m} L_{n} = L$. The phasematching function of the complete inhomogeneous fibre can be found by integrating Eq.~\ref{eq:PMF_Int} in a piecewise manner resulting in \cite{Cui2012Spectral-Properties-of-Photon-Pairs}: \begin{eqnarray} \phi(\omega_{s},\omega_{i}) &= L_{1}\textnormal{sinc}(\frac{\Delta \beta_{1}L_{1}}{2})\exp(i\frac{\Delta \beta_{1} L_{1}}{2}) \\ & + \sum_{n = 2}^{m} L_{n}\textnormal{sinc}(\frac{\Delta \beta_{n}L_{n}}{2})\exp(i\frac{\Delta \beta_{n} L_{n}}{2})\exp(i\sum_{l = 1}^{n-1}\Delta \beta_{l} L_{l}), \label{eq:Inhomo_PMF} \end{eqnarray} corresponding to the coherent combination of the different phasematching functions of each homogeneous segment, with phase mismatch carried forward from the previous segments. In Fig.~\ref{fig:Inhomo_Sims} we show how the JSI of an inhomogeneous PCF 0.25\,m in length can be constructed from three homogeneous segments with structural parameters drawn from a normal distribution with a variance of $1\%$. Each section has a different phasematching function given by Eq.~\ref{eq:PMF_Homog} that combine to yield the complete phasematching function shown in panel d. When multiplied by the pump function shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI} a, we obtain the JSI for the inhomogeneous PCF displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:Inhomo_Sims}. It is clear to see that the changes in structure and therefore dispersion along the length of the PCF have drastically altered the FWM JSI compared to that of the homogeneous PCF in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI} c. Whereas the JSI for the homogeneous fibre exhibited a single area of high probability, for the inhomogeneous PCF additional high probability features appear within the JSI that increase the spectral correlation between signal and idler. In high-intensity FWM, these additional features in the JSI increase the bandwidth of the generated beams and reduce spectral brightness. However, when FWM is used for photon-pair generation, their effect is far more detrimental. In order to generate heralded single photons in pure quantum states, the JSI must be engineered to minimise frequency correlation between signal and idler. This is enabled by dispersion control in PCF, as shown for the homogeneous case in Fig.~\ref{fig:Homo_Sim_PMF_PEF_JSI} c, but additional features in the JSI caused by variations in the PCF structure introduce frequency correlation and drastically reduce the purity of the resulting heralded photons making them unsuitable for quantum information applications. Hence to generate pure single photons it is critical to characterise the level of variation accurately, and understand the length scale over which the structure fluctuates. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.95\textwidth]{Inhomo_Description} \caption{(a - c) Phasematching functions of three different sections of homogeneous PCF each 0.083m in length and with nominal values of $\Lambda = 1.49 \mu m, d/\Lambda = 0.41$. (d) PMF of inhomogeneous fibre formed by coherent addition of phasematching functions (a)--(c). (e) Resulting joint spectral intensity for inhomogeneous PCF.} \label{fig:Inhomo_Sims} \end{figure} \section{Measurements of FWM joint spectra} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{SET_Schematic_Multi_Panel_V2} \caption{(a) Scanning electron micrograph of cleaved PCF end face with a pitch of $d = 1.49 \mu m$. (b) Schematic of stimulated emission tomography measurement; see text for details. (c) Schematic of the measurement tree. The complete PCF consists of a single 3\,m length (level 3). This was divided into three 1\,m lengths (level 2), each subsequently split into a further three 30\,cm lengths (level 1). Finally, each of the level 1 sections was cut into two 15\,cm lengths (base segments).} \label{fig:SET_Set_Up} \end{figure} An 8-ring PCF was fabricated using the stack-and-draw technique. The PCF was designed to generate signal and idler wavelengths in the region of 800\,nm and 1550\,nm respectively when pumped at 1064\,nm. A scanning electron micrograph of the end face is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SET_Set_Up}a. One capillary in the outermost ring of the cladding was replaced by a solid silica rod to create a missing hole used to orientate the PCF. The FWM JSIs of various lengths of the PCF were mapped using seeded FWM to emulate the SET technique~\cite{Liscidini2013Stimulated_Emission_Tomography}. It has been shown for FWM processes that when a seed field is injected at the idler wavelength the output at the conjugate signal frequency is proportional to the JSI~\cite{Fang2014Fast_and_Highly_Resolved}. Hence by tuning a narrow-band seed field across a range of idler wavelengths the JSI can be recovered from a series of measurements of the signal spectrum. A schematic of the experimental set-up is shown in Fig~\ref{fig:SET_Set_Up}b. A 1064~nm 10~MHz fibre laser (\emph{Fianium} FemtoPower-PP) was used to pump the FWM. The beam from this laser first passed through a half-wave plate and polarising beam splitter for power control before entering a 4f-spectrometer in which the central wavelength and bandwidth of the pump pulses were adjusted. A further half-wave plate and polariser were used to set the polarisation in the PCF. For the seed field a tuneable CW laser (\emph{ThorLabs INTUN-1550}) with a linewidth of approximately 125~kHz was used at the idler wavelength. The co-polarised seed and pump fields were mixed on a dichroic mirror and coupled into the PCF using and aspheric lens. Each fibre segment under measurement was placed in a bare fibre adapter with the missing hole marker aligned with the pump and seed polarisation. The output of the PCF was coupled directly to an optical spectral analyser (OSA). A computer controlled both the tunable seed laser and the OSA to allow fast data acquisition at high resolution. First the wavelength of the seed laser was set, following this the OSA scan was triggered. Once completed, the recorded stimulated signal spectrum was read out over GPIB to the PC and a new seed wavelength selected. The process was repeated for 100 different seed wavelengths. The JSI was recovered by stacking each stimulated signal spectrum into a 2D plot. We began with a 3\,m length of the PCF and recorded its JSI. This 3\,m sample was cut into lengths of 1\,m and the JSI of each measured. Subsequently each 1\,m length was cut into 30\,cm sections, and each of 30\,cm section cut in to two 15\,cm pieces, with the JSI of each section measured at each stage. The overall measurement tree is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SET_Set_Up}c. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{Meas_JSI_Multi_Panel_V3} \caption{A selection of JSIs measured for different fibre lengths. (a) Level 1 segment with L = 3\,m. (b) Level 2 segment with L = 1\,m. (c) Level 3 segment taken from (b) with L = 30\,cm. (d) Base segment taken from (c) with L = 15\,cm.} \label{fig:Stim_JSIs} \end{figure} A selection of the recorded JSIs at the different length scales are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Stim_JSIs}. We see that the level of inhomogeneity decreases as the fibre is cut up into shorter pieces, shown by the smaller number of high-intensity features in the JSIs of shorter lengths, until finally in Fig.\ref{fig:Stim_JSIs}d the sample is approximately homogeneous with a single high-intensity lobe. For the 15\,cm segments, the bandwidth of the phasematching function was now so large compared to that of the pump that the the JSI was dominated by the pump envelope function. In addition, a clear trend between sub-segments from the same parent segment was seen. Fig.~\ref{fig:Stim_JSIs} shows JSIs recorded for sub-segments taken from a single parent segment; the dominant features in the parent can be seen in the sub-segments as one would expect. \section{Numerical reconstruction of PCF structure} We have developed a numerical reconstruction technique to reconstruct the JSI of each parent segment using the JSIs of its sub-segments with the appropriate phase applied. We used the set of 15\,cm lengths that are approximately homogeneous, which we term the base segments, as a starting point to estimate numerically the structural parameters present in the original fibre. To begin, the uniform FWM phasematching function in Eq.~\ref{eq:PMF_Int} was used to reconstruct the JSI of each of the base segments. Starting from nominal values for hole diameter $d$ and pitch $\Lambda$, the resulting phasematching function was combined with a standard pump envelope function that matched the experimental conditions. The parameters $d$ and $\Lambda$ were then iterated to fit a reconstructed JSI for each base segment to the measured data. The length of the fibre in the model was taken from measurements of the fibre segments under test. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.7\textwidth]{Sim_JSI_Multi_Panel_V2} \caption{A comparison of measured JSIs (a)--(c) with the corresponding reconstructed JSIs (d)--(f). (a, d) Level 3 segment with L = 30 cm. (b, e) Level 2 segment with L = 1m. (c, f) Level 1 segment L = 3m.} \label{fig:Recon_JSIs} \end{figure} The set of fitted structural parameters of the base segments formed the basis for the reconstruction of the JSIs of the longer segments. First, the level 1 segments composed of two base segments were reconstructed by combining the phasematching functions of the relevant base segments using Eq.~\ref{eq:Inhomo_PMF}. The experimentally measured JSI and the numerically reconstructed JSI were then compared to evaluate the quality of the fitted structural parameters. To improve the quality of the fit, the fitting parameters of the base segments were adjusted and the JSI recalculated. This new JSI was compared to the measured JSI; if the new JSI was a better fit to the data the new set of fitted parameters were accepted, if not the changes were rejected. The process was repeated to optimise iteratively the overlap between measurements and simulation. Once this was achieved for all level 1 segments, these were combined as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SET_Set_Up}c to form the level 2 segments. The same optimisation procedure was applied, varying the parameters of the base segments to correct the fit. Finally, the full 3\,m fibre (level 3) consisting of the 18 base segments was reconstructed by combining the three level 2 segments together in the same manner. A comparison of the measured and reconstructed JSIs for the different stages of the reconstruction is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Recon_JSIs}. To simplify the reconstruction it was assumed that the majority of the inhomogeneity was introduced through fluctuations in the pitch, $\Lambda$, along the fibre. This allowed the reconstruction to be carried out using fewer parameters whilst still maintaining a good fit to the experimental data. For each base segment the hole size $d$ was fixed once the initial parameters were found. From the complete reconstructed PCF the fluctuation in the pitch along the fibre can be visualised as the fractional variance in the pitch about the mean of the entire fibre as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fitting_Distribution}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width = 0.6\textwidth]{Position_Variance_2} \caption{Fractional variation of the reconstructed pitch as a function of position along the fibre.} \label{fig:Fitting_Distribution} \end{figure} The fractional variance in the pitch about the mean for the final parameter set shows variation over two different length scales. Firstly, on the longest length scales there is a large variation roughly every metre. Secondly, within each of those metre lengths, variations are still present but the difference is much smaller. On average, the pitch of all of the sub-segments lie within $\pm$1\% of the mean, in agreement with the 1\% variation in the outer diameter of the fibre that was achieved during fabrication. \section{Conclusion} In conclusion, we have demonstrated a technique for determining the degree of structural variation in PCF by measuring seeded FWM and carrying out a numerical reconstruction. Hence we infer the level of variation in our PCF to be below $\pm 1\%$ and the length scale of the variations to be around 15\,cm. Not only can these methods be used to determine the suitability of PCF samples for use in high-purity heralded single photon sources, where any inhomogeneity in the fibre introduces additional unwanted spectral correlations in the two-photon state, but also in other uses of PCF, for example in bright FWM sources that require high spectral brightness. Our work demonstrates that these measurements can be made using widely available equipment over short time scales and that a good estimate of the level of variation can be made without destroying the fibre. \section*{Funding Information} This work was funded by the UK EPSRC First Grant scheme (EP/K022407/1) and the EPSRC Quantum Technology Hub \textit{Networked Quantum Information Technologies} (EP/M013243/1). \end{document}
\section{Introduction} \label{S:I} \subsection{The Keller-Segel model}\label{SS:KS} A general Keller-Segel model of chemotaxis in one space dimension is \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KSgen} \begin{aligned} u_t&={\varepsilon} u_{xx}-\alpha w u^m+\kappa u,\\ w_t&=\delta w_{xx}-{\beta}\left(\Phi_x(u) w\right)_x. \end{aligned} \end{equation} The model represents the directed movement of a cell species $w$, such as a bacterial population, governed by the gradient of a chemical $u$. The function $\Phi(u)$ is the so-called chemotactic function. We take $(x,t)\in\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}^+$, with $\alpha,\ \kappa\geq0, m \in \mathbb{R}$, and $\beta,\ \delta>0$ and assume that the diffusion of the chemical is taken to be much smaller than that of the bacteria, \emph{i.e.}\ $0\leq {\varepsilon}\ll \delta$. Originally proposed by Keller and Segel in the 1970's (see \cite{keller1971model, keller1971traveling}) much of the focus in the literature has been on the so-called minimal Keller-Segel model (see, for example, \cite{horstmann2005boundedness,kang2007stability} and references therein, as well as the review paper \cite{horstmann20031970}). This is \eqref{EQ:KSgen} with a chemotactic function of the form $\Phi_x(u)=u$ and $\kappa=0$ (representing no growth of the chemical in the absence of the bacteria). The minimal Keller-Segel model admits solutions that blow-up in finite or infinite time \cite{horstmann20031970}. As blow-up solutions are not biologically feasible, efforts have been made to prevent or bound blow-up solutions in the minimal Keller-Segel model by appending the model; for instance by selecting an appropriate growth term \cite{kolokolnikov2014basic}, by bounding the chemotactic function \cite{horstmann2005boundedness}, \edit{or by incorporating nonlinear diffusivity \cite{wang2010chemotaxis}}. Alternatively, by moving away from the minimal Keller-Segel model, one can find travelling wave solutions by the choice of a singular chemotactic function \cite{keller1971traveling, schwetlick2003traveling}. The literature predominantly discusses the case when the growth term $\kappa =0$, and when $\Phi(u)=\log(u)$ (see \cite{ebihara1992singular,feltham2000travelling,keller1975necessary} and the references therein). In this manuscript, we consider such a Keller-Segel model: \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KSalpha} \begin{aligned} u_{{t}}&={\varepsilon} u_{{x}{x}}-\alpha w u^m,\\ w_{{t}}&=\delta w_{{x}{x}}-{\beta}\left(\frac{wu_{{x}}}{u}\right)_{{x}}. \end{aligned} \end{equation} The condition ${\beta}/\delta+m>1$ is necessary for finite solutions \cite{keller1971traveling}. It has been shown that for $m>1$ and $m<0,$ \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} admits no travelling wave solutions \cite{schwetlick2003traveling,wang2013mathematics}, thus we take $0\leq m\leq 1$. When $0\leq m \leq 1$, there are two main cases; first, for $0\leq m<1$, the model supports a travelling front of the chemical attractant coupled with a travelling pulse for the bacterial population \cite{nagai1991traveling, wang2013mathematics}. This has been used to model travelling bands of bacteria \cite{holz1978quasi, novick1984gradually}. When $m=1$, \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} supports a pair of travelling fronts and has been used to model the boundary behaviours of populations of bacteria \cite{nossal1972boundary}. See Figure \ref{fig:tw_profiles} for plots of travelling wave solutions in these two cases. While the existence of travelling wave solutions to \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} has been studied since the model's inception, stability analysis of these travelling wave solutions has been comparatively limited. A typical first step in the stability analysis of travelling wave solutions is to linearise around the travelling wave solution and to compute the spectrum of the resulting linearised operator. For travelling wave solutions in \eqref{EQ:KSalpha}, with $\varepsilon = m=0$, the essential spectrum (see Definition \ref{DEFN:EssSpect}) of the associated linear operator, dealing with instabilities at infinity, was located in \cite{nagai1991traveling}. It was shown that the essential spectrum always intersects the right half plane and so the waves are (spectrally) unstable. It is possible to shift the essential spectrum using weighted function spaces, see \S\ref{SS:Weighted_spaces}. In \cite{nagai1991traveling} a weighted function space was considered for a range of weights and it was shown that in this range the spectrum remains unstable. These results were generalised in \cite{wang2013mathematics} for $0\leq m\leq1 $. In this manuscript, we locate the essential spectrum associated with travelling wave solutions in \eqref{EQ:KSalpha}. By computing the absolute spectrum (see Definition \ref{DEFN:Abs_spect}), we show that for all $0\leq m<1$ there exists a range of the chemotactic parameter $\beta$, independent of the speed of the travelling wave solution, such that the essential spectrum can be weighted fully into the left half plane for an appropriate two-sided weight. See \S\ref{SS:theorem} for a more in depth explanation of the main results. In \S \ref{SS:SETUP}, we describe the linearised eigenvalue problem associated with a travelling wave solution to \eqref{EQ:KSalpha}, outline the particulars of spectral theory, and state our main results. In \S\ref{S:MZERO}, we locate the essential and absolute spectrum and explain the procedure for calculating the so-called ideal weight (see Definition \ref{DEFN:ideal_weight}), in the case of constant consumption and zero diffusivity of the attractant, \emph{i.e.}\ $\varepsilon=m=0$. We also calculate the range of $\beta$ values for which the essential spectrum can be weighted into the left half plane. Outside this range the travelling wave solutions are absolutely unstable. In \S\ref{S:SUBLIN}, we extend the results of the constant consumption case ($m=0$) to the case of sublinear $(0<m<1)$ and linear consumption ($m=1$), still in the absence of diffusion of the attractant. While the procedures of \S\ref{S:SUBLIN} are similar to the procedures of \S\ref{S:MZERO}, the computations are algebraically more involved and therefore we split these two sections. In \S\ref{SS:MNONZERO_EPSNONZERO}, we include a small, non-zero, diffusivity of the attractant in the model, \emph{i.e.}\ $0<\varepsilon \ll1$, and show that (in)stability conditions are to leading order the same as before. We conclude the manuscript with a summary and discussion of future work. \section{Set-up, definitions, and main results} \label{SS:SETUP} We briefly discuss the existence of travelling wave solutions to \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} and define the stability problem. Following \cite{nagai1991traveling}, we nondimensionalise \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} through the change of variables $\tilde{x}:=\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{\delta}}{x},\ \tilde{t}:=\alpha {t}$. Then, \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} becomes \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KStildex} \begin{aligned} u_{\tilde{t}}&=\tilde{\varepsilon} u_{\tilde{x}\tilde{x}}- w u^m,\\ w_{\tilde{t}}&=w_{\tilde{x}\tilde{x}}-\tilde{\beta}\left(\frac{wu_{\tilde{x}}}{u}\right)_{\tilde{x}}, \end{aligned} \end{equation} where we have set $\tilde{\varepsilon}:=\frac{{\varepsilon}}{\delta}$ and $\tilde{\beta}:=\frac{{\beta}}{\delta}$. We drop the tildes for notational convenience \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KStw1} \begin{split} u_t&=\varepsilon u_{xx}- w u^m,\\ w_t&=w_{xx}-\beta\left(\frac{wu_x}{u}\right)_x, \end{split} \end{equation} and the conditions on our parameters are now $0\leq \varepsilon \ll1$, $\beta+m>1$ and $0\leq m\leq 1$. \subsection{Travelling wave solutions} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \subfloat{\label{fig:tw1}\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{tw_pulsefront_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \subfloat{\label{fig:tw2}\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{tw_frontfront_SCALED.pdf}}} \caption{Travelling wave solutions to \eqref{EQ:KStw} for $\varepsilon=0$, $\beta=c=2$. Left panel: For $m=0$ the travelling wave solutions are a front and a pulse. Right panel: For $m=1$ the travelling wave solutions are a pair of travelling fronts.} \label{fig:tw_profiles} \end{figure} We make the change of variables $z=x-ct$, where $c>0$ is a constant, finite wave speed. In this moving frame, we have \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KStw} \begin{split} u_t&=\varepsilon u_{zz}+cu_z- w u^m,\\ w_t&=w_{zz}+cw_z-\beta\left(\frac{wu_z}{u}\right)_z. \end{split} \end{equation} Travelling wave solutions exist as stationary solutions to \eqref{EQ:KStw}, \emph{i.e.}\ $(u(z,t),w(z,t)) = (u(z),w(z))$ and satisfy \begin{equation} \label{EQ:KStw2} \begin{split} 0 &= \varepsilon u_{zz}+cu_z- w u^m,\\ 0 &= w_{zz}+cw_z-\beta\left(\frac{wu_z}{u}\right)_z\,. \end{split} \end{equation} When $0\leq m<1$, travelling wave solutions satisfy \eqref{EQ:KStw2} with $$\lim_{z\to-\infty}u(z)=\lim_{z\to-\infty}w(z)=0,\quad\lim_{z\to\infty}u(z)=u_r,\quad \lim_{z\to\infty}w(z)=0,$$ where $u(z)$ is a wavefront and $w(z)$ is a pulse \cite{nagai1991traveling, wang2013mathematics} (see the left panel of Figure \ref{fig:tw_profiles}). When $m=1$ travelling wave solutions satisfy \eqref{EQ:KStw2} with $$\lim_{z\to-\infty}u(z)=0,\quad \lim_{z\to-\infty}w(z)=\frac{c^2}{\beta}+\varepsilon\frac{c^2}{\beta^2} ,\quad\lim_{z\to\infty}u(z)=u_r,\quad \lim_{z\to\infty}w(z)=0,$$ where both $u(z)$ and $w(z)$ are now wavefronts \cite{wang2013mathematics} (see the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:tw_profiles}). Though explicit formulas for travelling wave solutions are known only for $\varepsilon = 0$ (\emph{i.e.}\ zero-diffusivity of the chemoattractant), the existence of travelling wave solutions in \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} has been shown for $0\leq m \leq 1$ and small enough values of the diffusivity of the chemoattractant (\emph{i.e.}\ $0 \leq \varepsilon \ll1$), see, for example, \cite{harley2014geometric,nagai1991traveling,wang2013mathematics} and the references therein. To leading order in $\varepsilon$, the profiles of travelling wave solutions are given by \begin{align} u(z)&=\left( u_r^{-1/\gamma}+\sigma e^{-c(z+z^)} \right)^{-\gamma}\,,\\ w(z)&=e^{-c(z+z^)}\left(u(z)\right)^\beta \numberthis\label{tw_profiles_0}\,,\\ \gamma&=\frac{1}{\beta+m-1}, \quad \sigma=\frac{\beta+m-1}{c^2}, \end{align} where $z^$ is a constant associated with the location of the centre of the travelling wave solution, and $u_r$ is the end state of the chemoattractant \cite{feltham2000travelling,nagai1991traveling,wang2013mathematics}. Because of translation invariance, we set $z_ = 0$, and because of scaling invariance in the nondimensionalisation of \eqref{EQ:KSalpha} to \eqref{EQ:KStildex}, we take $u_r = 1$ \cite{harley2014geometric}, in the remainder of this manuscript without loss of generality. Furthermore, from \cite{nagai1991traveling, wang2013mathematics} we have the following limits for the travelling wave solutions \begin{align} \lim_{z\to-\infty} \frac{u_z}{u}=\frac{c}{\beta+m-1},\quad\quad \lim_{z\to-\infty}\frac{w}{u^{1-m}}= \frac{c}{\beta+m-1}\left(\frac{c\varepsilon}{\beta+m-1}+c\right), \label{EQ:limits} \end{align} which will be useful for the stability analysis in the upcoming sections. \subsection{The spectral problem} To determine the stability of the travelling wave solutions $(u,w)$ of \eqref{EQ:KStw1}, we consider $U(z,t)=u(z)+p(z,t)$, and $W(z,t)=w(z)+q(z,t)$, where $p, q$ are perturbations in some appropriately chosen Banach space $\mathcal{X}$. Substituting $U$ and $W$ into \eqref{EQ:KStw} and considering only leading order terms for $p$ and $q$, we obtain the linear operator $\mathcal{L}$ defined by, \begin{align}&\begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix}_t=\mathcal{L} \begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix},\quad\quad \mathcal{L}:=\begin{pmatrix}\varepsilon\partial_{zz}+c\pder{}{z}{}- m w u^{m-1}& -u^m\\ \mathcal{L}_p &\mathcal{L}_q \end{pmatrix}\numberthis\label{EQ:Lop_gen} \end{align} where \begin{equation} \label{EQ:Lop_gen_pq} \begin{aligned} \mathcal{L}_p&:=\beta\left(\frac{w_zu_z }{u^2}+\frac{wu_{zz} }{u^2}-\frac{2wu_z^2}{u^3}\right)+\beta\left(\frac{2wu_z}{u^2}-\frac{w_z}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}-\frac{\beta w}{u}\pder{}{z}{2},\\ \mathcal{L}_q&:=\beta\left(\frac{u_z^2}{u^2}-\frac{u_{zz}}{u}\right)+\left(c-\frac{\beta u_z}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}+\pder{}{z}{2}. \end{aligned} \end{equation} The associated eigenvalue problem is obtained by taking perturbations of the form $\begin{pmatrix} p(z,t)\\q(z,t) \end{pmatrix}=e^{\lambda t}\begin{pmatrix} p(z)\\q(z) \end{pmatrix}$ where we now make the choice that $p,q \in \mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R})$. Here, $\mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R})$ is the usual Sobolev space of once (weakly) differentiable functions such that both the function and its first (weak) derivative (in $z$) are in $\mathbb{L}^2(\mathbb{R})$, \emph{i.e.}\ square integrable. Equation \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} becomes \begin{equation}\label{EQ:eigen} \begin{aligned} \mathcal{L} :\mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R})\times \mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R}) & \to \mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R})\times \mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R}) \\ \mathcal{L} \begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix} &= \lambda \begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned} \end{equation} \subsection{Spectral stability: Background and definitions} \label{SS:spectral_background} A travelling wave solution is said to be spectrally stable if the spectrum of the associated linear operator $\sigma(\mathcal{L})$ is contained in the closed left half plane except for the origin. The spectrum $\sigma(\mathcal{L})$ is defined as follows: \begin{definition}\label{DEFN:SPECTRUM} (\cite{sandstede2002stability} Definition 3.2) We say $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ is in the spectrum of a linear operator $\mathcal{L}$, denoted $\sigma(\mathcal{L})$, if the operator $\mathcal{L}-\lambda I$, where $I$ is the identity operator, is not invertible, \emph{i.e.}\ the inverse does not exist or is not bounded. \end{definition} The spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$ falls naturally into two parts, the essential spectrum, denoted $\sigma_{\rm ess}(\mathcal{L})$, and the point spectrum, denoted $\sigma_{\rm pt}(\mathcal{L})$ \cite{sandstede2000spectral}. The focus of this manuscript is on the essential spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$. We refer to \S\ref{SS:POINT} for a discussion on the point spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$. \subsubsection{The essential spectrum} We define an operator $\mathcal{T}(\lambda)$, equivalent to $\mathcal{L}-\lambda I$, by transforming the eigenvalue problem into a system of first order order ordinary differential equations (ODEs); \begin{align} \mathcal{T}(\lambda)\textbf{p}:=\left(\frac{d}{dz}-M(z,\lambda)\right)\textbf{p}=0. \label{EQ:Top_gen_setup} \end{align} The essential spectrum of an operator of the form in \eqref{EQ:Top_gen_setup} is found by analysing the asymptotic behaviour of the operator $\mathcal{T}(\lambda)$. We set $M_\pm(\lambda):= \displaystyle\lim_{z\rightarrow\pm\infty}M(z,\lambda)$ and define the asymptotic operator associated with $\mathcal{T}(\lambda)$ as the piecewise constant operator \begin{align} &\mathcal{T}_\infty(\lambda) := \begin{cases} \dfrac{d}{dz}-M_-(\lambda) &\mbox{if } z<0, \\[2.2mm] \dfrac{d}{dz}-M_+(\lambda) & \mbox{if } z\ge 0. \end{cases} \numberthis\label{EQ:Tinfty} \end{align} The essential spectrum is found by analysing the dimensions of the unstable, stable and centre subspaces of $M_\pm(\lambda)$. We define the Morse index $i(A)$ of a constant matrix $A$ as the dimension of its unstable subspace, see \cite{kapitula2013spectral} Definition 3.1.9. So, for an asymptotic operator of the form of \eqref{EQ:Tinfty}, we denote the Morse indices $i_\pm:=i(M_\pm(\lambda)):=\dim(\mathbb{E}^u_\pm),$ where $\mathbb{E}^u_\pm$ denotes the unstable subspace of $M_\pm(\lambda)$ respectively. \begin{definition} (\cite{kapitula2013spectral} Definition 3.1.11) \label{DEFN:EssSpect} We say $\lambda \in \sigma_{\rm ess}(\mathcal{T}_\infty)$, the essential spectrum of $\mathcal{T}_\infty$, if either \begin{enumerate} \item $M_+(\lambda)\text{ and }M_-(\lambda)$ are hyperbolic with a different number of unstable matrix eigenvalues, \emph{i.e.}\ $i_+-i_-\neq0$; or \item $M_+(\lambda) \text{ or } M_-(\lambda)$ has at least one purely imaginary matrix eigenvalue. \end{enumerate} \end{definition} The essential spectrum is conserved under relatively compact perturbations of an operator. This follows from Weyl's essential spectrum theorem, see for example \cite{kapitula2013spectral} Theorem 2.2.6 and \cite{katoperturbation} Theorem 5.35. In a variety of operators that arise from linearisation about travelling wave solutions, including the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw}, the operator $\mathcal{T}_\infty$ is a relatively compact perturbation of $\mathcal{T}$ (see for example \cite{kapitula2013spectral} Theorem 3.1.11 or \cite{henry1981geometric}) and so their essential spectra coincide. Due to the continuous dependence of $\mathcal{T}(\lambda)$ on $\lambda$ we have that the essential spectrum is bounded by the values of $\lambda$ where $M_+(\lambda) \text{ or } M_-(\lambda)$ has at least one purely imaginary matrix eigenvalue. These $\lambda$ values form curves in the complex plane referred to as the dispersion relations of the respective matrices. Generally, the region of the complex plane containing $\Re(\lambda)\gg1$ is not contained in the essential spectrum, \emph{i.e.}\ the region to the right of the essential spectrum has $i_+=i_-$. This condition is related to well-posedness of the eigenvalue problem \cite{kapitula2013spectral} (see also the left panel of Figure~\ref{FIG:spec}) and is satisfied for the Keller-Segel model discussed in this manuscript. \begin{remark} Following the terminology of \cite{kapitula2013spectral,sandstede2000spectral}, we refer to the matrix eigenvalues $\mu$ of $M_\pm(\lambda)$ as the spatial eigenvalues and to $\lambda$ as the temporal spectral parameter. Values $\lambda$ for which there is a solution to \eqref{EQ:eigen} are referred to as temporal eigenvalues. We note that temporal eigenvalues as defined here can be either in $\sigma_{\rm ess}$ or in $\sigma_{\rm pt}$. \end{remark} \subsubsection{The absolute spectrum} \label{SS:absolute} The absolute spectrum, denoted $\sigma_{\rm abs}$, is not spectrum in the usual sense as it does not arise from Definition \ref{DEFN:SPECTRUM}, see, for instance, \cite{kapitula2013spectral,sandstede2002stability,sandstede2000absolute}. However, it provides important stability information as it gives an indication of how far the essential spectrum can be shifted by allowing for perturbations in weighted spaces (instead of $\mathbb{H}^1$), see also Figure~\ref{FIG:spec}. If the absolute spectrum contains values in the right half plane the solutions are said to be {\it absolutely unstable} \cite{kapitula2013spectral,sandstede2000absolute}. The absolute spectrum of $\mathcal{T}_\infty$ (equivalently of $\mathcal{T}$) is defined as follows: \begin{definition}(\cite{sandstede2002stability} Definition 6.1)\label{DEFN:Abs_spect} Take an $N$ dimension asymptotic operator, $\mathcal{T}_\infty$, in the form of \eqref{EQ:Tinfty}, that is well-posed in the sense that $i_+=i_-=j$ for $\Re(\lambda)\gg1$. For $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ we rank the $N$ spatial eigenvalues $\mu_i^\pm$ of the asymptotic matrices $M_\pm$ by the magnitude of their real parts, \emph{i.e.} \begin{align} \Re(\mu^\pm_1(\lambda))\geq \Re(\mu ^\pm_2(\lambda))\geq\hdots\geq \Re(\mu^\pm_j(\lambda))\geq \Re(\mu^\pm_{j+1}(\lambda))\geq\hdots\geq \Re(\mu^\pm_{N}(\lambda)). \end{align} We define the sets \begin{align} \sigma_{\rm abs}^+=\left\lbrace \lambda\in\mathbb{C}\left\|\Re(\mu^+_j)= \Re(\mu^+_{j+1})\right.\right\rbrace\ \text{and}\ \sigma_{\rm abs}^-=\left\lbrace \lambda\in\mathbb{C}\left\|\Re(\mu^-_j)= \Re(\mu^-_{j+1})\right.\right\rbrace, \end{align} and the absolute spectrum of $\mathcal{T}_\infty$ (and of $\mathcal{T}$) is $\sigma_{\rm abs} :=\sigma_{\rm abs}^+\cup\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$. \end{definition} \begin{figure} \centering \scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{spatial_pic_NEW}} \caption{A schematic of the spatial eigenvalues of the asymptotic matrices $M_+(\lambda)$ (dots) and $M_-(\lambda)$ (crosses), with $M_\pm(\lambda)$ $3\times 3$ matrices, for three distinct values $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$. Left panel: for $\Re(\lambda) \gg 1$, $M_\pm(\lambda)$ are hyperbolic and $i_\pm=2$. Middle panel: $\lambda\in \sigma_{\rm ess}$ since $M_+(\lambda)$ has a purely imaginary spatial eigenvalue. However, there exists a weight, represented by the red line, such that $i_+=2$ in this weighted space. So, $\lambda \notin \sigma_{\rm ess}$ in the weighted space (and $\lambda\notin\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$). Right panel: $\Re(\mu_1^+)> \Re(\mu_2^+)=\Re(\mu_3^+)$, so $\lambda\in\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ (since $i_+=2$ for $\Re(\lambda) \gg 1$, see left panel). Observe that the order of the spatial eigenvalues persists under all weights, \emph{i.e.}\ the absolute spectrum does not change under weighting the space. However, there exists a unique weight, represented by the red line, such that $\lambda$ is in the boundary of the weighted essential spectrum. This image is adapted from Figure 3.6 of \cite{kapitula2013spectral}. } \label{FIG:spec} \end{figure} Due to the continuous dependence of $\mathcal{T}$ on $\lambda$, the Morse indices will only change upon crossing one of the dispersion relations and so the absolute spectrum will always be to the left of the rightmost boundary of the essential spectrum. That is, moving $\lambda$ from right to left in the complex plane we will first encounter a dispersion relation of either $M_\pm(\lambda)$ before (potentially) encountering absolute spectrum, see also Figure~\ref{FIG:spec}. \begin{remark} \label{R:GENABS} For an operator $\mathcal{T}$, with Morse indices $i_+=i_-=j$ in the region to the right of the essential spectrum, the set of $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ with $\Re(\mu^+_i(\lambda))= \Re(\mu^+_{i+1}(\lambda))$ or $\Re(\mu^-_i(\lambda))= \Re(\mu^-_{i+1}(\lambda))$ where $i\neq j$ is referred to as the {\it generalised absolute spectrum}. \end{remark} \subsubsection{Weighted spaces} \label{SS:Weighted_spaces} The presence of essential spectrum of a linear operator in the right half plane implies instability of the travelling wave solution in $\mathbb{H}^1$. However, for many travelling wave solutions that are widely considered `stable', the linearised operator associated with them has essential spectrum in the right half plane; one such example is the well-known Fisher-Kolmogorov-Petrovsky-Piscounov (F-KPP) equation. A resolution proposed for this apparent contradiction is to work in an appropriately weighted space \cite{sattinger1977weighted}. Weighting the space adjusts the types of perturbations allowed. Following \cite{kapitula2013spectral}, we define the weighted space $\mathbb{H}^1_\nu(\mathbb{R})$ by the norm \begin{align} \\|p\\|_{\mathbb{H}^1_\nu} =\\|e^{\nu z}p\\|_{\mathbb{H}^1}=\\|\tilde{p}\\|_{\mathbb{H}^1},\label{EQ:weighted_norm} \end{align} where $\tilde{p}:=e^{\nu z} p$. So, $p\in \mathbb{H}^1_\nu$ if and only if $\tilde{p}\in \mathbb{H}^1$. We define $\mathbb{L}^2_\nu$ similarly. The weight provides information as to whether the travelling wave solutions are more sensitive to perturbations in front of the wavefront (\emph{i.e.}\ as $z\to\infty$) or behind the wavefront (\emph{i.e.}\ as $z\to-\infty$). In other words, if $\nu>0$ then the perturbation $p(z,t)$ must decay at a rate faster than $e^{-\nu z}$ as $z\to\infty$, while it is allowed to grow exponentially at any rate less than $e^{-\nu z}$ as $z\to-\infty$. We can also consider a two-sided weight \begin{equation}\label{EQ:two_sided_weight}\nu=\begin{cases} \nu_- \mbox{ if} & z \leq0, \\ \nu_+\mbox{ if} & z>0,\end{cases} \end{equation} which forces the perturbation to decay exponentially in both directions. It turns out that we need to consider a two-sided weight \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight} in the case of the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw1}. A practical consequence of considering $\mathcal{L}$ on weighted function spaces is that the essential spectrum is moved. In particular, assume we have an operator $\mathcal{T}$ of the form of \eqref{EQ:Top_gen_setup} coming from the linearisation around a travelling wave solution and with asymptotic operator \eqref{EQ:Tinfty}. The operator $\mathcal{T}(\lambda)$ in the weighted space is given by $$\mathcal{T}(\lambda)\tilde{\textbf{p}}=\textbf{p}'-(M(z,\lambda)+\nu I)\textbf{p}=0,$$ with asymptotic matrices $M_\pm(\lambda)+\nu I$ \cite{kapitula2013spectral}. So, we need to consider the magnitude and sign of the real part of the spatial eigenvalues compared to the weight, \emph{i.e.}\ we consider $\mu-\nu$, the spatial eigenvalues of $M_\pm(\lambda)+\nu I$, instead of $\mu$, the spatial eigenvalues of $M_\pm(\lambda)$. See Figure~\ref{FIG:spec}. If the operator $\mathcal{T}$ has essential spectrum in the right half plane in the unweighted space, weights of interest are those that move this essential spectrum into the open left half plane. If such weights $\nu$ exist (and if there is no point spectrum in the right half plane), we say the travelling wave solution is spectrally stable in $\mathbb{H}^1_\nu(\mathbb{R})$ and it is referred to as being {\it transiently unstable} \cite{sandstede2000absolute, sherratt2014mathematical}. Since the order of the spatial eigenvalues is not changed, the absolute spectrum is unaffected by weighting the function space and the presence of absolute spectrum in the right half plane indicates an {\it absolute instability}. In particular, in the case of an absolute instability no weights can be found that move the essential spectrum into the left half plane since the absolute spectrum is to the left of the rightmost boundary of the essential spectrum. \subsection{Main results} \label{SS:theorem} In this section, we state the main results of this manuscript related to the location of the absolute spectrum of travelling wave solutions supported by \eqref{EQ:KStw1}. \begin{thm} \label{TH:MAIN1} Assume that $c>0, 0 \leq m < 1$ and $\beta> 1-m$. Let $\beta_{\rm crit}$ be the unique real root larger than one of \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} f(\beta) =\ &310 \beta^{10} - 3234 \beta^9 + 17112 \beta^8 - 49101 \beta^7 + 76180 \beta^6 - 58398 \beta^5 \\ & + 10056 \beta^4+ 15040 \beta^3 - 9680 \beta^2 + 1716 \beta -4. \label{EQ:10th_order_poly} \end{aligned} \end{equation} Then, there exists an $\varepsilon_0>0$ such that for all $0\leq \varepsilon <\varepsilon_0$ the absolute spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$ given in \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} is fully contained in the left half plane for all $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$, with $\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$ to leading order given by $\beta_{\rm crit}^m := \beta_{\rm crit}(1-m)$. Crucially, at $\beta=\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$ the absolute spectrum crosses into the right half plane off of the real axis with increasing $\beta$. For $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$ the absolute spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} contains values in the right half plane and the travelling wave solutions of \eqref{EQ:KStw1} are thus absolutely unstable. For $m=1$, the absolute spectrum of $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} includes the origin for all parameter values. \end{thm} The fact that the polynomial $f$ \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly} has only one real root larger than one follows directly from Sturm's Theorem, see, for instance, Theorem 6.3d in \cite{henrici1978applied}. In particular, $\beta_{\rm crit} \approx 1.6195$. Moreover, for every $0\leq m<1$ and $1<\beta<\beta_{{\rm crit}}^m(\varepsilon)$ there exists a range of two-sided weights $\nu$ \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight} such that weighted essential spectrum is contained in the open left half plane, see Remark~\ref{REM:weighted_dispersion_range} and Remark~\ref{REM:weighted_dispersion_range2}. Also, observe that the above leading order results are independent of the wave speed $c$, see Remark~\ref{REM:scaling_invariance_c}. So, we fully classify the (in)stabilities coming from the weighted essential spectrum of travelling wave solutions of \eqref{EQ:KStw1} for the complete parameter range for which travelling wave solutions exist, \emph{i.e.}\ for $0\leq m \leq 1$ and $1-m<\beta$ \cite{schwetlick2003traveling,wang2013mathematics}. In essence, we obtain the complete picture of the essential spectrum, extending the initial results obtained in \cite{nagai1991traveling,wang2013mathematics}. As we are primarily concerned with the absolute spectrum, we define the {\it ideal weight} as the weight such that the weighted dispersion relations intersect the rightmost points of the absolute spectrum. \begin{definition}\label{DEFN:ideal_weight} The ideal weight for the operator \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} is the unique two-sided weight such that the dispersion relations of $M_\pm (\lambda)+\nu_\pm I$ intersect the leading edges of the $\sigma_{\rm abs}^\pm$ respectively. \end{definition} This definition is motivated by the fact that as $\beta$ increases, the ideally weighted essential spectrum and the absolute spectrum cross into the right half plane simultaneously. \section{Constant consumption and zero diffusivity of the chemoattractant} \label{S:MZERO} For clarity of presentation, we first prove Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1} in the case of constant consumption ($m=0$) and zero diffusivity of the chemoattractant ($\varepsilon=0$). We show that the absolute spectrum is contained in the left half plane when $1<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$ (with $\beta_{\rm crit}$ the root of \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly}), while it contains values in the right half plane when $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}$. Consequently, when $1<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$, there exists a two-sided weight $\nu$ \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight} such that the essential spectrum is contained in the open left half plane in the ideally weighted space, while all travelling wave solutions are absolutely unstable when $\beta\geq\beta_{\rm crit}$. \subsection{Set-up} \label{SS:SETUP2} In the $\varepsilon=m=0$ case, the eigenvalue problem \eqref{EQ:eigen} reduces to \begin{align} \mathcal{L}\begin{pmatrix}p\\ q \end{pmatrix}=\lambda\begin{pmatrix}p\\ q \end{pmatrix},\quad\text{with}\quad \mathcal{L}&=\begin{pmatrix}c\pder{}{z}{}& -1\\ \mathcal{L}_p &\mathcal{L}_q \end{pmatrix}, \end{align} where $\mathcal{L}_p$ and $\mathcal{L}_q$ are given by \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen_pq}, restated here for convenience, \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \mathcal{L}_p&:=\beta\left(\frac{w_z u_z }{u^2}+\frac{wu_{zz} }{u^2}-\frac{2wu_z^2}{u^3}\right)+\beta\left(\frac{2wu_z}{u^2}-\frac{w_z}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}-\frac{\beta w}{u}\pder{}{z}{2},\\ \mathcal{L}_q&:=\beta\left(\frac{u_z^2}{u^2}-\frac{u_{zz}}{u}\right)+\left(c-\frac{\beta u_z}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}+\pder{}{z}{2}. \end{align} \end{subequations} Here $(u,w)$ are the (explicit) travelling wave solutions given in \eqref{tw_profiles_0}. We define the operator $\mathcal{T}_0(\lambda)$, equivalent to $\mathcal{L}-\lambda I$, by setting $s=q_z$. The operator $\mathcal{T}_0(\lambda)$, with $p,q\in \mathbb{H}^1(\mathbb{R})$ and $s\in \mathbb{L}^2(\mathbb{R})$, is given by \begin{align} &\mathcal{T}_0(\lambda)\begin{pmatrix} p\\q\\s \end{pmatrix}:=\begin{pmatrix} p\\q\\s \end{pmatrix}'-M_0(z,\lambda)\begin{pmatrix} p\\q\\s \end{pmatrix}=0, &&M_0(z,\lambda):=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{\lambda }{c} & \frac{1}{c} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ \mathcal{A}_0 & \mathcal{B}_0 & \mathcal{C}_0 \end{pmatrix},\numberthis\label{EQ:T0} \end{align} with \begin{align} \mathcal{A}_0&=\beta\left(\frac{2wu_{z}^2}{u^3}-\frac{w_zu_{z} }{u^2}-\frac{wu_{zz} }{u^2}\right)+\frac{\lambda \beta}{c}\left(\frac{w_z}{u}-\frac{2wu_{z}}{u^2}\right)+\frac{\lambda^2\beta w}{c^2 u},\\ \mathcal{B}_0&=\beta\left(\frac{u_{zz}}{u}-\frac{u_{z}^2}{u^2}\right)+\frac{\beta}{c}\left(\frac{w_z}{u}-\frac{2wu_{z}}{u^2}\right)+\frac{\lambda\beta}{c^2}\left(\frac{w}{u}\right)+\lambda,\\ \mathcal{C}_0&=\frac{\beta u_{z}}{u}-c+\frac{\beta}{c}\frac{w}{u}. \end{align} \subsection{Essential spectrum} \label{SS:ESS} We first locate the essential spectrum in the unweighted function space. We calculate the dispersion relations of the asymptotic matrices as these act as the boundaries of the essential spectrum. From \eqref{EQ:KStw2}, with $\varepsilon=0$, we have $u_z=w/c$ and by integrating the second equation we get $w_z=-cw+\beta\left(wu_z/u\right)$ (where the integration constant is zero \cite{harley2014geometric,keller1971traveling}). Thus, all terms of $M_0$ can be written in terms of $w/u$. From \eqref{EQ:limits}, or directly from the travelling wave profiles \eqref{tw_profiles_0}, we have, \begin{align} \lim_{z\to\infty} \frac{w}{u}=0,\quad \lim_{z\to-\infty} \frac{w}{u}=\frac{c^2}{\beta-1} \end{align} Using these facts, the limits of $\mathcal{A}_0$, $\mathcal{B}_0$ and $\mathcal{C}_0$ as $z\rightarrow\pm\infty$, denoted $\mathcal{A}_{0}^{\pm}$, $\mathcal{B}_{0}^{\pm}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{0}^{\pm}$, are straightforward to compute and are, respectively, given by \begin{align} \mathcal{A}_{0}^+&=0, & \mathcal{A}_{0}^-&=\frac{\beta \lambda \left((\beta -1) \lambda -c^2\right)}{(\beta -1)^2}, \\ \mathcal{B}_{0}^+&=\lambda, & \mathcal{B}_{0}^-&= \frac{\left(2\beta ^2-3 \beta +1\right) \lambda -c^2 \beta }{(\beta -1)^2}, \\ \mathcal{C}_{0}^+&= -c,& \mathcal{C}_{0}^-&= \frac{c (\beta +1)}{\beta -1}. \end{align} We also define the asymptotic matrices, \begin{align} M_0^\pm(\lambda):=\displaystyle\lim_{z\rightarrow\pm\infty}M_0(z,\lambda)=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{\lambda }{c} & \frac{1}{c} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ \mathcal{A}_0^\pm & \mathcal{B}_0^\pm & \mathcal{C}_0^\pm \end{pmatrix}. \end{align} The dispersion relations of $M_0^+$ are \begin{align} &\lambda=-k^2+ick,\quad\text{and}\quad\lambda=ick, \label{EQ:dispersion_plus} \end{align} where $k\in\mathbb{R}$ and where $\mu=ik$ is a purely imaginary spatial eigenvalue of $M_0^+$. Note that the imaginary axis is one of the dispersion relations, while the other is a parabola opening to the left half plan with vertex at the origin. The dispersion relations of $M_0^-$ are given by \begin{align} \lambda ^2+\left(k^2-\frac{i (\beta -2) c k}{\beta -1}\right)\lambda+\frac{(\beta +1) c^2 k^2}{\beta -1}+i c k\left(\frac{ \beta c^2}{(\beta -1)^2}- k^2\right)=0, \label{EQ:dispersion_minus} \end{align} where $k\in\mathbb{R}$ and where $\mu=ik$ is a purely imaginary spatial eigenvalue of $M_0^-$. Equation \eqref{EQ:dispersion_minus} is quadratic in the temporal parameter $\lambda$ and cubic in the parameter $k$ (and thus in the spatial eigenvalue). \begin{figure \centering \scalebox{1}{ \includegraphics{essential_spectrum_SCALED}} \caption{The essential spectrum $\sigma_{\rm ess}$ of the operator $\mathcal{L}$ about the travelling wave solutions $\left(u, w\right)$ \eqref{tw_profiles_0} for $\varepsilon=m=0$ and $\beta=c=2$. The solid curves are the dispersion relations of $M_0^-$, while the dashed curves are the dispersion relations of $M_0^+$. The shaded region is $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that $i_+\neq i_-$ and the essential spectrum is the union of the shaded region and the dispersion relations. Observe that the entire imaginary axis is included in the essential spectrum. The general shape of the unweighted essential spectrum is qualitatively similar for all values $\beta>1$, while changing the wave speed $c$ only affects the scaling of the image, see Remark \ref{REM:scaling_invariance_c}. Note this figure is a slight correction to Figure 6 from \cite{harley2015numerical}.}\label{FIG:ess_spect} \end{figure} The boundary of the essential spectrum is traced out by the solutions $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$, parametrised by $k$, from \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus} and \eqref{EQ:dispersion_minus}. We label the connected set containing $\Re(\lambda)\gg1$ as $\Omega_1$, see Figure \ref{FIG:ess_spect}. For $\lambda\in\Omega_1$, we have that the dimensions of the unstable subspaces of $M_0^\pm$ are both two, \emph{i.e.}\ $i_\pm=2$. There are two other regions in the complex plane where $i_+=i_-$. We denote these regions $\Omega_2$ and $\Omega_3$, see Figure \ref{FIG:ess_spect}. The remaining part of the complex plane is the essential spectrum. It is clear from Figure \ref{FIG:ess_spect} that part of the essential spectrum is in the right half plane. This agrees with previous results; by considering \eqref{EQ:dispersion_minus} for small $\|k\|$ values it was shown all travelling wave solutions for $\varepsilon=m=0$ are unstable in the unweighted space \cite{nagai1991traveling}. \subsection{The weighted essential spectrum and the absolute spectrum} \label{S:Weights_eps_zero_m_zero} To further investigate the stability properties of the travelling wave solutions, we consider the spectrum in various two-sided weighted spaces, locate the absolute spectrum and identify the ideal weight. We substitute $\tilde{\textbf{p}}=e^{\nu z} \textbf{p}$, where $\textbf{p}=(p,q,s)^T$, into \eqref{EQ:T0} and consider the weighted space $\mathbb{H}^1_\nu$ \eqref{EQ:weighted_norm} with $\nu$ a two-sided weight \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight}. This substitution transforms \eqref{EQ:T0} into $$\mathcal{T}_0(\lambda)\tilde{\textbf{p}}=\textbf{p}'-(M_0(z,\lambda)+\nu I)\textbf{p}=0,$$ with $M_0(z,\lambda)$ as given in \eqref{EQ:T0}. The essential spectrum in the weighted space is bounded by the dispersion relations of the asymptotic matrices $M_0^\pm+\nu_\pm I$. \subsubsection{The weighted dispersion relations and absolute spectrum from $M_0^+$} First, we consider the dispersion relations of $M_0^+(\lambda)+\nu_+ I$; \begin{align} \lambda=-c \nu_+ +i c k,\quad \text{and}\quad \lambda=-k^2-\nu_+(c-\nu_+)+i (c k-2 k \nu_+ ).\numberthis\label{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} \end{align} For $\nu_+\in (0,c)$ the real part of the dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} have strictly negative real parts and the furthest left these relations can be shifted is for the ideal weight $\nu_+^=c/2$. Under this weight, the dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} reduce to \begin{align} \lambda=-\frac{c^2}{2} +i c k,\quad \text{and}\quad \lambda=-\frac{c^2}{4}-k^2.\label{EQ:dispersion_plus_max_weighted} \end{align} Next, we calculate $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$, the subset of the absolute spectrum arising from the spatial eigenvalues for $z\to\infty$. Since $i_+=2=i_-$ for $\Re(\lambda) \gg1$, we search for $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that the spatial eigenvalues with the second and third largest real part have the same real part (see Definition \ref{DEFN:Abs_spect}). The spatial eigenvalues of $M_0^+$ are \begin{align} \mu_{1}^+=\frac{\lambda}{c},\quad\mu_{2}^+=\frac{-c+\sqrt{c^2+4\lambda}}{2}, \quad\mu_3^+=\frac{-c-\sqrt{c^2+4\lambda}}{2}.\label{EQ:spatial_eigenvalues_plus} \end{align} For $\Re(\lambda)\geq-\frac{c^2}{2}$, we have that $\Re(\mu^+_1)\geq\Re(\mu^+_2)\geq \Re(\mu^+_3)$. So, the absolute spectrum in this region is given by $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that $\Re(\mu^+_2)=\Re(\mu^+_3)$. That is, $\left\lbrace\lambda\in\mathbb{R}\left\|-\frac{c^2}{2}\leq\lambda\leq\frac{-c^2}{4}\right.\right\rbrace$. For $\Re(\lambda)<-\frac{c^2}{2}$, we have that $\mu_2^+$ has the largest real part and the absolute spectrum in this region is thus given by $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that $\Re(\mu_1)=\Re(\mu_3)$. That is, $\left\lbrace \lambda=\lambda_1+i\lambda_2,\ \lambda_1,\lambda_2\in\mathbb{R}\left\| \lambda_1<-\frac{c^2}{2};\ \lambda_2=\pm\lambda_1\left(1+\frac{2 \lambda_1}{c^2}\right)\right. \right\rbrace$. So, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ is given by \begin{equation}\label{EQ:abs_plus_m0} \begin{aligned} \sigma_{\rm abs}^{+}&=\left\lbrace\lambda\in\mathbb{R}\left\|-\frac{c^2}{2}\leq\lambda\leq\frac{-c^2}{4}\right.\right\rbrace\cup\\ &\left\lbrace \lambda=\lambda_1+i\lambda_2,\ \lambda_1,\lambda_2\in\mathbb{R}\left\| \lambda_1<-\frac{c^2}{2};\ \lambda_2=\pm\lambda_1\left(1+\frac{2 \lambda_1}{c^2}\right)\right. \right\rbrace. \end{aligned} \end{equation} Obviously, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ is fully contained in the left half plane for all $c>0$. Consequently, no absolute instabilities arise from $z\to\infty$. See Figure \ref{fig:absplus} for a plot of $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ \eqref{EQ:abs_plus_m0} and the ideally weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_max_weighted} and the unweighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus} (or \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} with $\nu_+=0$). \begin{figure \centering \scalebox{.9}{\subfloat{\label{fig:a}\includegraphics[trim={.6cm 0 0 0}, clip]{abs_plus_SCALED}}}\hspace{.1cm} \scalebox{.9}{\subfloat{\label{fig:b}\includegraphics[trim={.4cm 0 0 0}, clip]{abs_plus_weighted_SCALED}}} \caption{The subset of the absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ (red) and the dispersion relations of $M_0^++\nu_+ I$ (black). Left panel: the dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} in the unweighted space, \emph{i.e.}\ $\nu_+=0$. The imaginary axis is one of the dispersion relations. Right panel: the ideally weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_max_weighted}, \emph{i.e.}\ $\nu_+^=c/2$. Note that the parabola from the left panel collapses to the real line under the ideal weight.} \label{fig:absplus} \end{figure} \subsubsection{The weighted dispersion relations and absolute spectrum from $M_0^-$} The characteristic equation of $M_0^-$ is given by \begin{align} \mu^3-\mu^2\left(\frac{(\beta +1) c}{\beta -1}+\frac{\lambda }{c}\right)+\mu\left(\frac{(2-\beta ) \lambda }{\beta -1}+\frac{\beta c^2}{(\beta -1)^2}\right)+\frac{\lambda ^2}{c}=0,\numberthis \label{EQ:char_poly_minus} \end{align} and the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ are implicitly given by \begin{equation}\label{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} \begin{aligned} &\lambda^2+\left(\frac{c(2-\beta ) (i k-\nu_-)}{\beta -1}-(i k-\nu_-)^2\right)\lambda+\frac{\beta c^3 (i k-\nu_-)}{(\beta -1)^2}\\ &\qquad-\frac{(\beta +1) c^2 (i k-\nu_-)^2}{\beta -1}+ c(i k-\nu_-)^3=0. \end{aligned} \end{equation} For a fixed $\beta$ and $c$ and for various weights $\nu_-$, we can plot the weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus}, see, for example, Figure \ref{FIG:various_weighted_minus}. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \scalebox{1}{ \includegraphics{range_weights_minus_SCALED_UPDATED.pdf}} \caption{ The subset of the absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ (red) and the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ (black) for $\beta=c=2$ and various weights $\nu_-$. The dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} in the unweighted space (left panel), a weighted space with $\nu_-=-1/4$ (middle panel), and a weighted space with $\nu_-=-3/2$ (right panel). As $\nu_-$ is further decreased, the dispersion relations move further into the right half plane. For $\nu_->0$, the leading edge of the weighted dispersion relation also moves further into the right half plane. } \label{FIG:various_weighted_minus} \end{center} \end{figure} Observe that the weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} have self-intersections for some $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ over a large range of weights $\nu_-$, including $\nu_-=0$ (related to the unweighted space). This self-intersection corresponds to two complex roots of the characteristic polynomial \eqref{EQ:char_poly_minus} of the form $\mu_{1,2}^-=-\nu_-+ik_{1,2}$ with $k_{1,2}\in\mathbb{R}$. Thus, we have $\Re(\mu_1^-)=\Re(\mu_2^-)$, while the third spatial eigenvalue $\mu_3^-$ has a larger real part. Consequently, the $\lambda$ value at the self-intersection is part of the absolute spectrum. There exists some weight $\nu_-^<0$ such that the self-intersection vanishes for $\nu_-<\nu_-^$, see, for instance, the right panel of Figure~\ref{FIG:various_weighted_minus}. For $\nu_-=\nu_-^$, the self-intersection forms a cusp of the weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} and is thus the ideal weight, see Figure~\ref{FIG:critical_weight}. For $\nu_->\nu_-^$, the self-intersections trace out the subset of the absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$. This allows us to directly locate $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ using a find root procedure on the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_-I$. Values $\lambda\in\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ such that there is a second order root (in $\mu$) of the characteristic polynomial \eqref{EQ:char_poly_minus} are referred to as {\it branch points} $\lambda_{br}$, see Remark \ref{REM:branch_points} and Figure~\ref{FIG:critical_weight}. For the Keller-Segel model, the cusp of the ideally weighted dispersion relations corresponds to the second order root and so the branch points are the rightmost points of $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$, see Figure~\ref{FIG:critical_weight}. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \scalebox{.9}{\includegraphics[trim={0 .5cm 0 0}, clip]{critical_weight_SCALED_UPDATED.pdf}} \caption{ The subset of the absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ (red) and the ideally weighted dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_-^* I$ (black) for $\beta=c=2$, where the ideal weight $\nu_-^\approx-0.73$. The weighted dispersion relations form cusps whose tips coincide with the leading edge of the absolute spectrum, \emph{i.e.}\ the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ \edit{(see Remark \ref{REM:branch_points})}. Since the absolute spectrum, and thus the essential spectrum, enter into the right half plane, the travelling wave solution is absolutely unstable for this parameter set.} \label{FIG:critical_weight} \end{center} \end{figure} To locate the branch points $\lambda_{br}$, we treat the characteristic polynomial \eqref{EQ:char_poly_minus} as a cubic polynomial in $\mu$ and determine the second order roots. This boils down to finding $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that the discriminant of \eqref{EQ:char_poly_minus} is zero. That is, we solve \begin{align} &\lambda^5+\frac{(2 \beta -1)^2 c^2 \lambda ^4}{4 (\beta -1)^2}+\frac{\beta(18 \beta^2 -37\beta+20) c^4 \lambda ^3}{2 (\beta -1)^3}+\frac{\beta(5 \beta^3 -28\beta^2+50\beta-26) c^6 \lambda ^2}{4 (\beta -1)^4}\\ &\quad\quad-\frac{\beta(\beta^2 -6\beta +2 ) c^8 \lambda }{2 (\beta -1)^4}+\frac{\beta ^2 c^{10}}{4 (\beta -1)^4}=0. \numberthis \label{EQ:discriminant} \end{align} We look for roots of \eqref{EQ:discriminant} that correspond to the two smallest spatial eigenvalues having the same real part, \emph{i.e.}\ the values $\lambda\in\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ that solve \eqref{EQ:discriminant}. For given parameters, we find a pair of complex conjugate solutions to \eqref{EQ:discriminant} that are in the absolute spectrum; these solutions are the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ that form the leading edge of $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$. Note that the other three roots of \eqref{EQ:discriminant} are part of the generalised absolute spectrum, see Remark~\ref{R:GENABS}. Locating the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ also allows us to compute the ideal weight $\nu_-^$, since $\nu_-^$ corresponds to the negative of the real part of the second order root $\mu$ evaluated at the branch point $\lambda_{br}^\pm$. That is, \begin{align} \nu_-^:=-min\lbrace\Re(\mu_i(\lambda_{br})),\ i=1,2,3\rbrace.\label{EQ:ideal_weight_definition} \end{align} We have outlined how to locate the full essential and absolute spectrum, as well as how to compute the ideal weights, for a given parameter set. See, for example, Figures \ref{FIG:allspect} and \ref{FIG:allspect_stable}. For the parameter values used in Figure \ref{FIG:allspect}, the ideally weighted essential spectrum and absolute spectrum contain values in the right half plane and the travelling wave solution is thus absolutely unstable. In contrast, for the parameter values used in Figure \ref{FIG:allspect_stable}, there exists a range of weights such that the essential spectrum (in the weighted space) is in the open left half plane and the travelling wave solution is potentially only transiently unstable. Observe that $M_0^+$ requires positive weights $\nu_+$ to weigh its dispersion relations into the open left half plane, while $M_0^-$ requires negative weights $\nu_-$, necessitating the two-sided weight \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight}. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspecta}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspectb}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_weighted_SCALED.pdf}}} \caption{The essential and absolute spectrum in the unweighted space (left panel) and in the ideally weighted space (right panel) for $\beta=c=2$, $\varepsilon=0$ and $m=0$, where the ideal weight is $\nu_-^\approx -0.73$ and $\nu_+^=c/2=1$. The dispersion relations of $M_0^++\nu_+I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} are shown as black dashed lines, while those of $M_0^-+\nu_-I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} are shown as black solid lines, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ is shown as red dashed lines and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ as red solid lines. The shaded regions are the interior of the (weighted) essential spectrum. Note the ideally weighted essential spectrum still contains values in the right half plane and the travelling wave solutions are thus absolutely unstable.} \label{FIG:allspect} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspect_stablea1}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_stable_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspect_stableb2}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_stable_weighted_SCALED.pdf}}} \caption{ The essential and absolute spectrum in the unweighted space (left panel) and in the ideally weighted space (right panel) for $\beta=1.3<\beta_{\rm crit}$ \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly}, $c=2$, $\varepsilon=0$ and $m=0$, where the ideal weight is $\nu_-^\approx -2.445$ and $\nu_+^=c/2=1$. The dispersion relations of $M_0^++\nu_+I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} are shown as black dashed lines, while those of $M_0^-+\nu_-I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} are shown as black solid lines, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ is shown as red dashed lines and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ as red solid lines. The shaded regions are the interior of the (weighted) essential spectrum. Note the ideally weighted essential spectrum is fully contained in the left half plane.} \label{FIG:allspect_stable} \end{figure} \begin{remark}\label{REM:branch_points} We refer to the value $\lambda$ such that $\mu(\lambda)$ is a second order root of \eqref{EQ:char_poly_minus} and $\lambda\in\sigma_{\rm abs}$ as a {\it branch point} because it is a branch point of the Evans function, an analytic tool used to locate the point spectrum. In general, not all spatial eigenvalues with algebraic multiplicity greater than one are contained in the absolute spectrum, they also occur in the generalised absolute spectrum. It is also not always the case that the leading edge of the absolute spectrum is a branch point, see for example \cite{sandstede2000absolute}. However, for the Keller-Segel model the leading edge of the sets $\sigma_{\rm abs}^\pm$ do coincide with branch points. See \S\ref{SS:POINT} for further discussion of the Evans function and point spectrum. \end{remark} \subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{TH:MAIN1} for $\varepsilon=m=0$} \label{SS:PROOF1} From Figures \ref{FIG:allspect} and \ref{FIG:allspect_stable} it is clear that there is a transition from absolute spectrum fully contained in the left half plane to absolute spectrum entering into the right half plane. Consequently, there must be a critical set of parameters such that the branch point $\lambda_{br}$ solving \eqref{EQ:discriminant} is purely imaginary. So, we set $\lambda_{br}:= i\lambda$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, and equate the real and imaginary parts of \eqref{EQ:discriminant} to zero. This gives \begin{align} \lambda ^4-\frac{\beta \left(5 \beta ^3-28 \beta ^2+50 \beta -26\right) c^4 \lambda^2}{(\beta -1)^2 (2 \beta -1)^2}+\frac{\beta ^2 c^8}{(\beta -1)^2 (2 \beta -1)^2}&=0,\numberthis\label{EQ:br_cond1} \\ \lambda\left(\lambda^4-\frac{\beta \left(18 \beta ^2-37 \beta +20\right) c^4 \lambda ^2}{2 (\beta -1)^3} -\frac{\beta \left(\beta ^2-6 \beta +2\right) c^8}{2 (\beta -1)^4}\right)&=0. \numberthis\label{EQ:br_cond2} \end{align} Since $\lambda=0$ is not a solution of \eqref{EQ:br_cond1}, the transition occurs away from the real axis, \emph{i.e.}\ the branch points form a complex \edit{conjugate} pair. Moreover, we can divide out $\lambda$ from \eqref{EQ:br_cond2} and the roots of \eqref{EQ:br_cond2} are given by $\lambda = \pm \sqrt{\Lambda_{1,2}}$ with \begin{align} \Lambda_{1,2}&=\frac{c^4\left(\beta \left(18 \beta ^2-37 \beta +20\right)\pm \sqrt{\Delta} \right)}{4 (\beta -1)^3}, \label{eqn_L2} \end{align} where \begin{align} \Delta&:=\beta \left(324 \beta ^5-1324 \beta ^4+2025 \beta ^3-1360 \beta ^2+320 \beta +16\right). \end{align} It follows from Sturm's Theorem, see, for instance, Theorem 6.3d in \cite{henrici1978applied}, that $\Delta>0$ for all $\beta>1$, \emph{i.e.}\ $\Lambda_{1,2}$ are real-valued for $\beta>1$. Substituting these roots into \eqref{EQ:br_cond1} gives \begin{align} &\frac{\beta c^8}{8 (\beta -1)^4}\Big(1116 \beta ^7-5 050 \beta ^6+8422 \beta ^5-5440 \beta ^4-455 \beta ^3 \\ &\left.+2104 \beta ^2 -704 \beta+8\pm\left(62 \beta ^4-154 \beta ^3+90 \beta ^2+35 \beta -32\right) \sqrt{\Delta}\right)=0. \end{align} Since $\beta>1$ and $c>0$, this is equivalent to \begin{equation} \begin{split} &\left(1116 \beta ^7-5 050 \beta ^6+8422 \beta ^5-5440 \beta ^4-455 \beta ^3 +2104 \beta ^2 -704 \beta+8\right)\\ &=\pm\left(-62 \beta ^4+154 \beta ^3-90 \beta ^2-35 \beta +32\right)\sqrt{ \Delta},\label{EQ:beta_crit_before_squaring} \end{split} \end{equation} which is independent of $c$, see Remark \ref{REM:scaling_invariance_c}. Squaring \eqref{EQ:beta_crit_before_squaring} gives \begin{align} 16(\beta-1)^3f(\beta)&=16(\beta-1)^3\left(310 \beta ^{10}-3234 \beta ^9+17112 \beta ^8-49101 \beta ^7+76180 \beta ^6\right.\\ &\quad\left.-58398 \beta ^5+10056 \beta ^4+15040 \beta ^3-9680 \beta ^2+1716 \beta -4\right)\\ &=0, \end{align} where $f(\beta)$ is the same polynomial as the polynomial \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly} of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1}. So, the purely imaginary branch points indicating the transition to absolute instability are determined by the root $\beta_{\rm crit}$. In particular, $\beta_{\rm crit}\approx1.6195$ solves \eqref{EQ:br_cond1} and \eqref{EQ:br_cond2} with $\lambda_{br}^\pm= \pm i \sqrt{\Lambda_1(\beta_{\rm crit})}\approx\pm 1.0883\,c^2\,i$. As there is only one root of \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly} satisfying the condition $\beta>1$, the absolute spectrum is fully contained in the open left half plane for $1<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$, \emph{i.e.}\ the transition into the right half plane only happens for $\beta=\beta_{\rm crit}$. Since the absolute spectrum always contains values in the right half plane for $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}$, all travelling wave solutions with $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}$ are absolutely unstable. This concludes the proof of Theorem~\ref{TH:MAIN1} for $\varepsilon=m=0$. \begin{remark}\label{REM:weighted_dispersion_range} It is possible for the absolute spectrum of an operator to be contained in the open left half plane, yet the weighted essential spectrum contains values in the right half plane for all weights. This is referred to as an {\it essential instability}, see \cite{sandstede2000absolute} for examples of essential instabilities. We now show that for a range of weights, the weighted dispersion relations, and thus the weighted essential spectrum, do not cross into the right half plane for $1< \beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$, \emph{i.e.}\ travelling wave solutions in the Keller-Segel model do not exhibit essential instabilities. The ideally weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_max_weighted} and absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ \eqref{EQ:abs_plus_m0} associated with $M_0^+$ are contained in the open left half plane for $1< \beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$. So, what remains to prove is that there exists a range of weights such that the weighted dispersion relations of $M_0^-$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} are fully contained in the open left half plane for $1< \beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$. The characteristic polynomial of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} is quadratic in $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$. So, we can explicitly solve for $\lambda_{1,2}$ and extract the real parts of the solutions. It follows that \begin{align} \label{EQ:limit22} &\lim_{\|k\|\to\infty} \Re(\lambda_1)=-c\left(\frac{c\beta }{\beta -1}+\nu_-\right),\qquad \lim_{\|k\|\to\infty} \Re(\lambda_2)=-\infty. \end{align} That is, the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ approach vertical lines in the complex plane. Requiring that $\Re(\lambda_1)<0$ as $\|k\|\to\infty$ gives a lower bound on admissible weights $\nu_->-\frac{c\beta}{\beta-1}$ (note that it turns out that this lower bound is not sharp, see Figure~\ref{FIG:range_permissable}). Next, we compute the values $\lambda$ where the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} cross the imaginary axis. Therefore, we assume that $\lambda$ is purely imaginary and solve \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus}. This way, we eliminate the parameter $k$ and obtain a cubic polynomial equation in $\Lambda:=\Im(\lambda)^2$ (with unknowns $\beta, c$ and $\nu_-$). So, non-negative real roots of this polynomial in $\Lambda$ correspond to the intersections of the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ with the imaginary axis. In the unweighted case $\nu_-=0$ it has one positive root and a root in the origin, see also the left panels of Figure~\ref{FIG:allspect} and \ref{FIG:allspect_stable}. For decreasing $\nu_-$, these two roots approach each other and collide at $\nu_{\rm max}=\nu_{\rm max}(\beta, c)$ (while the third root stays negative). The polynomial has no non-negative real roots if we further decrease $\nu_-$. These weights correspond to the case where the weighted dispersion relations do not intersect the imaginary axis and are thus fully contained in the open left half plane. At $\nu_{\rm min}=\nu_{\rm min}(\beta, c)$ two positive roots reappear (while the third root is still negative) and these positive roots persist upon further decreasing $\nu_-$. In other words, for weights $\nu_- \in(\nu_{\rm min},\nu_{\rm max})$ the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} never intersect the imaginary axis and are fully contained in the open left half plane. The values $\nu_{\rm min}$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$ are given as the roots of an $11^{th}$ order polynomial in $\nu_-$ and the range of admissible weights shrinks to a point as $\beta\uparrow\beta_{\rm crit}$, see Figure \ref{FIG:range_permissable}. In particular, one rediscovers $f$ \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly} by equating the derivative of this $11^{th}$ order polynomial to zero. This is equivalent to finding $\beta$ such that $\nu_{\rm min}=\nu_{\rm max}$. Obtaining the range of admissible weights is straightforward for given values of $\beta$ and $c$, but complicated to determine for general $1<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}$ and $c$. See Figure \ref{FIG:range_permissable} for a plot of $\nu_{\rm max}$ and $\nu_{\rm min}$ (and the ideal weight $\nu_-^$ obtained from \eqref{EQ:ideal_weight_definition}) versus $\beta$. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1.1}{\includegraphics{Range_permissable_weight_SCALED.pdf}} \caption{The area in between the curves $\nu_{\rm min}$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$ indicates the range of weights $\nu_-$ such that the absolute spectrum and weighted essential spectrum are contained in the open left half plane for $c=1,\ m=0$, $\varepsilon=0$ (and $\nu^_+ = c/2=1/2$). For $\beta=\beta_{\rm crit}$ the values $\nu_{\rm min},\ \nu_{\rm max}$ and the ideal weight $\nu_-^$ coincide and so the essential spectrum cannot be weighted into the open left half plane for $\beta \geq \beta_{\rm crit}$. The dot-dashed curve represents the asymptotic condition $\nu_->-\frac{\beta}{\beta-1}$ coming from \eqref{EQ:limit22}. } \label{FIG:range_permissable} \end{figure} \end{remark} \begin{remark}\label{REM:scaling_invariance_c} The results on the existence of a range of weights to move the essential spectrum into the open left half plane and the (in)stability of the absolute spectrum are independent of the wave speed $c$. This is not a coincidence as the dispersion relations can be rescaled to be independent of $c$. In particular, the substitutions $\lambda=c^2\tilde{ \lambda},\ \nu=c\tilde{ \nu},\ k=c\tilde{k}$ transform the dispersion relations of $M_0^++\nu_+ I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} into \begin{equation} c^2\tilde{\lambda}=c^2\left(-\tilde{\nu}_++i\tilde{k}\right),\ \text{ and }\ c^2\tilde{\lambda}=c^2\left(-\tilde{k}^2-\tilde{\nu}_+(1-\tilde{\nu})+i(\tilde{k}-2\tilde{k}\tilde{\nu}_+\right), \end{equation} which is equivalent to the dispersion relations of $M_0^++\nu_+ I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} for $c=1$. Similarly, the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} become \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} &c^4\bigg(\tilde{\lambda}^2+\left(\frac{(2-\beta ) (i \tilde{k}-\tilde{\nu}_-)}{\beta -1}-(i \tilde{k}-\tilde{\nu}_-)^2\right)\tilde{\lambda}+\frac{\beta (i \tilde{k}-\tilde{\nu}_-)}{(\beta -1)^2}\\ &\qquad-\frac{(\beta +1) (i \tilde{k}-\tilde{\nu}_-)^2}{\beta -1}+ (i \tilde{k}-\tilde{\nu}_-)^3\bigg)=0, \end{aligned} \end{equation} which is equivalent to the dispersion relations of $M_0^-+\nu_- I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_weighted_minus} for $c=1$. In other words, the magnitude of $c$ does not affect the (in)stability results and only affects the multiplicative scaling of the spectrum. As a consequence, all the figures presented in this manuscript are {\it generic} in $c$ up to the above scaling of $\lambda, \nu$ and $k$. \end{remark} \section{Sublinear and linear consumption and zero diffusivity of the chemoattractant} \label{S:SUBLIN} In this section, we examine the effect of the parameter $m$ on the location of the weighted essential spectrum and absolute spectrum associated with a travelling wave solution. Since travelling wave solutions only exist for $0\leq m\leq 1$, {\it e.g.} \cite{wang2013mathematics}, we take $0<m\leq1$. We prove Theorem~\ref{TH:MAIN1} for $0<m\leq1$ and $\varepsilon=0$. It turns out that the analysis for $0< m<1$ is similar, at least qualitatively, to the analysis of the previous section for $m=0$. The analysis simplifies significantly for $m=1$ and \edit{we} note that the results of this case can be in part deduced from \cite{meyries2011local} where a version of the Keller-Segel model with nonzero growth rate is studied. In particular, we show that for sublinear consumption, \emph{i.e.}\ $0<m<1$, there exists a critical value $\beta_{\rm crit}^m=\beta_{\rm crit}(1-m)$ (with $\beta_{\rm crit}$ the root of \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly}) such that for $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m$ the absolute spectrum is fully contained in the open left half plane. The absolute spectrum enters the right half plane for $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m$ and all travelling wave solutions are thus absolutely unstable for $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m$. For linear consumption, \emph{i.e.}\ $m=1$, we show that the absolute spectrum always contains the origin. Consequently, the essential spectrum cannot be weighted into the open left half plane. \subsection{Set-up} For $0<m\leq 1$ and $\varepsilon=0$, the eigenvalue problem is given by \eqref{EQ:eigen}, which we restate for convenience \begin{align}&\mathcal{L} \begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix}=\lambda\begin{pmatrix} p\\q \end{pmatrix},\quad\quad \mathcal{L}:=\begin{pmatrix}c\pder{}{z}{}- m w u^{m-1}& -u^m\\ \mathcal{L}_p &\mathcal{L}_q \end{pmatrix}\label{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m} \end{align} with \begin{equation} \label{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m_Lp_Lq} \begin{aligned} \mathcal{L}_p&:=\beta\left(\frac{w_z u_z }{u^2}+\frac{wu_{zz} }{u^2}-\frac{2wu_{z}^2}{u^3}\right)+\beta\left(\frac{2wu_{z}}{u^2}-\frac{w_z}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}-\frac{\beta w}{u}\pder{}{z}{2},\\ \mathcal{L}_q&:=\beta\left(\frac{u_{z}^2}{u^2}-\frac{u_{zz}}{u}\right)+\left(c-\frac{\beta u_{z}}{u}\right)\pder{}{z}{}+\pder{}{z}{2}, \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $u$ and $w$ are the travelling wave solutions given in \eqref{tw_profiles_0}. Observe that the first row of $\mathcal{L}$ simplifies significantly in the cases $m=0$ and $m=1$. We take a slightly different approach as in \S\ref{S:MZERO} and first write \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m} as a third order equation in $p$, see Remark \ref{REM:pq_subs}. From the first row of \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m} we have \begin{equation} q= c u^{-m}p_z - (mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m}) p\,,\label{EQ:q_m_nonzero} \end{equation} and we differentiate this to obtain \begin{equation} \label{EQ:qz_m_nonzero} \begin{aligned} q_z&=c u^{-m}p_{zz} +((c u^{-m})_z-(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m}))p_z\\ &-\left(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m}\right)_z p,\\ q_{zz}&=c u^{-m}p_{zzz}+\left(2(c u^{-m})_z-(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})\right)p_{zz}\\ &+\left((cmu^{-m})_{zz}-2(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})_z\right)p_z-(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})_{zz} p. \end{aligned} \end{equation} We substitute \eqref{EQ:q_m_nonzero} and \eqref{EQ:qz_m_nonzero} into the second row of \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m}, that is into $ \mathcal{L}_pp+\mathcal{L}_qq=\lambda q$, and we eliminate $w$ using $w=cu_z u^{-m}$ (\eqref{EQ:KStw2} with $\varepsilon=0$). The resulting third order operator is \begin{align} p_{zzz}- \mathcal{C}_mp_{zz}- \mathcal{B}_mp_z - \mathcal{A}_mp = 0 \label{EQ:Pop_m_nonzero_eps_zero} \end{align} where \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathcal{A}_m = \, \, & \left(\lambda (m+1) (\beta +m)-c^2 m\right)\frac{u_z^2 }{c u^2}+2 (m+1) (\beta +m) \frac{u_z^3}{u^3}-2\lambda m\frac{ u_z}{u}\\ &-(2 \beta+3 m)\frac{ u_z u_{zz}}{u^2}-\lambda(\beta +m)\frac{ u_{zz}}{c u}-\frac{\lambda ^2}{c},\\ \mathcal{B}_m = \, \, & \left(2 c^2 m-\lambda (\beta +2 m)\right)\frac{u_z }{c u} -3 (m+1) (\beta +m) \frac{u_z^2}{u^2}+(2 \beta +3 m)\frac{ u_{zz}}{u}+2 \lambda, \\ \mathcal{C}_m = \, \, & \frac{\lambda }{c}-c+(2 \beta +3 m)\frac{ u_z}{u}. \end{split} \end{equation} Next, we set $p_1:=p_z$ and $p_2:=p_{zz}$, and define the operator $\mathcal{T}_m(\lambda)$ \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathcal{T}_m(\lambda)\begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2 \end{pmatrix} &:= \begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2 \end{pmatrix}' -M_m(z,\lambda) \begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2 \end{pmatrix}=0, \\ \\ M_m(z,\lambda) &:=\begin{pmatrix} 0&1&0\\ 0&0&1\\ \mathcal{A}_m&\mathcal{B}_m&\mathcal{C}_m \end{pmatrix}.\label{EQ:Top_m_nonzero} \end{split} \end{equation} While we have used a slightly different approach compared to \S\ref{S:MZERO}, the spectrum of $\mathcal{T}_0(\lambda)$ in \eqref{EQ:T0} and the spectrum of $\mathcal{T}_m(\lambda)$ \eqref{EQ:Top_m_nonzero} agree in the limit $m\to0$. \begin{remark}\label{REM:pq_subs} The substitutions \eqref{EQ:q_m_nonzero} and \eqref{EQ:qz_m_nonzero} are necessary due to the appearence of the term $w/u$ appearing in $\mathcal{L}_p$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m_Lp_Lq}. While the term $w/u$ is bounded for $m=0$, the term is unbounded as $z\to-\infty$ for $0<m<1$. However, by making the substitutions \eqref{EQ:q_m_nonzero} and \eqref{EQ:qz_m_nonzero}, we obtain \eqref{EQ:Pop_m_nonzero_eps_zero}, which is {\it asymptotically constant} and equivalent to $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m}. The equivalence of \eqref{EQ:Pop_m_nonzero_eps_zero} and $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_sublinear_m} becomes clearer when we see that \eqref{EQ:Pop_m_nonzero_eps_zero} is actually the linearised eigenvalue problem obtained from eliminating $w(z,t)=u^{-m}(z,t)\left( c u_z(z,t)-u_t(z,t)\right)$ from \eqref{EQ:KStw} first. \end{remark} \subsection{Essential spectrum} \label{SS:ESS_SPECT_MNONZERO} \begin{figure}[t] \subfloat{\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{essential_spectrum_m0p1_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \subfloat{\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{essential_spectrum_m0p1_weighted_SCALED.pdf}}}\\ \subfloat{\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{essential_spectrum_m0p7_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \subfloat{\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{essential_spectrum_m0p7_weighted_SCALED.pdf}}} \caption{The essential and absolute spectrum for $m=0.1$ (upper panels) and $m=0.7$ (lower panels) with $\beta=c=2$ and $\varepsilon=0$. The dispersion relations of $M_m^{+}+\nu_+I$ (dashed black) and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{m,+}$ (dashed red) are the same in all four panels and the ideal weight for $z\to\infty$ is still given by $\nu_+^=c/2=1$. The dispersion relations of $M_m^{-}+\nu_-I$ are shown as solid black lines and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{m,-}$ as solid red. Upper left panel: the spectrum in the unweighted space for $m=0.1$. Upper right panel: the ideally weighted space for $m=0.1$, where the ideal weight is $\nu_-^\approx-0.778$. Lower left panel: the spectrum in the unweighted space for $m=0.7$. Lower right panel: the ideally weighted space for $m=0.7$, where $\nu_-^\approx-0.959$. As $m$ increases to one, the real and imaginary components of the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ decrease and approach the origin, see \S\ref{SS:MLINEAR}. } \label{FIG:m_changing} \end{figure} We use the limits given in \eqref{EQ:limits} (with $\varepsilon=0$) and the fact that $u_{zz}=(w u^{m})_z/c$ \eqref{EQ:KStw2}, to obtain \begin{align} \lim_{z\to-\infty}\frac{u_z}{u}=\frac{c}{\beta+m-1},\quad \lim_{z\to-\infty}\frac{u_{zz}}{u}=\frac{c^2}{(\beta+m-1)^2},\quad \lim_{z\to\infty} (u,u_z,u_{zz})=(1,0,0). \end{align} Using these limits, the asymptotic values of $\mathcal{A}_m,\ \mathcal{B}_m$ and $\mathcal{C}_m$ as $z\to\pm\infty$, denoted $\mathcal{A}_m^{\pm},\ \mathcal{B}_m^{\pm}$ and $\mathcal{C}_m^\pm$ respectively, are \begin{align} \mathcal{A}_m^{+}= \, \,& -\frac{\lambda ^2}{c},\quad \mathcal{B}_m^{+}= \, \, 2\lambda, \quad \mathcal{C}_m^{+}= \, \, \frac{\lambda }{c}-c, \end{align} and \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathcal{A}_m^{-}= \, \, &-\frac{\lambda ^2}{c}-\frac{c m (\beta +m-2)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}\lambda+\frac{c^3 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3},\\ \mathcal{B}_m^{-}= \, \, & \frac{(\beta -2) }{\beta +m-1}\lambda-\frac{c^2 \left(\beta +m(\beta+m +2) \right)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}, \\ \mathcal{C}_m^{-}= \, \, & \frac{\lambda }{c}+\frac{c (\beta +2 m+1)}{\beta +m-1}. \end{split} \end{equation} We define the asymptotic matrices \begin{align} \label{EQ:M} M_m^{\pm}(\lambda):=\displaystyle\lim_{z\rightarrow\pm\infty}M_m(z,\lambda)=\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ \mathcal{A}_m^{\pm} & \mathcal{B}_m^{\pm} & \mathcal{C}_m^{\pm} \end{pmatrix}, \end{align} related to the asymptotic operator associated with $\mathcal{T}_m$ \eqref{EQ:Top_m_nonzero}. The dispersion relations of $M_m^{+}$ are independent of $m$ and $\beta$, and the same as for $m=0$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus}. The dispersion relations of $M_m^{-}$ depend on $m$ and are implicitly given by \begin{equation} \begin{split} &\lambda^2+\left(k^2+\frac{c^2 m (\beta +m-2)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}-\frac{ick (\beta -2)}{\beta +m-1}\right)\lambda+\frac{c^2 k^2 (\beta +2 m+1)}{\beta +m-1}\\ &-\frac{c^4 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3}+ \frac{ic^3k \left(\beta +m(m+\beta +2)\right)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}-ick^3=0.\label{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus} \end{split} \end{equation} In the limit $m\to0$, \eqref{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus} coincides with the dispersion relations of $M_0^-$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_minus}. The dispersion relations $M_m^{+}$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus} and $M_m^{-}$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus} form the boundaries of the essential spectrum and $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ such that \emph{i.e.}\ $i_+\neq i_-$ (see Definition \ref{DEFN:EssSpect}) forms the interior of the (unweighted) essential spectrum. See the two left panels of Figure~\ref{FIG:m_changing} for the unweighted essential spectrum for two different values of $m$. \subsection{The weighted essential spectrum and the absolute spectrum} As for $m=0$, we consider a two-sided weight of the form \eqref{EQ:two_sided_weight}. Since the dispersion relations of $M_m^{+}$ and $M_0^+$ are the same the ideal weight for $z \to \infty$ are unchanged for $0<m \leq 1$. That is, $\nu_+^=c/2$. Consequently, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{m,+}=\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ \eqref{EQ:abs_plus_m0}. See also Figure \ref{fig:absplus}. The dispersion relations of $M_m^{-}+\nu_- I$ are implicitly given by \begin{equation} \begin{split} &\lambda ^2+ \lambda \left(-(ik-\nu_-)^2+\frac{c^2 m (\beta +m-2)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}-\frac{c(i k-\nu_-)(\beta-2 ) }{\beta +m-1}\right)\\ &-\frac{c^2 (ik-\nu_-)^2 (\beta +2 m+1)}{\beta +m-1}-\frac{c^4 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3}\\ &+\frac{c^3 (ik-\nu_-) (\beta +m (\beta +m+2))}{(\beta +m-1)^2}+c(ik-\nu_-)^3=0.\label{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus_weighted} \end{split} \end{equation} The shift in the essential spectrum due to weighting in the $0<m\leq1$ case is qualitatively similar to the behaviour shown in Figure \ref{FIG:various_weighted_minus}. That is, under a large range of weights the dispersion relations have self-intersections and these self-intersections form part of the absolute spectrum $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{m,-}$. So, we can once again use a find root procedure on the weighted dispersion relations \eqref{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus_weighted} to locate $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{m,-}$. See Figure~\ref{FIG:m_changing} for the unweighted essential spectrum, the ideally weighted essential spectrum, and the absolute spectrum for two different values of $m$. \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1} for $0<m<1$ and $\varepsilon=0$} \label{SS:PROOF3} For $0<m< 1$ and $\varepsilon=0$, a polynomial $f_m(\beta)$, similar to the polynomial $f(\beta)$ \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly} for $m=0$, can be derived. Its root $\beta_{\rm crit}^m = \beta_{\rm crit}(1-m)>1-m$ predicts the transition of the absolute spectrum into the right half plane (for increasing $\beta$). For $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m$, the absolute spectrum is fully contained in the open left half plane. For $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m$, the absolute spectrum enters the right half plane and the travelling wave solutions are thus absolutely unstable. To determine the transition of the absolute spectrum into the right half plane we follow the same procedure as in \S\ref{SS:PROOF1} and we treat the characteristic polynomial of $M_m^{-}$ as a cubic polynomial in $\mu$ and equate the discriminant to zero. This gives \begin{equation} \label{EQ:disc_m} \begin{aligned} &\lambda^5+\frac{c^2 (2 \beta +m-1)^2}{4 (\beta +m-1)^2}\lambda^4+\frac{\beta c^4 \left(18 \beta ^2+37 \beta (m-1)+20 (m-1)^2\right)}{2 (\beta +m-1)^3}\lambda^3\\ &+\frac{\beta c^6 \left(5 \beta ^3+28 \beta ^2 (m-1)+50 \beta (m-1)^2+26 (m-1)^3\right)}{4 (\beta +m-1)^4}\lambda^2\\ &+\frac{\beta c^8 (m-1) \left(\beta ^2+6 \beta (m-1)+2 (m-1)^2\right)}{2 (\beta+m-1)^4}\lambda+\frac{\beta ^2 c^{10} (m-1)^2}{4 (\beta +m-1)^4}=0. \end{aligned} \end{equation} This discriminant has a purely imaginary root under the condition \begin{equation} \label{EQ:beta_crit_m_nonzero} \begin{aligned} 0&=\frac{\beta ^2 c^{20} (m-1)}{64 (\beta +m-1)^{13}}f_m(\beta) \end{aligned} \end{equation} where \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} &f_m(\beta):=\left(310 \beta ^{10}+3234 \beta ^9 (m-1)+17112 \beta ^8 (m-1)^2+49101 \beta ^7 (m-1)^3\right.\\ &\quad+76180 \beta ^6 (m-1)^4+58398 \beta ^5 (m-1)^5+10056 \beta ^4 (m-1)^6\\ &\quad\left.-15040 \beta ^3 (m-1)^7-9680 \beta ^2 (m-1)^8-1716 \beta (m-1)^9-4 (m-1)^{10}\right)\,. \end{aligned} \end{equation} For $m=1$, \eqref{EQ:beta_crit_m_nonzero} is trivially satisfied. Therefore, we treat the $m=1$ case seperately, see \S\ref{SS:MLINEAR}. Upon introducing the variable $B=\frac{\beta}{(1-m)}$ (and setting $0<m<1$), \eqref{EQ:beta_crit_m_nonzero} becomes, \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} 0&=\frac{-B^2 c^{20}}{64 (B-1)^{13}}\left(310 B^{10}-3234 B^9+17112 B^8-49101 B^7+76180 B^6\right.\\ &\quad\left.-58398 B^5+10056 B^4+15040 B^3-9680 B^2+1716 B-4\right)\\ &=\frac{-B^2 c^{20}}{64 (B-1)^{13}}f(B), \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $f$ is given by \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly}. So, the roots of $f_m$ and $f$ are related by $\beta_{\rm crit}^m=\beta_{\rm crit}(1-m)$, and $\beta_{\rm crit}^m$ is the only root of \eqref{EQ:beta_crit_m_nonzero} that satisfies the condition $\beta+m>1$. In conclusion, we have that the absolute spectrum is fully contained in the open left half plane for $0\leq m<1, \varepsilon=0$ and $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m$, while the absolute spectrum enters into the right half plane for $0\leq m<1, \varepsilon=0$ and $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m$. This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1} for $0<m<1$ and $\varepsilon=0$. \begin{remark} \label{REM:weighted_dispersion_range2} Similar to the $m=0$ case, there also exist a range of weights $\nu_{\rm min}^m<\nu_-<\nu_{\rm max}^m$ for $0<m<1$ and $\varepsilon=0$, such that the weighted essential spectrum is contained in the open left half plane for $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m$. In other words, there are no essential instabilities in this case. See also Remark \ref{REM:weighted_dispersion_range}. \end{remark} \subsection{Linear consumption} \label{SS:MLINEAR} In the case of linear consumption, \emph{i.e.}\ $m=1$, the travelling wave solutions $(u,w)$ \eqref{tw_profiles_0} are a pair of wavefronts, rather than a pulse and a wavefront, see, for example, the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:tw_profiles}. In this case, the absolute spectrum and the ideally weighted essential spectrum contain the origin for all $\beta$ and as a result the essential spectrum cannot be weighted into the open left half plane. Note that the model \eqref{EQ:KStw1} with $m=1$ can be seen as a limit case of the model with non-zero growth term ($\kappa>0$ in \eqref{EQ:KSgen}) considered in \cite{meyries2011local}. The dispersion relations of $M_1^{+}$ are independent of $m$ and $\beta$, see \S\ref{SS:ESS_SPECT_MNONZERO}, and therefore $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,+}=\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ \eqref{EQ:abs_plus_m0} is fully contained in the open left half plane. Consequently, we only need to examine $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,-}$. The characteristic polynomial of $M_1^{-}$ is \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} &\mu ^3-\mu ^2 \left(\frac{\beta\left(\beta +3 \right) c}{\beta ^2}+\frac{\lambda }{c}\right)+\mu \left(\frac{(2-\beta ) \lambda }{\beta }+\frac{\beta\left(\beta ^2+(\beta -1) +4 \beta \right) c^2}{\beta ^3}\right)\\ &-\frac{(\beta +1) c^3}{\beta ^3}+\frac{(\beta -1) c \lambda }{\beta ^2}+\frac{\lambda ^2}{c}=0.\label{EQ:char_poly_m_1} \end{aligned} \end{equation} To locate $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,-}$, we follow the same process as for $0\leq m<1$. In particular, we locate $\lambda\in\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,-}$ such that the characteristic polynomial \eqref{EQ:char_poly_m_1} has a second order root in $\mu$. That is, we locate the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$. We equate the discriminant of \eqref{EQ:char_poly_m_1} to zero to obtain \begin{align} \lambda ^2 \left(4 \lambda ^3+4 c^2 \lambda ^2+36 c^4 \lambda +5 c^6 \right) = 0,\label{EQ:discriminant_m_1} \end{align} which has a second order root $\lambda=0$. For $\lambda=0$, \eqref{EQ:char_poly_m_1} becomes \begin{align} (\beta \mu-c(\beta+1)) (c-\beta \mu )^2=0 \quad \implies \quad \mu_{1}=\frac{(\beta+1)c}{\beta},\quad\mu_{2,3}=\frac{c}{\beta}. \end{align} Since $\Re(\mu_1)>\Re(\mu_2)=\Re(\mu_3)$, $0 \in \sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,-}$ and the ideal weight is $\nu_-^=-\Re(\mu_{2,3})=-\frac{c}{\beta}$ \eqref{EQ:ideal_weight_definition}. Furthermore, the ideally weighted essential spectrum and the absolute spectrum contain the origin for all $\beta$. That is, there are no parameter values such that the essential spectrum can be weighted fully into the open left half plane, see, for example, Figure \ref{FIG:allspect_m_1}. Note that the other three roots of \eqref{EQ:discriminant_m_1} are part of the generalised absolute spectrum. This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1} for $m=1$ and $\varepsilon=0$. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:aaa}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_mlinear_SCALED}}}\hspace{.5cm} \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:bbb}\includegraphics{full_spectrum_mlinear_weighted_SCALED}}} \caption{The essential and absolute spectrum in the unweighted space (left panel) and in the ideally weighted space (right panel) for $\beta=c=2$, $\varepsilon=0$ and $m=1$, where the ideal weight is $\nu_-^=-c/\beta=-1$ and $\nu_+^=c/2=1$. The dispersion relations of $M_1^{+}+\nu_+I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_weighted} are shown as black dashed lines, while those of $M_1^{-}+\nu_-I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_m_nonzero_minus_weighted} are shown as black solid lines, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,+}$ is shown as red dashed lines and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^{1,-}$ as red solid lines. The shaded regions are the interior of the (weighted) essential spectrum. The absolute spectrum contains the origin (for all parameter values $\beta$ and $c$) and the essential spectrum thus cannot be weighted into the open left half plane. } \label{FIG:allspect_m_1} \end{figure} \begin{remark} For $0\leq m<1, \varepsilon=0$ and $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m$, the absolute spectrum contains values in the right half plane. However, for a large chemotactic parameter, \emph{i.e.}\ $\beta\gg1$, the end points of the absolute spectrum $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ approach zero, see Figure \ref{FIG:beta_limit}. Actually, in the limit $\beta\to\infty$, the discriminant of the characteristic polynomial of $M_m^{-}$ \eqref{EQ:disc_m} reduces to the discriminant of the characteristic polynomial of $M_1^{-}$ \eqref{EQ:discriminant_m_1}. That is, the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ of the absolute spectrum approach the origin from the right. Furthermore, the ideally weighted essential spectrum for $0\leq m<1, \varepsilon=0$ and $\beta$ large is qualitatively similar to the ideally weighted essential spectrum shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{FIG:allspect_m_1} for $m=1$ and $\varepsilon=0$. \end{remark} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{branch_points_beta_SCALED}} \caption{Plot of the real component of the branch points versus the magnitude of the imaginary component of the branch points parametrised by $\beta>1$ for $m=0, \varepsilon=0$ and $c=1$ (dashed line) and $c=2$ (solid line). For both curves the intersections with the imaginary axis away from the origin correspond to $\beta=\beta_{\rm crit}$ and $\lim_{\beta\to\infty}\|\lambda_{br}\|=0$. Note that the figure is qualitatively similar for $0<m<1$. }\label{FIG:beta_limit} \end{figure} \section{Small diffusion} \label{SS:MNONZERO_EPSNONZERO} In this section, we \edit{finish} the proof of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1} and show that the results obtained for $\varepsilon=0$ \edit{persist to leading order when we allow for small diffusion of the attractant $u$ in \eqref{EQ:KStw1} (\emph{i.e.} for $0<\varepsilon\ll1$)}. In particular, we show that for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$ the weighted essential spectrum and absolute spectrum correspond, in leading order, to the spectra in the $\varepsilon=0$ case. For \edit{$\|\lambda\|$} large, the spectra differ significantly, however, the differences do not alter the explicit stability results since they occur in the open left half plane. \subsection{Set-up} We treat the various consumption rates $0\leq m\leq1$ simultaneously. First, we eliminate the perturbation $q$, and its derivatives, from \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen}. From the first row of \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} we have \begin{align} q = \, \, &\varepsilon u^{-m} p_{zz} + c u^{-m}p_z - (mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m}) p. \label{EQ:q_sub_mnonzero} \end{align} Differentiating \eqref{EQ:q_sub_mnonzero} gives \begin{equation}\label{EQ:qz_sub_mnonzero} \begin{split} q_z = \, \, & \varepsilon u^{-m} p^{(3)} +\left((\varepsilon u^{-m})_z + c u^{-m}\right)p_{zz} \\ & \qquad +((c u^{-m})_z-(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m}))p_zq+ (mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})_zp, \\ q_{zz} = \, \, & \varepsilon u^{-m} p^{(4)}+ \left(2(\varepsilon u^{-m})_z + c u^{-m}\right)p^{(3)}\\ \, \, & +\left((\varepsilon u^{-m})_{zz}+2(c u^{-m})_z-(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})\right)p_{zz}\\ \, \, &+\left((cmu^{-m})_{zz}-2(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})_z\right)p_z+(mwu^{-1}+ \lambda u^{-m})_{zz} p. \end{split} \end{equation} We substitute \eqref{EQ:q_sub_mnonzero} and \eqref{EQ:qz_sub_mnonzero} into the second row of \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} $\mathcal{L}_p p+\mathcal{L}_qq=\lambda q$. The resulting singular fourth ODE is \begin{align} \varepsilon p_{zzzz}- \mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}p_{zzz}- \mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}p_{zz}- \mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon} p_z - \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon} p = 0 \label{EQ:Pop_m_nonzero_eps_nonzero} \end{align} where \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon}:=&(\beta+m) \left(c^2+\lambda +\lambda m\right)\frac{ u_z^2}{u^2}-2 c \lambda m\frac{ u_z}{u}-c (\beta+m)\frac{ u_z u_{zz}}{u^2}-\lambda ^2\\ &-\lambda (\beta+m)\frac{ u_{zz}}{u}- c (\beta -2)(\beta+m)\frac{ u_z^3}{u^3} \\ & + \varepsilon \bigg(c (\beta+m)\frac{ u_z u_{zz}}{u^2}-(\beta -2) (\beta+m) \frac{u_z^2 u_{zz}}{u^3} -(\beta+m)\frac{ u_{zz}^2}{u^2}-\lambda m\frac{ u_{zz}}{u}\bigg), \\ \mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}:=&2 c \lambda-\left(\beta c^2+\lambda (\beta+2 m)\right)\frac{u_z }{u}+c (\beta -m-3) (\beta+m)\frac{ u_z^2}{u^2}+c (\beta+m)\frac{ u_{zz}}{u}\\ &+\varepsilon \left((\beta -2) (\beta+m)\frac{ u_z u_{zz}}{u^2}-c (\beta+m)\frac{ u_{zz}}{u}\right),\\ \mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}:=&-c^2+c (2 (\beta+m) +m)\frac{ u_z}{u}+\lambda+\varepsilon \bigg(\lambda-(m+1) (\beta+m)\frac{ u_z^2}{u^2}+c m\frac{ u_z}{u}\\ & +2 (\beta+m) \frac{u_{zz}}{u}\bigg),\\ \mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}:=&-c+\varepsilon \left((\beta+2 m) \frac{u_z}{u}-c\right), \end{split} \end{equation} with $(u,w)$ the travelling wave solutions given, to leading order, by \eqref{tw_profiles_0}. We set $p_1:=p_z$, $p_2:=p_{zz}$ and $p_3:=p_{zzz}$ and define the operator $\mathcal{T}_\varepsilon$ by \begin{align} &\mathcal{T}_{m,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2\\p_3 \end{pmatrix}:=\begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2\\p_3 \end{pmatrix}'- M_{m,\varepsilon}(z,\lambda)\begin{pmatrix} p\\p_1\\p_2\\p_3 \end{pmatrix}=0, \end{align} where \begin{align} M_{m,\varepsilon}(z,\lambda):=\begin{pmatrix} 0&1&0&0\\ 0&0&1&0\\0&0&0&1\\ \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}/\varepsilon \end{pmatrix}.\numberthis\label{EQ:Teps} \end{align} All terms in $\mathcal{T}_{m,\varepsilon}$ can be expressed in terms of either $u_z/u$ or $w/u$, since $u_{zz}=\left(cu_z-w\right)/\varepsilon$ and $w_z=-cw+\beta\left(\frac{wu_z}{u}\right)$ \eqref{EQ:KStw2}. Using \eqref{EQ:limits}, the limits of $\mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon}$, $\mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}$, $\mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}$ and $\mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}$ as $z\rightarrow\pm\infty$ are \begin{align} \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon}^+:=-\lambda ^2, \qquad \mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}^+:=2 c \lambda,\qquad\mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}^+:=-c^2+\lambda(1 +\varepsilon),\qquad \mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}^+:=-c(1+\varepsilon), \end{align} and \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon} ^- = \, \, & \frac{c^4 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3}-\lambda ^2-\frac{c^2 \lambda m (\beta +m-2)}{(\beta +m-1)^2} - \varepsilon \left(\frac{ \lambda c^2 m }{(\beta +m-1)^2}-\frac{c^4 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^4} \right)\\ \mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}^- = \, \, & \frac{c \lambda(\beta -2) }{(\beta +m-1)}-\frac{c^3 (\beta +m (\beta +m+2))}{(\beta +m-1)^2}+ \varepsilon\frac{c^3 (m+1) (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3} , \\ \mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}^- = \, \, & \left(\frac{c^2 (\beta +2 m+1)}{\beta +m-1}+\lambda\right) +\varepsilon \left( \frac{\beta c^2}{(\beta +m-1)^2}+\lambda \right) , \\ \mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}^- = \,\, &-c+ \varepsilon \frac{c (m+1) }{\beta +m-1} \,. \end{split} \end{equation} We define the asymptotic matrices $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}(\lambda):=\displaystyle\lim_{z\rightarrow\pm\infty}M_\varepsilon^m(z,\lambda)$. That is, \begin{align} \label{EQ:M2} M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}(\lambda)=\begin{pmatrix} 0&1&0&0\\0&0&1&0\\ 0&0&0&1\\ \mathcal{A}_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{B}_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{C}_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}/\varepsilon&\mathcal{D}_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}/\varepsilon \end{pmatrix}. \end{align} \subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{TH:MAIN1} for $0 \leq m \leq 1$ and $0<\varepsilon \ll1$} \label{SS:PROOF2} \edit{The matrices $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}$ have four spatial eigenvalues, while $M_{m}^{\pm}$ have only three. } We show that the fourth spatial eigenvalue is far into the left half plane for both asymptotic matrices $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}$ (and for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$), while the other three spatial eigenvalues are, to leading order, given by the spatial eigenvalues of $M_{m}^{\pm}$. The characteristic polynomial of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{+}$ is \begin{align} \varepsilon\left(\mu^4+c\mu^3-\lambda\mu^2\right) +(\mu^2+c\mu-\lambda)(c\mu-\lambda)=0,\label{EQ:eps_nonzero_charpolyplus} \end{align} which is regular in $\lambda$, but \edit{singularly perturbed} in $\mu$. In the limit $\varepsilon \to0$, we recover the characteristic polynomial of $M_m^{+}$. The dispersion relations of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{+}+\nu_+ I$ are \begin{equation}\label{EQ:dispersion_plus_epsnonzero} \lambda=-k^2-\nu_+ (c-\nu_+ )+i (c k-2 k \nu_+ )\,,\quad \lambda=-\varepsilon k^2-\nu_+ (c-\nu_+ \varepsilon )+i (c k-2 \varepsilon k \nu_+ ) . \end{equation} For $\nu_+ \in (0,c)$, \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_epsnonzero} is fully contained in the open left half plane and the ideal weight is still $\nu_+^=c/2$. Observe that, unlike the $\varepsilon=0$ case, both dispersion relations of $M_\varepsilon^{m,+}+\nu_+ I$ are parabolas in $k$ and consequently they no longer approach a vertical line in the limit $\|k\| \to \infty$. The spatial eigenvalues of \eqref{EQ:eps_nonzero_charpolyplus} are \begin{align} &\mu_1^+=\frac{-c+\sqrt{c^2+4\varepsilon \lambda }}{2\varepsilon}=\frac{\lambda }{c}-\frac{\lambda ^2 \varepsilon }{c^3}+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),\\ &\mu_{2,3}^+=\frac{-c\pm\sqrt{c^2+4 \lambda }}{2}, \\ &\mu_4^+=\frac{-c-\sqrt{c^2+4\varepsilon \lambda }}{2\varepsilon}=-\frac{c}{\varepsilon }-\frac{\lambda }{c}+\frac{\lambda ^2 \varepsilon }{c^3}+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2), \end{align} where the asymptotic expansions only hold for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$. The spatial eigenvalues $\mu_{1,2,3}^+$ are, to leading order, the same as those in the $\varepsilon=0$ case \eqref{EQ:spatial_eigenvalues_plus}. The singular spatial eigenvalue $\mu_4^+$ approaches $-\infty$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$ (for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$). \begin{figure}[t] \centering \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspect_stablea}\includegraphics{epsilon_nonzero_stable_SCALED.pdf}}}\hspace{.5cm} \scalebox{1}{\subfloat{\label{fig:allspect_stableb}\includegraphics{epsilon_nonzero_stable_weighted_SCALED.pdf}}} \caption{The essential and absolute spectrum in the unweighted space (left panel) and in the ideally weighted space (right panel) for $\beta=1.3<\beta_{\rm crit}$ \eqref{EQ:10th_order_poly}, $c=2$, $\varepsilon=0.02$ and $m=0$, where the ideal weight is $\nu_-^\approx -2.447$ and $\nu_+^=c/2=1$. The dispersion relations of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{+}+\nu_+I$ \eqref{EQ:dispersion_plus_epsnonzero} are shown as black dashed lines, while those of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{-}+\nu_-I$ are shown as black solid lines, $\sigma_{\rm abs}^+$ is shown as red dashed lines and $\sigma_{\rm abs}^-$ as red solid lines. The shaded regions are the interior of the (weighted) essential spectrum. Observe that the (weighted) essential spectra and absolute spectra agree, to leading order, for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$, but not for $\|\lambda\|$ large, to the spectra for the same parameter set but with $\varepsilon=0$, see Figure \ref{FIG:allspect_stable}. Also note that the ideal weights are similar. } \label{FIG:allspect_stable_eps_nonzero} \end{figure} The characteristic polynomial of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{-}$ is \begin{equation}\label{EQ:eps_nonzero_charpolyminus} \begin{split} &\mu ^2 \left(-\frac{c^2 (\beta +2 m+1)}{\beta +m-1}-\lambda \right)+\frac{\mu \left(c^3 (\beta +m (\beta +m+2))-(\beta -2) c \lambda (\beta +m-1)\right)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}\\ &+\frac{c^2 \lambda m (\beta +m-2)}{(\beta +m-1)^2}-\frac{c^4 m (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3}+c \mu ^3+\lambda ^2+\varepsilon \bigg(\frac{c^3 \mu (m+1) (\beta +m)}{(\beta +m-1)^3}\\ &+\mu ^2 \left(-\frac{\beta c^2}{(\beta +m-1)^2}-\lambda \right)+\frac{c^2 m \left(\lambda (\beta +m-1)^2-c^2 (\beta +m)\right)}{(\beta +m-1)^4}\\ &-\frac{c \mu ^3 (m+1)}{\beta +m-1}+\mu ^4\bigg). \end{split} \end{equation} which is still regular in $\lambda$, but singularly perturbed in $\mu$. In the limit $\varepsilon \to0$, we recover the characteristic polynomial of $M_m^{-}$ \begin{align} &c \mu ^3-\mu ^2 \left(\frac{c^2 (\beta+2 m+1)}{\beta+m-1}+\lambda \right)+\mu \left(\frac{ c^3 (\beta +m (r+2))}{(\beta+m-1)^2}-\frac{(\beta -2) c \lambda }{(\beta+m-1)}\right)\\ &-\frac{c^4 m (\beta+m)}{(\beta+m-1)^3}+\frac{c^2 \lambda m (\beta+m-2)}{(\beta+m-1)^2}+\lambda ^2=0, \end{align} and three of the spatial eigenvalues of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{-}$ are, to leading order, thus given by spatial eigenvalues of $M_m^{-}$ for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$. We use the expansion $\mu=\eta_{-1}/\varepsilon+\eta_0+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$ to determine the leading order contribution of the singular spatial eigenvalue of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{-}$. Substituting this expansion into \eqref{EQ:eps_nonzero_charpolyminus} gives, to leading order, $ \eta_{-1}^3(\eta_{-1}+c)=0. $ So, the singular spatial eigenvalue of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{-}$ is $\mu_4^- = -c/\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(1)$ (for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$). In particular, both singular spatial eigenvalues are to leading order the same and approach $-\infty$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$. For $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$, the (weighted) dispersion relations of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}$ are $\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$ perturbations of those from $M_m^{\pm}$, since $\mu_{1,2,3}^\pm$ are, to leading order, the same as those in the $\varepsilon=0$ case, and since the singular spatial eigenvalues $\mu_4^\pm$ have asymptotically large negative real parts (for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$). Moreover, the characteristic polynomials of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}$ are regularly perturbed in $\lambda$. Consequently, the Morse indices $i_{\pm}$ and the interior of the essential spectrum are unaffected by the singular spatial eigenvalues $\mu_4^\pm$. Similarly, since $\mu_4^\pm$ also does not affect the ranking of $\mu_{1,2,3}^\pm$, the absolute spectrum is, to leading order, the same as for the $\varepsilon=0$ case. In particular, the branch points $\lambda_{br}^\pm$ are, to leading order, the same as those for the $\varepsilon=0$ case and there is some parameter $\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$, given to leading order by $\beta_{\rm crit}^m$, such that the branch points, and therefore the absolute spectrum, are contained in the open left half plane for $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$. The above asymptotic analysis is only valid for $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$, since the singular spatial eigenvalues $\mu_4^\pm$ become $\mathcal{O}(1)$ for $\|\lambda\|$ large. However, it can be shown using asymptotic analysis that, to leading order, there are no additional intersections between the dispersion relations of $M_{m,\varepsilon}^{\pm}+\nu_\pm I$ and the imaginary axis for $\|\lambda\|$ large as long as $\nu_->-\frac{c(\beta+m)}{\beta+m-1}$. This condition arises from the asymptotic limits of the weighted dispersion relations $M_{m}^{-}+\nu_- I$ (see \eqref{EQ:limit22} for the analogous condition for $m=0$). We omit the technical details of this asymptotic analysis. As the dispersion relations do not intersect the imaginary axis for large $\|\lambda\|$, the essential spectrum, and therefore the absolute spectrum, does not enter into the right half plane, except in the region $\|\lambda\|=\mathcal{O}(1)$. See Figure~\ref{FIG:allspect_stable_eps_nonzero} for an example of the spectral picture in the case $\varepsilon \neq 0$. This concludes the complete proof of Theorem \ref{TH:MAIN1}. \section{Outlook} \label{SS:POINT} In this manuscript, we located the weighted essential spectrum and absolute spectrum associated with travelling wave solutions to the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw1} for $0\leq m\leq 1$, $\beta>1-m$ and $0\leq \varepsilon\ll1$. By locating the branch points, that form the leading edge of the absolute spectrum, we proved that the absolute spectrum and ideally weighted essential spectrum are contained in the open left half plane for $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$ and we derived leading order expressions determining $\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$. We also developed a procedure for locating the range of weighted spaces for which the weighted essential spectrum is in the open left half plane. For $\beta>\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$, all travelling wave solutions have absolute spectrum in the right half plane and the travelling wave solutions are thus absolutely unstable. These results provide a complete picture of the absolute spectrum and weighted essential spectrum associated with all possible travelling wave solutions to the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw1} and they expand on the previous results for the essential spectrum known in the literature \cite{nagai1991traveling, wang2013mathematics}. Furthermore, it is now clear how the absolute spectrum and weighted essential spectrum deform between the limit cases $m=0$ and $m=1$. Moreover, we showed that the transition to the absolutely unstable parameter regime is characterised by the absolute spectrum crossing into the right half plane away from the real axis (similar to the example in \cite{rademacher2007computing}). In order to complete the full spectral picture for travelling wave solutions to \eqref{EQ:KStw1} the point spectrum must also be located. This is usually far more involved as it requires information about the linearised system on the whole spatial domain, rather than just its asymptotic behaviour. If there exists \edit{point spectrum} with positive real part, then the travelling wave solutions are spectrally unstable, regardless of the stability properties of the absolute spectrum and weighted essential spectrum. Note that point spectrum is unaffected by weighting the space \cite{kapitula2013spectral}. An early proof offered by \cite{rosen1975stability} shows that there are no positive eigenvalues for $0\leq\varepsilon\ll1$ under the assumption that eigenvalues are real-valued. However, it is unclear that this assumption holds, since the linearised operator $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} is not self-adjoint. An analytic tool for locating the point spectrum is the Evans function \cite{evans1,evans2,evans3,evans4}. Unfortunately, the Evans function is generically hard to explicitly compute for systems of partial differential equations and one has to rely on numerics. This is also the case here, especially since the explicit travelling wave profiles for \eqref{EQ:KStw1} with $\varepsilon >0$ are not known. In \cite{harley2015numerical}, the Evans function associated with travelling wave solutions to \eqref{EQ:KStw1} with $m=0$ and $\varepsilon=0$ was calculated numerically using a Riccati transformation. It was shown that there is a second order temporal eigenvalue at the origin and that there are no other eigenvalues in the right half plane with $\|\lambda\|<10^7$. Due to the translation invariance, $\lambda=0$ persists as an eigenvalue (with order at least one) for $0<\varepsilon\ll1$. However, the second eigenvalue most likely perturbs for $0<\varepsilon\ll1$ determining the fate of the spectral stability of the travelling wave solution (assuming the weighted essential spectrum is in the open left half plane). In ongoing research, we are addressing the issue of the point spectrum by using methods similar to the ones used in \cite{harley2015numerical}. If there is no point spectrum in the right half plane, one can conclude that the travelling wave solutions are spectrally stable in the ideally weighted space for $1-m<\beta<\beta_{\rm crit}^m(\varepsilon)$, \emph{i.e.}\ transiently unstable. Ideally, one would like to use this spectral stability result to conclude nonlinear (in)stability of the travelling wave solutions. For a sectorial semilinear operator with a spectral gap (\emph{i.e.}\ the spectrum is contained in the open left half plane except for the translation invariance eigenvalue at the origin), spectral stability implies nonlinear stability of the associated travelling wave solution \cite{henry1981geometric,sandstede2000spectral}. However, while the operator $\mathcal{L}$ \eqref{EQ:Lop_gen} appears to be sectorial for $0<\varepsilon\ll1$, see, for instance, Figure~\ref{FIG:allspect_stable_eps_nonzero}, it is quasilinear rather than semilinear. In \cite{meyries2014quasi}, it was shown that for a large class of quasilinear parabolic reaction-diffusion systems one can still deduce nonlinear stability results from the spectral stability results, as long as the linearised operator fulfills certain conditions. Unfortunately, the Keller-Segel model studied in this manuscript does not fall into the class of quasilinear parabolic reaction-diffusion systems considered in \cite{meyries2014quasi}. For the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KSgen} with nonlinear diffusion and with logarithmic chemosensitivty (\emph{i.e.}\ $\Phi(u)=\log(u)$), linear consumption (\emph{i.e.}\ $m=1$) and nonzero growth (\emph{i.e.}\ $\kappa>0$), the general theory for semilinear operators was extended in \cite{meyries2011local} to prove nonlinear instability results in certain cases of the model. Another approach using a Hopf-Cole transformation, in conjunction with weighted energy estimates, was used in \cite{li2014stability,li2012steadily} to deduce nonlinear stability results for the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KSgen} with logarithmic chemosensitivty, linear consumption and zero growth. Alternatively, in order to apply the general theory for semilinear systems, \cite{henry1981geometric} proposes to transform a quasilinear system to a semilinear system. Observe that this approach is akin to the method used in \S\ref{S:SUBLIN}. It is a challenge to see if any of these methods can be used to obtain nonlinear stability results for the travelling wave solutions of \eqref{EQ:KStw1} studied in this manuscript. The dynamical implications of absolute spectrum in the right half plane for travelling wave solutions of the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw1} are not known. In typical examples, such as the F-KPP equation, the transition to an absolutely unstable regime is associated with the so-called linear spreading speed, \emph{i.e.}\ the speed `generic' initial conditions will eventually travel at. Note that in the F-KPP equation this is known as the minimal wave speed. In other words, the linear spreading speed is the speed of a travelling wave solution `selected' by the model. However, in the Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KStw1} the transition to the absolutely unstable regime is, to leading order, independent of the wave speed and it thus does not seem to have an influence on the asymptotic speed of a generic initial condition (that evolves to a travelling wave solution). Rather, the initial condition of the bacteria population $w$ determines the wave speed \cite{nagai1991traveling}. Note that in the case of a Keller-Segel model \eqref{EQ:KSgen} with a growth term, the absolute spectrum does appear to have an influence on the wave speed selection \cite{bose2013invasion,meyries2011local}. Moreover, as the transition of the absolute spectrum into the right half plane is complex valued, one expects oscillatory instabilities to manifest themselves. These type of bifurcations have, for instance, been studied in \cite{sandstede1999essential,sandstede2001structure}. Future work will address, both analytically and numerically, what the absolute instabilities imply dynamically and the connection, if any, with the wave speed. \section{Acknowledgments} PD and PvH acknowledge support under the Australian Research Council's Discovery Early Career Researcher Award funding scheme DE140100741. \edit{RM would like to thank M. Holzer and J. Rademacher for very informative discussions regarding the material covered in this paper as well as for pointing out some illuminating references}. \bibliographystyle{siamplain}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} Massive stars have a large impact on the evolution of the interstellar medium, not only on their immediate vicinity due to energetic stellar winds, ionising radiation and outflows, but also on galactic scales via the continual processing of heavy elements released when they die as supernovae. Therefore, a good understanding of the formation of massive stars is crucial for many areas of astrophysics. However, despite low mass star formation being relatively well understood \citep[e.g.][]{shu_1987}, there is little consensus on how exactly high mass ($M_{\star} > 8$\,M$_{\odot}$) stars form. \smallskip Observationally, difficulties arise from the fact that the pre-main-sequence phase of massive stars is very short ($\sim$10$^{4}$ -- a few $\times$ 10$^{5}$\,years, e.g.\ \citealt{davies_2011}) thus providing little opportunity to directly observe massive young stellar objects (MYSOs) due to high extinctions and the small number of candidate objects. However, despite these difficulties, recent years have seen a steady rise in the number of detections of candidate Keplerian discs around massive young protostars \citep[see e.g.][]{hunter_2014, johnston_2015, zapata_2015, chen_2016, Ilee2016}. \smallskip From a theoretical perspective, circumstellar discs provide a mechanism for accretion that overcomes the feedback from the central protostar, via channelling material along the equatorial plane \citep[see the models of, e.g.,][]{krumholz_2009, kuiper_2011, klassen_2016}. A common feature of these models is the prediction of disc instability \citep{vaidya_2009} leading to significant non-axisymmetric structure, caused by high accretion rates through the disc, large disc-to-star mass ratios and self-gravity \citep[see, e.g.,][]{vorobyov_2010}. However, such details have been below the spatial resolution limits of previous observational campaigns, due in part to the high angular resolution required to observe such structure, even for nearby low mass systems \citep[e.g.][]{douglas_2013, dipierro_2014}. \smallskip The inferred physical parameters of disc candidates around massive stars, in particular the estimated masses, suggest that they are in fact self-gravitating discs. Simulations of low mass star formation suggest that during the very earliest epochs, protostars are likely to be surrounded by discs of comparable mass, and hence disc self-gravity is important. In the first-core second-core paradigm of low mass star formation \citep{larson_1969,Masunaga_1}, it seems that for protostellar collapse in the presence of rotation, the first-core is in fact the disc, with the second-core forming the protostar \citep{Bate2010}. If massive star formation proceeds in a similar format to low mass star formation, albeit in a scaled-up manner, then we should expect similar behaviour. \smallskip Self-gravitating discs can produce highly effective angular momentum transport through low mode spiral density waves at very high masses \citep{Laughlin1996} and through gravito-turbulence, which produces a relatively strong turbulent viscosity at a range of disc masses \citep{gammie_2001}. The self-gravitating phase is likely to be relatively brief, but provides an attractive means for loading mass onto the central massive star, and may have significant impact on the subsequent dynamical and chemical evolution of the disc \citep[e.g.][]{ilee_2011, evans_2015}. As self-gravitating discs can be described in a pseudo-viscous manner under certain conditions \citep{forgan_2011}, it is relatively simple to compute quasi-steady disc models given the observed accretion rate, stellar mass and the disc inner and outer radii. \smallskip In this paper, we compute such models for five massive stars with reported observations of relatively massive circumstellar disc-like structures. We show that in several cases, the observational constraints on disc properties strongly suggest that self-gravity is playing a key role in mediating angular momentum transport in these discs. Further to this, some of the discs display accretion rates sufficiently high to prevent quasi-steady self-gravitating disc solutions. Our models therefore predict these systems could be undergoing disc fragmentation into bound objects, with expected fragment masses above the hydrogen burning limit, i.e.\ low mass stars. The paper is structured as follows: we outline the self-gravitating disc model in Section \ref{sec:method}. We apply this model to the observations on an object-by-object basis in Section \ref{sec:results}. Finally, our conclusions are presented in Section \ref{sec:conclusions}. \begin{table} \begin{minipage}{0.96\textwidth} \centering \caption{Star and disc parameters adopted in the models.} \label{tab:properties} \begin{tabular}{lccccc} \hline Object & Stellar Mass & Stellar Radius & Effective Temperature & Disc Inner Radius & Disc Outer Radius \\ & $M_{\star}$ (M$_{\odot}$) & $R_{\star}$ (R$_{\odot}$) & $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$ (K) & $R_{\mathrm{in}}$ (au) & $R_{\mathrm{out}}$ (au) \\ \hline G11.92$-$0.61 MM1$^{a}$ & 34 & 9 & 6300 & 21 & 1200 \\ NGC 6334 I(N) SMA1b$^{b}$ & 20 & 15 & 6100 & 22 & 800 \\ AFGL 4176 mm1$^{c}$ & 25 & 10 & 6200 & 31 & 2000 \\ IRAS 16547$-$4247$^{d}$ & 20 & 15 & 6100 & 20 & 800 \\ IRAS 20126$+$4104$^{e}$ & 12 & 35 & 6000 & 20 & 1200 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{flushleft} \small{$a$: \citet{Ilee2016}, $b$: \citet{hunter_2014}, $c$: \citet{johnston_2015}, $d$: \citet{zapata_2015}, $e$: \citet{chen_2016}.}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{minipage} \end{table} \section{Method} \label{sec:method} \subsection{Quasi-steady Self-Gravitating Disc Models} Discs are gravitationally unstable if the Toomre Parameter \citep{toomre_1964}: \begin{equation} Q = \frac{c_s \kappa_{\rm epi}}{\pi G \Sigma} \sim 1, \label{eq:Q} \end{equation} where $c_s$ is the local sound speed, $\Sigma$ is the local surface density and $\kappa_{epi}$ is the epicyclic frequency (in Keplerian discs, this is equal to the angular frequency $\Omega$). This criterion is sufficient to produce axisymmetric instabilities in the disc. Numerical simulations indicate that non-axisymmetric instabilities proceed when $Q\sim 1.5-1.7$ \citep[see e.g.][]{durisen_2007,kratter_2016}. \smallskip We can construct a simple one dimensional self-gravitating disc model assuming that the angular momentum transport is pseudo-viscous \citep{clarke_2009,rice_2009}. We use the $\alpha$-prescription \citep{shakura_1973}: \begin{equation} \nu = \alpha c_s H, \end{equation} where $\nu$ is the turbulent viscosity, and $H$ is the disc scale height: \begin{equation} H = \frac{c_s}{\Omega} \approx \frac{c^2_s}{\pi G \Sigma}. \end{equation} We are in the limit that the non-self-gravitating and self-gravitating expressions for the scale height are approximately equal thanks to Equation (\ref{eq:Q}). This pseudo-viscous approach is acceptable if the angular momentum transport is locally determined, and the disc aspect ratio $H/r$ remains low (of order 0.1), or equivalently the disc-to-star mass ratio is below 0.5 \citep{forgan_2011}. We shall see that the disc masses derived for the five massive stars we study are sufficiently low to justify assuming local angular momentum transport. \smallskip We construct our disc model in the same manner as \citet{forgan_2011a,forgan_2013,forgan_2013a}. We assume a fixed $Q=2$, and that the accretion rate, $\dot{M}$, is constant across all radii: \begin{equation} \dot{M} = 3 \pi \nu \Sigma = \frac{3 \pi \alpha c^2_s \Sigma}{\Omega}. \end{equation} The value of $\alpha$ at each radius is determined assuming local thermodynamic equilibrium: \begin{equation} \alpha = \frac{4}{9\gamma(\gamma-1) \beta_c}, \end{equation} where we assume $\gamma=5/3$. We obtain the dimensionless cooling parameter \begin{equation} \beta_c = t_{\mathrm{cool}} \Omega^{-1} \end{equation} by assuming the disc cools according to \begin{equation} \dot{u} = -\frac{u}{t_{\mathrm{cool}}} = \frac{\sigma_{\mathrm{SB}} (T^4-T^4_{\mathrm{irr}})}{\tau + \tau^{-1}}, \end{equation} where $u$ is the local internal energy per unit mass, $\sigma_{\mathrm{SB}}$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, $\tau = \Sigma \kappa$ is the local optical depth (from a grey opacity $\kappa$), $T$ is the disc temperature and $T_{\mathrm{irr}}$ is the temperature of the local environment due to irradiation from the central star. We calculate $\Omega$ from the standard Keplerian expression: \begin{equation} \Omega(r) = \sqrt{\frac{G M_{\mathrm{enc}}(r)}{r^3}}, \end{equation} where we account for the disc self-gravity by replacing $M_{\star}$ with the total mass within a radius $r$, $M_{\mathrm{enc}}(r)$. The system of equations is hence closed, and we solve via iteration of the surface density at each radius. Therefore, for a given value of the star mass $M_{\star}$ and accretion rate $\dot{M}$, we deliver a self-consistent self-gravitating disc model for a given inner and outer radius, and we can obtain the disc mass by integrating the surface density. \subsection{Stellar Irradiation} The local irradiation temperature is dominated by the massive central protostar. We assume a standard Stefan-Boltzmann relationship between equilibrium temperature and distance from the star \citep[cf][]{hayashi_1981}: \begin{equation} T_{\mathrm{irr}}(r) = 280 \left(\frac{M}{\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}}\right) \left(\frac{r}{1 \,\mathrm{au}}\right)^{-1/2}. \end{equation} The above assumes a standard main sequence mass luminosity relation. However, such a simple prescription vastly overestimates the stellar irradiation from massive young protostars. \citet{hosokawa_2009} determine that at the large accretion rates measured in MYSOs, the entropy generated at the accretion shock cannot be radiated away efficiently due to long cooling times, resulting in a swelling of the stellar radius and a corresponding reduction in the effective temperature $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$. As such, we determine stellar radii and effective temperatures for each object from the models of \citet{hosokawa_2009}, based on the stellar mass, and rescale the above equation to ensure that $T_{\mathrm{irr}}(r=R_{\star})=T_{\mathrm{eff}}$. The star and disc properties assumed for each object are listed in Table \ref{tab:properties}, however we note from test simulations that our results are only sensitive to these parameters at low disc radii. At large distances from the star where fragmentation can occur, we find little effect on the resulting disc structure. \subsection{Fragmentation and Fragment Masses} We test for the propensity of the disc to fragment into bound objects using the Jeans mass formalism of \citet{forgan_2011a,forgan_2013}. The local Jeans mass inside a spiral density wave in a self-gravitating disc is given by: \begin{equation} M_J = \frac{4\sqrt{2}\pi^3 }{3G}\frac{Q^{1/2} c^2_s H}{\left(1 + \frac{\Delta \Sigma}{\Sigma}\right)}, \label{eq:mjeans} \end{equation} where we use the empirical relation from \citet{rice_2011} (see also \citealt{Cossins2008}): \begin{equation} \left<\frac{\Delta \Sigma_{\mathrm{rms}}}{\Sigma}\right> = 4.47 \sqrt{\alpha}. \end{equation} We compute the time derivative $\dot{M}_J$ and identify regions where this quantity is large and negative. In these regions, surface density perturbations produced by the gravitational instability are most likely to result in a parcel of disc material that is Jeans unstable and will begin collapsing into a disc fragment. \subsection{Observed Dust-derived Mass} We can compare the disc mass obtained from the model to observations by computing the predicted dust continuum emission. We estimate the observed flux density at frequency $\nu$ using (cf\ \citealt{forgan_2013a}): \begin{equation} F_{\nu}(r) dr= \left\{ \begin{array}{l l } \frac{2k}{c^2D^2} \nu^2 \kappa(\nu) \Sigma(r) T(r) 2\pi r dr & \tau \leq 1 \\ \frac{2k}{c^2D^2} \nu^2 \frac{T(r)}{\tau^{1/4}} 2\pi r dr & \tau > 1, \end{array} \right. \label{eq:modflux} \end{equation} where the optical depth $\tau = \Sigma \kappa$ and $D$ is the system distance. This approach reflects the fact that self-gravitating discs can become optically thick even at quite long wavelengths, and as such only the dust mass above the photosphere (with temperature $T_{phot}=\frac{T(r)}{\tau^{1/4}}$) is measurable \citep{greaves_2010}. \smallskip The greatest source of uncertainty in these calculations is the opacity. Where possible, we adopt the opacity used by the observers (assuming a gas-to-dust mass ratio $R_{g}=100$ where necessary). We then convert this into an observed disc mass using \begin{equation} M_{\mathrm{disc}} = \frac{D^2 F_\nu c^2}{2 \kappa(\nu) k \nu^2 T_{\mathrm{dust}}}, \label{eq:Mdisc_dust} \end{equation} where $\kappa(\nu)$ is a frequency-dependent opacity law, and $T_{dust}$ is the inferred dust temperature. We adopt the same opacity law and dust temperature as used for each observation, and we also adopt a common observer assumption that the disc is optically thin, which is unlikely to be the case for massive self-gravitating discs. Note also that assuming a single dust opacity, a common practice when recovering disc masses, is also problematic when it is evident that opacities will be radially dependent. Equations (\ref{eq:modflux}) and (\ref{eq:Mdisc_dust}) assume the frequency is sufficiently short (or wavelength sufficiently long) that the radiation is emitted from the Rayleigh-Jeans tail of the blackbody spectrum. Some observers do instead use the full Planck function in equation (\ref{eq:Mdisc_dust}), but this has a negligible effect on $M_{\mathrm disc}$. \section{Results} \label{sec:results} \subsection{G11.92$-$0.61 MM1} \begin{figure} $\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/MM1_34msol_mtot.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/MM1_34msol_mflux.png} \\ \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/MM1_34msol_temp.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/MM1_34msol_mjeans.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{Self-gravitating disc models for MM1, assuming a central object mass of $34\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$. The inner disc radius is fixed at 21\,au. Each accretion rate and outer radius point represents a self-gravitating disc model, with colours representing the value of a given variable for that model (\textit{top left} - disc mass interior to $r_{\rm out}$; \textit{top right} - disc mass measured from dust continuum flux; \textit{bottom left} - midplane temperature; \textit{bottom right} - local Jeans mass inside a spiral density wave, i.e.\ the local mass of fragments (where fragmentation occurs)). Hashed regions in the lower right plot indicate disc models that do not produce fragments.} \label{fig:MM1_34msol} \end{figure} \noindent This system (hereafter MM1) has been shown by \citet{Ilee2016} to fit a Keplerian rotation profile, with an enclosed mass of approximately 30--60\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ within $\sim 1200$\,au (at a distance of 3.37\,kpc). The disc mass is around $2-3\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$, estimated from the continuum dust emission. The dust is assumed to be optically thin but with an opacity correction based on the observed millimetre continuum brightness temperature, which has an effect of order 10\% on the mass estimate. MM1 drives a bipolar molecular outflow with a relatively short dynamical time of $\leq$ 10,000 years \citep{cyganowski_2011sma}, suggesting this is a particularly young system. Along with its high disc to star mass ratio of $\gtrsim 0.035$, this suggests that MM1 could be a self-gravitating disc system. \smallskip We display outputs from the self-gravitating disc models for MM1 in Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol} assuming a central star mass of $34\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$. The inner disc radius is set to 21\,au, i.e. at the boundary of the source's hyper-compact H\,{\sc ii} region, and we neglect the ionised material within. \smallskip The top left panel of Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol} shows that for the disc parameters derived from this model, the true disc mass is between 5 -- 8\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ depending on the accretion rate. By assuming the dust temperature is 150\,K, we derive an ``observed'' disc mass (from equation \ref{eq:Mdisc_dust}) of around 1.5 -- 2\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ (right panel of Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}), which is close to that measured by \citet{Ilee2016} and \citet{cyganowski_2014}. This temperature is determined from the cool component of the CH$_3$CN\ emission, and is reasonably consistent with midplane temperatures in the self-gravitating disc model, which are of order a few hundred Kelvin (bottom left panel of Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}). Our estimate excludes the mass of any surrounding envelope, which may explain why our model's ``observed'' mass is a slight underestimate. \smallskip If our model is correct, we predict the disc should also be in the process of fragmenting. The Jeans mass criterion is easily satisfied for accretion rates above around $3 \times 10^{-5} \, \mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$. The bottom right panel of Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol} shows the fragment mass in solar masses (for disc parameters where fragmentation occurs). Generally, the Jeans mass exceeds the hydrogen burning limit of 0.08 $\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$, and it is expected that fragments can accrete further mass from the surrounding disc shortly after birth. We would therefore expect the system to be forming low mass protostars in the outer regions of the disc, presumably containing their own subdisc systems (see e.g. \citealt{forgan_2016}). These objects are beyond the resolution of our observations at this time, but may be detectable with future high angular resolution campaigns \citep{cossins_2010,vorobyov_2013, Dong2016}. \smallskip The formation of protostars is likely to launch jets. It is tempting to speculate that the water maser emission observed in the outer regions of the MM1 disc \citep{moscadelli_2016} could be indicative of fragmentation, with the masers tracing the base of a disc fragment's jet column, but such masers are sufficiently common that their presence is at best circumstantial evidence. \subsection{NGC 6334 I(N)-SMA1b} \begin{figure} $\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/INorth_20msol_mtot.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/INorth_20msol_mflux.png} \\ \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/INorth_20msol_temp.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/INorth_20msol_mjeans.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{As Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}, but for the SMA1b system.} \label{fig:INorth_20msol} \end{figure} \noindent NGC 6334 I(N)-SMA1b (hereafter SMA1b) is a candidate disc system with enclosed mass of $10-30\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ within 800\,au (depending on the system inclination), at a distance of 1.3\,kpc \citep{hunter_2014}. A velocity gradient traced by multiple species, perpendicular to an outflow traced by SiO(5-4) emission, is strong evidence for a disc configuration \citep{brogan_2009,hunter_2014}. \smallskip Figure \ref{fig:INorth_20msol} shows the resulting disc models for a 20\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ star with an inner radius of 22\,au (based on the reported radius of the hyper-compact H\,{\sc ii} region). The true disc masses derived in this case are approximately 4 $\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$, although the mass derived from the dust continuum (assuming a dust temperature of 150\,K) is around 1.3--1.7\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$. Given \citet{hunter_2014}'s estimate of $\sim $3--5\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ from dust continuum emission (assuming optically thin emission, corrected for opacity according to the system's brightness temperature), our prediction lies just below their lower limit. Again, extra mass in the surrounding envelope may explain the small discrepancy between our prediction and the observations, again suggesting that SMA1b may be a self-gravitating disc system, with the potential to form low mass stars via fragmentation. \subsection{AFGL 4176-mm1} \begin{figure} $\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/AFGL4176_mtot.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/AFGL4176_mflux.png} \\ \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/AFGL4176_temp.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/AFGL4176_mjeans.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{As Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}, but for the AFGL 4176 mm1 system. The grey hatched regions denote parameter spaces which do not produce viable self-gravitating disc solutions, due to irradiation preventing $Q$ from reaching the instability regime. \citet{johnston_2015}'s derived accretion rate places AFGL4176 in the hashed region, hence we conclude that AFGL4176 is not gravitationally unstable.} \label{fig:AFGL4176} \end{figure} \noindent This forming O-star has a Keplerian-like disc, with mass measured to be $\sim 8\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ assuming isothermal dust emission, and $12\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ when detailed radiative transfer modelling is employed \citep{johnston_2015}. \smallskip Our models (Figure \ref{fig:AFGL4176}), assuming a 25\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ central star and an inner radius of 31 au, suggest that this system is probably not completely self-gravitating. If the infall rate from the envelope modelled by \citet{johnston_2015} is correct, and the disc accretes at a similar rate ($\dot{M} = 4.6\times 10^{-4}\, \mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$), then even relatively weak irradiation prevents the Toomre $Q$ parameter from reaching low values, and as such the optically thin outer disc is stable against self-gravity. This is shown by the grey hatched regions in Figure \ref{fig:AFGL4176}, which indicate that a consistent self-gravitating solution cannot be found. Our true disc masses are slightly lower than \citet{johnston_2015}'s model fit to their data. Our estimates of disc masses from optically thin continuum dust emission are lower still. If we assume \citet{johnston_2015}'s adopted dust temperature of 190 K, and opacity law \citep{draine_2011}, we derive an observed mass of around 3\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$. \smallskip This discrepancy highlights the dangers of assuming dust emission is always optically thin. If we assume that the full continuum radiative transfer modelling carried out by \citet{johnston_2015} gives a faithful disc mass estimate, then we can compare their results to the true disc mass generated by the self-gravitating disc model, and we see that our true disc mass estimates are lower. We can therefore conclude that the data for AFGL 4176 mm1 are consistent with a system that is sufficiently irradiated by external sources to prevent the gravitational instability activating, and has possibly just left the self-gravitating phase. \subsection{IRAS 16547$-$4247} \citet{zapata_2015} presented observations of this system, indicating an enclosed mass of around 20--30\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ within 1000\,au, and an upper limit on the disc mass of around 6\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ from dust emission, assuming the dust is optically thin. \begin{figure} $\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS16547_mtot.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS16547_mflux.png} \\ \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS16547_temp.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS16547_mjeans.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{As Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}, but for the IRAS 16547$-$4247 system. The disc model (and predicted mass for continuum dust emission) both underestimate the observed mass of $\sim 6 \mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ significantly. The observed disc temperatures beyond $\sim$ 100 au are also much higher than suggested by our model, suggesting that this disc is kept gravitationally stable by external irradiation.} \label{fig:IRAS16547} \end{figure} If the disc is self-gravitating, then it is unlikely to satisfy this assumption (Figure \ref{fig:IRAS16547}). For the assumed stellar mass of 20\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ (and assumed inner radius of 20 au), our models indicate self-gravitating discs will possess a true mass of 3--5\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ depending on accretion rate. Dust thermal emission (at their assumed dust temperature of 250\,K) will only reveal approximately 15 per cent of this mass, with any other observed emission originating in the envelope and other optically thin components. If we were to attempt to construct a disc model with around 6\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ of observable material, it is likely that the true underlying disc mass would exceed the star mass by a factor of two - an unlikely scenario. \smallskip Our model temperatures are slightly lower than measured by \citet{zapata_2015}, who measure molecular lines with excitation temperatures above 500\,K within the disc extent. The inner regions of our disc model reach approximately 500\,K, but fail to exceed 100\,K beyond approximately 100\,au, i.e. we are unable to reproduce the temperatures consistent with such extensive emission at temperatures above 100K. It seems that this disc is significantly hotter than predicted from models where the star is the principal irradiation source. We conclude that external irradiation is permitting this disc to be massive and gravitationally stable, and we are therefore reasonably assured that marginally unstable self-gravitating disc models do not present a good fit to IRAS 16547$-$4247. \subsection{IRAS 20126$+$4104} This system (composed of a 12\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ star surrounded by a 1.5\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ disc) has been intensively modelled to explicitly check for gravitational instability \citep{chen_2016}. Rather than relying on a simple dust mass calculation from the continuum, the aforementioned authors fit their data (continuum, CH$_3$CN\ and CH$_3$OH) to a thin flared Keplerian disc plus envelope model, and find their best fit corresponds to a hot, gravitationally stable disc with $Q>3$ at all radii. \begin{figure} $\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS20126_mtot.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS20126_mflux.png} \\ \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS20126_temp.png} & \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/IRAS20126_mjeans.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{As Figure \ref{fig:MM1_34msol}, but for the IRAS 20126$+$4104 system.} \label{fig:IRAS20126} \end{figure} Our disc models (Figure \ref{fig:IRAS20126}), with an inner radius of 20 au, are broadly consistent with this picture. Our models fix $Q=2$ at all radii, and as a result produce more massive discs. For their established accretion rate of $3 \times 10^{-5}\, \mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$, our models derive a true disc mass of approximately 3\,$\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$, of which $1.5\,\mathrm{M}_{\rm \odot}$ is observable in the dust continuum at 870\,$\micron$. A gravitationally unstable disc is hence a poor description of the data, but this result is of course sensitive to uncertainties in the opacity, and to the accretion luminosity of the star, which we do not explicitly model and is likely to be the cause of our lower disc temperatures (\citet{chen_2016} compute temperatures of approximately 300 K at 200 au, see Figure \ref{fig:IRAS20126}). \citet{chen_2016} calculate a 27 per cent error in their estimation of $Q$, but it is unclear how they incorporate systematic effects due to opacity uncertainties into this estimate. Changes to the opacity modify the derived equilibrium disc structure, and hence the derived $Q$. That being said, we would agree with their statement that this system is just above the marginally unstable regime of $Q<2$. \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusions} We have constructed one dimensional self-gravitating disc models for five disc candidates around massive stars: G11.92$-$0.61 MM1 \citep{Ilee2016}, NGC 6334 I(N) SMA1b \citep{hunter_2014}, AFGL 4176 mm1 \citep{johnston_2015}, IRAS 16547$-$4247 \citep{zapata_2015} and IRAS 20126$+$4104 \citep{chen_2016}. We show that while in general observed disc masses from continuum dust emission may be quite low, suggesting the systems are not in fact self-gravitating, much of the true disc mass can be masked by the high optical depth of self-gravitating discs even at relatively long (i.e.\ millimetre) wavelengths. \smallskip Indeed, we find that our disc models indicate that systems with a star mass of tens of solar masses and an observed disc-to-star mass ratio of $\sim 0.05$ or less can possess true disc-to-star mass ratios of $\sim 0.2$, placing them in the self-gravitating regime, and indeed potentially fragmenting into low mass protostars. \smallskip We find two broad categories of disc. In the first category, the disc is sufficiently massive and cool that marginally stable self-gravitating disc models make accurate predictions for the observed continuum dust emission, while masking a significantly larger true disc mass, potentially prone to fragmentation (G11.92$-$0.61 MM1 and NGC 6334 I(N) SMA1b). The other three objects belong to the other category, where fragmentation (and gravitational instability generally) is forestalled by sufficient irradiation from the central star and/or external sources. Our model temperatures at large radii are slightly lower than the observed values for these three sources, which suggests external irradiation or extra sources of luminosity may be important. \smallskip Our models exclude the envelope and inner H\,{\sc ii} regions in these systems, and hence our true disc masses will underestimate observed total enclosed masses. Our intent is not to precisely fit each system, but to illustrate how self-gravitating discs can mask a large fraction of their mass even at millimetre wavelengths. \smallskip If the mass (and hence the stability) of a self-gravitating disc is to be correctly characterised by observations, then one must be cautious when calculating masses using thermal dust emission. If one assumes the dust is optically thin, then one is at risk of dramatically underestimating the total disc mass. A fuller analysis of the complete disc structure, ideally with radiative transfer modelling of both the dust and gas emission, is necessary \citep[see e.g.][]{johnston_2015,chen_2016}. \smallskip In light of this, we suggest that disc candidates around massive stars that have measured Toomre $Q$ values $<$ 3--5, or measured disc-to-star mass ratios of order $0.05$ or higher, should be modelled carefully to ensure that disc masses have been correctly inferred, and studied for signs of fragmentation. We note that G11.92$-$0.61 MM1 and NGC 6334 I(N) SMA1b are perhaps the most promising candidates for self-gravitating discs, given the apparent youth of the objects, and the fact a simple self-gravitating disc model agrees well with observations. As such, we recommend they be studied at higher resolution and sensitivity (such as with ALMA or NOEMA) to search for substructure that is indicative of gravitational instability, and perhaps even low mass star formation via disc fragmentation. \section*{Acknowledgements} We would like to thank Katharine Johnston for useful discussions. DHF gratefully acknowledges support from the ECOGAL project, grant agreement 291227, funded by the European Research Council under ERC-2011-ADG. JDI gratefully acknowledges support from the DISCSIM project, grant agreement 341137, funded by the European Research Council under ERC-2013-ADG. CJC acknowledges support from STFC grant ST/M001296/1. This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services. \bibliographystyle{mnras}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec::intro} Noise correlations modulate the coactivation of neurons and neural populations at multiple levels in the brain, potentially introducing information that cannot be decoded without knowing their strength and structure. To test this hypothesis, previous studies have assessed, for example, whether correlations are strong, vary across stimuli or experimental tasks, increase the amount of encoded information, or shape spike-triggered averages and decoding filters \citep{gawne1993,meister1995,warland1997,nirenberg1998,panzeri2001,abbott1999,brenner2000,schneidman2003,eyherabide2008,quiroga2009}. These findings were thought to imply that ignoring noise correlations during decoding must cause an information loss. This conclusion was challenged by \citet{nirenberg2001} who proposed to test the hypothesis directly from the decoder, observer or organism perspective \citep{bialek1991,jaynes2003}. To that end, they derived an information-theoretical measure of correlation importance here called $ \dini^{D\!} $ \citep[also called $ \Delta I $, $ I_{\rs{cordep}} $, $ \Delta I_1 $, and $ \Delta I_{N\!I}^D $][]{nirenberg2003,montani2007,ince2010,eyherabide2013}. However, the measure has been perceived as an upper bound, partially because it may potentially exceed the information loss $ \dini^{B\!} $ caused by optimal decoders constructed assuming noise independence and even the transmitted information \citep{schneidman2003,latham2005,oizumi2009,oizumi2010,eyherabide2013,latham2013}. These putative limitations were seemingly solved by \citet{latham2005} who derived a new information-theoretical measure of correlation importance here called $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ \citep[also denoted $ \Delta I^* $ and $ \Delta I_{N\!I}^{D\!L} $ in neural decoding, and analogous to $ \Phi^$ within integrated information theory of consciousness;][]{latham2005,eyherabide2013,oizumi2016}. Initially, this measure was employed to justify $ \dini^{D\!} $ as an upper-bound of correlation importance \citep{latham2005}. However, its applications have been extended to included the study of medium-to-large populations, thereby overcoming the putative overestimation produced by $ \dini^{D\!} $; higher-order neural correlations, by combining $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ with maximum-entropy methods; integrated-information theory of consciousness, introducing the decoder perspective and the first measure that seemingly fulfills the theoretical requirements within the field; and neural stochastic codes from the decoding perspective \citep{oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016,eyherabide2016b}. Since its introduction, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ has been regarded as the exact information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}. However, we have recently shown that, like its predecessor, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ can also exceed $ \dini^{B\!} $ \citep{eyherabide2013}. Unfortunately, due to the rigorous information-theoretical derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and the different information notions underlying $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and $ \dini^{B\!} $, whether the aforementioned numerical comparison either reveals major departures from traditional views on the relation between information and decoding, or constitutes an indication that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is flawed, remains an open question. To answer this question, we first disentangle the information notion underlying $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, here called communication information, from the one that we argue underlies $ \dini^{B\!} $, which we call axiomatic information. Taking their differences into account, we determine under which conditions observing that $ \dini^{B\!}{<}\dini^{D\!L\!} $ implies that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is flawed and overestimates the communication information loss. We also address whether this conclusion can be reached even if $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ does not exceed $ \dini^{B\!} $. To that end, we study neural populations that transmit independent information, and show that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ grows when decoding them together, as opposed to decoding them in parallel. This paradoxical growth, which can reach about $ 100\,\% $ of transmitted information, is here shown to stem from unforeseen information-theoretical limitations in the derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. Surprisingly, we find exactly the opposite phenomena when using $ \dini^{B\!} $, and trace it back to the choice of tie-breaking rules employed during the decoder construction. Our study shows, for the first time, that none of these measures need be additive when information is independent, and most importantly, that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ need not be exact and may overestimate the communication information loss. Above all, we contribute with tight estimates of communication information losses, thereby potentially improving the accuracy of previous and future theoretical and experimental inferences drawn from them. On the practical side, our results open up new possibilities for simplifying, with tolerable information losses, the computational models that underlie the design of brain-machine interfaces and neuroprosthetics, and for reducing the amount of resources required to study brain computations and information integration \citep{nirenberg2001,nirenberg2003,latham2005,quiroga2009,eyherabide2013,aflalo2015,zhang2016,bouton2016}. \section{Materials and methods} \subsection{Notation}\label{met::sec::notation} Sensory stimuli are here characterized by vectors $ \mathbf{S}{=}[S_1,\ldots,S_J]$ of $ J $ components, where each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ component $ S_j $ represents the value adopted by a different feature. For example, most of our hypothetical experiments employ the following four stimuli: $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $. These stimuli can be characterize using vectors $ \mathbf{S}{=}[S_1,S_2] $ of two components (i.e. $ J{=}2 $), where the first component denotes the type of frame (i.e., $ S_1{\in}\{\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}},\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\}) $, and the second component, the type of letter (i.e., $ S_2{\in}\{\mathrm{A},\mathrm{B}\} $). Neural responses are here characterized by vectors $\mathbf{R}{=}[\mathbf{R}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{R}_J] $ of $ J $ components. Each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ component $ \mathbf{R}_j$ typically characterizes those aspects of the neural responses (e.g., first-spike latency and spike counts either in the individual or concurrent activity of all neurons; phase and amplitudes in local field potentials or sensor signals from brain-imaging devices; etc.) that are sensitive to the value adopted by the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ stimulus feature. To that end, each $ \mathbf{R}_j$ is here characterized as a vector of $ K_j $ components, namely $ \mathbf{R}_j{=}[R_j^1,\ldots,R_j^{K_j}] $, where each $ k\textsuperscript{th} $ component $ R_j^k $ denotes the value adopted by the $ k\textsuperscript{th} $ response aspect in the set of response aspects that are sensitive to the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ stimulus feature $ S_j $. However, to improve readability, the subscript $ j $ will often be eliminated when $ J{=}1 $. As an example, imagine an experiment with two populations of two neurons each, that fire in response to the stimuli mentioned above. The first population is only sensitive to frames and the second population is only sensitive to letters. In this experiment, we will denote the concurrent responses of all neurons as $ \mathbf{R}{=}[\mathbf{R}_1,\mathbf{R}_2] $. Here, $ \mathbf{R}_1 $ and $ \mathbf{R}_2 $ denote the concurrent responses of all neurons in the first and the second population, respectively. In addition, $ \mathbf{R}_1{=}[R_1^1,R_1^2] $, with $ R_1^1 $ and $ R_1^2 $ denoting the responses of the first and the second neuron in the first population; $ \mathbf{R}_2 $ is defined analogously to $ \mathbf{R}_1 $. Should the four neurons have been sensitive to all stimulus features, we would have denoted their concurrent responses as $ \mathbf{R}{=}[R^1,R^2,R^3,R^4] $. \subsection{Neural encoding}\label{met::sec::neuenc} Transforming $ \mathbf{S} $ into $ \mathbf{R} $ is called encoding \citep{panzeri2010}. Because the same $ \mathbf{S} $ may elicit different $ \mathbf{R} $s, and the same $ \mathbf{R} $ may occur for different $ \mathbf{S} $s, both $ \mathbf{S} $ and $ \mathbf{R} $ are often treated as random variables with joint probabilities $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) $. The Shannon or mutual information $ I(\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R})$ encoded in $ \mathbf{R} $ about $ \mathbf{S} $ is given by the following \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::encinfo} I(\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}) = \sum_{\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}}{P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R})\,\ln \frac{P(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})}{P(\mathbf{S}) \,P(\mathbf{R})}}\, , \end{equation} \noindent where $ \ln $ denotes natural logarithms. Consequently, absolute information values are measured in units of nats, as opposed to units of bits \citep[the conversion from nats to bits only requires to divide by $ \ln 2 $;][]{cover2006}. However, our choice of natural logarithms does not affect information ratios, and simplifies calculations and notation. \subsection{Noise correlations}\label{met::sec::noisecorr} The responses of $ K $ neurons are deemed noise independent (NI) when the following condition always holds \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::noiseind} P(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}) = \prod_{k=1}^{K}{P(R^k\|\mathbf{S})} \overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S})\, . \end{equation} \noindent Otherwise, the responses are deemed noise correlated. Here, $ \overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} $ denotes a definition; and $ \prod $, a product. This definition can be traced back to \citet{schneidman2003} and takes into account noise correlations at all orders \citep{latham2013}, as opposed to those based on linear or nonlinear correlations \citep{pereda2005,cohen2011}. However, contrary to previous studies \citep{nirenberg2003,latham2005,meytlis2012,delis2013}, here we note that this definition need not be equivalent to those that additionally average across all stimuli \citep{gawne1993,womelsdorf2012}, which potentially confuse noise correlations with activity correlations \citep{schneidman2003} and are prone to cancellation effects \citep{nirenberg2003}. \subsection{Neural decoding}\label{met::sec::neudec} Transforming $ \mathbf{R} $ into estimated stimuli $ \tilde{\VS} $ (or into perceptions, decisions and actions) is called decoding \citep{panzeri2010}. Analogous to $ \mathbf{S} $ and $ \mathbf{R} $, both $ \mathbf{S} $ and $ \tilde{\VS} $ are often treated as random variables with joint probabilities $ P(\mathbf{S},\tilde{\VS}) $, also called confusion matrix \citep{quiroga2009,ince2010,rolls2011,delis2013}. In this study, we focus on optimal decoders, also known as Bayesian or maximum-a-posteriori decoders, ideal homunculus, ideal or Bayesian observers, and optimal-unbiased or maximum-likelihood discrimination \citep{bialek1987,knill1996,oram1998,ernst2002,simoncelli2009,geisler2011,zhang2016}. These decoders map each $ \mathbf{R} $ into $ \tilde{\VS}$ as follows \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::bayesdec} \tilde{\VS} = \arg \max_{\mathbf{S}}{P(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})}\, , \end{equation} \noindent where $ P(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})$ is computed via Bayes' rule \citep{eyherabide2013}. When neurons are noise correlated, decoding their concurrent responses $ \mathbf{R} $ using the exact $ P(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}) $ can become experimentally and computationally intractable even for the brain. For this reason, previous studies have proposed to construct optimal decoders assuming that neurons are NI, here called optimal NI decoders \citep{eyherabide2013}, but also known as weak-coupling or independent models, weak observers, and naive Bayes classifiers \citep{landy1995,knill1996,duda2000,nirenberg2001,nirenberg2003,quiroga2009,meytlis2012}. These decoders map each $ \mathbf{S} $ into $ \VSD $ as follows \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::bayesnidec} \VSD = \arg \max_{\mathbf{S}}{P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})}\, , \end{equation} \noindent with $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})$ computed from $P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}) $ via Bayes' rule. \subsection{Decoding perspective}\label{met::sec::perspective} This study assesses the role of noise correlations from the decoding perspective. Within it, the importance of noise correlations is measured as the losses caused by decoding the actual neural responses assuming that neurons are NI. Noise correlations are deemed important if the losses are significant, and inessential if they are not \citep[see][and references therein]{eyherabide2013}. The decoding perspective if often confused with other approaches that measure correlation importance, for example, by comparing the information encoded in real responses with the one encoded in surrogate NI responses (responses generated assuming that neurons are NI). Even when using decoders \citep{nirenberg1998,quiroga2009,delis2013}, these approaches need be neither conceptually nor quantitatively related to the decoding perspective \citep{nirenberg2003,latham2005,averbeck2006}. Avoiding such confusion is fundamental to correctly interpreting our results and conclusions. \subsection{Measures of correlation importance}\label{met::sec::measures} Even within the decoding perspective, the choice of correlation-importance measure remains controversial. Here we will study the relation between the following three commonly-used measures \begin{align} \dini^{B\!}(S,\mathbf{R}) & = \sum_{S,\mathbf{R}}{P(S,\mathbf{R})\,\ln \frac{P(S\|\mathbf{R})}{P(S\|\VSD)}} \label{met::def::dinidd}\\ \dini^{D\!}(S,\mathbf{R}) & = \sum_{S,\mathbf{R}}{P(S,\mathbf{R})\,\ln \frac{P\sdrarg}{P^{\rl{NI}}(\VS\|\VR)}}\label{met::def::dinid}\\ \dini^{D\!L\!}(S,\mathbf{R}) & = \min_{\theta}{\sum_{S,\mathbf{R}}{P(S,\mathbf{R})\,\ln \frac{P\sdrarg}{P^{\rl{NI}}(\VS\|\VR,\theta)}}}\label{met::def::dinidl}\overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} \min_{\theta}{\dinidlt{\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}\|}}\, , \end{align} \noindent where $ \VSD $ is the output of an optimal NI decoder (\sref{met::sec::neudec}), and \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::qsrtheta} P^{\rl{NI}}(\VS\|\VR,\theta) \propto P(\VS)\,P^{\rl{NI}}(\VR\|\VS)^{\theta} \, , \end{equation} \noindent with the convention that $ 0^0{=}0 $ for automatically overcoming the drawbacks of previous definitions found in \citep{eyherabide2013}. These measures have been previously related to the information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding \citep{nirenberg2003,latham2005,ince2010}. Accordingly, the decoded information when ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding has previously been quantified by subtracting these measures from the encoded information \citep{oizumi2009,oizumi2010}. Further details about their derivations and interpretations are here postponed until \sref{sec::results}, where we will reassess them in the context of the present study. \subsection{Independent information}\label{met::sec::indinfo} The notion of independent information has previously been given different definitions that need not be interchangeable. In this study, we say that the responses $ \mathbf{R}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{R}_J $ of $ J $ neural populations transmit independent information when they fire independently and selectively to $ J $ independent stimulus features $ S_1,\ldots,S_J $ \citep{fano1961}. Using the notation introduced in \sref{met::sec::notation}, our definition implies the following \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::indjoint} P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) = \textstyle\prod_{j=1}^J{P(S_j,\mathbf{R}_j)} \, . \end{equation} \noindent When \eref{met::eq::indjoint} holds, each pair $ [S_j,\mathbf{R}_j] $ is here said to constitute an independent-information channel or stream. Under our definition, the information carried by independent-information streams is additive \citep{fano1961}, namely \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::infoadd} I(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R})= \sum_{j=1}^{J}{I(S_j;\mathbf{R}_j)}\, . \end{equation} \noindent For simplicity, hereinafter we abbreviate the notation for the arguments of any information measure $ X $ as follows \begin{align} \makebox[6ex][l]{$ X_{1,\ldots,J} $}&\overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} X(S_1,\ldots,S_J;\mathbf{R}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{R}_J)\\ \makebox[6ex][l]{$ X_j $} &\overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} X(S_j,\mathbf{R}_j)\\ \makebox[6ex][l]{$ X_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $}&\overset{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{def}}{=} X_1+\cdots+X_J \end{align} \noindent Using these abbreviations, the additivity of the information carried by independent-information streams can be simply put as $ I_{{1,\ldots,J}}{=}I_{{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J}} $. This property has often been used as the actual definition of independent information \citep{brenner2000,schneidman2003,schneidman2011,rolls2011}, whereas other definitions only require that populations are asymptotically or conditionally independent \citep{gawne1993,samengo2000,cover2006}. Our definition is more stringent than those and ensures that independent information remains independent after arbitrary parallel transformations of the form $ [\tilde{S}_j,\tilde{\mathbf{R}}_j]=f_j(S_j,\mathbf{R}_j)$, namely \begin{equation}\label{se::eq::infoaddtransform} P\bigl(\tilde{S}_1,\tilde{\mathbf{R}}_1,\ldots,\tilde{S}_J,\tilde{\mathbf{R}}_J\bigr) = \textstyle\prod_{j=1}^{J}{P\bigl(\tilde{S}_j,\tilde{\mathbf{R}}_j\bigr)}\, . \end{equation} \noindent This property plays a fundamental role in our study, and it also holds for the definitions given in \citet{cover2006} and \citet{eyherabide2010FCN}. However, our definition is more general than those for the noise in each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ stream is allowed to depend on the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ feature. \section{Results}\label{sec::results} \subsection{Underlying information notions need not be reliably related}\label{res::sec::difnotion} Quantifying the information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations from the decoding perspective remains controversial, oftentimes due to unfulfilled expectations about the relation between different measures of information loss. One of the most important unfulfilled expectations concerns the measures $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and $ \dini^{B\!} $ (\sref{met::sec::measures}). Because $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ continues to be considered the exact information loss in optimal NI decoding (\sref{sec::intro} and references therein), it may seem natural to expect that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ constitute a lower bound on the information loss $ \dini^{B\!} $ caused by optimal NI decoders. However, as we have recently shown, this relation need not hold \citep{eyherabide2013}. In this section, we begin our quest to disentangle whether this result indicates that the measures are flawed or that traditional expectations are unjustified, by comparing the information notions underlying $ \dini^{D\!L\!}$ and $ \dini^{B\!} $. The measure $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ was derived by \citet{latham2005} using a notion of information with roots in communication theory, here called communication information (\sref{met::sec::neuenc}). Within the context of this study, this notion and the derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ can both be intuitively described using the population of two neurons depicted in \fref{fig01}(a). These two neurons can distinguish between two visual stimuli, namely $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $, by concurrently firing the same number of spikes ($ 1 $ or $ 2 $) after observing $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $, and different number of spikes ($ 2 $ or $ 3 $) after observing $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig01.eps} \caption[]{Communication notions previously used to derive $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. (a) Hypothetical intracellular recording of the concurrent spike trains produced by two neurons within $ 100\,ms $ after presenting each of the visual stimuli $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ in alternation, with pauses between each presentation. Only two types of population responses occur for each stimulus, and can be fully described using spike counts. (b) Representation of the memoryless communication system employed by \citet{latham2005} to compute $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $.}\label{fig01} \end{figure} To compute $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, \citet{latham2005} employed sequences $ \MSEnc{=}[\MSEnc[1],\ldots,\MSEnc[N]] $ of $ N $ independent and identically distributed stimuli, and grouped into sets called codebooks (\fref{fig01}(b)). Each $ \MSEnc $ is transformed by the aforementioned neural population, one stimulus at a time and independently of the others, into a sequence $ \MR{=}[\MR[1],\ldots,\MR[N]] $ of $ N $ population responses. The $ \MR $ are then fed into an optimal NI decoder that attempts to reconstruct the original $ \MSEnc $ (\sref{met::sec::neudec}). Using this interpretation, \citet{latham2005} computed an estimate of the average probability $ P(\MSEnc{\neq}\MSDec) $ that the decoded sequences $ \MSDec$ produced by optimal NI decoders differ from the transmitted sequences $ \MSEnc $, usually denoted $ P_e^{\mathtt{[N]}} $. They showed this estimate to decay exponentially as $ N $ grows for codebooks of up to $ \exp[N\,\tilde{I}] $ sequences, from which they concluded, based on standard information-theoretical results, that $ \tilde{I} $ quantifies the communicated information. Subtracting $ \tilde{I} $ from the encoded information yielded the measure $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ that is currently believed the exact information loss caused when ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding (\sref{met::sec::measures}). Current beliefs notwithstanding, we have recently shown that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ can exceed the information loss $ \dini^{B\!} $ caused by optimal decoders constructed ignoring noise correlations \citep[\sref{met::sec::measures};][]{eyherabide2013}. Analogously to previous conclusions about $ \dini^{D\!} $, this finding may seem to directly indicate that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is flawed and overestimates the information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding. However, as we note here, this conclusion overlooks the fact that $ \dini^{B\!} $ is fundamentally different from $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, and therefore not necessarily comparable. Specifically, $ \dini^{B\!} $ differs from $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ in at least the following three fundamental aspects. First, it stems from treating decoding as a recoding process, rather than as the final stage in a communication system \citep{quiroga2009}. Second, it is sensitive to random errors but insensitive to systematic errors, and hence be large without decoders ever being correct \citep{schneidman2003,quiroga2009}. Third, its derivation involves single stimuli, as opposed to stimulus sequence and asymptotic limits. These three differences are not necessarily unknown in the neuroscience literature, but they are often overlooked. Overlooking the differences between $ \dini^{B\!} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, and therefore deeming them comparable, may seem justified for at least two reasons. First, previous studies have shown that $ \dini^{D\!} $ \citep{nirenberg2003,latham2013}, and consequently $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ \citep{eyherabide2016b}, reduces to the traditional information loss when applied to ignoring response aspects through transformations of the population response. Second, the data processing inequality ensures that, under those cases, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is a lower bound of the information loss caused by decoders that operates on the transformed responses. However, as we have recently shown, the second reason is invalid because, within the decoding perspective, decoders operate on the original responses, as opposed to the transformed ones. Furthermore, we have recently proved that, contrary to previously thought, the first reason need not be valid even for deterministic transformations \citep{eyherabide2016b}. Therefore, we find questionable both to overlook the differences between the information notions underlying $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and $ \dini^{B\!} $, and to draw conclusions conclusion about flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ based on previous observations that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{>}\dini^{B\!} $. Instead, those observations may indicate major departures from traditional relations between their underlying information notions. Nevertheless, it seems to us rather unfortunate that a putative exact measure of information loss cannot be regarded as a yardstick against which the performance of optimal NI decoders can be measured. Resolving this puzzle requires that we hereinafter undertake at least two actions. First, distinguishing the notion of communication information underlying $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, from the notion of axiomatic information underlying $ \dini^{B\!} $, here so-called because it seemingly interprets information as an abstract measure of arbitrary correlations that fulfills certain intuitive and desirable axioms \citep{shannon1949,woodward1952,fano1961,gallager1968}. Second, assessing the properties of these two measures within the boundaries of their underlying information notions. In this way, our strategy becomes unfortunately more complex than those followed by previous studies, but guarantees to avoid their potential confounds, and to accurately compare $ \dini^{B\!} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. \subsection{$ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates the communication information loss}\label{res::sec::paradox} We have recently shown not only that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ can exceed $ \dini^{B\!} $, but also that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ can be positive even when optimal NI decoders never make mistakes \citep{eyherabide2013}. However, the results there shown comprised a single hypothetical experiment analogous to the one depicted in \fref{fig01}(a), which may seem to possess peculiar characteristics. Most importantly, we did not connect those results with the possitibility of flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. In this section, we test this possibility, avoiding potential confounds by recasting the above experiment within the framework of \citet{latham2005}, and generalizing the results to any experiment in which optimal NI decoders never make mistakes, regardless of the stimulus-response distributions. Imagine generic experiments in which optimal NI decoders can perfectly identify the $ \mathbf{S} $ that elicited each $ \mathbf{R} $, including and beyond that in \fref{fig01}(a). Mathematically, this means that $ P(\mathbf{S}{\neq}\tilde{\VS}){=}0 $, where $ \tilde{\VS} $ denotes the decoded stimuli. As we note here, all these experiments can be recast within the framework of \citet{latham2005}, by interpreting neural populations as memoryless channels that read unit-length stimulus sequences $ \MSEnc[1] $. These sequences are turned into unit-length population-response sequences $ \MR[1] $, which are subsequently fed into optimal NI decoders. Suppose now that the length of the sequences is increased to an arbitrary value $ N $. According to $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, optimal NI decoders may start making mistakes. Indeed, suppose that, in the experiment of \fref{fig01}(a), the population responses $ \mathbf{R}{=}[R^1,R^2] $ associated with each stimulus are equally-likely and $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ occurs more frequently than $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $. Mathematically, this implies that $ P(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}){=}0.5 $ regardless of $ \mathbf{R} $ and $ \mathbf{S} $, and that $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){>}0.5 $. In that case, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is positive and can reach ${\approx}25\,\% $ of the transmitted information \citep{eyherabide2013}, both of which can only occur if $ P_e^{\mathtt{[N]}}{>}0 $. To prove that this is not the case, recall that by hypothesis, optimal NI decoders can produce stimulus estimates $ \MSDec[n] $ for each $ n\textsuperscript{th} $ population response $ \MR[n] $ within the received $ \MR $ without errors, namely $ P(\MSEnc[n]{\neq}\MSDec[n]){=}0 $. Boole's inequality \citep{casella2002} ensures that concatenating these parallel estimates to produce the decoded stimulus sequence $ \MSDec $ yields no sequence-errors, that is \begin{equation} P(\MSEnc{\neq}\MSDec)\leq N\,\max_{n}{P(\MSEnc[n]{\neq}\MSDec[n])} = 0\, . \end{equation} \noindent Following \citet{latham2005}, this result implies that, in the above experiments, ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding never causes communication information losses. Therefore, we have proved for the first time that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is flawed and overestimates the communication information loss when ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding. For this reason, we denote the latter as $ \Delta CI $. Momentarily, we will define $ \Delta CI $ as follows \begin{equation} \Delta CI = \begin{cases}0 & \mbox{in the absence of decoding errors}\\ \dini^{D\!L\!} & \mbox{otherwise} \end{cases}\, , \end{equation} \noindent but refine it later after revealing additional sources of overestimation. \subsection{Misleading intuitions and limitations}\label{res::sec::misleading} Although we proved above that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates $ \Delta CI $, our proof still partially rests on the experiment in \fref{fig01}(a). This experiment possesses three properties that may seem peculiar and in direct contradiction with current intuitions about the role of noise correlations in optimal decoding. In this section, we show these properties inessential for $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ to overestimate $ \Delta CI $. Our demonstrations focus on cases in which optimal NI decoders make no mistakes. This property implies that each $ \mathbf{R} $ occurs for only one $ \mathbf{S} $. However, we exclude the cases in which each $ \mathbf{R} $ would occur for only one $ \mathbf{S} $ should neurons be NI, because the resulting $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is trivially zero and therefore tight. In the remaining cases, at least one $ \mathbf{R} $ that occurs when neurons are correlated always occur for more than one $ \mathbf{S} $ should neurons be NI. To illustrate this condition, we constructed three experiments analogous to \fref{fig01}(a) and represented them using Cartesian coordinates (\fref{fig02}). In all panels, the $ \mathbf{R} $s recorded during the experiment are represented at the top, and those that would have been recorded should neurons be NI are represented at the bottom. The experiment in \fref{fig02}(a) actually coincides with that in \fref{fig01}(a), whereas those in \fref{fig02}(b) and \fref{fig02}(c) are variations of it explained below. In all cases, the Cartesian representations clearly show that each $ \mathbf{R} $ occurs for only one $ \mathbf{S} $ when neurons are correlated (top) and that $ \mathbf{R}{=}[2,2] $ would have occurred for all $ \mathbf{S} $s should neurons be NI. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig02.eps} \caption[]{$ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may overestimate the communication information loss. (a) Cartesian representation of the responses recorded in the experiment of \fref{fig01}(a) (top) and the surrogate NI responses that would have occur should neurons be NI (bottom). (b) Analogous description to panel (a), but for the responses recorded in another hypothetical experiment. (c) Analogous description to panel (b). In all cases, the symbols represent the stimuli; and their locations, the concurrent responses they elicit. To improve visibility, symbols that occur in the same location are shown to only partially overlap.}\label{fig02} \end{figure} The first seemingly peculiar property of \fref{fig01}(a) is that noise correlations vary across $ \mathbf{S} $. Indeed, \fref{fig02}(a) shows that the concurrent responses of both neurons are positively correlated when elicited by $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ (that is, the Pearson correlation coefficient $ \rho(R^1,R^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){>}0 $), and negatively correlated when elicited by $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ (that is, $ \rho(R^1,R^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){<}0 $). This observation has previously been thought to indicate that noise correlation must be important from the decoding perspective \citep{nirenberg2001addmeister,latham2005}. However, in \sref{res::sec::paradox}, we proved that this intuition need not be correct. Most importantly, this first property is insufficient and unnecessary for proving that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates $ \Delta CI $. To prove it insufficient, we take the experiment in \fref{fig02}(a) and set $ P(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}){\neq}0.5 $ regardless of $ \mathbf{S} $ and $ \mathbf{R} $, thereby obtaining through \eref{met::def::dinidl} that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{=}0 $ \citep{eyherabide2013}. To prove it unnecessary, we build another experiment analogous to \fref{fig02}(a), but with $ \mathbf{R}{=}[1,1] $ replaced by $ [1,3] $ (\fref{fig02}(b)). Contrary to \fref{fig02}(a), here noise correlations remain constant across stimuli both in sign and in strength (i.e., $ \rho(R^1,R^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}\rho(R^1,R^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}-1 $). Notwithstanding, setting $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.52$, $P(\mathbf{R}{=}[2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.48 $, and $ P(\mathbf{R}{=}[2,3]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.52 $, yields $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{\approx}50\,\% $ even though optimal NI decoders can be readily proved to never make mistakes. The second seemingly peculiar property is that the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}$ equals the value of its predecessor, namely $\dini^{D\!} $ \citep{eyherabide2013}. Interestingly, this observation has previously been thought to indicate that $ \dini^{D\!} $ is tight \citep{latham2013}. On the contrary, here we show that such observation actually indicates that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is loose. Specifically, we can prove that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{=}\dini^{D\!} $ is sufficient but inessential for proving that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates the communication information loss. To avoid clutter, we hereinafter omit the response labels from the arguments of the probabilities. To prove it sufficient, notice that, for the cases under consideration (see second paragraph), at least one $ \mathbf{R} $ and $ \mathbf{S} $ exists for which $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){<}1 $ and $ P(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){=}1 $. Therefore, \eref{met::def::dinid} yields that $ \dini^{D\!}{>}0 $, and consequently, the second property implies that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{>}0 $. However, the second property need not imply that optimal NI decoders make mistakes. Indeed, the property holds when setting $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) $ in \fref{fig02}(a) so that $ P^{\rl{NI}}([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}P^{\rl{NI}}([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, even though optimal NI decoders never make mistakes when $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){>}0.5 $. To prove it inessential, we set in \fref{fig02}(b) $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.48 $, $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.58 $, and $ P([2,3]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.48 $. Using these probabilities, \eref{met::def::dinid} and \eref{met::def::dinidl} readily yield different values for $ \dini^{D\!}$ (${\approx}48\,\% $) and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}$ (${\approx}36\,\% $), respectively. However, optimal NI decoders can be readily proved to never make mistakes. The third seemingly peculiar property is that each $ \mathbf{R} $ that would occur for more than one $ \mathbf{S} $ should neurons be NI, would do so with equal frequency for those $ \mathbf{S} $. Mathematically, $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_A){>}0 $ and $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_B){>}0 $ implies that $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_A){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_B) $. However, this property is sufficient but typically inessential for proving that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates $ \Delta CI $. We prove it sufficient by noting that this property turns $ \dinidlt{\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}\|} $ independent of $ \theta $, and thus $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{=}\dini^{D\!} $. To prove it typically inessential, we first note that the third property is necessary for experiments comprising only two $ \mathbf{S} $ and only one $ \mathbf{R} $ for which $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_A){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_B) $, because otherwise $ \dinidlt{\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}\|}{\rightarrow }0 $ either when $ \theta{\rightarrow}{-}\infty $ or $ {+}\infty $, thereby yielding $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{=}0 $. However, this need not be the case when experiments comprise either more than one $ \mathbf{R} $ for which $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_A){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_B) $ even if for only two stimuli, as we have already shown during our proofs of the first and the second properties, or a single $ \mathbf{R} $ with $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_A){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S}_B) $ for more than two stimuli. To prove the latter, we take the experiment of \fref{fig02}(a) and add two population responses elicited by a third stimulus $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\atriangled{\makebox[.8ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{.8ex}}}}} $ (\fref{fig02}(c)). Setting $ P(\mathbf{R}\|\mathbf{S})$ so that $P^{\rl{NI}}([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\atriangled{\makebox[.8ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{.8ex}}}}}){<}P^{\rl{NI}}([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){<}P^{\rl{NI}}([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ (or in reversed order) turns $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{>}0 $ regardless of the stimulus probabilities, even though it can be readily proved that stimulus probabilities always exist for which optimal NI decoders never make mistakes. To summarize, we have shown that the seemingly peculiar properties of the experiment in \fref{fig01}(a) are inessential for proving that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ overestimates $ \Delta CI $. Contrary to previous beliefs, we have also found that the sign and strength of noise correlations can be misleading about their role in optimal decoding. Most importantly, we have proved that the proximity of $ \dini^{D\!} $ to $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ need not indicate that $ \dini^{D\!} $ is close to $ \Delta CI $, but that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is loose. \subsection{Overestimation in the presence of decoding errors}\label{res::sec::overest} Our analysis so far may seem limited to cases in which optimal NI decoder make no mistakes, which is arguably rare in the nervous system. In this section, we show that the measure $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may overestimate $ \Delta CI $ even when optimal NI decoders do make mistakes. To prove this, consider the experiment shown in \fref{fig03}(a) depicting the concurrent responses $ \mathbf{R}{=}[R_1^1,R_1^2,R_2^1] $ of three neurons elicited by four different $ \mathbf{S} $, namely $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig03.eps} \caption[]{Correlations become paradoxically important when integrating independent information. (a) Cartesian representation of the concurrent responses $ \mathbf{R}{=}[R_1^1,R_1^2,R_2^1] $ of three neurons elicited by four different compound stimuli ($ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $). (b) Cartesian representations of the concurrent responses of $R_1^1$ and $R_1^2 $ (left), which are sensitive only to variations in the frames; and the responses $ R_2^1 $ (right), which are only sensitive to variations in the letters. (c) Density or heat maps (with color-scale given on the right) depicting, as a function of $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ and $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, the following three quantities: the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ when decoding frames and letters together (left); the sum of the values of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ when decoding them singly (middle); and the resulting destructive interference (right). The line $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $ has been widened to ease the visualization of discontinuities.}\label{fig03} \end{figure} In this experiment, $ \mathbf{S}{=}[S_1,S_2] $ consist of two independently chosen features: a frame ($ S_1{\in}\{\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}},\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\} $) and a letter ($ S_2{\in}\{\mathrm{A},\mathrm{B}\} $). The neurons can be separated into two populations that fire independently of one another and selectively to different stimulus features (\fref{fig03}(b)). The first population is only sensitive to the frames and analogous to that in \fref{fig01}(a). The second population is only sensitive to the letters, and consists of a single neuron. As a result, each population constitutes an independent information stream, namely $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}){=}P(S_1,\mathbf{R}_1)\,P(S_2,\mathbf{R}_2) $ (\sref{met::sec::indinfo}). Suppose that we set for the second population $ P(2\|\mathrm{A}){=}P(2\|\mathrm{B})$. In that case, \eref{met::def::dinidl} readily yields that the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed using all neurons equals the one computed using only the first two. However, these two neurons are analogous to those in \fref{fig01}(a), for which we have already shown that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may overestimate $ \Delta CI $. Therefore, it seems evident that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ also overestimates $ \Delta CI $ for the experiment in \fref{fig03}(a) as well. Using this result, we can refine the computation of $ \Delta CI $ as follows \begin{equation} \Delta CI \begin{cases}=0 & \mbox{if $ P(\mathbf{S}{\neq}\tilde{\VS}){=}0 $}\\ \leq\dini^{D\!L\!} & \mbox{otherwise} \end{cases}\, , \end{equation} \noindent thereby reflecting our findings that, contrary to previous studies, $\dini^{D\!L\!} $ cannot be ensured tight. Although this conclusion is correct, the rationale need not be general and should therefore be observed with caution. The reason for our concerns lies in paradoxical properties of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ that, as we reveal in the next section, emerge when setting $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) $ to other values than those used in our demonstration. \subsection{The whole is less than the sum of its independent parts}\label{res::sec::together} We have just shown for the first time that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may overestimate $ \Delta CI $, but the overestimation may seem to occur only when at least some stimulus features (as opposed to stimulus identities) can be perfectly identified. These cases are arguably rare in the nervous system where stimulus features can almost never be perfectly identified due to noise, in which case $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may still be exact. Surprisingly, here we show that, in those cases, the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed over all neural populations typically exceeds the sum of the values of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed over each neural population, even when neural populations fire independently and selectively to different and independent stimulus features, thereby transmitting independent information (section~\ref{met::sec::indinfo}). Specifically, suppose that in \fref{fig03}(a) we set $ P(\mathrm{B})$ equal to $P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$. In addition, we set $ P(1\|\mathrm{A})$, $P(2\|\mathrm{B})$, and $P([2,3]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$, equal to $P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, where without risk of confusion we have omitted the response labels $ R_j^k $ within the arguments of the probabilities to avoid clutter. Under these conditions, the computation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ using all neurons in both populations yields a value here denoted $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $ given by the following \begin{equation}\label{res::eq::dinidl12fig03} \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} = \begin{cases}-0.5\,q\,\ln q \hspace{-3ex}& \mbox{if $ \alpha {=} 0.5 $} \\ \phi \,\mathcal{H}(q\,\alpha/\phi) - q\,\alpha\,\ln 4 \hspace{-3ex}& \mbox{otherwise},\end{cases} \end{equation} \noindent where for compactness, we have defined $ q{=}P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, $ \alpha{=}P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, $ \mathcal{H}(x){=}-x \ln x{-}{\bar{x}}\ln{\bar{x}}$ (also called binary entropy function), $ \phi{=}2\, q\,\alpha+\qc\,\alphac $, and the bar over a symbol denotes complement to unity (e.g., $ \bar{z}{=}1{-}z $). Notice that Pearson correlation coefficients ($ \rho $) cannot fully characterize the response distributions. Indeed, the only nonzero $ \rho $s arise for the responses of both neurons in population 1. For $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \rho{=}1 $, whereas for $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \rho{=}{-}1 $, and their values remain constant regardless of $P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $. In addition, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ depends on $P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, as we show in \eref{res::eq::dinidl12fig03} and \fref{fig03}(c), thereby rendering $ \rho $ also unsuitable for assessing the properties of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. The value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $ in \fref{fig03}(a) is almost always positive, and can reach ${\approx}100\,\% $ of the transmitted information when $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){\rightarrow}0$ and $P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){\rightarrow}1$ (\fref{fig03}(c) left, and \ref{se::fig1}). According to previous studies, this result would indicate that noise correlations are important in optimal decoding or even crucial \citep{latham2005,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}. However, we find the above result paradoxical because noise correlations only exist within population 1, and, unless $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) {=}0.5$, they are irrelevant for decoding that population \citep{eyherabide2013}. Indeed, the computation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ using only the neurons in the first population always yields $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1{=}0 $, unless $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $, whereas its computation using only the neurons in the second population always yields $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_2{=}0 $, regardless of $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ (\fref{fig03}(c) middle). Therefore, the positive values of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $ seem to arise from a paradoxical growth in correlation importance caused by decoding the populations together, as opposed to decoding them in parallel, even though the populations transmit independent information. This paradoxical growth is here called destructive interference, and quantified as the following difference \begin{equation} \label{res::eq::interference} \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;2} = \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} - \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1} - \dini^{D\!L\!}_{2}\, . \end{equation} \noindent In our experiment, $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;2}$ is always positive and equal to $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $ (though zero when $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $), and therefore can reach $ {\approx}100\,\% $ of the transmitted information (\fref{fig03}(c) right). Notice that the above results have not been corrected for the overestimation problems described in \sref{res::sec::paradox} and \sref{res::sec::overest}. As a result, the observed destructive interference cannot be directly attributed to an overestimation of the types there studied. Instead, it constitutes a new phenomena that can occur in parallel with other sources of overestimation. Indeed, as shown in \sref{res::sec::paradox}, the actual communication information loss $ \Delta CI_1 $ computed using only the neurons in the first population is equal to zero when optimal NI decoders make no mistakes, and this can occur even if $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $. To that end, one of the following two conditions must hold: $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){>}0.5 $, or $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $ but optimal NI decoders are constructed using tie-breaking rules that choose $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ whenever $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\|\mathbf{R}_1){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\|\mathbf{R}_1) $ \citep{eyherabide2013}. Unfortunately, we can not refine the estimation of the actual communication information loss $ \Delta CI_{1,2} $ computed using all neurons in all populations based on the results in \sref{res::sec::overest} because, unlike the example there studied, here $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2}{>}\dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $. This result would imply that the actual destructive interference is zero only when $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $ and $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){<}0.5 $, that is, on the lower half of the line defined by $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.5 $ in \fref{fig03}(c). In conclusion, here we have shown for the first time that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is superadditive when information is independent. This result is in stark contrast with the additivity of its predecessor, $ \dini^{D\!} $, which we later prove in \sref{res::sec::ubiquity}. Most importantly, our observation reveals a major departure from traditional views on the desirable properties of information measures \citep{fano1961,cover2006}. From a neuroscientific perspective, our result implies that, should $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ be exact as currently thought, noise correlations would paradoxically become more important when analyzing neural populations as a whole than when analyzing each of its constituent parts, even when the parts transmit independent information. \subsection{Destructive interference in brain models}\label{res::sec::brain} Information in the brain may be transmitted by one or multiple heterogeneous neural substrates (e.g. single neurons, neural populations, cortical areas or functional networks) using different temporal scales, frequency bands, amplitude intervals, or other types of multiplexed codes \citep{shannon1949,oppenheim1997,cover2006,eyherabide2010FCN,panzeri2010,huk2012,gross2013,harvey2013,akam2014}. Moreover, neural activity may be characterized using continuous (quantitative) variables, as opposed to discrete (qualitative, nominal or categorical) variables. Continuous variables naturally arise when estimating firing rates, peak amplitudes, phases, or mean power within specific frequency-bands and time-intervals using tuning curves, local-field potentials (LFP), event-related potentials (ERP), or sensor signals from brain-imaging devices including electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG). Unless quantized (discretized), these estimations may yield locally-smooth probability densities for which the above paradox need not arise. To test this, we build another hypothetical experiment by replacing the discrete responses in \fref{fig03}(a) with continuous ones generated using unit-variance Gaussian distributions (\fref{fig04}(a)). Mathematically, their probability distributions can be rewritten as follows \begin{align} P(\mathbf{R}_1\|S_1) &\propto \exp\lrcor{\frac{\big(R_1^1-R_1^2\big)^2}{2\,({\rho}^2-1)}-\frac{(R_1^1-\mu_1)\,(R_1^2-\mu_1)}{1+\rho}}\label{res::eq::brainprobabilities1}\\ P(\mathbf{R}_2\|S_2) &\propto \exp\lrcor{-0.5\,\big(R_2^1-\mu_2\big)^2}\, .\label{res::eq::brainprobabilities2} \end{align} \noindent where $ \rho $ is the correlation coefficient between $ R_1^1 $ and $ R_1^2 $; $ \mu_1 {=} 2$ if $ S_1 {=} \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ 4$ if $ S_1 {=} \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}$; and $ \mu_2 {=} 2$ if $ S_2 {=} \mathrm{A} $ and $ 4$ if $ S_2 {=} \mathrm{B}$. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig04.eps} \caption[]{Destructive interference in brain models. (a) Cartesian representation of the probability densities defined in \eref{res::eq::brainprobabilities1} and \eref{res::eq::brainprobabilities2}. The dummy variable $ R_2^2 $ uniformly distributed within the interval $ [0,2] $ was introduced for visualization purposes. (b) Hypothetical recording of the activity in two cortical areas, elicited within $ 100\,ms $ after the onset of each stimulus $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $, and defined through \eref{res::eq::brainactivity1} and \eref{res::eq::brainactivity2}. (c) Analogous description to \fref{fig03}(c), but with $ P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ replaced by $ \rho $.}\label{fig04} \end{figure} To study multiplexed codes, we reinterpret $ R_1^1 $ and $ R_1^2 $ as the amplitudes of $ 10\,Hz $-oscillations at two different cortical areas, denoted $ 1 $ and $ 2 $. Analogously, $ R_2^1 $ as the amplitude of $ 80\,Hz $-oscillations at the cortical area $ 1 $. Mathematically, \begin{align} Z_1 &= R_1^1\,\sin(20\,\pi\,t) + R_2^1\,\sin(160\,\pi\,t)\label{res::eq::brainactivity1}\\ Z_2 &= R_1^2\,\sin(20\,\pi\,t)\, ,\label{res::eq::brainactivity2} \end{align} \noindent where $ Z_1 $ and $ Z_2 $ represent the possibly-filtered signals recorded from the cortical areas $ 1 $ and $ 2 $, and $ t $ is the time (\fref{fig04}(b)). Analogous to the experiment in the previous section, noise correlations only occur between $ R_1^1 $ and $ R_1^2 $. However, here they affect the amplitudes of the $ 10\,Hz $-oscillations at the two different cortical areas, as opposed to the spike counts of two neurons within the same population. Nevertheless, they need not be important from the decoding perspective regardless of their sign and strength, as previous studies have already shown \citep{averbeck2006,averbeck2006b,eyherabide2013}. Unfortunately, the results and conclusions of the above studies cannot be directly applied to our experiment because they were obtained using different measures and information notions. Nevertheless, we can rigorously prove that value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed taking only the $10\,Hz $-oscillations into account, here denoted $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1} $, is zero regardless of $ \rho $. Indeed, after some algebra, $ P(\mathbf{S}\|[R_1^1,R_1^2]) $ can be proved equal to $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|[R_1^1,R_1^2],\theta) $ for $ \theta{=}1/(1+\rho) $ whenever $ P([R_1^1,R_1^2]){>}0 $. According to previous studies, this result would indicate that noise correlations are irrelevant for decoding them in isolation regardless of the correlation strength. Even so, the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $ computed using all oscillations amplitudes in all cortical areas is always positive (except when $ \rho{=}0 $). Based on our results in the previous section, we can conclude that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1.2} $ is completely attributable to destructive interference, namely $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2}{=}\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;2} $ (\fref{fig04}(c)). In conclusion, we have shown that destructive interference is ubiquitous regardless of the type of variables employed to characterize the recorded neural activity, and the neural substrates that the variables are interpreted to represent. In this way, we have conclusively answered two of the most recurrent questions in computational neuroscience: whether the phenomena observed when studying single neurons would also occur when studying cortical areas, and whether the results obtained with discrete variables would also emerge for continuous variables. In addition, recall that we interpreted \fref{fig04} as an example of multiplexed codes that transmit independent information through frequency division, whereas we can interpret \fref{fig03} as an example of multiplexed codes that transmit independent information through space division \citep{oppenheim1997,panzeri2010}. These interpretations allow us to predict that destructive interference is a characteristic feature of multiplexed codes regardless of their implementation. However, our prediction need not imply that demultiplexing improves the performance of optimal NI decoders when information is independent, as we show in \sref{res::sec::moreefficient}. \subsection{Ubiquity of destructive interference}\label{res::sec::ubiquity} In the previous section, we quantified $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ using only two populations transmitting independent information and found that it is superadditive. This result constitutes a major departure both from traditional views on the desirable properties of information measures, and from traditional expectations when operating on independent-information streams \citep{fano1961,schneidman2003,cover2006,oizumi2016}. However, the aforementioned experiments may still seem overly simple, thereby questioning the generality of our results. In this section, we trace back this phenomenon to the mathematical definition of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, as opposed to particular properties of the hypothetical neural data analyzed above. Recall that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is defined through \eref{met::def::dinidl} as the minimization over the parameter $ \theta $ of the function $ \dinidlt{} $, which is given by the following \begin{equation}\label{res::eq::dinidlt} \dinidlt{\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}\|} = \sum_{S,\mathbf{R}}{P(S,\mathbf{R})\,\ln \frac{P\sdrarg}{P^{\rl{NI}}(\VS\|\VR,\theta)}}\, . \end{equation} \noindent When two neural populations transmit independent information, like those in \fref{fig03} and \fref{fig04}, it can be readily shown that, in addition to \eref{met::eq::indjoint}, the following equations hold \begin{align} P\sdrarg & = P(S_1\|\mathbf{R}_1)\,P(S_2\|\mathbf{R}_2)\label{met::eq::posteriors1}\\ P^{\rl{NI}}(\VS\|\VR,\theta) &= P^{\rl{NI}}(S_1\|\mathbf{R}_1,\theta)\,P^{\rl{NI}}(S_2\|\mathbf{R}_2,\theta)\label{met::eq::posteriors3}\, , \end{align} \noindent where $ S_j $ denotes the stimulus features encoded in the activity $ \mathbf{R}_j $ of the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population. Therefore, we can rewrite \eref{res::eq::dinidlt12} for these cases as follows \begin{equation}\label{res::eq::dinidlt12} \dinidlt{\mathbf{S};\mathbf{R}\|} = \dinidlt{\mathbf{S}_1;\mathbf{R}_1\|} + \dinidlt{\mathbf{S}_2;\mathbf{R}_2\|}\, , \end{equation} \noindent thereby proving that $ \dinidlt{} $ is additive when information is independent. For compactness, hereinafter we employ the abbreviated notation introduced in \sref{met::sec::indinfo}, and rewrite the above equation simply as $ \dinidltsub{}{1,2}{=}\dinidltsub{}{1}+\dinidltsub{}{2} $. Notice that the additivity of $ \dinidlt{} $ directly implies the additivity of $ \dini^{D\!} $. Indeed $ \dini^{D\!} $ can be computed as $ \dinidlt{} $ with $ \theta{=}1 $ \citep{latham2005}. Therefore, using the aforementioned notation, $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J}{=}\dini^{D\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $. This result should not be confused with the additivity found in \citet{nirenberg2003}, which involved neither decoders nor independent information, and is limited to non-overlapping response distributions. However, the additivity of $ \dinidlt{} $ need not imply the additivity of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. Indeed, $ \dinidlt{} $ is convex \citep[also called U-concave][]{gallager1968,latham2005}, and the sum of the minima to two convex functions can never exceed the minimum of their sum. Therefore, the minimum of each tern in \eref{res::eq::dinidlt12}, which correspond from left to right to $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $, $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_2 $, are related according to the following \begin{equation}\label{se::eq::dinidlgreater12} \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} \geq \dini^{D\!L\!}_1 + \dini^{D\!L\!}_2\, . \end{equation} \noindent Strict inequality holds whenever the minima occur at different locations, irrespective of their separation or the values of the minima (\fref{fig05}). To illustrate this, we build the three examples shown in \fref{fig05}. The first example is based on \fref{fig03}(a) with $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$ and $P([2,2]\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$ equal to $0.8 $ (\fref{fig05}(a)), and shows the characteristic U-shape of $ \dinidlt{} $ regardless of whether it is computed using the neurons in population 1, in population 2, or in both. The minimum of $ \dinidltsub{}{1} $, namely $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $, occurs at $ \theta{\rightarrow}\infty $, whereas the minimum of $ \dinidltsub{}{2} $, namely $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_2 $, occurs at $ \theta{=}1 $. As expected, their sum is less than the minimum of $ \dinidltsub{}{1,2} $, namely $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2} $, thereby leading to destructive interference. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig05.eps} \caption[]{Destructive interference stems from differences in the location of minima.}\label{fig05} \end{figure} The second example is based on \fref{fig04}(a) with $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}){=}0.8 $ and $ \rho{=}{-0.5} $ (\fref{fig05}(b)). This example is qualitatively analogous to the first one except that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $ occurs not at $ \infty $, but at $ \theta{=}2$. The third example (\fref{fig05}(c)) is analogous to the second one, but with different correlation coefficients for $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ ($ -0.8 $) and $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ ($ -0.2 $). As a result, $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $ is not zero, but positive and equal to $ {\approx}3.8\,\% $. In both cases, the observed differences are inessential and cannot prevent the occurrence of destructive interference. Nevertheless, notice that a value of $ \theta $ that simultaneously minimizes each and every term in \eref{res::eq::dinidlt12} may theoretically occur. Indeed, recall the experiment in \fref{fig03} with $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) $ set as in \sref{res::sec::overest}. In that case, we found that $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_2{=}0 $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,2}{=}\dini^{D\!L\!}_1 $, from which we can immediately conclude that $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;2}{=}0 $. This conclusion agrees with the fact that both $ \dinidltsub{}{1} $ and $ \dinidltsub{}{2} $ are both minimized for the same value of $ \theta $. The fact that the value of $ \theta $ turns out to be unity is inessential. Our results not only prove that the superadditivity of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ stems directly from its mathematical definition, but also that the property is ubiquitous and independent of the type of data on which $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is applied. Most importantly, they show that previous experimental findings in which $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ either grows with the number of neurons or with the decoding-window length or lies close to $ \dini^{D\!} $, need not be completely attributable to temporal correlations across time bins, pseudo-correlations caused by inappropriately assuming stationarity, or higher-order correlations, as previous studies have conjectured \citep{oizumi2009,oizumi2010,latham2013}. Instead, they can at least partially arise, even when information is independent, due to destructive interference. Answering these questions requires that we test our results on arbitrary number $ J $ of neural populations. To that end, we use mathematical induction and rewrite $ \dinidl_\sj $ as the minimization of the convex function $\dinidltsub{}{{1,\ldots,J}}{=}\dinidltsub{}{1,\ldots,J{-}1}{+}\dinidltsub{}{J} $, which minima are related through $ \dinidl_\sj{\geq}\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J{-}1}{+}\dini^{D\!L\!}_J $. This result implies that \begin{equation}\label{se::eq::dinidlgreater} \dinidl_\sj \geq \dinidl_\spj\, , \end{equation} \noindent with equality if and only if some $ \hat{\theta} $ exists that simultaneously minimizes $ \dinidltsub{}{j} $ for all $ 1{\leq}j{\leq}J $ (that is, $ \dinit_j(\hat{\theta}){=}\min_{\theta}{\dinidltsub{}{j}} $ for all $ 1{\leq}j{\leq}J $). Based on the above result, we can define destructive interference for an arbitrary number $ J $ of independent information streams as the following difference \begin{equation} \dintdl_\sjsc = \dinidl_\sj - \dinidl_\spj\, . \end{equation} \noindent It immediately follows from our demonstration of \eref{se::eq::dinidlgreater} that $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ never decreases with $ J $. In addition, the condition for equality in \eref{se::eq::dinidlgreater} immediately implies that the observation of $ \dintdl_\sjsc{>}0 $ requires of two independent information streams $ j_1 $ and $ j_2 $, for which $ \dinidltsub{}{j_1} $ and $ \dinidltsub{}{j_2} $ are strictly convex, and achieve their minima at different values of $ \theta $. These conditions need not always hold, for $ \dinidlt{} $ can also be constant \citep{eyherabide2013}, as in the cases that fulfill the third property mentioned in \sref{res::sec::misleading}. However, the fact that in these cases $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{=}\dini^{D\!} $ need not imply that this condition should not hold for both streams. Indeed, destructive interference can arise even if only one stream exists for which $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{\neq}\dini^{D\!} $, as shown in \fref{fig05}. In conclusion, we have shown that destructive interference is a direct consequence of the convex minimization that defines the estimate $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ of the actual communication information loss $ \Delta CI $. In addition, we have derived the necessary and sufficient conditions for destructive interference to arise. These conditions need not always hold, as in \fref{fig03} with the probabilities set as in \sref{res::sec::overest}, but our results show that the conditions are quite unrestrictive. Most importantly, we have extended the validity of our results to arbitrarily-complex independent information streams, regardless of their number and type. \subsection{Relative monotonic growth}\label{res::sec::morestreams} We have just shown that $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ never decreases with the number $ J $ of independent information streams. However, this trend need not apply when measuring $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ relative to the transmitted information $ I_\sj $ or to $ \dinidl_\sj $. Should it decrease instead, the destructive interference would become a minor component of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, and according to current beliefs, would play a minor role in the cost of ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding. In this section, we test this hypothesis and show that the relative average of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ never decreases, thereby driving $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $ towards, but not necessarily reaching, its upper bound $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $. To test this hypothesis, we build an experiment with $ J $ neural populations analogous to the first population in \fref{fig03}. These populations fire in response to visual stimuli $ \mathbf{S}{=}[S_1,\ldots,S_J] $ composed of $ J $ different and independently-chosen stimulus features. Each $ S_j $ denotes a frame ($ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ or $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $) projected at a different location in a screen. For each value of $ S_j $, the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population produces only two types of responses (\fref{fig06}). \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig06.eps} \caption[]{Hypothetical experiment with $ 9 $ populations of two neurons each firing independently and selectively to $ 9 $ different and independently chosen stimulus features. Each feature is a frame ($ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ or $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $) located at a different position in the screen. The populations were generated by replicating the first population in \fref{fig03}(a), except that $ P(S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$ were chosen independently for each population.}\label{fig06} \end{figure} In this experiment, $ P(\mathbf{S},\mathbf{R}) $ was chosen to fulfill \eref{met::eq::indjoint}. In this way, each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population fires independently of the other populations and selectively to the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ stimulus feature $ S_j $, thereby constituting independent information streams. For each stream, we set $P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,3]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}})$ equal to $P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, and chose $ P(S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ and $ P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ both uniformly from the interval $ [0.05,0.95] $, and independently for each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population. Repeating the above procedure, we generated 128 random instances of the same hypothetical experiment, each one with 1024 independent information streams. For each instance, we computed $ \dintdl_\sjsc$ using the first $ J $ streams. This computation showed that the relative value of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ can increase or decrease with $ J $ depending on the sample (\fref{fig07}(a), left). However, we also found that the average value of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ across instances never decreased. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig07.eps} \caption[]{Destructive interference grows with the number of independent-information streams. (a) Variation as the number $ J $ of streams grows, for 128 instances of hypothetical experiments generated from \fref{fig05}(a), of the destructive interference (left), its average across instances (left) and the averages of the information losses $\lrang{\dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J}} $,$\lrang{ \dinidl_\spj} $ and $\lrang{ \dinidl_\sj} $ (middle). The right panel shows the value attained by the destructive interference and the above information losses in the limit for large $ J $, when all $ P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ are drawn uniformly from the interval $[0.05,\alpha_{M\!A\!X}] $, as a function of $ \alpha_{M\!A\!X} $ (right panel). All values are given relative to $ I_\sj $. (b) Analogous description to (a), but for 128 instances of hypothetical experiments generated from \fref{fig05}(b), and with correlation coefficients in the right panel drawn from the interval $[-0.95, \rho_{M\!A\!X}] $. (c) Analogous description to (b), but for 128 instances of hypothetical experiments generated from \fref{fig05}(c). Vertical segments: standard error of the mean.}\label{fig07} \end{figure} For the reasons we mentioned in \sref{res::sec::brain}, we repeated the analysis using as prototype information streams not the first population in \fref{fig03}, but the amplitudes of the $ 10\,Hz $-oscillations in the activity of two cortical areas studied in \fref{fig04}. The resulting experiments can be thought as concerning the information transmitted independently by the amplitudes of $ 10\,Hz $-oscillations at $ J $ pairs of cortical areas, namely \begin{align} Z_j^1 &= R_j^1\,\sin(20\,\pi\,t)\\ Z_j^2 &= R_j^2\,\sin(20\,\pi\,t)\, , \end{align} \noindent where $ Z_j^k $ denotes the activity recorded in the $ k\textsuperscript{th} $ cortical area of the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ pair. However, the experiments can also be interpreted as the amplitudes of oscillations within $ J $ different frequency bands $ f_1,\ldots,f_J $ in the activity of two cortical areas, namely \begin{align} Z_1 &= \sum_{j=1}^{J}{R_j^1\,\sin(2\,\pi\,f_j\,t)}\\ Z_2 &= \sum_{j=1}^{J}{R_j^1\,\sin(2\,\pi\,f_j\,t)}\, , \end{align} \noindent or a combination of both. As before, the stimulus-response probabilities were chosen to fulfill \eref{met::eq::indjoint}. Each $ P(\mathbf{R}_j\|S_j) $ was given by the following unit-variance Gaussian distribution \begin{equation} P(\mathbf{R}_j\|S_j) \propto \exp\lrcor{\frac{\big(R_j^1-R_j^2\big)^2}{2\,({\rho_j(S_j)}^2-1)}-\frac{(R_j^1-\mu_j)\,(R_j^2-\mu_j)}{1+\rho_j(S_j)}}\, , \end{equation} \noindent where $ \rho_j(S_j) $ is the correlation coefficient between $ R_j^1 $ and $ R_j^2 $ given $ S_j $; whereas $ \mu_j {=} 2$ if $ S_j {=} \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ 4$ if $ S_j {=} \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}$. We chose $ P(S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ and all correlation coefficients independently for each stream, the former uniformly from the interval $ [0.05,0.95] $, and the latter uniformly from the interval $ [-0.95,0.95] $. Analogously to \fref{fig05}, we considered both the case in which the correlation coefficients $ \rho_j(R_j^1,R_j^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ and $ \rho_j(R_j^1,R_j^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ for each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ information stream coincide (\fref{fig07}(b)), and the case in which $ \rho_j(R_j^1,R_j^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ and $ \rho_j(R_j^1,R_j^2\|\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ differ (\fref{fig07}(c)). In both cases, we found trends for the relative value and the relative average of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ as a function of $ J $ analogous to those in \fref{fig07}(a). We also found that, for the three hypothetical experiments mentioned above, the relative averages of $ \dini^{D\!} $ and $ \dinidl_\spj $ remain virtually constant as $ J $ grows (\fref{fig07}, middle panels). In that case, the growth with $ J $ of the average $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ relative to $ I_\sj $ is equivalent to that of the average $ \dinidl_\sj $ relative to $ I_\sj $. Most importantly, these results imply that the relative value of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ with respect to $ \dinidl_\sj $ also grows with $ J $. In other words, the proportion of $ \dinidl_\sj $, as opposed to that of $ I_\sj $, explained by $ \dintdl_\sjsc $, never decreases with the number of independent information streams. The above results are valid not only for the three hypothetical experiments studied in \fref{fig07}, but for more general hypothetical experiments comprising $ J $ independent information streams defined through independent and identically distributed parameter vectors. For these class of experiments, we can prove that the following relations hold \begin{align} \lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} & = \lambda J\,\lrang{I_j}\label{met::eq::infolinear}\\ \lrang{\dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} & = \lambda J\,\lrang{\dini^{D\!}_j}\label{met::eq::dinidlinear}\\ \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1\mysp\texttt{+}\mysp\ldots\mysp\texttt{+}\mysp\lambda J}} & = \lambda J\,\lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_j}\label{met::eq::dinidlplinear}\\ \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} &\geq \lambda \,\lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J}}\label{met::eq::dinidlgreaterJ}\\ \lrang{\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\lambda J}} &\geq \lambda \,\lrang{\dintdl_\sjsc}\label{met::eq::dintdlgreaterJ}\, , \end{align} \noindent where $ \lambda $ is a positive integer. All these equations rest partially on the linearity of the mean. In addition, \eref{met::eq::infolinear} stems from \eref{met::eq::infoadd}; \eref{met::eq::dinidlinear}, from \eref{res::eq::dinidlt12} with $ \theta{=}1 $; \eref{met::eq::dinidlgreaterJ}, from the convexity of $ \dinit $; and \eref{met::eq::dintdlgreaterJ}, from subtracting \eref{met::eq::dinidlgreaterJ} and \eref{met::eq::dinidlplinear}. Dividing by $ \lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} $ each side of \eref{met::eq::dinidlinear}--\eref{met::eq::dintdlgreaterJ} yields the following relations for the relative averages \begin{align} \lrang{\dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} & = \lrang{\dini^{D\!}_j}/\lrang{I_j}\label{met::eq::dinidrelconstant}\\ \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1\mysp\texttt{+}\mysp\ldots\mysp\texttt{+}\mysp\lambda J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} & = \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_j}/\lrang{I_j}\label{met::eq::dinidlprelconstant}\\ \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} &\geq \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,J}}\label{met::eq::dinidlrelgreaterJ}\\ \lrang{\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\lambda J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} &\geq \lrang{\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J}}/\lrang{I_{1,\ldots,J}}\label{met::eq::dintdlrelgreaterJ}\, . \end{align} \noindent Furthermore, dividing \eref{met::eq::dintdlgreaterJ} by $ \lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda J}} $ yields the following relation \begin{equation} \lrang{\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\lambda_1 \lambda_2 J}}/\lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda_1 \lambda_2 J}} \geq \lrang{\dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\lambda_1 Jj}}/\lrang{\dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\lambda_2 J}}\label{met::eq::dintdlreldinidlgreaterJ}\, , \end{equation} \noindent after replacing $ \lambda $ with the product of two positive integers $ \lambda_1 $ and $ \lambda_2 $, and some relatively simple algebra. These relations generalize our observations in \fref{fig07}, and prove that the destructive interference never decreases in absolute or relative magnitude, and becomes increasingly important as the number of independent information streams grows. We also noticed that the relative magnitude of $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ converges as $ J $ grows to a value, here called $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\infty} $. This observation need not be surprising for the relative average of $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\infty} $ across instances. Indeed, not only this value is bounded by unity, but also increasing with $ J $, as we have shown, and therefore the monotone convergence theorem ensures that a limit exists as $ J{\rightarrow}\infty $. However, our observation also applies to each instance of the experiments, as opposed to their averages (\fref{fig07}, left). Most importantly, these observations open up the possibility that $ \dintdl_\sjsc $ becomes so large when $ J{\rightarrow}\infty $ as to drive $ \dinidl_\sj $ close to its maximum value, namely $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $. To test this hypothesis, we generated different instances of the experiment in \fref{fig07}(a) by choosing $ P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ uniformly from intervals $ [0.05,\alpha_{M\!A\!X}]$, for $ 0.05{\leq}\alpha_{M\!A\!X}{\leq}0.95 $. For these instances, we computed $ \info_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ analytically, and estimated $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $, $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1\mtp\ldots\mtp \infty} $ numerically using Matlab R2015b. We found that the relative value of $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\infty} $, and consequently of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $, reached its maximum when $\alpha_{M\!A\!X}{\approx}0.83 $. This value was estimated as the maximum of a cubic function that locally approximated the trace of $ \nabla I_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ as $ \alpha_{M\!A\!X} $ grows. Furthermore, we found that both $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\infty} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ converged to $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ whenever $ P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $ was drawn from intervals centered at $ 0.5 $. Indeed, for large $ J $, $ \dinidltsub{}{{1,\ldots,J}} $ can be approximated using the law of large numbers as follows \begin{equation} \dinidltsub{}{{1,\ldots,J}} \approx J\,\lrang{q_j\,\alpha_j\,\ln\left(1+\frac{\qcj}{\qj}\lrpar{\kalphaj}^\theta\right)} \, , \end{equation} \noindent where for compactness, we have employed a notation analogous to that introduced after \eref{res::eq::dinidl12fig03}, defining $ q_j{=}P(S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, $ \alpha_j{=}P(\mathbf{R}_j{=}[2,2]\|S_j{=}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}) $, and $ \bar{x}{=}1{-}x $ for any real value $ x $. After some algebra, this equation can be shown to reach its minimum when $ \theta{=}1 $ provided that $ q_j $ and $ \alpha_j $ are chosen with probability distributions that are symmetric about $ 0.5 $, and hence \begin{equation} \dinidl_\sj \underset{\scriptscriptstyle J\gg 1}{\approx} \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J} \, . \end{equation} In \fref{fig07}(b)-(c), different instances were generated by choosing the correlation coefficients uniformly from intervals $ [-0.95,\rho_{M\!A\!X}]$, for $ -0.95{\leq}\rho_{M\!A\!X}{\leq}0.95 $. In these cases, we estimated $ I_{1,\ldots,\infty} $, $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ using Monte Carlo integration in Python 3.4.3 with the packages Vegas 3.0 and SciPy 0.14.1, using 2000000 vector samples, divided in 10 iterations for training and 10 iterations for evaluation. The value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1\mtp\ldots\mtp \infty} $ was estimated using $ 163840 $ independently generated streams. Unlike in \fref{fig07}(a), here the relative values of both $ \dint^{D\!L\!}_{1;\ldots;\infty} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ increased with $ \rho_{M\!A\!X} $. However, $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ converged to $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,\infty} $ only when $\rho_{M\!A\!X}{\approx}0.73 $ in both \fref{fig07}(b) and \fref{fig07}(c). This value was estimated analogously to the value of $ \alpha_{M\!A\!X} $ in \fref{fig07}(a). To summarize, our results show that as the number of independent information streams grows, the relative amount of destructive interference is never negative and never decreases. This result finally answers the question we posited in the previous section, and shows that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may grow with the number of neurons or the decoding-window duration by the virtue of destructive interference alone, or in conjunction with other possible causes. In addition, destructive interference may drive the loss $ \dinidl_\sj $ near its upper bound $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $. Analogous observations have previously been regarded as a sign that $ \dini^{D\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $ is tight \citep{latham2013}. Our results once again cast doubt on this interpretation, but this time by showing that it may stem from a paradoxical growth in the cost of ignoring noise correlations. \subsection{The construction of optimal NI decoders is not unique}\label{res::sec::moreefficient} The measure $ \dinidl_\sj $ computed above stems from computing the measure $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ introduced by \citet{latham2005} using all neurons in $ J $ populations that transmit independent information. According to previous studies, this computation would yield the exact information loss caused when optimally decoding the aforementioned neurons ignoring noise correlations. However, in this section we show that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is actually limited to a specific construction of optimal NI decoders, thereby opening up the possibility that other constructions be more efficient than predicted by $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. Specifically, we noticed that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, and consequently $ \dinidl_\sj $, use what we here call joint NI decoders \citep[also called centralized integration;][]{zhang2016}. These decoders produce simultaneous estimates $ \mathbf{S}^{J\!I} $ of all stimulus features only after reading the concurrent responses $ \mathbf{R} $ of all populations (\fref{fig5}(a)). Mathematically, joint NI decoders can be defined as follows \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::sji} \mathbf{S}^{J\!I} = \arg \max_{\mathbf{S}}{P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R})}\, . \end{equation} \noindent However, joint NI decoders need not be the only way in which optimal NI decoders can be constructed. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig08.eps} \caption[]{Two different constructions of optimal NI decoders. (a) Joint NI decoders choose stimultaneously all the stimulus features that maximize the NI posterior $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}) $. (b) Parallel NI decoders choose each stimulus feature singly but in parallel by maximizing each of their corresponding NI posteriors $ P^{\rl{NI}}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}_j) $.}\label{fig5} \end{figure} To show this, recall our definition of independent information given in \sref{met::sec::indinfo}. According to this definition, $ J $ neural populations transmit independent information when they fire independently and selectively to $ J $ independent stimulus features, respectively. In that case, the stimulus features can also be optimally identified in parallel \citep[also known as distributed, modular or decentralized decoding;][]{zhang2016} regardless of whether neurons are noise independent or not. However, the use of parallel decoders when studying the role of noise correlations in neural decoding has previously been controversial \citep{meister2001,nirenberg2001,schneidman2003,latham2005}. As we note here, this controversy could have been avoided should previous studies have combined the outputs of the parallel decoders into a single consistent estimate. However, such combination may not be possible without taking implicitly or explicitly correlations into account or making additional assumptions \citep{landy1995,knill1996,schneidman2003,jaynes2003,eyherabide2013}. These difficulties do not arise here because populations transmit independent information. Specifically, here we construct parallel NI decoders as two-stage processes (\fref{fig5}(b)). The first stage consists of $ J $ optimal NI decoders, each of which operates separately on a different population. Mathematically, the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ optimal NI decoder reads the response $ \mathbf{R}_j $ of the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population and produces an estimate $ S^{PI}_j$ of the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ feature, according to the following \begin{equation}\label{met::eq::spi} S^{PI}_j = \arg \max_{S_j} P^{\rl{NI}}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}_j) = \arg \max_{S_j} P^{\rl{NI}}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}) \, . \end{equation} \noindent These estimates are concurrently fed into the second stage, which concatenates them to produce the estimated stimulus $ \mathbf{S}^{P\!I}{=}{\lrcor{S^{PI}_1,\ldots,S^{PI}_J}} $. Unlike \citet{zhang2016}, the definitions of joint and parallel decoders given here are both valid for arbitrary stimulus distributions. The last equality in \eref{met::eq::spi} shows that feeding each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ optimal NI decoder in the first stage only with the responses of the $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population (or demultiplexing, as mentioned in \sref{res::sec::brain}) is inessential. Indeed, after some algebra, \eref{se::eq::infoaddtransform} turns into $ P^{N\!I}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}_j){=}P^{N\!I}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}) $ for populations that transmit independent information. Therefore, parallel estimations of each individual stimulus feature $ S^{PI}_j $ can be conducted without the interference of other information streams that seemingly affect the joint estimations, at least according to the results we have obtained above. To summarize, we have shown for the first time that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is only based on joint NI decoders. However, even though unnoticed by previous studies, we found that the construction of optimal NI decoders need not be unique, and different alternatives may exist depending on the case. In particular, we showed that, when information is independent, optimal NI decoding can be performed in parallel. These possibilities have remained largely ignored in the neural coding literature, and most importantly, may lead to constructions that outperform joint NI decoders and overcome the destructive interference. In that case, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ would potentially overestimate $ \Delta CI $, and the importance of noise correlations in optimal decoding, for yet another reason than those we have mentioned above. \subsection{Decoding more efficiently than predicted} Our finding that the construction of optimal NI decoders is not uniquely defined immediately raises the question of what difference do different constructions make. To address this question, we compute in this section the information losses caused by parallel NI decoders using the information notions underlying $ \dini^{D\!} $, $ \dini^{B\!} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. Contrary to current pervasive ideas, these computations need not stem straight-forwardly from previous results on encoded information losses for for the reasons we mentioned in \sref{res::sec::difnotion}. The axiomatic information loss caused by parallel NI decoders can be computed by reinterpreting the first stage as parallel transformations of each individual population response. When information is independent, \eref{se::eq::infoaddtransform} holds, and the axiomatic information losses $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_1,\ldots,\dini^{D\!L\!}_J $ caused by each of these parallel transformations are additive. The second stage is invertible, and hence lossless. Consequently, using the notation introduced in \sref{met::sec::indinfo}, the axiomatic information loss caused by parallel NI decoders is equal to $ \dini^{B\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $. Analogous results can be obtained for the value of $ \dini^{D\!} $ associated with parallel NI decoders. To that end, recall that $ \dini^{D\!} $ was derived by \citet{nirenberg2001} using a notion of information with roots in coding theory, here called descriptive information. Within this notion, $ \dini^{D\!} $ can be interpreted as the increment caused by ignoring noise correlations in the minimum average description length $ L_{\mathbf{S}} $ of the stimulus identity $ \mathbf{S} $ after observing the population response $ \mathbf{R} $ \citep{cover2006}. Within that context, parallel NI decoding can be interpreted as describing $ \mathbf{S} $ by concatenating the individual descriptions of its $ J $ stimulus features. The resulting minimum average description length $ L^{PI}_{\mathbf{S}} $ equals the sum of the minimum average description lengths $ L_{S_1},\ldots,L_{S_J} $ associated with each stimulus feature, and therefore, their corresponding increments $ \dini^{D\!}_1,\ldots,\dini^{D\!}_J $ caused by ignoring noise correlations are additive. Consequently, the descriptive information loss caused by parallel NI decoders equals $ \dini^{D\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $. Notice that this result need not immediately arise from the additivity of $ \dini^{D\!} $ found in \sref{res::sec::ubiquity}, for that mathematical findings need not be conceptually related to the operation of parallel NI decoders. The above results render seemingly reasonable to hypothesize that the communication information loss produced by parallel NI decoders equals $ \dinidl_\spj $. To rigorously prove this, recall the notation introduced in \sref{met::sec::indinfo}, and the derivation of \citet{latham2005} introduced in \sref{res::sec::difnotion}. According to their derivation, we can associate each $ j\textsuperscript{th} $ population with codebooks of up to $ \exp(N\,\tilde{I}_j)$ sequences $ \MSEnc[j]$, where $ \tilde{I}_j{\leq} I_j{-}\dini^{D\!L\!}_j $, for which the average decoding-error rate $ P_{e,j}^{\mathtt{[N]}} $ produced by optimal NI decoders vanishes exponentially as $ N $ grows. Combining the above codebooks using Cartesian products yields a product codebook of up to $ \exp(N\,\sum_{j=1}^{J}{\tilde{I}_j})$ sequences. For theses codebooks, Boole's inequality \citep{casella2002} yields after some algebra that the average decoding error rate $ P_e^{\mathtt{[N]}} $ decays exponentially as $ N $ grows at least as fast as $ \max_j{P_{e,j}^{\mathtt{[N]}}} $. Hence, $ \dinidl_\spj $ is achievable \citep{cover2006} and quantifies the communication information loss caused when decoding $ J $ independent information streams ignoring noise correlations. In conclusion, we have proved that, when information is independent, the information loss caused by parallel NI decoders is equal to the sum of the information losses caused by each of its constituent optimal NI decoders regardless of the underlying information notion. Most importantly, this result shows that $ \dinidl_\spj $ is achievable, thereby proving that parallel NI decoders can overcome the destructive interference. Therefore, we conclude that parallel NI decoders can be more efficient than predicted by $ \dinidl_\sj $, and that, contrary to current beliefs, noise correlations can be less important than predicted by $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. \subsection{Joint NI decoders can potentially outperform parallel NI decoders} We have shown in the previous sections have shown that the communication information loss $ \dinidl_\spj $ caused by parallel NI decoders is never greater and can be less than the communication information loss $ \dinidl_\sj $ caused by joint NI decoders. These results seemingly indicate both that parallel NI decoders do outperform joint NI decoders, at least in terms of communication information losses, and that, regardless of how paradoxical it may seem, destructive interference need not merely stems from flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. In this section, we address these hypotheses and show that joint NI decoders can both achieve $ \dinidl_\spj $ and potentially outperform parallel NI decoders, at least in terms of axiomatic information loss. To prove that joint NI decoders can achieve $ \dinidl_\spj $, recall that the derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ in \citet{latham2005} is based on the average decoding error probability $ P_e^{\mathtt{[N]}} $, which they wrote as $ P\left(P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){<}P^{\rl{NI}}(\VSD\|\mathbf{R})\right) $. However, notice that the estimates $ \mathbf{S}^{J\!I} $ and $ \mathbf{S}^{P\!I} $ produced by joint and parallel NI decoders, respectively, are always associated with the same NI posteriors, namely \begin{align} P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{J\!I}\|\mathbf{R}) &=\max_{S_1,\ldots,S_J}{\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^J{P^{N\!I}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}_j)}}\nonumber\\ &={\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^J}{\max_{S_j}{P^{\rl{NI}}(S_j\|\mathbf{R}_j)}}\nonumber\\ &=P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{P\!I}\|\mathbf{R})\, . \label{res::eq::equalest} \end{align} \noindent Therefore, $ P\left(P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){<}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{J\!I}\|\mathbf{R})\right){=} P\left(P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){<}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{P\!I}\|\mathbf{R})\right) $, and consequently joint and parallel NI decoders produce the same average decoding error probability for the same set of codebooks. In other words, joint NI decoders can also achieve $ \dinidl_\spj $, thereby rendering $ \dinidl_\sj $ as an upper bound of the actual communication information loss caused by joint NI decoders. The equality between $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{J\!I}\|\mathbf{R}) $ and $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}^{P\!I}\|\mathbf{R}) $ also implies that both decoders will typically produce the same estimates. As a result, the axiomatic information losses $ \dini^{B\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $ and $ \dini^{B\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $ caused by joint and parallel NI decoders, respectively, will typically coincide. However, differences in their estimates, and hence in their axiomatic information losses, can still stem from arbitrary tie-braking rules. Specifically, the maxima in \eref{met::eq::sji} and \eref{met::eq::spi}, respectively, oftentimes occur for multiple stimuli. Hence, joint and parallel NI decoders cannot unambiguously produce an estimate. In practice, these situations need not be rare and may arise, for example, due to probability quantization when estimating them from experimental frequencies \citep{samengo2002,casella2002}. Should ambiguities arise, they can be resolved by adopting tie-breaking rules. Depending on how they are set, $ \dini^{B\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $ can be greater, equal or less than $ \dini^{B\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $. To illustrate this, we build the hypothetical experiment shown in \fref{fig7}(a). Analogously to \fref{fig03}(a), this experiment consists of two populations that fire independently and selectively to independent stimulus features. However, here population 1 also produces the response $ \mathbf{R}_1{=}[2,2] $ after $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ (where $ \mathbf{R}_j{=}[R_j^1,R_j^2] $). In addition, population 2 includes a second neuron that produces the same number of spikes as the first neuron after $ \mathrm{A} $, and only two spikes regardless of the response of the first neuron after $ \mathrm{B} $ (\fref{fig7}(b)). Suppose that we set $ P(S_1,\mathbf{R}_1)$ so that $ P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}},[2,2]){=}12/30$, $P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}},[2,2]){=}7/30$ and $P(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}},[2,3]){=}2/30 $. In that case, $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\|\mathbf{R}_1){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}\|\mathbf{R}_1) $ only when $ \mathbf{R}_1{=}̛[2,2] $, and thus optimal NI decoders cannot unambiguously choose a frame. To resolve this ambiguity, we can adopt the convention of choosing $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ over $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $, here denoted $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}{>}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $. This convention minimizes the axiomatic information loss $ \dini^{B\!}_1 $ computed using only population 1 ($ {\approx} 31\,\% $). Analogously, suppose that we set $ P(S_2,\mathbf{R}_2)$ so that $ P(\mathrm{A},[2,2]){=}90/190$ and $P(\mathrm{B},[2,2]){=}81/190$. In that case, $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathrm{A}\|\mathbf{R}_2){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathrm{B}\|\mathbf{R}_2) $ only when $ \mathbf{R}_2{=}̛[2,2] $, and thus optimal NI decoders cannot unambiguously choose a letter. To resolve this ambiguity, we can adopt the convention $ \mathrm{A}{>}\mathrm{B} $, which minimizes the axiomatic information loss $ \dini^{B\!}_2 $ computed using only population 2 ($ {\approx}11\,\%$). Together, the above two conventions minimize the axiomatic information loss $ \dini^{B\!}_{1+2} $ caused by parallel NI decoders (${\approx}42\,\%$). On the contrary, the opposite conventions (i.e., $ \makebox[2.2ex][c]{\acircled{\makebox[2ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}}{<}\makebox[2.2ex][c]{\asquared{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{\phantom{\rule[0ex]{0ex}{1.6ex}}}}} $ and $ \mathrm{A}{<}\mathrm{B} $) maximize $ \dini^{B\!}_{1+2} $ (${\approx }46\,\% $; with $ \dini^{B\!}_1{\approx}34\,\%$ and $ \dini^{B\!}_2{\approx}12\,\%$). Other two ways of combining the conventions exist that yield intermediate values of $ \dini^{B\!}_{1+2} $, thereby adding up to four different constructions of parallel NI decoders. \begin{figure}[htb!] \centering \includegraphics{Fig09.eps} \caption[]{Experiment in which joint and parallel NI decoders can yield different information losses even though information is independent. (a) Analogous description to \fref{fig03}(a). (b) Analogous description of \fref{fig03}(b). }\label{fig7} \end{figure} On the contrary, the number of joint NI decoders that can be constructed by choosing different tie-breaking rules is 64. These rules must choose between \begin{enumerate} \item $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $ if $ \mathbf{R}{=}[2,2,1,1] $, because $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}0.5$; \item $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $ if $ \mathbf{R}{=}[1,1,2,2] $, because $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1,6ex][c]{A}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}0.5$; \item $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $ if $ \mathbf{R}{=}[2,3,2,2] $ or $ [3,2,2,2] $, because $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][c]{A}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}0.5$; \item $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $ and $ \makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}} $ if $ \mathbf{R}{=}[2,2,2,3] $, because $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\squared{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}P^{\rl{NI}}(\makebox[2.3ex][l]{\circled{\makebox[1.6ex][r]{B}}}\|\mathbf{R}){=}0.5$; and \item all stimuli if $ \mathbf{R}{=}[2,2,2,2] $, because $ P^{\rl{NI}}(\mathbf{S}\|\mathbf{R}){=}0.25 $ for all $ \mathbf{S} $. \end{enumerate} \noindent By adopting tie-breaking rules independently for each of the above five situations, we can find joint NI decoders that cause axiomatic information losses $ \dini^{B\!}_{1,2} $ as low as $ {\approx}16\,\% $ (only $ {\approx}38\,\% $ of the minimum $ \dini^{B\!}_{1+2} $) or as large as $ {\approx} 58\,\% $ (and thus $ {\approx} 28\,\% $ larger than the maximum $ \dini^{B\!}_{1+2} $). In conclusion, we have shown that joint and parallel NI decoders are almost always equivalent, not only in terms of axiomatic information losses, namely $ \dini^{B\!}_{1,\ldots,J}{=}\dini^{B\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $, but also in their stimulus estimates, namely $ \mathbf{S}^{J\!I} $ and $ \mathbf{S}^{P\!I} $. However, this need not be the case when tie-breaking rules must be chosen. In those cases, $ \dini^{B\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J}$ can be greater or less than $\dini^{B\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $ depending on the chosen conventions, but, without restrictions, the best parallel NI decoder can never outperform the best joint NI decoder. These results may also apply to communication information losses $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1 \mtp \ldots \mtp J} $ and $ \dini^{D\!L\!}_{1,\ldots,J} $. Indeed, we have shown that both joint and parallel NI decodes can achieve the same communication information losses, namely $ \dinidl_\spj $. However, this need not always be the case for at least three reasons. First, neither our computations nor the derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ in \citet{latham2005} have taken into account the potential effect of tie-breaking rules. Second, here we showed that the set of all codebooks employed by \citet{latham2005} to derive $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may produce larger average decoding error probabilities than some of its subsets. Third, the set of codebooks for which joint and parallel NI decoders achieve the minimum average decoding error probability, respectively, need not coincide. These three considerations can be proved unnecessary when studying other response aspects such as spike counts or latencies. However, for the reasons we mentioned in \sref{res::sec::difnotion}, this observation need not apply to the study of noise correlations from the decoding perspective. Consequently, our results open up the possibility that joint NI decoders outperform parallel NI decoders in terms of communication information loss. Most importantly, they allow us to finally refine the estimation of $ \Delta CI $ as follows \begin{equation} \Delta CI \begin{cases}=0 & \mbox{if $ P(\mathbf{S}{\neq}\tilde{\VS}){=}0 $}\\ \leq\dinidl_\spj & \mbox{if information is independent}\\ \leq\dini^{D\!L\!} & \mbox{otherwise} \end{cases}\, . \end{equation} \noindent Above all, our results in this section show that the overestimation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ need not be constrained to independent information streams, and that current beliefs in the exactness of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may lead one to overestimate the importance of noise correlations in optimal decoding. \section{Discussion} Many measures have been proposed to quantify the information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in neural decoding, but their conceptual and quantitative accuracy remains controversial \citep{nirenberg2001,meister2001,nirenberg2003,schneidman2003,latham2005,averbeck2006,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,eyherabide2013,latham2013}. Resolving these controversies is fundamental for understanding the role of noise correlations in brain computations over multiple groups of neurons or neural substrates, or when decoding brain signals recorded from multiple brain locations either in one or even multiple subjects \citep{hari2009,babiloni2014}. In this study, we focus on one of the most prominent measures, due to its information-theoretical foundations and its underlying communication notion of information, here called $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. This measure was introduced by \citet{latham2005} based on the work of \citet{merhav1994} on mismatched decoding, and it is currently considered the exact information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}, despite the fact that, to our knowledge, the properties of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and the consequences of its putative exactness have both remained largely unexplored. Accordingly, our first step in this direction was to address the implications of what to our knowledge is the only controversial finding to date concerning $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and $ \dini^{B\!} $. As a putative exact measure of information loss, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ would be expected to never exceed $ \dini^{B\!} $ \citep{cover2006,quiroga2009,eyherabide2010b}. However, as we have recently shown, this need not be the case \citep{eyherabide2013}. However, due to the rigorous derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, it remains unclear whether this observation indicates major departures from traditional relations between information and decoding or flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. Although puzzling, here we argued that these observations need not actually contradict the belief that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is exact for at least two reasons. First, as mentioned in \sref{res::sec::difnotion}, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ and $ \dini^{B\!} $ are based on different notions of information, which differences are not necessarily unknown, but previous studies have often overlooked \citep{latham2005,thomson2005,quiroga2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013}. Second, here we point out that even though the relation $ \dini^{D\!L\!}{<}\dini^{B\!} $ holds when studying response aspects such as spike counts or latencies \citep{eyherabide2016b}, this observation need not immediately imply that the relation must also hold when studying noise correlations. These two reasons led us to hypothesize that previous observations of $ \dini^{D\!L\!}$ exceeding $\dini^{B\!} $ may simply stem from fundamental differences between the two underlying information notions rather than from previously unforeseen flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $. To disentangle these two possibilities, we compared for the first time the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ with a direct computation of the communication information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding that we called $ \Delta CI $. Contrary to currently thought \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}, our results showed for the first time that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ need not be exact and can overestimate $ \Delta CI $ at least when optimal NI decoders can perfectly identified some stimulus feature. Using populations that transmit independent information, we also showed for that the first time that, that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is actually superadditive. Specifically, we found that the value of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed using all neurons in all populations is larger than the sum of the values of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ computed using all neurons in each population, respectively. This result constitutes a major departure from the traditional additivity of mutual information \citep{shannon1949,fano1961,cover2006}, thereby questioning current beliefs in the exactness of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}. This paradoxical increment in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ was here called destructive interference, and shown ubiquitous regardless of whether the populations were interpreted as spatially or temporally multiplexed independent-information streams \citep{oppenheim1997,panzeri2010}, which we explained by tracing them back to the convex minimization in the definition of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,oizumi2010,eyherabide2013,oizumi2016}. Our explanation implies that may arise regardless of the correlation importance within populations, the composition of neural substrates and the type of multiplexed codes. Furthermore, the mathematical nature of this result extends this phenomenon beyond neural coding to information streams of arbitrary type \citep{shannon1949,fano1961,ernst2002,eyherabide2010FCN,panzeri2010,oizumi2016,zhang2016}. We also found that the destructive interference grows with the number of populations, driving $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ towards $ \dini^{D\!} $ (\fref{fig07}), and possibly reaching ${\approx} 100\,\% $ of the transmitted information (\fref{fig03}), even when each population could be safely decoded ignoring noise correlations (figures~\ref{fig03};~\ref{fig04};~\ref{fig05};~\ref{fig07}). These results are qualitatively similar to previous experimental findings in which $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ grows with the number of neurons or with the decoding-window length, and lies close to $ \dini^{D\!} $ \citep{oizumi2009,oizumi2010,latham2013}. Therefore, here we conclude that these phenomena may occur even in the absence of putative temporal correlations across time bins, pseudo-correlations caused by inappropriately assuming stationarity, or higher-order correlations, as previous studies have conjectured \citep{oizumi2009,oizumi2010}, due to the sole presence of destructive interference. However, we found the emergence of destructive interference puzzling for at least two reasons. First, it never occurs when studying response aspects such as spike counts or latencies \citep{eyherabide2016b}, or when studying correlation importance using $ \dini^{D\!} $, as we have here shown (\sref{res::sec::ubiquity}). Second, should $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ be exact as currently believed, noise correlations would seemingly grow in importance with the number of populations, even if they transmit independent information. These reasons notwithstanding, we cannot rigorously conclude that they imply flaws in $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ for at least two other reasons. First, whether or not ignoring response aspects differs from ignoring response probabilities remains unsettled \citep{nirenberg2003,schneidman2003,eyherabide2013,latham2013}. Second, although often overlooked in previous studies \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,oizumi2010,eyherabide2013,latham2013}, $ \dini^{D\!} $ is based on a different notion of information than $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ \citep{nirenberg2001,nirenberg2003,latham2013} and may overestimate the communication information loss \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,oizumi2010,eyherabide2013}. Instead, we hypothesized that the phenomenon of destructive interference may only indicate that the intuition gained from traditional information theory applied to ignoring aspects of neural responses should be observed with caution when applied to ignoring aspects of response probabilities. Unnoticed by previous studies is the fact that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is based on only one possible construction of optimal NI decoders, that we called joint NI decoding, which identifies all stimulus features simultaneously (\fref{fig5}(a)). However, here we showed that optimal NI decoders can be constructed in other ways that can potentially outperform the state of the art. In particular, and despite previous controversies, here we proved that optimal NI decoders constructed to identify independent stimulus features separately but in parallel can completely overcome the destructive interference (\fref{fig5}(b)). This finding was puzzling because, when information is independent, joint and parallel NI decoders typically produce the same estimates. This observation seemingly rules out construction differences as the ultimate cause of destructive interference, but provided us with valuable insight into potential flaws of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $, even when information is not independent. Specifically, we hypothesized that parallel NI decoders seemingly outperform joint NI decoders because they seemingly require that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ be computed with codebooks that preserve the independence of the stimulus features. Our tests on this hypothesis revealed for the first time in neural coding that, contrary to what occurs when studying response aspects such as spike counts or latencies, the average decoding error probability over the set of all codebooks used in the original derivation of $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ need not be representative of the average decoding error probability for smaller sets of codebooks when studying noise correlations. This result rigorously proved for the first time that, contrary to previously thought \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}, $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ may overestimate the communication information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding even when stimuli cannot be perfectly identified or when information is not independent. Most importantly, this observation puts forward testing different sets of codebooks as one possible strategy for solving the overestimation. We point out that the concept of destructive interference is not limited to the communication notion of information, can also be extended to the axiomatic notion of information. From our results on joint and parallel decoding, it follows immediately that this axiomatic destructive interference is not related to overestimations of the axiomatic information loss but to differences in tie-breaking rules adopted during the construction of joint and parallel NI decoders. Furthermore, it can be positive or negative, but the minimum axiomatic destructive interference over all possible conventions is always negative. Whether tie-breaking rules play any role in the communication destructive interference, or whether joint NI decoders can actually extract more communication information than parallel NI decoders, still remain open questions. Since its introduction, the information-theoretical measure $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ has been deemed the exact information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding \citep{latham2005,oizumi2009,ince2010,oizumi2010,latham2013,oizumi2016}. However, our results prove that $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ is biased and that the overestimation can reach $ {\approx}100\,\% $ of the encoded information. Hence, using $ \dini^{D\!L\!} $ in its basic form may lead to wasting experimental and computational resources, which can be avoided by estimating the communication information loss as we propose here. These estimates close the gap between axiomatic and communication information losses, thereby opening up the possibility that traditional relations between information and decoding observed when studying response aspects such as spike counts and latencies are also valid when studying noise correlations. In practice, our results indicate that noise correlations need not be as necessary as previously thought, and may potentially contribute to reduce the cost and complexity of computational brain models and neuroprosthetics. \section{Conclusion} Assessing the role of noise correlations in neural decoding is fundamental, not only for understanding how the brain perform computations and turn them into perceptions, decisions and actions, but also for estimating the amount of resources and the level of complexity required to study brain function and to construct neural prosthetics. This study sheds new light into their role by revealing and resolving unforeseen limitations of an approach that, due to its rigorous information-theoretical foundations, has always been deemed exact. Our analysis was entirely conducted taking into account the fundamental differences between the notions of information associated with this and other approaches. In this way, we avoided the confounds of previous studies, and rigorously proved that the currently-deemed-exact approach overestimates the information loss caused by ignoring noise correlations in optimal decoding. In practice, our study shows that the cost of ignoring noise correlations for studying brain computations and information integration, when evaluated using the communication notion of information, can be much lower than currently thought, thereby potentially saving experimental and computational resources, and contributing to develop simpler and more efficient neuroprosthetics and technological applications. \section{Acknowledgments} This work was supported by the Academy of Finland, Centre of Excellence in Inverse Problems (project number 213476) and Computational Sciences Program (project number 135198). \bibliographystyle{harvard}
\section{Introduction and some Preliminaries} A derivation from a Banach algebra $A$ to a Banach $A$-module $X$ is a bounded linear mapping $D:A\rightarrow X$ such that $D(ab)=D(a)b+aD(b)$ for all $a,b\in A$. For each $x\in X$ the mapping $d_x:a\rightarrow ax-xa$, $(a \in A)$ is a derivation, called the inner derivation implemented by $x$. The concept of $n-$weak amenability was introduced and intensively studied by Dales, Ghahramani and Gr{\o}nb{\ae}k \cite{DGG}. A Banach algebra $A$ is said to be $n-$weakly amenable ($n\in\mathbb{N}$) if every derivation from ${\mathcal A}$ into $ A^{(n)}$ is inner, where $A^{(n)}$ is the $n^{th}-$dual of $A$, we also write $A^{(0)}=A$. $1-$weak amenability is the so-called weak amenability which was first introduced and studied by Bade, Curtis and Dales \cite{BCD} for commutative Banach algebras and then by Johnson \cite{J} for a general Banach algebra. $C^-$ algebras and the convolution group algebras are the main examples of $n-$weakly amenable Banach algebras (for a proof see \cite{DGG}, \cite{Z1}). For more background concerning $n-$weak amenability one may refer to the monograph \cite{D}. Let $A$ and $X$ be Banach algebra and let $X$ be a Banach $A-$module. We say that $X$ is an algebraic Banach $A-$module if for every $x, y\in X$ and $a\in A,$ \begin{align} &a(xy)=(ax)y,\ (xy) a=x(ya),\ (xa)y=x(ay),\ \ \ \rm{and}\\ &\\|ax\\|\leq\\|a\\|\\|x\\|,\ \ \\|xa\\|\leq\\|a\\|\\|x\\| \end{align} \[.\] Then a direct verification shows that the $\ell^1-$direct sum $A\bowtie X$ under the multiplication \[(a,x)(b,y)=(ab, ay+xb+xy)\quad (a,b\in A, x,y\in X)\] is a Banach algebra which is called the generalized module extension of $A$ by $X$ and denoted by $A\bowtie X$. It is easy to check that $A\times\{0\}$ is a closed subalgebra while $\{0\}\times X$ is a closed ideal of $A\bowtie X$, and that $(A\bowtie X)/(\{0\}\times X)$ is isometrically isomorphic to $A\times\{0\}$.\\ The main examples of generalized module extensions are listed as follows: \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm $\bullet$] \item (\textit{The classical module extension algebras}) The (classical) module extension algebra $A\ltimes X$, as introduced in \cite{BDL}, is the $\ell^1-$direct sum of $A$ by the Banach $A-$module $X$ equipped with the multiplication \[(a,x)(b,y)=(ab, ay+xb)\quad (a,b\in A, x,y\in X).\] Clearly, $A\ltimes X$ is a generalized module extension Banach algebra, in which $X$ is equipped with the trivial product $xy=0.$ Module extension Banach algebras are known as a rich source of (counter-)examples in various situations in abstract harmonic analysis and functional analysis. Some aspects of the Banach algebra $A\ltimes X$ have been described in \cite{BDL}. In \cite{Z} Zhang has characterized the structures of derivations from $A\ltimes X$ into various duals from which he investigated the $n-$weak amenability properties of $A\ltimes X$. The class of module extension Banach algebras also includes the triangular Banach algebra whose weak amenability has been investigated in \cite{FM}. \item (\textit{$\theta-$Lau product of Banach algebras}) Let $A$ and $B$ be Banach algebras and let $\theta\in\sigma(A).$ Then the $\theta-$Lau product $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ which is equipped with the multiplication \[(a,b)(c,d)=(ac, \theta(a)d+\theta(c)b+bd)\quad (a,c\in A, b,d\in B),\] can be viewed as a generalized module extension algebra, in which $B$ endowed with the module operations $ab=ba=\theta(a)b$ is an algebraic Banach $A-$module. This product was introduced by Lau \cite{L} for certain class of Banach algebras and followed by Sangani Monfared \cite{M} for the general case. A very familiar example is the case that $A=\mathbb{C}$ with $\theta=\iota$ as the identity character, that we get the unitization $B^\sharp=\mathbb{C}{~}_{\iota\!\!}\times B$ of $B$. Some aspects of $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ are investigated in \cite{EK, EK1, K}. In particular, the $n-$weak amenability of $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ are discussed in \cite{EK1}. \item (\textit{$T-$Lau product of Banach algebras}) Let $A$ and $B$ be Banach algebras and let $T:A\to B$ be a continuous homomorphism with $\\|T\\|\leq 1$. Then the $T-$Lau product $A{~}_{T}\!\!\times B$ which is equipped with the multiplication \[(a,b)(c,d)=(ac, T(a)d+bT(c)+bd)\quad (a,c\in A, b,d\in B),\] can also be viewed as a generalized module extension algebra, in which $B$ furnished with the module operations $ab=T(a)b$ and $ba=bT(a)$ is an algebraic Banach $A-$module. This type of product was first introduced by Bhatt and Dabhi \cite{Bh-D} for the case where $B$ is commutative and was extended by Javanshiri and Nemati for the general case \cite{Javan-N}; see also \cite{NJav}. In particular, in the case $T=0$, we arrive at the $\ell^1-$direct sum $A\oplus_1 B$ of two Banach algebra $A$ and $B$, equipped with the pointwise multiplication \[(a,b)(c,d)=(ab,cd)\quad (a,c\in A, b,d\in B).\] Recently, Choi \cite{Choi} has demonstrated that the $T-$Lau product $A{~}_{T}\!\!\times B$ is isomorphic as a Banach algebra to the usual direct sum $A\oplus_1 B$. \end{enumerate} For a generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\bowtie X$ one can directly checked that the $n^{th}-$dual $(A\bowtie X)^{n}$ as a Banach $(A\bowtie X)-$module enjoys the following module operations: \begin{align} (F,G) (a,x)&=(Fa,Fx +G a+Gx),\\ (a,x) (F,G)&=(aF,xF +aG+xG),\\ (f,g) (a,x)&=(fa+g x ,g x+ga),\\ (a,x)(f,g)&=(af+x g, x g+ag), \end{align*} for all $a\in A, F\in A^{(2n)}, f\in A^{(2n+1)}, x\in X, G\in X^{(2n)}$ and $ g\in X^{(2n+1)}.$ The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2 we investigate $n-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie X$ in the case where $n$ is odd. Then we apply our results for the particular cases, $A\ltimes X,$ $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B,$ $A{~}_{T}\!\!\times B$ and $A\oplus_1 B.$ Section 3 follows the same discipline for the case $n$ is even. The case where $X$ is unital is invistigated in Section 4. This special case provides some simplifications in the constructions of derivations to various duals of $A\bowtie X$. \section{$(2n+1)-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie X$} In this section we characterize $(2n+1)-$weak amenability of the generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\bowtie X$ in terms of the $(2n+1)-$weak amenability of $A$ and $X$. We begin with the following elementary lemma characterizing derivations from $A\bowtie X$ into $(A\bowtie X)^{(2n+1)}$. \begin{lemma}\label{derivodd} Every derivation $D: A\bowtie X\to (A\bowtie X)^{(2n+1)}\quad (n\in\mathbb N\cup\{0\})$ enjoys the presentation \begin{equation}\label{der1} {D}(a,x)=(D_{A}(a)+T_{A}(x),D_{X}(a)+T_{X}(x)), \end{equation} where \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (a)] \item $D_{A}:A\to A^{(2n+1)}$ and $D_{X}:A\to X^{(2n+1)}$ are derivations. \item $T_{A}:X\to A^{(2n+1)}$ is a bounded linear map such that for every $a\in A, x\in X,$\\ $T_{A}(a x)=a T_{A}(x)+D_{X}(a) x$ and $T_{A}(x a)=T_{A}(x) a+x D_{X}(a).$ \item $T_{X}: X\to X^{(2n+1)}$ is a derivation such that for every $a\in A, x\in X,$\\ $T_X(a x)=D_X(a) x+a T_X(x)$, $T_X(x a)=x D_X(a)+T_X(x) a$ and $T_X(x) y+x T_X(y)=T_A(xy).$ \end{enumerate} Moreover, $D$ is inner, that is, $D=d_{(f,g)}$ for some $f\in A^{(2n+1)},$ $g\in X^{(2n+1)}$ if and only if $D_{A}=d_{f}, D_{X}=d_{g}$ and $T_{X}=d_{g}$ are inner derivations and $T_{A}=\delta_{g}$, where $\delta_{g}(x)=xg-gx$, $(x\in X)$. \end{lemma} We are ready to prove one of our main result characterizing $(2n+1)-$amenability of $A\bowtie X.$ \begin{theorem}\label{wamenodd} A generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \item If $T_X:X\to X^{(2n+1)}$ is a derivation such that there exist a derivation $D_X:A\to X^{(2n+1)}$ and a bounded linear map $T_A:X\to A^{(2n+1)}$ satisfying $T_A(a x)=a T_A(x)+D_X(a)x,$ $T_A(x a)=T_A(x) a+xD_X(a),$ $T_X(a x)=D_X(a) x+a T_X(x),$ $T_X(x a)=x D_X(a)+T_X(x) a$ and $T_X(x) y+x T_X(y)=T_A(xy),$ for all $a\in A, x\in X,$ then $T_X$ is inner. \item If $D_X:A\to X^{(2n+1)}$ is a derivation such that $x D_X(a)=D_X(a) x=0$, for all $a\in A, x\in X,$ then there exists an element $g\in X^{(2n+1)}$ such that $D_X=d_{g}$ and $x g=g x$, for all $x\in X$. \item If $T_A:X\to A^{(2n+1)}$ is a bounded $A-$module homomorphism such that $T_A(xy)=0$ for all $x,y\in X,$ then $T_A=0$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} As a consequence we have the following result which extends \cite[Theorem 2.4]{EK1}. \begin{proposition}\label{nweak-odd} Suppose that both $A$ and $X$ are $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. Then $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable when either of the following condition holds. \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $\langle XX^{(2n)}+X^{(2n)}X\rangle$ is dense in $X^{(2n)}$. \item $\langle XA^{(2n)}+A^{(2n)}X\rangle$ is dense in $X^{(2n)}$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} Applying Theorem \ref{wamenodd} for the calassical module extension Banach algebra $A\ltimes X$ we arrive at the following result which has already proved by Zhang \cite{Z} by a slightly different method. \begin{corollary}[{\cite[Theorem 2.1]{Z}}] A (classical) module extension Banach algebra $A\ltimes X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \item The only $A-$module morphism $T:X\rightarrow X^{(2n+1)}$ such that $xT(y)+T(x)y=0$, in $A^{(2n+1)}$, for all $x,y\in X$, is zero. \item $H^1(A,X^{(2n+1)})=\{0\}$; that is, every derivation from $A$ to $X^{(2n+1)}$ is inner. \item For every continuous $A-$module morphism $S:X\rightarrow A^{(2n+1)}$, there exists $f\in X^{(2n+1)}$ such that $af=fa$ for all $a\in A$ and $S(x)=xf-fx$ for all $x\in X$. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} It is enough to use Theorem \ref{wamenodd} for the case where $xy=0$ for all $x,y\in X.$ \end{proof} As another consequence of Theorem \ref{wamenodd}, we use it for the $\theta-$Lau product Banach algebra $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B.$ Then we get the following characterization for $(2n+1)-$weak amenability of $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ which extends the related results in \cite{EK1}. \begin{corollary}\label{Lauodd} The $\theta-$Lau product Banach algebra $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \item Every derivation $T:B\rightarrow B^{(2n+1)}$ for which there exists a bounded $A-$module homomorphism $S:B\rightarrow A^{(2n+1)}$ such that $\left(T(b)(d)+T(d)(d)\right)\theta=S(bd)$ for all $b,d\in B$ is inner. \item The only bounded linear map $D:A\to B^{(2n+1)}$ such that $D(ac)=\theta(a)D(c)+\theta(c)D(a)$ and $bD(a)=0=D(a)b$ for all $a,c\in A$ and $b\in B$, is zero. \item The only bounded linear operator $S:B\to A^{(2n+1)}$ such that $S(bd)=0, aS(b)=S(b)a=\theta(a)S(b)$ for all $a\in A$ and $b,d\in B$, is zero. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} Applying Theorem \ref{wamenodd} for the case where $X=A$, with the multiplication as the module operation, we have the following characterization of $(2n+1)-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie A$. \begin{corollary}\label{B=Aodd} $A\bowtie A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable if and only if $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \end{corollary} Applying Theorem \ref{wamenodd} for the direct sum algebra $A\oplus_1 B$ we get the following well known result. \begin{corollary}\label{zeromododd} $A\oplus_1 B$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable if and only if both $A$ and $B$ are $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \end{corollary} \section{$(2n)-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie X$} In this section we characterize $(2n)-$weak amenability of the generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\bowtie X$ in terms of the $(2n)-$weak amenability of $A$ and $X$. Similar to the previous section (Lemma \ref{derivodd}) we begin with the following elementary lemma characterizing the derivations from $A\bowtie X$ into $(A\bowtie X)^{(2n)}$. \begin{lemma}\label{deriveven} Every derivation $D: A\bowtie X\to (A\bowtie X)^{(2n)},\quad (n\in\mathbb N\cup\{0\})$, enjoys the presentation \begin{equation}\label{der2} {D}(a,x)=(D_{A}(a)+T_{A}(x),D_{X}(a)+T_{X}(x)), \end{equation} where \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (a)] \item $D_{A}:A\to A^{(2n)}$ and $D_{X}:A\to X^{(2n)}$ are derivation. \item $T_{A}:X\to A^{(2n)}$ is a bounded $A$-module homomorphism satisfying $T_{A}(xy)=0$, for all $x,y\in X$. \item $T_{X}:X\to X^{(2n)}$ is a bounded linear map such that $T_X(a x)=D_A(a) x+D_X(a) x+a T_X(x),$ $T_X(x a)=x D_A(a)+x D_X(a)+T_X(x) a$ and $T_X(xy)=x T_X(y)+T_X(x) y+x T_A(y)+T_A(x) y,$ for each $a\in A, x,y\in X.$ \end{enumerate} Moreover, $D=d_{(F,G)}$ for some $F\in A^{(2n)}, G\in X^{2n},$ if and only if $D_{A}=d_{F}, D_{X}=d_{G}$ and $T_{X}=d_{G}+\delta_{F}$ (are inner derivations), and $T_{A}=0$, where $\delta_{F}(x)=x F-F x,\ (x\in X)$. \end{lemma} The next result is the $(2n)-$version of Theorem \ref{wamenodd}. \begin{theorem}\label{wameneven} A generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item If $D_A:A\to A^{(2n)}$ is a derivation such that there exist a derivation $D_X:A\to X^{(2n)}$, a bounded linear operator $T_X:X\to X^{(2n)}$ and a bounded $A$-module homomorphism $T_A:X\to A^{(2n)}$ satisfying $T_A(xy)=0$, $T_X(a x)=D_A(a) x+D_X(a) x+a T_X(x),$ $T_X(x a)=x D_A(a)+x D_X(a)+T_X(x) a$ and $T_X(xy)=x T_X(y)+T_X(x) y+T_A(x) y+x T_A(y)$, for all $a\in A$ and $x,y\in X$, then $D_A$ is inner. \item If $T_X:X\to X^{(2n)}$ is a bounded linear operator such that there exist a derivation $D_X:A\to X^{(2n)}$ and a bounded $A$-module homomorphism $T_A:X\to A^{(2n)}$ satisfying $T_A(xy)=0$, $T_X(a x)=D_X(a) x+a T_X(x),$ $T_X(x a)=x D_X(a)+T_X(x) a$ and $T_X(xy)=x T_X(y)+T_X(x) y+T_A(x) y+x T_A(y)$, for all $a\in A$ and $x,y\in X$, then there exist elements $F\in A^{(2n)}$ and $G\in X^{(2n)}$ such that $T_X=\delta_{F}+d_{G}$ and $a F=F a$ for all $a\in A$. \item If $D_X:A\to X^{(2n)}$ is a derivation such that $x D_X(a)=D_X(a) x=0$, in $X^{(2n)}$, for all $a\in A$ and $x\in X$, then there exist elements $G\in X^{(2n)}$ and $F\in A^{(2n)}$ such that $D_X=d_{G},~ d_{G}+\delta_{F}=0$ and $a F=F a$ for all $a\in A$. \item If $T_A:X\to A^{(2n)}$ is a bounded $A$-module homomorphism such that $T_A(xy)=0$ for all $x,y\in X$, and there exists a bounded $A$-module homomorphism $T_X:X\to X^{(2n)}$ satisfying $T_X(xy)=x T_X(y)+T_X(x) y+T_A(x) y+x T_A(y)$, for all $x,y\in X$, then $T_A=0$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} As an application of the latter Theorem we bring the following even analogue of Proposition \ref{nweak-odd}. \begin{proposition}\label{nweak-even} Suppose that $X^2$ is dense in $X$ and both $A$ and $X$ are \break $(2n)-$weakly amenable. If $\langle XX^{(2n-1)}+X^{(2n-1)}X\rangle$ is dense in $X^{(2n-1)}$, then $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable. \end{proposition} We apply Theorem \ref{wameneven} for a classical generalized module extension Banach algebra $A\ltimes X$ to obtain the following result of Zhang \cite{Z}. \begin{corollary}[{\cite[Theorem 2.2]{Z}}] A (classical) module extension Banach algebra $A\ltimes X$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable if and only if the following conditions hold. \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item The only derivation $D:A \rightarrow A^{(2n)}$ for which there exists a continuous operator $T:X \rightarrow X^{(2n)}$ such that $T(ax)=aT(x)+D(a)x$ and $T(xa)=T(x)a+xD(a)$ for all $a\in A$ and $x\in X$, are inner derivations. \item For every continuous $A-$module morphism $T:X\rightarrow X^{(2n)}$, there exists a $F\in A^{(2n)}$ such that $T(x)=xF-Fx$ and $aF=Fa$ for all $x\in X, a\in A$. \item $H^1(A,X^{(2n)})=\{0\}$. \item The only continuous $A-$module morphism $S:X\rightarrow A^{(2n)}$ for which $xS(y)+S(x)y=0$, in $X^{(2n)}$, for all $x,y\in X,$ is zero. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} It is enough to use Theorem \ref{wameneven} for the case where $xy=0$ for all $x,y\in X.$ \end{proof} Applying Theorem \ref{wameneven} for the $\theta-$Lau product Banach algebra $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B,$ we get the following characterization for $(2n)-$weak amenability of $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ which extends the related results in \cite{EK1}. \begin{corollary}\label{Laueven} A $\theta$-Lau product Banach algebra $A{~}_{\theta\!\!}\times B$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable if and only if the following conitions hold. \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item The only derivations $D:A\to A^{(2n)}$ for which there is a derivation $D_1:A\to B^{(2n)}$ such that $D_1(a) b=b D_1(a)= -D(a)(\theta)b$ for all $a\in A$ and $b\in B,$ are inner derivations. \item $B$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable. \item The only bounded linear operator $D_1:A\to B^{(2n)}$ such that $D(ac)=\theta(a)D(c)+\theta(c)D(a)$ and $bD_1(a)=0=D_1(a)b$ for all $a,c\in A, b\in B,$ is zero. \item The only bounded linear operator $S:B\to A^{(2n)}$ for which $S(bd)=0, aS(b)=S(b)a=\theta(a)S(b)$ for all $a\in A, b,d\in B$ and there is a bounded linear operator $T:B\to B^{(2n)}$ such that $T(bd)=b T(d)+T(b) d+S(b)(\theta) d+S(d)(\theta) b$ for all $b,d\in B,$ is zero. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} Applying Theorem \ref{wameneven} for the case $X=A$, with the multiplication as module operation, we get the following characterization of $(2n)-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie A$. \begin{corollary}\label{B=Aeven} $A\bowtie A$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $A$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable. \item the only bounded homomorphism $S:A\to A^{(2n)}$ for which $aS(c)=S(a)c=S(ac)=0$ for each $a, c\in A$, is zero. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} Applying Theorem \ref{wameneven} for the direct sum algebra $A\oplus_1 B$ we get the following result. \begin{corollary}\label{zeromodeven} The direct sum $A\oplus_1 B$ of two Banach algebra $A$ and $B$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable if and only if \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item Both $A$ and $B$ are $(2n)-$weakly amenable. \item The only bounded homomorphism $D:A\to B^{(2n)}$ for which $D(ac)=0$ and $b D(a)=D(a) b=0$ for all $a,c\in A, b\in B,$ is zero. \item The only bounded homomorphism $S:B\to A^{(2n)}$ for which $S(bd)=0$ and $a S(b)=D(b) a=0$ for all $a\in A, b,d\in B,$ is zero. \end{enumerate} \end{corollary} If we combine Propositions \ref{nweak-odd} and \ref{nweak-even}, we have the following result providing some sufficient conditions for $n-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie X$. In particular, in the setting of $\theta-$Lau products, it improves \cite[Proposition 2.4]{EK1}, as well as, for $T-$Lau products, it improve \cite[Proposition 3.5]{Javan-N}. \begin{proposition}\label{nweak} Suppose that $X^2$ is dense in $X$ and for some $n>0$ either $\overline{X X^{(n-1)}}=X^{(n-1)}$ or $\overline{X^{(n-1)} X}=X^{(n-1)}$. If $A$ and $X$ are $n-$weakly amenable then $A\bowtie X$ is $n-$weakly amenable. \end{proposition} We recall from \cite[Proposition 1.2]{DGG} that if $A$ is weakly amenable, then $\overline{AA}=A$. Thus as a rapid consequence of Proposition \ref{nweak} we get, \begin{corollary} If $A$ and $X$ are weakly amenable then $A\bowtie X$ is weakly amenable. \end{corollary} From Corollaries \ref{zeromododd}, \ref{zeromodeven} and Proposition \ref{nweak} we get the following result. \begin{corollary} Suppose that $B^2$ is dense in $B$ and for some $n>0$ either $\overline{B B^{(n-1)}}=B^{(n-1)}$ or $\overline{B^{(n-1)} B}=B^{(n-1)}$. Then $A\oplus_1 B$ is $n-$weakly amenable if and only if both $A$ and $B$ are $n-$weakly amenable. \end{corollary} From Corollaries \ref{B=Aodd}, \ref{B=Aeven} we immediately obtain the next result. \begin{corollary} Suppose that $A^2$ is dense in $A$ then $A\bowtie A$ is $n-$weakly amenable if and only if $A$ is $n-$weakly amenable. \end{corollary} \section{The case where $X$ is unital} In this section we assume that $X$ is unital with the identity $1_X$. In this case the characterizations of derivations $D:A\bowtie X\to(A\bowtie X)^{(n)}$ presented in Lemma \ref{derivodd} and \ref{deriveven} can be considerably simplified. This result extends \cite[Corollareis 3.9, 3.10]{Javan-N} and \cite[Proposition 3.1]{EK1}. \begin{lemma} Let $X$ be unital with the identity $1_X$. Then \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item $D:A\bowtie X\to (A\bowtie X)^{(2n+1)}$ is a derivation if and only if $$D(a,x)=(D_{A}(a)+T_{X}(x) 1_X,T_{X}(a 1_X)+T_{X}(x)),\qquad(a\in A, x\in X);$$ where, $D_{A}:A\to A^{(2n+1)}$ and $T_{X}:X\to X^{(2n+1)}$ are derivations and $T_{X}(1_X a)=T_{X}(a 1_X)$ for all $a\in A$ and $T_{X}(x) 1_X=1_X T_{X}(x)$, in $A^{(2n+1)}$, for all $x\in X$. Moreover, $D=d_{(f,g)}$ is inner derivation if and only if $D_{A}=d_{f}$ and $T_{X}=d_{g}$ are inner derivations. \item $D:A\bowtie X\to (A\bowtie X)^{(2n)}$ is a derivation if and only if $$D(a,x)=(D_{A}(a),T_{X}(a 1_X)-D_A(a) 1_X+T_{X}(x)),\qquad(a\in A, x\in X);$$ where, $D_{A}:A\to A^{(2n)}$ and $T_{X}:X\to X^{(2n)}$ are derivations, $T_{X}(1_X a)-1_X D_A(a)=T_{X}(a 1_X)-D_A(a) 1_X$ for all $a\in A$ and $D(a)=D_A(a) 1_X$ is a bounded derivation from $A$ into $X^{(2n)}$. Moreover, $D=d_{(F,G)}$ is inner derivation if and only if $D_{A}=d_{F}$ and $T_{X}=d_{G}+\delta_{F}=d_{G+1_X F}$ are inner derivations. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} As a consequence of Proposition \ref{nweak} we give the next result concerning to the $(n)-$weak amenability of $A\bowtie X$ in the case where $X$ is unital. This result covers \cite[Theorem 3.1]{EK1} and \cite[Proposition 3.11]{Javan-N} in the special case. \begin{theorem} Suppose that $X$ is unital. \begin{enumerate}[\hspace{1em}\rm (1)] \item If $A$ and $X$ are $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable then $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable. \item If $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable then $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable and the only derivations $T_{X}:X\to X^{(2n+1)}$ which is also an $A-$module homomorphism and $T_{X}(x) 1_X=1_X T_{X}(x)$ are inner derivations. \item If $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable then $A$ is $(2n+1)-$weakly amenable and $X$ is $(2n+1)-$cyclicly weak $A$-module amenable. \item If $A$ and $X$ are $(2n)-$weakly amenable then $A\bowtie X$ is $(2n)-$weakly amenable.\\ \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} {\bf Acknowledgments.} The authors would like to express their appreciation to Professor H. R. Ebrahimi Vishki for introducing them to the subject of this work and all of his encouragement and valuable comments which provided significant improvements to this article.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction} The problem of convective stability has a long history, one that has enjoyed over a century's worth of attention by the fluids community in the study of atmospheric dynamics, oceanography, geophysics, and stellar atmospheres ({\it ``Strahlungsgleichgewicht''}, to use the term coined by \citet{schwarzschild06}). The study of convective stability in magnetised {\em plasmas}, on the other hand, is just over 50 years old, with rigorous astrophysical inquiry emerging only in the last decade and a half. Without this context, it may come as a surprise to find a contemporary paper on something as pedestrian as the linear Vlasov theory of a magnetised, thermally stratified atmosphere. But, as we demonstrate here, such surprise is not warranted -- there are new and novel findings to be had. This is despite a large body of work in the magnetic-confinement-fusion literature on instability and anomalous transport in magnetised, thermally stratified plasmas \citep[e.g.][]{rs61,mikhailovskii62,crs67,cks91,horton99,dimits00,dorland00}, as well as two encyclop\ae dic texts by \citet{mikhailovskii74,mikhailovskii92} on electromagnetic instabilities in inhomogeneous plasmas. The culprit is that prior work on the stability of magnetised, inhomogeneous plasmas has focused almost entirely on low-$\beta$ plasmas, that is, those whose thermal energy is strongly subdominant to the energy of the magnetic field that threads them. This is only natural. Energetically dominant magnetic fields are routinely employed to confine terrestrial plasmas, both for experiments in basic plasma physics and in efforts to produce a self-sustaining and controlled nuclear fusion reaction, and it is largely in these contexts that studies of plasma stability have been carried out. But most astrophysical plasmas are high-$\beta$, with the magnetic field energetically subdominant not only to the thermal energy but, often, to the bulk kinetic energy as well. While it may be tempting to ignore the field altogether in this case due to its dynamical weakness, one must exercise great care. Since magnetic fields serve as conduits of heat and momentum transport in magnetised plasmas, it matters where and how effectively the field is carried around by the plasma. This paper adds to the study of magnetised, thermally stratified, high-$\beta$ plasmas that are commonplace in astrophysical environments such as galaxy clusters and certain classes of black-hole accretion flows. Here, we take a kinetic Vlasov (i.e.~collisionless) approach to study linear stability, both complementing and extending recent work on the topic that alternatively used a magnetofluid ({\it viz.}, Braginskii) treatment. In the next section (\S\ref{sec:prereqs}), we provide a brief review of what is known from these previous fluid analyses about the linear convective stability of a collisional magnetised plasma. We also highlight some additional physics that is brought into play by adopting a kinetic approach, including Landau resonances, collisionless wave damping, and finite-Larmor-radius effects. The calculation proper begins in Section \ref{sec:vlasov}, in which the basic equations are given (\S\ref{sec:equations}), the equilibrium state is constructed (\S\ref{sec:equilibrium}), and the equilibrium particle trajectories are elucidated (\S\S\ref{sec:drifts}, \ref{sec:trajectories}). In Section \ref{sec:linear} we derive the linear theory governing small-amplitude perturbations about this equilibrium and specialize it for a quasi-Maxwell-Boltzmann equilibrium distribution function. Certain technical aspects of the derivation are relegated to Appendices \ref{app:derivation} and \ref{app:integrals}. The heart of the paper is Section \ref{sec:results}, in which the linear theory is used to assess convective stability across a wide range of perturbation wavelengths and frequencies. The physical interpretation of instability in each parameter regime is discussed in detail. Connection is made to drift-wave instabilities driven by ion- and electron-temperature gradients that are well known in the magnetic-confinement-fusion community. A supplementary appendix is provided in which the nonlinear gyrokinetic theory of a thermally stratified atmosphere is systematically derived (Appendix \ref{app:gk}). Finally, a summary of our findings is given in Section \ref{sec:summary}. \section{Prerequisites}\label{sec:prereqs} \subsection{Convective stability of a collisional magnetised plasma} Before embarking on a detailed kinetic analysis, it seems prudent to briefly review what is known about the convective stability of a {\em collisional} magnetised plasma, that is, one in which the collisional mean free path $\lambda_{mfp}$ is intermediate between the Larmor radius $\rho_s$ of plasma species $s$ and the scales of interest on which convection sets in (e.g., the thermal-pressure scale height $H$). Even in this case, the physics is surprisingly different than applies to hydrodynamic (or even ideal magnetohydrodynamic (MHD)) convection, for which the entropy gradient is the discriminating quantity for stability \citep{schwarzschild06}. The culprit is that frozen-in magnetic-field lines serve as conduits along which heat and/or (parallel) momentum are transported from one tethered fluid element to the next, the rate of transport increasing the more aligned the magnetic field becomes with the temperature and/or velocity gradients. This is a consequence of the small Larmor radius: the magnetic field interferes strongly with motions across itself, and so collisional transport occurs most readily along magnetic lines of force \citep{braginskii65}. For sufficiently weak collisions or on sufficiently small lengthscales such that $k^2_\parallel \lambda_{mfp} H \gg 1$, where $k_\parallel$ is the wavenumber along the magnetic field, field lines tend towards isotherms and/or isotachs. This has profound implications for the convective stability of such plasmas \citep{balbus00,balbus01}. Upward and downward fluid displacements that carry magnetic-field lines with them tend not to be isentropic but rather isothermal, since they remain magnetically and thus thermodynamically connected to conditions at their native altitude. For atmospheres in which the temperature increases in the direction of gravity, this implies that an upwardly (downwardly) displaced fluid element is always warmer (cooler) than the surroundings it is passing through. As it rises (sinks), the frozen-in field lines become ever more parallel to the temperature gradient, with the rate of entropy transfer increasing with separation. The result is instability, the temperature gradient taking precedence over the entropy gradient. To offer a concrete example of this process, let us consider a non-rotating, vertically ($z$) stratified atmosphere in hydrostatic equilibrium, threaded by a uniform, horizontal ($x$) magnetic field, subthermal in its strength. For simplicity, we take the gravitational acceleration $\bb{g} = -g\hat{\bb{e}}_z$ to be constant and assume that sound waves propagate fast enough to ensure near incompressibility (i.e.~the Boussinesq approximation). We also neglect any dynamical effect of the magnetic field; its only role is to channel the flow of entropy between magnetically tethered fluid elements. Under these conditions, a vertical displacement $\xi_z$ of a fluid element excites a linear perturbation in the temperature $\delta T$ according to \begin{equation}\label{eqn:prelim1} \left( \pD{t}{} + \omega_{cond} \right) \frac{\delta T}{T} = - \left( \frac{N^2}{g} \pD{t}{} + \omega_{cond} \D{z}{\ln T} \right) \xi_z , \end{equation} where $\omega_{cond}$ is the (field-aligned, or ``parallel'') conduction frequency and $N$ is the Brunt-V\"{a}is\"{a}l\"{a} frequency \citep{vaisala25,brunt27}. (This follows from the energy equation.) When conduction is negligible ($\omega_{cond} \rightarrow 0$), we find $\delta T / T = -(N^2/g) \xi_z$. In an atmosphere with an upwardly increasing entropy profile ($N^2 > 0$), an upwardly displaced fluid element ($\xi_z > 0$) adiabatically cools and falls back down towards its equilibrium position. Oscillations ensue with frequency $N$, {\em viz.}, $\partial^2\xi_z / \partial t^2 = -N^2 \xi_z$. In contrast, when conduction is rapid ($\omega_{cond} \gg \partial / \partial t$), the perturbed temperature satisfies $\Delta T/T \doteq \delta T / T + \xi_z \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z = 0$; i.e.~the Lagrangian change in a fluid element's temperature vanishes. Isentropic displacements are precluded, and the assessment of stability demands a comparison between the (unchanged) temperature of the fluid element and that of its new surroundings. For ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z < 0$, an upwardly (downwardly) displaced fluid element is too hot (cool), and the displacement grows exponentially: the $z$-component of the force equation becomes $\partial^2 \xi_z / \partial t^2 = g \| {\rm d} \ln T / {\rm d} z\| \, \xi_z$. This is the simplest version of the {\it magnetothermal instability} (MTI). The dynamics illustrated here are complicated further by the field-aligned collisional transport of parallel momentum, which performs the dual role of viscously damping those motions which change the magnetic-field strength (at a rate $\omega_{visc}$) and of coupling Alfv\'{e}n and slow modes so that slow-mode perturbations excite a buoyantly unstable Alfv\'{e}nic response \citep{kunz11}. Restoring the magnetic tension and the associated Alfv\'{e}n frequency $\omega_A$ in our presentation, vertical displacements with spatial dependence $\exp({\rm i} k_x x + {\rm i} k_y y + {\rm i} k_z z)$ in the limit of rapid field-aligned conduction satisfy \begin{equation}\label{eqn:prelim2} \biggl( \pDD{t}{} + \omega^2_A \biggr) \Biggl( \pDD{t}{} + \omega_{visc} \frac{k^2_\perp}{k^2} \pD{t}{} + \omega^2_A + g \D{z}{\ln T} \frac{\mc{K}}{k^2} \Biggr) \xi_z = - \omega_{visc} \, g \D{z}{\ln T}\frac{k^2_y}{k^2} \pD{t}{\xi_z} , \end{equation} where $k^2_\perp \doteq k^2_y + k^2_z$ is square of the wavenumber perpendicular to the mean magnetic field and $\mc{K} \doteq k^2_x + k^2_y$ (cf.~equation (38) of \citet{kunz11}). The first term in parentheses represents Alfv\'{e}n waves that are polarized with the perturbed magnetic field oriented along the $y$-axis. In the absence of parallel viscosity, they are unaffected by buoyancy. The second term in (\ref{eqn:prelim2}) represents slow modes, which are viscously damped at the rate $\omega_{visc}(k^2_\perp/k^2) $ and subject to the MTI when ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z < 0$. For $k_y \ne 0$, the right-hand side of (\ref{eqn:prelim2}) is non-zero, and parallel viscosity couples the Alfv\'{e}n and slow modes; slow-mode perturbations induce an Alfv\'{e}nic response. When the rate of transfer of parallel momentum $\omega_{visc}$ is much faster than the dynamical timescale, the slow mode is rapidly damped; in this limit, (\ref{eqn:prelim2}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:prelim3} \biggl( \pDD{t}{} + \omega^2_A \biggr) \pD{t}{\xi_z} \simeq - g \D{z}{\ln T} \frac{k^2_y}{k^2_\perp} \pD{t}{\xi_z} . \end{equation} If the temperature increases in the direction of gravity (${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d} z < 0$), slow-mode perturbations excite a buoyantly unstable Alfv\'{e}nic response (``Alfv\'{e}nic MTI'', to borrow the term used by \citet{kunz11}), an effect otherwise absent in an inviscid fluid. By damping motions along field lines, parallel viscosity effectively reorients magnetic-field fluctuations to be nearly perpendicular to the background magnetic field (via flux freezing). These modes therefore display characteristics of both slow and Alfv\'{e}n modes: they have density and temperature perturbations, and therefore are subject to buoyancy forces, but their velocity and magnetic-field perturbations are predominantly polarized across the mean field. As long as field-aligned conduction is rapid, regardless of whether or not parallel viscosity is effective, the maximum growth rate is $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}z}$. This concludes our recapitulation of convective instability in a collisional magnetised plasma. We now train our focus on collisionless plasmas.\footnote{A reader educated in buoyancy instabilities in weakly collisional, magnetised plasmas will note a glaring omission from the preceding five paragraphs -- the heat-flux-driven buoyancy instability (HBI), discovered by \citet[][see also \citet{kunz11} and \citet{lk12}]{quataert08} and studied using dedicated numerical simulations by \citet{pq08}, \citet{parrish09}, \citet{bogdanovic09}, \citet{mccourt11}, \citet{mikellides11}, \citet{parrish12}, \citet{kunz12}, and \citet{avara13}. In this paper, we concentrate solely on equilibrium atmospheres whose (uniform) magnetic field is oriented perpendicular to gravity, a situation stable to the HBI. The reason we do so is quite simple -- without collisions, any equilibrium field-aligned temperature gradient in a magnetized plasma will be wiped out on a sound-crossing time of the atmosphere by free-streaming particles. As this timescale is generally comparable to or even smaller than the growth times of the HBI and the other instabilities investigated herein, this does not constitute a reasonable background state about which one may perform a linear stability analysis. The collisional case skirts this issue by having large-scale field-aligned temperature gradients relaxed on a diffusive timescale, which is generally longer than the instabilities of interest. One may even construct equilibrium states in this case by ensuring that any background collisional heat flux is divergence free, or simply by balancing the downward field-aligned transport of heat with losses from radiative cooling.} \subsection{Collisionless physics in stratified atmospheres} The main difference between a collisional magnetised plasma comprising a stratified atmosphere and its collisionless counterpart is the ability of particles in the latter case to resonate with emergent waves in the system. For low-frequency, long-wavelength fluctuations -- those with frequencies $\omega$ much smaller than the Larmor frequency $\Omega_s$ and wavenumbers $k_\parallel$ much larger than the inverse Larmor radius $\rho^{-1}_s$ ($s$ denotes the species index) -- the primary resonance is the Landau resonance, $v_\parallel = \omega / k_\parallel$. In the presence of an electric field, an inhomogeneous magnetic field, and a gravitational field, the parallel velocity $v_\parallel$ of a particle with mass $m_s$, charge $q_s$, and magnetic moment $\mu_s$ evolves according to \begin{equation}\label{eqn:vprl} m_s \D{t}{v_\parallel} = q_s E_\parallel - \mu_s \nabla_\parallel B + m_s g_\parallel , \end{equation} where the subscript $\parallel$ on each field denotes the vector component along the local magnetic-field direction $\hat{\bb{b}}$. Landau-resonant particles interacting with the parallel electric field $E_\parallel$ result in collisionless damping of the electric-field fluctuations \citep{landau46}. A similar effect is caused by the second term in (\ref{eqn:vprl}), which goes by the name transit-time or \citet{barnes66} damping. Particles that are almost at rest with respect to the slow magnetosonic wave are subject to the action of the mirror force associated with the magnetic compressions in the wave. Since, for a monotonically decreasing distribution function ($\partial f / \partial v_\parallel < 0$), there are more particles with $v_\parallel < \omega / k_\parallel$ than with $v_\parallel > \omega / k_\parallel$, the energy exchange between resonant particles and the wave leads to a net gain (loss) of energy by the particles (wave). This is true even for non-oscillatory disturbances (which will constitute the majority of the instabilities investigating in this paper): particles with $v_\parallel \sim 0$ are resonant with the zero-frequency wave and extract energy through betatron acceleration. Put differently, the only way to maintain perpendicular pressure balance for such a disturbance is to increase the energy of the resonant particles at the expense of the wave energy. The fewer particles there are at small parallel velocity to be resonant, the higher the damping rate (i.e.~energy transfer) needs to be to maintain pressure balance. In both cases -- oscillatory waves and aperiodic modes -- the result is wave damping. The final term in (\ref{eqn:vprl}) represents the parallel acceleration of particles once the magnetic field acquires a component along the direction of gravity: $g_\parallel = \bb{g}\bcdot\hat{\bb{b}} = - g b_z$. In that case, the plasma streams downwards along the perturbed magnetic-field lines, with Landau-resonant particles transferring the free energy stored in the vertical magnetic-field fluctuations to the particle distribution function. As with Landau and Barnes damping, the result is collisionless damping of electromagnetic fluctuations. There are two further differences between the physics investigated in this paper and that which was the focus of previous (fluid) studies. First, the ions and electrons need not remain in thermal equilibrium as the plasma is perturbed. In standard fluid (collisional) treatments of the MTI, the electrons are responsible for ensuring isothermal displacements, while the ions, with their larger mass, are responsible for the buoyant response. The two are connected via thermal equilibration. In the collisionless case, this connection is lost. Second, we account for finite-Larmor-radius (FLR) effects. The consideration of FLR effects does not, of course, require specialization to a collisionless plasma, but our kinetic treatment does afford a systematic and rigorous way of deriving their impact on plasma stability. In particular, we will show that fluctuations with $k_\perp \rho_i \sim k_\parallel H \gg 1$ are unstable to a kinetic-Alfv\'{e}n version of the MTI, in which the ions are convected across the field lines as the electrons remain isothermal along them. \vspace{0.1in} These prerequisites fulfilled, our analysis begins. \section{Vlasov description of a magnetised thermally stratified atmosphere}\label{sec:vlasov} \subsection{Basic equations}\label{sec:equations} We start with the kinetic Vlasov equation \begin{equation}\label{eqn:vlasov} \D{t}{f_s} \doteq \pD{t}{f_s} + \bb{v}\bcdot\grad f_s + \left[ \frac{q_s}{m_s} \left( \bb{E} + \frac{\bb{v}}{c}\btimes\bb{B} \right) + \bb{g} \right] \bcdot \pD{\bb{v}}{f_s} = 0 , \end{equation} which governs the phase-space evolution of the distribution function of species $s$, $f_s = f_s(t,\bb{r},\bb{v})$. Our notation is standard: $q_s$ is the charge and $m_s$ is the mass of species $s$, $\bb{E}$ is the electric field, $\bb{B}$ is the magnetic field, and $\bb{g}$ is the gravitational acceleration. We take the latter to lie along the $-\hat{\bb{e}}_z$ direction of an $(x,y,z)$ Cartesian coordinate system, $\bb{g} = -g \hat{\bb{e}}_z$ with $g = {\rm const} > 0$. In the non-relativistic limit, the electromagnetic fields satisfy the plasma quasineutrality constraint (which follows from the Poisson equation to lowest order in $k^2 \lambda^2_D$, where $\lambda_D$ is the Debye length), \begin{equation}\label{eqn:quasineutrality} 0 = \sum_s q_s n_s \doteq \sum_s q_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\,f_s, \end{equation} and the pre-Maxwell version of Amp\`{e}re's law, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ampere} \grad\btimes\bb{B} = \frac{4\upi}{c} \bb{j} \doteq \frac{4\upi}{c} \sum_s q_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\,\bb{v} f_s. \end{equation} The magnetic field evolves according to Faraday's law of induction, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:faraday} \pD{t}{\bb{B}} = -c \grad\btimes\bb{E} , \end{equation} while satisfying the solenoidality constraint $\grad\bcdot\bb{B} = 0$. We neglect particle-particle collisions in this paper; the linear theory of a weakly collisional, magnetised, thermally stratified atmosphere, with which we make frequent contact, is presented in \citet{kunz11}. For future reference, we define the pressure tensor of species $s$, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ptensor} \msb{P}_s \doteq m_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\,( \bb{v} - \bb{u}_s ) ( \bb{v} - \bb{u}_s ) f_s, \end{equation} as well as its mean velocity, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:u} \bb{u}_s \doteq \frac{1}{n_s} \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\,\bb{v} f_s. \end{equation} The total thermal pressure $P_s = n_s T_s \doteq (1/3)\, {\rm tr}\msb{P}_s$, where the temperature $T_s$ is defined {\it in situ}. In many of the limiting cases we investigate, the pressure tensor is diagonal in a coordinate system defined by the directions perpendicular ($\perp$) and parallel ($\parallel$) to the magnetic-field direction $\hat{\bb{b}} \doteq \bb{B}/B$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gyrotropicP} \msb{P}_s \rightarrow P_{\perp s} ( \msb{I} - \hat{\bb{b}}\eb ) + P_{\parallel s} \hat{\bb{b}} \hat{\bb{b}} , \end{equation} where $\msb{I}$ is the unit dyadic, and \begin{gather}\label{eqn:pprp} P_{\perp s} = n_s T_{\perp s} \doteq m_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \frac{1}{2} \|\bb{v}_\perp - \bb{u}_{\perp,s} \|^2 f_s ,\\* \label{eqn:pprl} P_{\parallel s} = n_s T_{\parallel s} \doteq m_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\,(v_\parallel - u_{\parallel s})^2 f_s \end{gather} are the thermal pressures perpendicular and parallel to the magnetic-field direction, respectively, of species $s$; $T_{\perp s}$ ($T_{\parallel s}$) is the perpendicular (parallel) temperature. The total thermal pressure $P_s = (2/3) P_{\perp s} + (1/3) P_{\parallel s}$. We will sometimes express the electric and magnetic fields in terms of scalar and vector potentials: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:potentials} \bb{E} = - \grad\varphi - \frac{1}{c} \pD{t}{\bb{A}} \quad {\rm and} \quad \bb{B} = \grad\btimes\bb{A} , \end{equation} where $\grad\bcdot\bb{A} = 0$ (the Coulomb gauge). Working with potentials instead of fields is particularly useful when taking the gyrokinetic limit (\S\ref{sec:gyrokinetic}, Appendix \ref{app:gk}). \subsection{Equilibrium state}\label{sec:equilibrium} We seek equilibrium solutions to (\ref{eqn:vlasov})--(\ref{eqn:faraday}) in the presence of a uniform, stationary background magnetic field oriented perpendicular to gravity, $\bb{B}_0 = B_0 \hat{\bb{e}}_x$, whose magnitude $B_0$ is such that the Larmor radius of species $s$, $\rho_s \doteq v_{th\perp s} / \Omega_s$, where $v_{th\perp s} \doteq (2T_{\perp 0s}/m_s)^{1/2}$ is the (perpendicular) thermal speed and $\Omega_s = q_s B_0 / m_s c$ is the Larmor frequency, is much smaller than the thermal-pressure scale height $H$ of the equilibrium distribution function $f_{0s}$, i.e.~the plasma is ``magnetised''. In a collisionless plasma, this scale separation demands that $\bb{B}_0\bcdot\grad f_{0s} = 0$, or $\partial f_{0s} / \partial x = 0$. Physically, this is due to the fast streaming along the field lines of particles setting up thermal equilibrium (see \S\ref{sec:gkzeroth} for a proof). The cross-field drift of particles is instead constrained by the Larmor motion, and gradients in the field-perpendicular directions are thus allowed. In this paper, we assume $\partial f_{0s} / \partial y = 0$, and hence consider equilibrium distribution functions that are dependent only upon the vertical ($z$) coordinate. Under these conditions, the first moment of (\ref{eqn:vlasov}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:equilibriumforce} \D{z}{\msf{P}^{(zz)}_{0s}} - q_s n_{0s} E_0 + m_s n_{0s} g = 0 , \end{equation} where $\msf{P}^{(zz)}_{0s}$ is the $zz$-component of the equilibrium pressure tensor (cf.~(\ref{eqn:ptensor})). Summing this equation over species and using quasineutrality (\ref{eqn:quasineutrality}), we find \begin{equation}\label{eqn:hydrostatic} \sum_s \D{z}{\msf{P}^{(zz)}_{0s}} = - \sum_s m_s n_{0s} g \doteq - \varrho g < 0, \end{equation} a statement of hydrostatic equilibrium. That an equilibrium electrostatic field $\bb{E}_0 = E_0 \hat{\bb{e}}_z$ is in general required may be seen by multiplying (\ref{eqn:equilibriumforce}) by $q_s/m_s$, summing over species, and using quasineutrality (\ref{eqn:quasineutrality}) to find \begin{equation}\label{eqn:equilibriumE} E_0 = \sum_s \frac{q_s}{m_s} \D{z}{\msf{P}^{(zz)}_{0s}} \bigg/ \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_{0s}}{m_s} . \end{equation} For this to vanish in a hydrogenic plasma with constant ion-to-electron temperature ratio, the thermal speed must be species-independent -- a rather limiting condition. Up to this point, we have made no assumptions about $f_{0s}$ other than its lack of $y$ dependence. We now investigate what is allowed. A necessary and sufficient condition for a stationary solution to the Vlasov equation (\ref{eqn:vlasov}) is that $f_{0s}$ be a function only of the integrals of the motion. These may be identified by considering the Lagrangian \begin{equation}\label{eqn:lagrangian} \mc{L}(\bb{r},\bb{v}) = \frac{1}{2} m_s v^2 - q_s \left( \Phi_s - \frac{\bb{v}\bcdot\bb{A}_0}{c} \right) = \frac{1}{2} m_s v^2 - q_s \Phi_s - m_s v_y \Omega_s z, \end{equation} where $\bb{A}_0 = -B_0 z\hat{\bb{e}}_y$ is the equilibrium vector potential and we have introduced the total (i.e.~electrostatic plus gravitational) potential $\Phi_s$, defined via \begin{equation}\label{eqn:Phis} \D{z}{\Phi_s} = - E_0 + \frac{m_s}{q_s} g = - \frac{T_{0s}}{q_s} \D{z}{\ln\msf{P}^{(zz)}_{0s}} > 0, \end{equation} the final equality following from (\ref{eqn:equilibriumforce}). Since the Lagrangian (\ref{eqn:lagrangian}) is independent of the $y$ coordinate, the $y$-component of the canonical momentum $\bb{\wp} = \partial\mc{L} / \partial \bb{v}$ is conserved: $\wp_y = m_s v_y - m_s \Omega_s z = {\rm const}$. This in turn implies that \begin{equation}\label{eqn:Z} \mc{Z}_s \doteq z - \frac{v_y}{\Omega_s} = {\rm const} . \end{equation} Because the Lagrangian is time-independent, the Hamiltonian \begin{equation}\label{eqn:hamiltonian} \mc{H}(\bb{r},\bb{\wp}) \doteq \bb{v} \bcdot \pD{\bb{v}}{\mc{L}} - \mc{L} = \frac{1}{2m_s} \Bigl[ \wp^2_x + ( \wp_y + m_s \Omega_s z )^2 + \wp^2_z \Bigr] + q_s \Phi_s \end{equation} is also conserved. Expressing $\mc{H}$ in terms of the particle velocity $\bb{v} = \partial\mc{H}/\partial\bb{\wp}$ yields the total (i.e.~kinetic plus potential) particle energy \begin{equation}\label{eqn:E} \mc{E}_s \doteq \frac{1}{2} m_s v^2 + q_s \Phi_s , \end{equation} which is an invariant of the motion. Finally, the Lagrangian is independent of $x$, and so $\wp_x = m_s v_x$ is conserved as well. The equilibrium distribution function for species $s$ may therefore be written \begin{equation}\label{eqn:F0} f_{0s} = F_{0s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s,v_x) . \end{equation} In this work, we specialize to isotropic equilibrium distribution functions, i.e.~$F_{0s} = F_{0s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s)$. In magnetised, high-beta plasmas, such as the intracluster medium, velocity-space anisotropy in the equilibrium distribution function can drive myriad linear instabilities at Larmor scales, all of which we seek to exclude from (at least this first pass at) the calculation. Before proceeding any further, we forewarn the reader that, throughout the manuscript, the upper-case $F_{0s}$ refers to the equilibrium distribution function written as a function of the integrals of motion ($\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s$), while the lower-case $f_{0s}$ denotes the equilibrium distribution function written as a function of the standard phase-space coordinates ($z,\bb{v}$). Special attention must be paid to what variable is held fixed under partial differentiation. \subsection{Guiding-centre drifts and $\mu_s$ conservation}\label{sec:drifts} A particular feature of our equilibrium is that it supports guiding-centre drifts, namely \begin{equation}\label{eqn:vdrift} \bb{v}_{ds} \doteq \frac{1}{\Omega_s} \left( \frac{q_s}{m_s} \bb{E}_0 + \bb{g} \right) \!\btimes \hat{\bb{b}}_0 = - \frac{c}{B_0} \D{z}{\Phi_s} \hat{\bb{e}}_y \doteq - v_{ds} \hat{\bb{e}}_y , \end{equation} where we have used (\ref{eqn:Phis}) to obtain the second equality (note that $v_{ds} > 0$). The velocities of individual particles of species $s$ can thus be decomposed in terms of the parallel velocity $v_\parallel$, the perpendicular velocity $v_\perp$ relative to the guiding-centre drift $v_{ds}$, and the gyrophase angle $\vartheta$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:vvec} \bb{v} = v_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x - v_{ds} \hat{\bb{e}}_y + v_\perp \bigl( \cos\vartheta \hat{\bb{e}}_y + \sin\vartheta \hat{\bb{e}}_z \bigr) . \end{equation} Despite the presence of guiding-centre drifts in the equilibrium state, the plasma itself has no net momentum. This is because the equilibrium pressure gradients drive diamagnetic drifts $\propto$$\grad P_s \btimes \hat{\bb{b}}_0$, which precisely cancel the guiding-centre drifts when the plasma is in hydrostatic equilibrium. This is shown explicitly in Section \ref{sec:maxwellian}. Expressed in terms of the velocity-space variables $(v_\parallel,v_\perp,\vartheta)$, the integrals of the motion are \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:ZEv} \begin{gather}\label{eqn:Z2} \mc{Z}_s = z - \frac{v_\perp}{\Omega_s} \cos\vartheta + \frac{v_{ds}}{\Omega_s} = {\rm const.}, \\* \label{eqn:energy} \mc{E}_s = \frac{1}{2} m_s \bigl( v^2_\parallel + v^2_\perp \bigr) + q_s \Phi_s - m_s v_\perp v_{ds} \cos\vartheta + \frac{1}{2} m_s v^2_{ds} = {\rm const.}, \end{gather} \end{subequations} and $v_x = v_\parallel = {\rm const}$. The first two terms in (\ref{eqn:Z2}) are simply the projection of the particle guiding centre \begin{equation}\label{eqn:R} \bb{R}_s \doteq \bb{r} + \frac{(\bb{v}-\bb{v}_{ds})\btimes\hat{\bb{e}}_x}{\Omega_s} \end{equation} onto the $z$ axis. Differentiating (\ref{eqn:ZEv}), it is easy to show that the magnetic moment of a particle of species $s$, $\mu_s \doteq m_s v^2_\perp / 2 B_0$, is also conserved: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:mu} \D{t}{\mu_s} = \frac{1}{B_0} \biggl( \D{t}{\mc{E}_s} - \frac{m_s}{2} \D{t}{v^2_x} - q_s \D{z}{\Phi_s} \D{t}{\mc{Z}_s} \biggr) = 0 . \end{equation} Were we to be considering anisotropic equilibrium distribution functions, $F_{0s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s,v_x)$ could equivalently be replaced with $F_{0s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s,\mu_s)$. \subsection{Particle trajectories}\label{sec:trajectories} Having established that the particles drift across magnetic-field lines while conserving $\mc{E}_s$, $\mc{Z}_s$, and $\mu_s$, we now determine their full phase-space trajectories. The equations of particle motion may be obtained from the characteristics of the steady-state Vlasov equation or, equivalently, from the Hamiltonian (\ref{eqn:hamiltonian}). For some set of phase-space coordinates $[\bb{r}'(t'),\bb{v}'(t')]$, they are \begin{equation}\label{eqn:characteristics} \D{t'}{\bb{r}'} = \bb{v'} \quad {\rm and} \quad \D{t'}{\bb{v}'} = \Omega_s \bigl( \bb{v}' \btimes \hat{\bb{e}}_x - v_{ds} \hat{\bb{e}}_z \bigr) . \end{equation} Given some data $[\bb{r}(t), \bb{v}(t)]$ at time $t = t' + \tau$, (\ref{eqn:characteristics}) may be straightforwardly integrated to yield the phase-space trajectories \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:orbits} \begin{gather} \bb{r}' = \bb{r} - v_\parallel \tau \hat{\bb{e}}_x + v_{ds} \tau \hat{\bb{e}}_y - \frac{v_\perp}{\Omega_s} \bigl[ \sin(\vartheta + \Omega_s \tau) - \sin\vartheta \bigr] \hat{\bb{e}}_y + \frac{v_\perp}{\Omega_s} \bigl[ \cos(\vartheta + \Omega_s\tau) - \cos\vartheta \bigr] \hat{\bb{e}}_z , \\ \bb{v}' = v_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x - v_{ds} \hat{\bb{e}}_y + v_\perp \cos(\vartheta + \Omega_s \tau) \hat{\bb{e}}_y + v_\perp \sin(\vartheta + \Omega_s \tau) \hat{\bb{e}}_z . \end{gather} \end{subequations} The particles stream along field lines, $-\grad\Phi_s\btimes\hat{\bb{b}}_0$ drift across field lines, and execute Larmor gyrations about field lines. This information will be needed in Section \ref{sec:deltaf}, where we integrate the plasma response to electromagnetic fluctuations along these trajectories. \section{Linear theory}\label{sec:linear} In this Section, we consider the linear evolution of small perturbations to the equilibrium state. By considering the response of the distribution function to the fluctuating electromagnetic fields along the phase-space characteristics (\ref{eqn:orbits}), an integral relation is derived relating the current density to the fluctuating electric field (\S\ref{sec:deltaf}). This defines the conductivity tensor of the plasma and hence, in conjunction with Amp\`{e}re's law (\ref{eqn:ampere}), the dispersion properties of the linear waves. The procedure is a fairly standard one \citep[e.g.][]{mikhailovskii62,stix62}. In Sections \ref{sec:orbitintegral} and \ref{sec:maxwellian}, the conductivity tensor is calculated explicitly for an equilibrium plasma described by a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution in which the Larmor radii of all species are much smaller than the equilibrium gradient lengthscales. Some of the more technical steps in the derivation of the linear theory can be found in Appendix \ref{app:derivation}. \subsection{Perturbed distribution function and dispersion tensor}\label{sec:deltaf} The calculation begins by decomposing the distribution function and electromagnetic fields into their equilibrium and fluctuating parts, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:perturbations} f_s = F_{0s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s) + \delta f_s(t,\bb{r},\bb{v}), \quad \bb{B} = \bb{B}_0 + \delta\bb{B}(t,\bb{r}), \quad \bb{E} = \bb{E}_0 + \delta\bb{E}(t,\bb{r}) , \end{equation} and substituting them into (\ref{eqn:vlasov})--(\ref{eqn:faraday}). Retaining terms up to first order in the perturbation amplitudes, the linearised version of the Vlasov equation (\ref{eqn:vlasov}) may be written as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:linearVlasov1} \frac{{\rm D}}{{\rm D}t} \delta f_s(t,\bb{r},\bb{v}) = - \frac{q_s}{m_s} \left[ \delta\bb{E}(t,\bb{r}) + \frac{\bb{v}}{c} \btimes \delta\bb{B}(t,\bb{r}) \right]\! \bcdot \pD{\bb{v}}{F_{0s}} , \end{equation} where ${\rm D}/{\rm D}t$ is the time derivative taken along the unperturbed orbits given by (\ref{eqn:orbits}). Equation (\ref{eqn:linearVlasov1}) is solved by inverting the differential operator on the left-hand side and integrating along the phase-space trajectory $[\bb{r}'(t'),\bb{v}'(t')]$ terminating at $[\bb{r}(t), \bb{v}(t)]$ (see (\ref{eqn:orbits})): \begin{equation}\label{eqn:linearVlasov2} \delta f_s(t,\bb{r},\bb{v}) = - \frac{q_s}{m_s} \int_{-\infty}^t {\rm d}t' \left[ \delta\bb{E}(t',\bb{r}') + \frac{\bb{v}'}{c}\btimes\delta\bb{B}(t',\bb{r}') \right]\! \bcdot \!\left. \pD{\bb{v}}{F_{0s}} \right\|_{\bs{r}',\bs{v}'} . \end{equation} In order to ease the notation, we henceforth drop the `0' subscript on equilibrium quantities; because we are constructing a linear theory, this omission should cause no confusion. To proceed, we assume that the equilibrium varies slowly on the scale of the fluctuations and adopt WKBJ plane-wave solutions: \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \delta f_s(t,\bb{r},\bb{v}) &= \delta f_s(\bb{v}) \exp(-{\rm i}\omega t + {\rm i} \bb{k}\bcdot\bb{r}) ,\\* \delta\bb{B}(t,\bb{r}) &= \delta\bb{B} \exp(-{\rm i}\omega t + {\rm i}\bb{k}\bcdot\bb{r}) ,\\* \delta\bb{E}(t,\bb{r}) &= \delta\bb{E} \exp(-{\rm i}\omega t + {\rm i}\bb{k}\bcdot\bb{r} ) , \end{align} \end{subequations} where $\omega$ is the (complex) frequency and $\bb{k}$ is the wavevector. For such disturbances, Faraday's law (\ref{eqn:faraday}) is simply \begin{equation}\label{eqn:linearFaraday} \delta\bb{B} = \frac{c}{\omega} \,\bb{k} \btimes \delta\bb{E} , \end{equation} and so (\ref{eqn:linearVlasov2}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:linearVlasov3} \delta f_s = \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \frac{q_s}{m_s}\int_0^\infty {\rm d}\tau\, \exp[ - {\rm i} \phi(\tau) ] \!\left. \pD{\bb{v}}{F_s} \right\|_{\bs{r}',\bs{v}'} \!\bcdot \!\left( -{\rm i} \D{\tau}{\phi} \msb{I} + {\rm i} \bb{k}\bb{v}' \right) \!\bcdot \delta\bb{E} , \end{equation} where $\tau = t - t' \ge 0$ is the new time variable and we have introduced the phase function \begin{equation}\label{eqn:phase} \phi(\tau) \doteq \bb{k}\bcdot ( \bb{r} - \bb{r}' ) - \omega \tau . \end{equation} At this point, it is worth recalling that $\mc{Z}_s$ and $\mc{E}_s$, and therefore the equilibrium distribution $F_s(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s)$, are constant along the orbit $[\bb{r}'(t'), \bb{v}'(t')]$, i.e.~$\mc{E}'_s = \mc{E}_s$ and $\mc{Z}'_s = \mc{Z}_s$. We may use this fact alongside the chain rule to write \begin{equation} \left. \pD{\bb{v}}{F_s} \right\|_{\bs{r}',\bs{v}'} = \left( \pD{\bb{v}}{\mc{E}_s} \pD{\mc{E}_s}{F_s} + \pD{\bb{v}}{\mc{Z}_s} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} \right)_{\!\bs{r}',\bs{v}'} = m_s \bb{v}' \pD{\mc{E}_s}{F_s} - \frac{\hat{\bb{e}}_y}{\Omega_s} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} . \end{equation} The phase-space derivatives of $F_s$ can then be pulled outside of the $\tau$-integral in (\ref{eqn:linearVlasov3}) to yield, after integration by parts and some regrouping, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:deltaf} \delta f_s = \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} \frac{c}{B} \delta E_y + \frac{q_s}{T_s} \int_0^\infty {\rm d}\tau\, \exp[-{\rm i}\phi(\tau)] \left( - T_s \pD{\mc{E}_s}{F_s} + \frac{k_y}{\omega} \frac{c T_s}{q_s B} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} \right) \bb{v}' \bcdot \delta\bb{E} . \end{equation} This equation describes the velocity-space response of the distribution function to the fluctuating electric (and, thereby, magnetic) field. The differences between this expression and that pertaining to a homogeneous plasma lie in three places. The first term in (\ref{eqn:deltaf}) represents the advection of the distribution function by the perturbed particle drifts. It is ultimately the cause of the instabilities we discuss in Section \ref{sec:results}. The second addition is the final term in parentheses, which becomes comparable to the usual $-T_s \partial F_s / \partial \mc{E}_s$ term when $k_y v_{ds} \sim \omega$, i.e.~the velocity associated with the guiding-centre drifts must be comparable to the phase speed in the $y$ direction of the waves. Finally, the phase function in (\ref{eqn:deltaf}) takes into account the particle drifts, and so the fluctuating electric (and thereby magnetic) fields will ultimately be sampled at spatial locations a distance more than a Larmor orbit away perpendicular to the mean magnetic field. To complete the derivation of the general linear theory, we multiply (\ref{eqn:deltaf}) by $q_s\bb{v}$, integrate over velocity space, and sum over species to find a linear relationship between the current density and the fluctuating electric field: \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:current} \begin{align}\label{eqn:currenta} \bb{j} &= \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \sum_s \frac{q^2_s}{T_s} \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \bb{v}\hat{\bb{e}}_y \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} \bcdot \delta\bb{E} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad+ \sum_s \frac{q^2_s}{T_s} \int_0^\infty {\rm d}\tau \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \bb{v} \bb{v}' \exp[-{\rm i}\phi(\tau)] \left( - T_s \pD{\mc{E}_s}{F_s} + \frac{k_y}{\omega} \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \pD{\mc{Z}_s}{F_s} \right) \!\bcdot \delta\bb{E} \\* \label{eqn:currentb} \mbox{} &\doteq \bb{\sigma} \bcdot \delta\bb{E} , \end{align} \end{subequations} the final equality defining the conductivity tensor $\bb{\sigma}$. Inserting the solution of Faraday's law (\ref{eqn:linearFaraday}) into Amp\`{e}re's law (\ref{eqn:ampere}), and eliminating the current density using (\ref{eqn:currentb}) yields \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:DdotE} \begin{equation} \msb{D} \bcdot \delta\bb{E} = 0, \end{equation} where the dispersion tensor \begin{equation}\label{eqn:dispersion} \msb{D} \doteq \left( k^2 \msb{I} - \bb{k}\bb{k} - {\rm i} \frac{4\upi\omega}{c^2} \bb{\sigma} \right) v^2_A \end{equation} \end{subequations} and $v_A \doteq B / \sqrt{4\pi\varrho}$ is the Alfv\'{e}n speed. Setting the determinant of (\ref{eqn:dispersion}) to zero provides the sought-after dispersion relation. \subsection{Evaluation of the orbit and gyrophase integrals}\label{sec:orbitintegral} To derive any practical use from (\ref{eqn:DdotE}), we must evaluate the integrals in (\ref{eqn:currenta}). There are two main obstacles to doing so. First, we must choose a basis in which to express the conductivity and dispersion tensors. For the linear Vlasov theory of a homogeneous plasma, the basis typically used is defined by the magnetic field and the wavevector -- the so-called Stix basis \citep{stix62}. For the problem investigated here, there is a preferred direction set by gravity and the equilibrium gradients of $F_s$, and we therefore opt instead to use the $(x,y,z)$ coordinate system. While this complicates the appearance of simple wave motion in the dispersion tensor, it does greatly simplify the terms responsible for buoyancy and particle drifts, and affords a straightforward comparison with previous work on the magnetohydrodynamic stability of thermally stratified atmospheres. We thus decompose our wavevector as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:kvec} \bb{k} = k_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x + k_\perp \cos\psi \hat{\bb{e}}_y + k_\perp \sin\psi \hat{\bb{e}}_z \end{equation} for $\psi \doteq \tan^{-1}(k_z/k_y)$, so that the phase function (\ref{eqn:phase}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:phase2} \phi(\tau) = k_\parallel v_\parallel \tau - k_y v_{ds} \tau + \frac{k_\perp v_\perp}{\Omega_s} \bigl[ \sin(\vartheta + \Omega_s \tau - \psi) - \sin(\vartheta - \psi) \bigr] - \omega \tau . \end{equation} The second obstacle is that the equilibrium distribution function $F_s$ that resides in the integrand of (\ref{eqn:currenta}) is independent of gyrophase {\em at fixed guiding centre}, not at fixed position. As the conductivity tensor is determined by integrals over velocity $\bb{v}$ at fixed position $\bb{r}$, rather than integrals over $\mc{E}_s$ at fixed $\mc{Z}_s$, we must make both sides of (\ref{eqn:currenta}) commensurate. To do so, we leverage the scale separation between the Larmor radii and the gradient lengthscales of the plasma by Taylor expanding $F_s(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s)$ about the particle position $z$ and the new velocity-space variable \begin{align}\label{eqn:varepsilon} \varepsilon_s &\doteq \frac{1}{2} m_s \bigl( v^2_\parallel + v^2_\perp \bigr) + q_s \Phi_s , \end{align} which is simply the particle energy $\mc{E}_s$ written out to zeroth order to $\rho_s / H$ (cf.~(\ref{eqn:ZEv})). With $F_s$ then expressed as a function of our new phase-space variables $(z,\varepsilon_s)$, the integration over gyrophase angle $\vartheta$ becomes straightforward. Both of these tasks -- writing (\ref{eqn:current}) in the $(x,y,z)$ coordinate system to facilitate the orbit integral over $\tau$, and expanding the equilibrium distribution function about the phase-space coordinates $(z,\varepsilon_s)$ to ease the integration over gyrophase angle $\vartheta$ -- are detailed in Appendix \ref{app:derivation}. Here, we spare the reader the details and simply state the result: \begin{align}\label{eqn:sigma2} \bb{\sigma} &= - \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \sum_s \frac{q^2_s}{T_s} \frac{c}{B} \D{z}{\Phi_s} \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \hat{\bb{e}}_y\ey\frac{cT_s}{q_s B}\pD{z}{F_s(z,\varepsilon_s)} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &+ \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \sum_s \frac{q^2_s}{T_s} \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \frac{\omega \bb{u}_{n,s} \bb{u}^\ast_{n,s} }{\omega + k_y v_{ds} - k_\parallel v_\parallel - n\Omega_s} \left( - T_s \pD{\varepsilon_s}{} + \frac{k_y}{\omega} \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \pD{z}{} \right) F_s(z,\varepsilon_s) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &- \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \sum_s \frac{q^2_s}{T_s} \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \frac{v_\perp}{\Omega_s} \frac{\omega \bb{w}_{n,s} \bb{u}^\ast_{n,s} }{\omega + k_y v_{ds} - k_\parallel v_\parallel - n\Omega_s} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad\qquad\qquad\qquad\times \left( - T_s \pD{\varepsilon_s}{} + \frac{k_y}{\omega} \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \pD{z}{} \right) \left( \pD{z}{} + q_s \D{z}{\Phi_s} \pD{\varepsilon_s}{} \right) F_s(z,\varepsilon_s), \end{align} where ${\rm d}^3\bb{v} = 2\upi v_\perp {\rm d}v_\perp {\rm d}v_\parallel$ and $\ast$ denotes the complex conjugate. The velocities $\bb{u}_{n,s}$ and $\bb{w}_{n,s}$ are composed of combinations of $v_\parallel$ and $v_\perp$ with the $n$th-order Bessel function $J_n(a_s)$ and derivatives with respect to its argument $a_s \doteq k_\perp v_\perp / \Omega_s$, and are given by (\ref{eqn:uns}) and (\ref{eqn:wns}), respectively. Note that the partial $z$-derivatives of $F_s$ in (\ref{eqn:sigma2}) are taken at fixed $\varepsilon_s$, {\em not} at fixed $v_\parallel$ and $v_\perp$.\footnote{It is of at least historical interest to note that, notwithstanding a few typos (or perhaps errors, as they seem to have propagated through the calculation) and his omission of the self-consistent equilibrium electric field, A.~B.~Mikhailovskii essentially obtained equation (\ref{eqn:sigma2}) 49 years ago in an apparently overlooked appendix to his monograph on {\it Oscillations of an Inhomogeneous Plasma} \citep{mikhailovskii67}. In it, he derived the dielectric tensor for an equilibrium Vlasov plasma in a constant gravitational field (see his equation (II.3)). Were he to have solved for the dispersion relation and analysed it, he might have discovered the MTI more than three decades before it entered the astrophysics literature.} Up to this point, the only assumptions that have been made about the equilibrium distribution function are that it is isotropic in velocity space at fixed guiding-centre position, that it is independent of the $y$ coordinate, and that its gradient lengthscales are much larger than the Larmor radii of all species. In order to carry out the remaining integrals in (\ref{eqn:sigma2}), we must choose a particular form for $F_s(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s)$. In the next Section, we use (\ref{eqn:sigma2}) to compute the dispersion tensor for an isotropic Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution function. \subsection{Dispersion tensor and perturbed distribution for a Maxwell-Boltzmann equilibrium}\label{sec:maxwellian} A natural choice for our isotropic equilibrium distribution function is the quasi-Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution \begin{equation}\label{eqn:quasimaxwell} F_{M,s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s) \doteq \frac{\mc{N}_s(\mc{Z}_s)}{[2\upi T_s(\mc{Z}_s) / m_s]^{3/2}} \exp\biggl[ - \frac{\mc{E}_s}{T_s(\mc{Z}_s)} \biggr] . \end{equation} where $\mc{N}_s$ is the number density of guiding centres. Besides being physically motivated by the systems of interest likely being near local thermodynamic equilibrium, (\ref{eqn:quasimaxwell}) also has the convenient mathematical property that the integrals in (\ref{eqn:sigma2}) can be readily performed. To wit, the integrals over $v_\parallel$ may be written in terms of \begin{equation}\label{eqn:plasmadisp} Z_p(\zeta) \doteq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int^\infty_{-\infty} {\rm d}x\,x^p\frac{{\rm e}^{-x^2}}{x-\zeta} \quad ( p \ge 0) , \end{equation} which for $p=0$ is the standard plasma dispersion function \citep{fc61}, while those over $v_\perp$ can be calculated with the aid of the \citet{watson66} relation \begin{equation}\label{eqn:watson} \int_0^\infty {\rm d}x\, x J_n(px) J_n(qx) \, {\rm e}^{-a^2 x^2} = \frac{1}{2a^2} \Gamma_n\Bigl(\frac{pq}{2a^2}\Bigr) \,{\rm e}^{-(p-q)^2/4a^2}, \end{equation} where $\Gamma_n(\lambda) \doteq I_n(\lambda) \exp(-\lambda)$ and $I_n$ is the $n$th-order modified Bessel function. (Several particularly useful integrals derived from (\ref{eqn:plasmadisp}) and (\ref{eqn:watson}) are given in Appendix \ref{app:integrals}.) As explained in Section \ref{sec:orbitintegral} and detailed in Appendix \ref{app:derivation}, we may use the scale separation between the Larmor radii and the gradient lengthscales of the plasma to write \begin{align}\label{eqn:maxwellexpanded} F_{M,s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s) = \left[ 1 - \frac{v_\perp\cos\vartheta}{\Omega_s} \left( \pD{z}{} + q_s \D{z}{\Phi_s} \pD{\varepsilon_s}{} \right) \right] F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s) + \mc{O}\Bigl(\frac{\rho_s}{H}\Bigr)^2 , \end{align} in which \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:dFM} \begin{align} \label{eqn:dFdz} \pD{z}{F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s)} &= F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s) \left( \D{z}{\ln\mc{N}_s} - \frac{3}{2} \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \frac{\varepsilon_s}{T_s} \D{z}{\ln T_s} \right) ,\\* -T_s \pD{\varepsilon_s}{F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s)} &= F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s) . \end{align} \end{subequations} Taking the zeroth moment of (\ref{eqn:maxwellexpanded}), we see that the number density of particles is related to that of the guiding centres via a Boltzmann factor: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ntoN} n_s \doteq \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, F_{M,s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s) \simeq \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s) = \mc{N}_s(z) \exp\biggl[ - \frac{q_s\Phi_s}{T_s(z)}\biggr] , \end{equation} so that the zeroth-order equilibrium distribution function $F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s)$ is equivalent to the standard (gyrotropic) Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution \begin{equation}\label{eqn:fMs} f_{M,s}(z,v_\parallel,v_\perp) = \frac{n_s}{\upi v^2_{ths}} \exp\Biggl( - \frac{v^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \Biggr) \frac{1}{\sqrt{\upi} v_{ths}} \exp\Biggl( - \frac{v^2_\parallel}{v^2_{ths}} \Biggr) , \end{equation} where $v_{ths} \doteq ( 2 T_s / m_s )^{1/2}$ is the thermal speed of species $s$. This is useful. Taking the first moment of (\ref{eqn:maxwellexpanded}) and using (\ref{eqn:vvec}), (\ref{eqn:dFM}), and (\ref{eqn:ntoN}), one can also show that the mean flow of the equilibrium plasma \begin{align} \bb{u}_s &\doteq \frac{1}{n_s} \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \bb{v} F_{M,s}(\mc{Z}_s,\mc{E}_s) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\simeq \frac{1}{n_s} \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \hat{\bb{e}}_y \left[ - v_{ds} - \frac{v^2_\perp \cos^2\vartheta}{\Omega_s} \left( \pD{z}{} + q_s \D{z}{\Phi_s} \pD{\varepsilon_s}{} \right) \right] F_{M,s}(z,\varepsilon_s) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &= \frac{1}{\Omega_s} \!\left( \frac{q_s}{m_s} \bb{E}_0 + \bb{g} - \frac{1}{m_s n_s} \grad P_s \right) \!\btimes \hat{\bb{b}}_0 = 0. \end{align} In other words, the average equilibrium velocity is a superposition of the particle drifts, which are caused by the equilibrium electric field and gravity (see \S\ref{sec:drifts}), and the diamagnetic drift, which is driven by the equilibrium pressure gradient. The two balance in equilibrium, giving zero net flow. Our equilibrium distribution function now specified, we substitute (\ref{eqn:dFM}) into (\ref{eqn:sigma2}), perform the integrals using (\ref{eqn:plasmadisp}) and (\ref{eqn:watson}), and plug the resulting conductivity tensor into (\ref{eqn:dispersion}) to find \begin{equation}\label{eqn:Maxdispersion} \msb{D} = \bigl( k^2\msb{I} - \bb{k}\bb{k} \bigr) v^2_ A - \hat{\bb{e}}_y\ey \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \D{z}{\ln T_s} - \sum_s \frac{m_s n_s}{\varrho} \Omega^2_s \!\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty \frac{2\omega}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} \bigl( \msb{U}_{n,s} + \msb{W}_{n,s} \bigr) . \end{equation} The species- and Bessel-order-dependent tensors $\msb{U}_{n,s}$ and $\msb{W}_{n,s}$, whose elements are given by (\ref{eqn:Utensor}) and (\ref{eqn:Wtensor}), respectively, are functions of the $n$th-order Landau pole $\zeta_{n,s} \doteq (\omega+k_y v_{ds} - n\Omega_s)/\|k_\parallel\| v_{ths}$ and the dimensionless square of the perpendicular wavenumber $\alpha_s \doteq (k_\perp \rho_s)^2/2$. The perturbed distribution function may be calculated from (\ref{eqn:deltaf}) using (\ref{eqn:dFM}). The general result is not particularly useful in the discussion that follows, and so we provide here only the leading-order (in $\rho_s/H$) terms: \begin{align}\label{eqn:df} \delta f_s &= \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \pD{z}{F_s(z,\varepsilon_s)} \frac{c}{B} \delta E_y \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &+ \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \frac{q_s}{T_s} \sum_{m,\,n=-\infty}^\infty {\rm e}^{{\rm i}(m-n)(\vartheta-\psi)} \frac{\omega J_m(a_s) \bb{u}^\ast_{n,s}\bcdot \delta\bb{E}}{\omega + k_y v_{ds} - k_\parallel v_\parallel - n\Omega_s} \left( 1 + \frac{k_y}{\omega} \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \pD{z}{} \right) F_s(z,\varepsilon_s) , \end{align} with $\partial F_s / \partial z$ being given by (\ref{eqn:dFdz}). \section{Results}\label{sec:results} The dispersion relation that results from taking the determinant of (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}) is rather unwieldy, and it seems best not to write it down here in full. Fortunately, all of the interesting results we have found can be obtained by taking some relatively simple asymptotic limits, which are catalogued in table \ref{tab:ordering}. To make contact with previous MHD calculations of the linear stability of a thermally stratified atmosphere, we first consider the long-wavelength (``drift-kinetic'') limit, $k \rho_s \ll 1$ (\S\ref{sec:longwavelength}). Contact is made with the theory of kinetic MHD for a stratified plasma. For parallel propagating modes ($k_\perp = 0$), we obtain in Section \ref{sec:gyroviscous} the leading-order correction that incorporates finite-Lamor-radius (FLR) effects -- the so-called gyroviscosity. Proceeding to yet smaller scales, in Section \ref{sec:gyrokinetic} we allow for low-frequency fluctuations whose spatial scales perpendicular to the guide magnetic field are comparable to the Larmor radius of the particles. In this ``gyrokinetic'' limit, the physics of drift waves becomes important, as does the damping of modes at perpendicular Larmor scales. In Appendix \ref{app:gk}, we show that one may alternatively obtain the results of Section \ref{sec:gyrokinetic} directly from the nonlinear gyrokinetic theory for a stratified atmosphere. We follow this with a discussion of our results as they relate to the ion- and electron-temperature-gradient drift-wave instabilities well known to the magnetic-confinement-fusion community (\S\ref{sec:ITG}). In the results that follow, we have taken the thermal-pressure scale height to be species independent, {\em viz.}~${\rm d}\ln P_s / {\rm d}z = {\rm d}\ln P / {\rm d}z$. The same is true for the temperature scale height, ${\rm d}\ln T_s / {\rm d}z = {\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z$. While we have generally allowed the equilibrium temperatures of the various species to differ ({\em viz.}~$T_i \ne T_e$), in preparing the figures we have taken the plasma to be composed of electrons and a single species of singly charged ions ($q_i = e$, $m_i/m_e = 1836$) with identical equilibrium temperatures ($T_i / T_e = 1$), unless otherwise explicitly stated. Without loss of generality, we take $k_\parallel > 0$. Because we have astrophysical applications in mind, we primarily focus on high-$\beta$ plasmas, the discussion in Section \ref{sec:ITG} being a notable exception. \setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt} \begin{table} \begin{center} \def~{\hphantom{0}} \begin{tabular}{cccccc} Limit & $\omega/\Omega_s$ & $k_\parallel \rho_s$ & $k_\perp \rho_s$ & $\beta^{-1}_s$ & Section\\[3pt] drift-kinetic & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(1)$ & \S\ref{sec:longwavelength}\\ gyroviscous & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(\sqrt{\epsilon})$ & 0 & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & \S\ref{sec:gyroviscous} \\ gyrokinetic & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(\epsilon)$ & $\mc{O}(1)$ & $\mc{O}(1)$ & \S\ref{sec:gyrokinetic} \\ \end{tabular} \caption{Ordering of parameters relative to $\epsilon \doteq \rho_s/H$ in the various limits taken in Section \ref{sec:results}. Subsidiary expansions in small $m_e/m_i$ and in small or large $\beta_i$ and $T_i/T_e$ can be taken after the $\epsilon$ expansion is done, as long as their values do not interfere with the primary expansion in $\epsilon$.} \label{tab:ordering} \end{center} \end{table} \subsection{Drift-kinetic limit: $k \rho_s \ll 1$}\label{sec:longwavelength} In the drift-kinetic limit, there is no practical difference between the particle position and the guiding-centre position. This simplifies things considerably. For one thing, the pressure tensor becomes diagonal in a coordinate system set by the magnetic-field direction (cf.~(\ref{eqn:gyrotropicP})), so that \begin{equation} \delta\msb{P}_s = \delta P_{\parallel s} \hat{\bb{e}}_x\ex + \delta P_{\perp s} ( \hat{\bb{e}}_y\ey + \hat{\bb{e}}_z\ez ). \end{equation} In addition, the higher-order contribution to the conductivity tensor, $\msb{W}_{n,s}$, may be completely dropped from the analysis, and $\msb{U}_{n,s}$ takes on a relatively simple form in which contributions from $n=-1$, $0$, and $1$ are all that is needed. Let us proceed. We start by applying the low-frequency, long-wavelength ordering \begin{equation}\label{eqn:longwave_limit} \frac{\omega}{\Omega_s} \sim k_\parallel \rho_s \sim k_\perp \rho_s \sim \frac{\rho_s}{H} \doteq \epsilon \ll 1, \end{equation} with $\beta_s \doteq 8\upi n_s T_s / B^2_0 \sim 1$, to (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}). (A subsidiary expansion in, e.g., large $\beta_s$ may be taken, so long as $\beta_s \nsim 1/\epsilon$.) Note that this ordering precludes drift waves, since $k_y v_{ds} \sim k_y v_{ths} (\rho_s / H ) \ll \omega$. Expanding the $Z_p(\zeta_{n,s})$ functions about $\zeta_s \doteq \omega / k_\parallel v_{ths}$ and using the lowest-order approximations $\Gamma_0(\alpha_s) \simeq - \Gamma'_0(\alpha_s) \simeq 1$ and $\Gamma_1(\alpha_s) \simeq \alpha_s/2$, the elements of the tensor $\msb{U}_{n,s}$ (cf.~(\ref{eqn:Utensor})) simplify considerably. They are \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:longwavetensor} \begin{align} \msb{U}^{(xx)}_{n,s} &\simeq Z_2(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0}, \\ \msb{U}^{(xy)}_{n,s} &\simeq {\rm i} \frac{k_z \rho_s}{2} \left( 1 - \frac{{\rm i}}{k_z} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \right) Z_1(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0} ,\\ \msb{U}^{(xz)}_{n,s} &\simeq -{\rm i} \frac{k_y \rho_s}{2} Z_1(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0} , \\ \msb{U}^{(yy)}_{n,s} &\simeq \frac{k^2_\parallel \rho^2_s}{4} \, \zeta_s \bigl( \delta_{n,1} + \delta_{n,-1} \bigr) + \frac{k^2_z\rho^2_s}{4} \left[ 2 + \left(\frac{1}{k_z} \D{z}{\ln P_s}\right)^2 \right] Z_0(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0} , \\ \label{eqn:longwavelength_Uyz} \msb{U}^{(yz)}_{n,s} &\simeq {\rm i} \frac{k_\parallel \rho_s}{4} \bigl( \delta_{n,1} + \delta_{n,-1} \bigr) - \frac{k_y k_z \rho^2_s}{4} \left( 2 + \frac{{\rm i}}{k_z} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \right) Z_0(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0} ,\\ \msb{U}^{(zz)}_{n,s} &\simeq \frac{k^2_\parallel \rho^2_s}{4} \, \zeta_s \bigl( \delta_{n,1} + \delta_{n,-1} \bigr) + \frac{k^2_y \rho^2_s}{2} Z_0(\zeta_s) \,\delta_{n,0} , \end{align} \end{subequations} where $\delta_{n,m}$ denotes the Kronecker delta. The un-written components of $\msb{U}_{n,s}$ (namely, $yx$, $zx$, and $zy$) are the same as their transpose counterparts but with ${\rm i} \rightarrow -{\rm i}$. The final term in (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_Uyz}), while formally one order in $\epsilon$ smaller than the first term in that expression, must be retained, as the latter eventually vanishes to leading order under quasi-neutrality. Inserting (\ref{eqn:longwavetensor}) into (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}) and setting its determinant to zero yields the general dispersion relation in the drift-kinetic limit, which we analyze for a variety of wavevector geometries in the next four subsections (\S\S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl}--\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprp}). Before doing so, it will serve useful to have readily available the long-wavelength limit of the perturbed distribution function (cf.~(\ref{eqn:df})): \begin{equation}\label{eqn:longwavelength_df} \delta f_s = \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \frac{c}{B} \pD{z}{F_s} \delta E_y - \left( \frac{{\rm i}}{\omega} \frac{q_s}{T_s} \frac{\omega \bb{u}^\ast_{0,s}\bcdot\delta\bb{E}}{\omega - k_\parallel v_\parallel} + \frac{2\bb{v}_\perp\bcdot\delta\bb{u}_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \right) T_s \pD{\varepsilon_s}{F_s} \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{eqn:longwavelength_uprp} \delta\bb{u}_\perp \doteq \frac{c}{B} \delta\bb{E} \btimes \hat{\bb{e}}_x \end{equation} is the lowest-order mean perpendicular velocity -- the (species-independent!) perturbed $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ flow. The appearance of the combination $(2\bb{v}_\perp\bcdot\delta\bb{u}_\perp )(\partial F_s / \partial \varepsilon_s)$ in (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df}) suggests that, in the long-wavelength limit, it would be advantageous to redefine our energy variable to account for the kinetic energy of this flow, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:einw} \varepsilon_s = \frac{1}{2} m_s v^2 + q_s \Phi_s \longrightarrow \frac{1}{2} m_s \| \bb{v} - \delta\bb{u}_\perp \|^2 + q_s \Phi_s \doteq \frac{1}{2} m_s w^2_\perp + q_s \Phi_s, \end{equation} such that the energies of all particles are measured {\em in the frame of the} $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ {\em velocity}. In other words, Alfv\'{e}nic fluctuations do not change the form of the distribution function, but rather define the moving frame in which any changes to it are to be measured. Physically, this is because particles in a magnetised plasma adjust on a cyclotron timescale to take on the local $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ velocity; in a sense, $\rho_i$ performs the role of the mean free path. This principle is what underlies Kulsrud's formulation of kinetic MHD, in which the perpendicular particle velocities are measured relative to the $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ drift, the latter being governed by a set of MHD-like fluid equations rather than by a kinetic equation \citep{kulsrud64,kulsrud83}. In this frame, the perturbed distribution is gyrotropic at fixed position -- a particularly useful result. Interpreting the other terms in (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df}) is eased by shifting from $F_s(v_\parallel,\varepsilon_s)$ to $f_s(v_\parallel,w_\perp)$ and by using Faraday's law (\ref{eqn:linearFaraday}) to write the perpendicular components of $\delta\bb{E}$ in terms of $\delta B_z$ and $\delta B_\parallel$: \begin{align}\label{eqn:longwavelength_df2} \delta f_s(v_\parallel,w_\perp) &= \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \pD{z}{f_s} \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + \frac{w^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} f_s \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad - \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \left( \frac{q_s \delta E_\parallel}{T_s} + \D{z}{\ln P_s} \frac{\delta B_z}{B} - {\rm i} k_\parallel \frac{w^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \right) \frac{v_\parallel}{v_\parallel - \omega / k_\parallel } f_s . \end{align} Each of the terms on the right-hand side of (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df2}) has a straightforward physical interpretation. The first term arises from particles sampling the equilibrium gradients as they stream along the perturbed magnetic field, or, equivalently, from the distribution function being advected in a Lagrangian sense upwards along a vertically perturbed magnetic-field line. The second term merely serves to enforce adiabatic invariance of $\mu_s$, and would vanish if we were to have written our distribution function in terms of $\mu_s$ rather than $w_\perp$. The remaining three terms -- those on the second line of (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df2}) -- are due to the acceleration of particles along the magnetic field by the parallel electric force $q_s \delta E_\parallel$, the divergence of the parallel pressure $-(1/n_s) \grad\bcdot(\hat{\bb{b}} P_{\parallel s}) \rightarrow - (\delta B_z/B) (1/n_s) {\rm d}P_s/{\rm d}z$, and the mirror force $-\mu_s \hat{\bb{b}}\bcdot\grad B \rightarrow -\mu_s {\rm i} k_\parallel \delta B_\parallel$. Each of these forces may lead to collisionless damping if a significant fraction of the particles in the distribution function is Landau resonant, $\omega \sim k_\parallel v_\parallel$, thereby transferring the free energy stored in the lower-order moments of (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df2}) (e.g.,~density, momentum, pressure) to the higher-order ``kinetic'' moments (i.e.~fine-scale structure in velocity space). Lower-order moments of particular interest in this section are the perturbed density of species $s$, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:longwavelength_dn} \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} = \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \left[ \D{z}{\ln n_s} - \D{z}{\ln P_s} Z_1(\zeta_s) \right] \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} - \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \frac{q_s \delta E_\parallel}{T_s} Z_1(\zeta_s) , \end{equation} the perturbed perpendicular pressure of species $s$, \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:longwavelength_Pprp} \begin{align} \frac{\delta P_{\perp s}}{P_s} &= \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + 2 \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} - \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \frac{q_s \delta E_\parallel}{T_s} Z_1(\zeta_s) \\* \label{eqn:longwavelength_dpprp} \mbox{} &= \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} + \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \D{z}{\ln T_s} \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} , \end{align} \end{subequations} and the perturbed parallel pressure of species $s$, \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:longwavelength_Pprl} \begin{align} \frac{\delta P_{\parallel s}}{P_s} &= \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \bigl[ 1 - 2 Z_3(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + \bigl[ 1 - 2Z_3(\zeta_s)\bigr] \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B_0} - \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \frac{q_s \delta E_\parallel}{T_s} 2Z_3(\zeta_s) \\* \label{eqn:longwavelength_dpprl} \mbox{} &= \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} + \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \frac{\delta B_z}{B} \left[ \D{z}{\ln P_s} - \D{z}{\ln n_s} \frac{2Z_3(\zeta_s)}{Z_1(\zeta_s)} \right] + \frac{2Z_3(\zeta_s) - Z_1(\zeta_s)}{Z_1(\zeta_s)} \left( \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} - \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \right) . \end{align} \end{subequations} To obtain (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprp}) and (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprl}), we have used (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dn}) to eliminate $\delta E_\parallel$ in favour of $\delta n_s$; this makes the calculation of the perturbed temperatures particularly easy. The final preparatory exercise before proceeding with the analysis of the drift-kinetic dispersion relation is to compute the parallel electric field found in (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_df}). This is most easily accomplished by multiplying (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dn}) by $q_s n_s$, summing the result over species, and using quasi-neutrality (\ref{eqn:quasineutrality}) to eliminate all but the Landau terms. The result is \begin{equation}\label{eqn:eparallel} \delta E_\parallel = { {\displaystyle \sum\nolimits_s q_s n_s Z_1(\zeta_s) } \over {\displaystyle \sum\nolimits_s \frac{q^2_s n_s}{T_s} Z_1(\zeta_s) } } \left( {\rm i} k_\parallel \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} - \D{z}{\ln P_s} \frac{\delta B_z}{B} \right) . \end{equation} This equation amounts to a statement of parallel pressure balance, taking into account the forcing-out of large-pitch-angle particles (those with $\cos^{-1}(v_\parallel / v ) \sim \upi / 2$) from regions of increased magnetic-field strength and the squeezing of particles upwards along vertically displaced magnetic-field lines by the pressure gradient. The rapid establishment of quasi-neutrality by the parallel electric field (\ref{eqn:eparallel}) means, upon comparison with (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_uprp}), that $\delta E_\parallel / \delta E_\perp \sim k \rho_s \ll 1$. Faraday's law (\ref{eqn:linearFaraday}) then expresses the freezing of the magnetic flux into the mean perpendicular flow of the perturbed plasma, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:fluxfreezing} \delta\bb{B} = \frac{c}{\omega} \bb{k}\btimes \delta\bb{E}_\perp = - \frac{\bb{k}}{\omega}\btimes \bigl( \delta\bb{u}_\perp\btimes B\hat{\bb{e}}_x \bigr) , \end{equation} a natural outcome at long wavelengths. Introducing the Lagrangian perpendicular displacement via $\delta\bb{u}_\perp \doteq {\rm d}\bb{\xi}_\perp/{\rm d}t \rightarrow -{\rm i}\omega\bb{\xi}_\perp$, (\ref{eqn:fluxfreezing}) may be written \begin{equation}\label{eqn:induction} \frac{\delta\bb{B}}{B} = {\rm i} k_\parallel \bb{\xi}_\perp - {\rm i} \bb{k}_\perp\bcdot\bb{\xi}_\perp \hat{\bb{e}}_x . \end{equation} This particular form of the induction equation affords a better physical understanding of the second moments (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprp}) and (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprl}), as follows. Using (\ref{eqn:induction}) to replace $\delta B_z/B$ by ${\rm i} k_\parallel \xi_z$ in (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprp}) and (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprl}), we find that the Lagrangian changes in the perpendicular and parallel temperatures as a fluid element of species $s$ is displaced are \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:longwavelength_DT} \begin{align} \frac{\Delta T_{\perp s}}{T_s} &\doteq \frac{\delta T_{\perp s}}{T_s} + \xi_z \D{z}{\ln T_s} = \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} , \\* \frac{\Delta T_{\parallel s}}{T_s} &\doteq \frac{\delta T_{\parallel s}}{T_s} + \xi_z \D{z}{\ln T_s} = \frac{2Z_3(\zeta_s) - Z_1(\zeta_s)}{Z_1(\zeta_s)} \left( \frac{\Delta n_s}{n_s} - \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \right) . \end{align} \end{subequations} For $\zeta_s \gg 1$ (i.e., the fluctuation propagates/grows faster than the time it takes a particle of species $s$ to traverse its parallel wavelength), $Z_1(\zeta_s) \simeq -1/2\zeta^2_s$ and $Z_3(\zeta_s) \simeq -3/4\zeta^2_s$, and (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_DT}) returns the linearised version of the double-adiabatic theory, $T_\perp / B \simeq {\rm const}$ and $T_\parallel B^2/n^2 \simeq {\rm const}$, in which heat flows are assumed negligible \citep{cgl56}. In the opposite limit $\zeta_s \ll 1$, $Z_1(\zeta_s) \simeq 1 + {\rm i} \sqrt{\pi}\zeta_s$ and $Z_3(\zeta_s) \simeq 1/2$, and so we have $\Delta T_{\perp s}/T_s \simeq -{\rm i}\sqrt{\pi} \zeta_s \delta B_\parallel / B$ and $\Delta T_{\parallel s}/T_s \simeq -{\rm i}\sqrt{\pi} \zeta_s ( \Delta n_s / n_s - \delta B_\parallel / B )$, corresponding to nearly isothermal fluctuations. Each of these limits will aid in the analysis of the drift-kinetic dispersion relation, which we now, finally, commence. \subsubsection{Drift-kinetic limit: Parallel propagation $(\bb{k}\parallel\hat{\bb{b}})$}\label{sec:longwavelength_kprl} The simplest wavevector geometry to analyze is $k_\perp = 0$, in which case (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}) and (\ref{eqn:longwavetensor}) combine to give $\msb{D}^{(xx)} \sim \mc{O}(1)$, $\msb{D}^{(xy)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon)$, $\msb{D}^{(yy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(zz)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon^2)$, and $\msb{D}^{(xz)} = \msb{D}^{(zx)} = 0$. It is straightforward to show further that the contributions from $\msb{U}^{(yz)}_{n,s}$ and $\msb{U}^{(zy)}_{n,s}$ to the dispersion tensor vanish to leading order by quasi-neutrality (\ref{eqn:quasineutrality}), a fact that will become important again in Section \ref{sec:gyroviscous} when we consider gyroviscous contributions to the wave dispersion. The long-wavelength dispersion relation then reads \begin{equation}\label{eqn:longwavelength_kprl_disprel} \msb{D}^{(zz)} \left[ \msb{D}^{(xx)} \msb{D}^{(yy)} - \msb{D}^{(xy)} \msb{D}^{(yx)} \right] = 0 . \end{equation} The first solution, $\msb{D}^{(zz)} = 0$, corresponds to Alfv\'{e}n waves with frequencies $\omega = \pm k_\parallel v_A$, which are polarized with $\delta\bb{B}$ along the $y$-axis. They are unaffected by buoyancy, and are completely decoupled from the compressive fluctuations. The latter satisfy \begin{equation}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl} \omega^2 = k^2_\parallel v^2_A - \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \, \Upsilon_s \right] , \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{eqn:eta} \Upsilon_s \doteq 1 - { {\displaystyle \sum\nolimits_{s'} \frac{q_s q_{s'} n_{s'}}{T_s} Z_1(\zeta_{s'})} \over {\displaystyle \sum\nolimits_{s'} \frac{q^2_{s'} n_{s'}}{T_{s'}} Z_1(\zeta_{s'})} } . \end{equation} The terms on the right-hand side of (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}) correspond, respectively, to the effects of magnetic tension, buoyancy, and collisionless damping by way of Landau-resonant particles undergoing acceleration by a combination of parallel electric fields and parallel gravity (both of which are proportional to the pressure gradient, and thus have been combined by introducing $\Upsilon_s$). It is instructive to compare (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}) with its more familiar Braginskii-MHD (i.e.~collisional, magnetised) counterpart \citep[cf.][]{balbus00,kunz11}, written in a rather auspicious guise: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:collisionalMTI} \omega^2 = k^2_\parallel v^2_A - \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \frac{{\rm i}\omega}{k^2_\parallel \kappa - (5/2) {\rm i}\omega} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \right] , \end{equation} where $\kappa$ is the (electron-dominated) thermal diffusivity of a collisional plasma. At large enough wavenumbers such that their final terms (those proportional to ${\rm d}\ln P_s/{\rm d}z$) are negligible, both solutions return what now bears the moniker ``magnetothermal instability'' \citep{balbus00,balbus01}: \begin{equation} \omega^2 \simeq k^2_\parallel v^2_A + g \D{z}{\ln T} , \end{equation} which may be unstable in an atmosphere with ${\rm d}\ln T_s / {\rm d}z < 0$, provided the magnetic field is sufficiently subthermal (i.e. $\sqrt{\beta} \gg k_\parallel H \gg 1$). That both the collisional and collisionless calculations return nearly the same result in the long-wavelength limit is encouraging -- the MTI in its simplest form passes unscathed through to the kinetic case. But while, in both cases, the MTI is driven by the rapid transport of heat along perturbed magnetic-field lines, there is quite different physics at play in what governs that transport. For the collisional case, in which particles interact with one another on the collisional mean free path $\lambda_{mfp}$, the MTI grows maximally once $k^2_\parallel \lambda_{mfp} H \gtrsim 1$, that is, for wavelengths intermediate between the mean free path and the thermal-pressure scale height. The lower bound of $\lambda_{mfp}$ is readily understood: fluid elements separated by a fluctuation wavelength must be able to equilibrate their temperatures via conduction, short-circuiting the usual adiabatic response and allowing, say, hot fluid elements to remain hot as they are convectively lifted upwards into cooler surroundings. The upper bound of $H$ results from a displaced fluid element needing to maintain pressure balance with its surroundings by radiating sound waves faster than the fluid element rises (i.e.~$k_\parallel v_{thi} \gg \omega \sim v_{thi} / H$).\footnote{This limit, the {\em Boussinesq approximation} (for which the perturbed pressure $\delta p / p \sim \mc{O}(\zeta^{-2})$), was used to obtain the collisional dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:collisionalMTI}). Such a limit cannot in general be taken in the collisionless case, because the pressure response is different parallel and perpendicular to the magnetic field (see (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprp}) and (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dpprl})).} In the collisionless case, conduction is not set by particle-particle interactions, and sounds waves are collisionlessly damped. The application of the collisional MTI to a collisionless plasma is not obvious {\it a priori}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width =0.6\textwidth]{longwave.pdf} \caption{Growth rates (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) as calculated from the collisionless drift-kinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}; solid line) and from the collisional Braginskii-MHD dispersion relation (dotted and dashed lines), both with $k_\perp = 0$, $\beta_i = 10^6$, and ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$. See \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl} for details.} \label{fig:longwave_comp} \end{figure} In fact, the collisionless case is somewhat simpler than the collisional case, in that the same condition that allows displaced fluid elements to maintain pressure balance with their surroundings (that is, $\zeta_s \ll 1$) also ensures that such displacements proceed approximately isothermally. Indeed, (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_Pprp})--(\ref{eqn:longwavelength_DT}) with $k_\perp = 0$ and $\zeta_s \ll 1$ imply \begin{equation}\label{eqn:DTcollisionless} \frac{\delta P_{\perp}}{P} \sim \mc{O}(\zeta_i) , ~\frac{\delta P_{\parallel}}{P} \sim \mc{O}(\zeta^2_i) ,~ \frac{\Delta T_{\perp}}{T} = 0,~ \frac{\Delta T_{\parallel}}{T} \sim \mc{O}(\zeta_i) \quad \textrm{(collisionless, magnetised).} \end{equation} Simply put, conduction and buoyancy in a collisionless plasma are inextricably linked. This is {\em not} true in a collisional, magnetised plasma, for which \citep[cf.][]{kunz11} \begin{equation}\label{eqn:DTcollisional} \frac{\delta P}{P} \sim \mc{O}(\zeta^2_i) ,~ \frac{\Delta T}{T} \simeq \xi_z \D{z}{\ln P} \frac{-{\rm i} \omega}{k^2_\parallel \kappa - (5/2) {\rm i} \omega} \quad \textrm{(collisional, magnetised).} \end{equation} In this case, pressure balance can be achieved regardless of whether conduction is rapid enough to ensure nearly isothermal displacements (just take $k_\parallel \lambda_{mfp} \rightarrow 0$). By contrast, in a collisionless plasma, particles redistribute heat along field lines not by communicating thermodynamic information via collisions with other particles, but by free-streaming along perturbed magnetic fields. This naturally occurs on roughly the same timescale on which a sound wave propagates and establishes pressure balance. If the perturbed field lines are not isothermal, it is for the same reason that a fluid element cannot maintain pressure equilibrium with its surroundings, that is, an appreciable number of particles are Landau-resonant with the fluctuation. Figure \ref{fig:longwave_comp} displays the growth rates as calculated from (solid line) the collisionless drift-kinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}) and (dotted and dashed lines) the collisional Braginskii-MHD dispersion relation \citep[e.g.~equation 24 of][]{kunz11} with $k_\perp = 0$. All solutions asymptote to a value close to the maximum growth rate $\sqrt{-g\,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$ before being cutoff by magnetic tension at $k_\parallel H \approx \sqrt{\beta\, {\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P}$. Their approach to the maximum growth rate, however, is quite different. These trends may be retrieved by balancing the final (stabilizing) terms in (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}) and (\ref{eqn:collisionalMTI}) with the destabilizing temperature gradient, which gives $\omega \propto k_\parallel$ for the collisionless case and $\omega \propto k^2_\parallel$ for the collisional case. As explained above, this is related to the scale on which conduction can efficiently isothermalize displaced magnetic-field lines (cf.~(\ref{eqn:DTcollisionless}) and (\ref{eqn:DTcollisional})). \subsubsection{Drift-kinetic limit: Oblique propagation with $k_\perp = k_z$ $(\psi = \upi/2)$}\label{sec:longwavelength_kz} Next, we relax our assumption that $k_\perp = 0$ and allow for wavevectors with a vertical component: $\bb{k} = k_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x + k_z \hat{\bb{e}}_z$. The first thing to notice is that we no longer have $\delta B_\parallel = 0$, but rather $\delta B_\parallel/B = -{\rm i} k_z \xi_z$ (see (\ref{eqn:induction})), and so the Lagrangian change of the perpendicular temperature (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_DT}) as a fluid element is displaced upwards or downwards no longer identically vanishes. Instead, {\em changes in temperature go hand-in-hand with changes in magnetic-field strength}. Because the latter are collisionlessly damped \citep{barnes66}, this makes the physics of the MTI much richer than in the collisional case, for which $\Delta T \simeq 0$ in the fast-conduction limit regardless of wavevector orientation. This is particularly true at large $k_z$, as we now show. For $k_\perp = k_z$, we have $\msb{D}^{(xx)} \sim \mc{O}(1)$, $\msb{D}^{(xy)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon)$, and $\msb{D}^{(xz)} \sim \msb{D}^{(yy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(zz)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon^2)$. (As in \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl}, the contributions from $\msb{U}^{(yz)}_{n,s}$ and $\msb{U}^{(zy)}_{n,s}$ vanish by quasi-neutrality.) The leading-order dispersion relation is thus of the same form as (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_kprl_disprel}), with the Alfv\'{e}nic fluctuations $\omega = \pm k_\parallel v_A$ completely decoupled from the compressive ones. The dispersion relation for the latter may be manipulated into a form similar to the $k_\perp = 0$ result (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}), \begin{align}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kz} \omega^2 = k^2 v^2_A - \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \widetilde{\Upsilon}_s \right] , \end{align} the only substantive difference between the two being that $\Upsilon_s$ (see equation (\ref{eqn:eta})) is replaced by \begin{equation}\label{eqn:eta-tilde} \widetilde{\Upsilon}_s \doteq \Upsilon_s + k^2_z H^2 (1+\Upsilon_s). \end{equation} The additional term in $\widetilde{\Upsilon}_s$ that is proportional to $k^2_z H^2$ arises from the Barnes damping of magnetic-field-strength fluctuations, an effect we anticipate to stabilize the drift-kinetic MTI once that term becomes comparable to the destabilizing temperature gradient -- that is, once $\zeta_i k^2_z H^2 \sim 1$, or $k_z H \sim \sqrt{k_\parallel H}$. Just before that, where $\zeta_i \ll (k_z/k_\parallel)^2$, the two terms in brackets in (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kz}) must balance and the growth rate ought to decrease as $k^{-2}_z$. This is indeed what we find in Figure \ref{fig:longwave}a, which shows the instability growth rate as a function of $k_\parallel$ and $k_z$. As for the $k_\perp = 0$ modes, the growth rate increases with $k_\parallel$ until it attains its maximum value $\approx$$\sqrt{-g \, {\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$ at $k_\parallel H \sim 100$. Beyond $k_\parallel H \approx \sqrt{\beta\, {\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P}$, magnetic tension stabilizes the mode and it propagates as a pseudo-Alfv\'{e}n wave undergoing weak Landau damping. As anticipated, increasing $k_z$ reduces the growth rate $\propto$$k^{-2}_z$, strongly suppressing the drift-kinetic MTI once $k_z H \sim \sqrt{k_\parallel H}$ (demarcated by the white dashed line in the figure). Note that, in the collisional case, the limiting $k_z$ is set by the Braginskii viscosity and is instead given by $k_z H \sim \sqrt{H/\lambda_{mfp}}$, independent of parallel wavenumber \citep[see \S 4.2.1 and fig.~5b of][]{kunz11}. The difference is because, in the collisional case, wave damping is caused by the parallel diffusion of momentum (occurring at a rate $\sim$$k^2_\parallel \lambda_{mfp} v_{ths}$) rather than by collisionless wave-particle interactions ($\sim$$k_\parallel v_{ths}$). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width =0.48\textwidth]{kz.pdf} \quad \includegraphics[width =0.48\textwidth]{ky.pdf} \caption{Kinetic MTI growth rate (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) as calculated from the collisionless drift-kinetic dispersion relation with $\beta_i = 10^6$, ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$, and either ({\em left}) $k_y = 0$ (see (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kz})) or ({\em right}) $k_z = 0$ (see (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky})). The white dashed line on the left panel is $k_z H \sim \sqrt{k_\parallel H}$, which traces the boundary where Barnes damping stabilizes the drift-kinetic MTI. See \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kz} and \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_ky} for details.} \label{fig:longwave} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Drift-kinetic limit: Oblique propagation with $k_\perp = k_y$ $(\psi = 0)$}\label{sec:longwavelength_ky} The story gets a bit more complicated when the wavevector has a component perpendicular to both the mean magnetic field and the equilibrium gradients, $\bb{k} = k_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x + k_y \hat{\bb{e}}_y$. First, the contributions from $\msb{U}^{(yz)}_{n,s}$ and $\msb{U}^{(zy)}_{n,s}$ to the dispersion tensor no longer vanish. This is crucial, as these matrix elements are responsible for coupling Alfv\'{e}n waves and slow modes, a feature heretofore lacking (and one that will reappear in \S\ref{sec:gyroviscous}). Secondly, with $\msb{D}^{(xx)} \sim \mc{O}(1)$, $\msb{D}^{(xy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(xz)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon)$, and $\msb{D}^{(yy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(yz)} \sim \msb{D}^{(zz)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon^2)$, all the elements of the dispersion tensor ultimately contribute to the dispersion relation, and the algebra gets considerably more thorny. Surprisingly, a fortuitous rearrangement of terms leads to a rather compact dispersion relation: \begin{align}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky} \Biggl\{ \omega^2 &- k^2_\parallel v^2_A + \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \Upsilon_s \right] \Biggr\} \\* \mbox{} &\times \left[ \omega^2 - k^2 v^2_A + k^2_y \sum_s \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \bigl( 1 + \Upsilon_s \bigr) \right] = k^2_y \left[ \sum_s \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \Upsilon_s \right]^2 \nonumber . \end{align} The first term on the left-hand side -- the one in braces -- should look familiar from Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl} (cf.~(\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl})). It captures the effects of magnetic tension, buoyancy, and collisionless damping on fluctuations polarized with $\delta\bb{B}$ in the $z$ direction. The second term on the left-hand side of (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky}) should also look familiar; it includes the contribution from Barnes damping of $\delta B_\parallel \ne 0$ fluctuations ($\propto k^2_y ( 1 + \Upsilon_s )$) that featured prominently in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_kz}. The right-hand side is new, and deserves some discussion. Recall from Sections \ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl} and \ref{sec:longwavelength_kz} that, for $k_\perp = 0$ or $k_\perp = k_z$, Alfv\'{e}n waves polarized with $\delta\bb{B}$ in the $y$ direction are completely decoupled from all other fluctuations. This is because they change neither the density nor the temperature (see (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dn})--(\ref{eqn:longwavelength_Pprl})), and therefore are not subject to buoyancy forces. This is clearly not the case when $k_y \ne 0$. These fluctuations are now accompanied by compressions and rarefactions in the magnetic-field lines in order to preserve the divergence-free constraint, $\delta B_\parallel = -(k_y/k_\parallel) \delta B_y$. Accompanying these magnetic-field-strength fluctuations are changes in temperature and density (see (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_DT})), which influence the behaviour of vertical displacements subject to gravity. As a result, all components of the magnetic field are coupled. In particular, consider the limit $k^2_y H^2 \gg k_\parallel H$. The first bracket on the second line of (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky}) -- the one associated with $y$-polarized magnetic-field fluctuations -- is then dominated by the $\propto$$k^2_y$ term. This corresponds to strong Barnes damping of $\delta B_\parallel$ fluctuations. In the previous section (\S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kz}), this damping was detrimental to the growth of the drift-kinetic MTI, since, there, $\delta B_z = -(k_z/k_\parallel) \delta B_\parallel$. However, in the present arrangement, the system has a mechanism to minimize the collisionless damping: simply counter the mirror force $-\mu_s \grad_\parallel \delta B_\parallel$ with the parallel gravitational force $m_s\bb{g}\bcdot\delta\hat{\bb{b}}$. As a Landau-resonant particle accelerates downwards along a vertically perturbed magnetic-field line into a region of lower potential energy, arrange the magnetic field so that the particle is also entering a region of enhanced magnetic-field strength. The mathematical manifestation of this arrangement is the cancellation of $k^2_y$ from the Barnes-damping term in (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky}) with the $k^2_y$ on that equation's right-hand side, the result being that \begin{equation}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largeky} \omega^2 \simeq k^2_\parallel v^2_A - \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \widehat{\Upsilon}_s \right] , \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{eqn:eta-hat} \widehat{\Upsilon}_s \doteq \frac{\sum_{s'} \zeta_{s'} Z_0(\zeta_{s'}) P_{s'} \Upsilon_s}{\sum_{s'} \zeta_{s'} Z_0(\zeta_{s'}) P_{s'} \bigl( 1 + \Upsilon_{s'} \bigr)} \simeq \frac{\Upsilon_s}{2} ~{\rm for}~\zeta_s \ll 1. \end{equation} Comparing (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largeky}) with (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_kprl}), we see that the collisionless damping (captured by the final term in those equations) is reduced from the $k_\perp = 0$ case by a factor of $\simeq$$2$ at large $k_\parallel H$ -- that is, the growth rate is actually {\it larger} for $k_y \ne 0$, independent of $k_y$ (so long as $k^2_y H^2 \gg k_\parallel H \gg 1$). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{kineticMTI_ky.pdf} \caption{Geometry of perturbed magnetic-field lines for an MTI-unstable mode with $k_\parallel H = k_y H \gg 1$ in the drift-kinetic limit. Field lines are shown as viewed ({\it left}) from above in the $x$-$y$ plane and ({\it right}) from the side in the $x$-$z$ plane. The horizontal field fluctuations satisfy $\delta B_\parallel = - \delta B_y$, with vertical displacements of field lines anti-correlated with the strength of the perturbed field (indicated by the coloring of field lines on the right). The mirror force $-\mu\nabla_\parallel \delta B_\parallel$ thus acts oppositely to the parallel gravitational force $m_s \bb{g}\bcdot\delta\hat{\bb{b}}$. See \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_ky} for details.} \label{fig:kydiagram} \end{figure} This scenario is diagrammed in Figure \ref{fig:kydiagram}, which shows the geometry of perturbed magnetic-field lines for an MTI-unstable mode with $k_\parallel H = k_y H \gg 1$. The horizontal field fluctuations satisfy $\delta B_\parallel = -\delta B_y$ in order to preserve the solenoidality constraint (shown in the left panel), with vertical displacements of field lines anti-correlated with the strength of the perturbed field (indicated by the coloring of field lines on the right). As a result of this arrangement, the mirror force acts oppositely to the parallel gravitational force, reducing the parallel acceleration experienced by Landau-resonant particles. Perhaps the simplest way of understanding this advantageous field-line topology is to examine the energy of a $\mu$-conserving particle in the frame of the perturbed $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ drift, $(1/2) m_s v^2_\parallel + \mu_s B + q_s \Phi_s$. The change in energy of this particle as it interacts with the wave is reduced by ensuring that increasing (decreasing) magnetic-field strengths occur in regions of decreasing (increasing) potential. At the risk of belaboring this point, let us use (\ref{eqn:longwavelength_dn}) and (\ref{eqn:induction}) to write the evolution equation for the vertical displacement of a fluid element (neglecting magnetic tension): \begin{align}\label{eqn:xiky} \DD{t}{\xi_z} &= - g \sum_s \frac{m_s n_s}{\varrho} \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &= - g \D{z}{\ln T} \xi_z - g \sum_s \frac{m_s n_s}{\varrho} \bigl[ 1 - \Upsilon_s Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \left( \frac{q_s}{T_s} \D{z}{\Phi_s} \xi_z + \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \right) . \end{align} Growth is maximized by reducing the amplitude of the final term, which is achieved by having magnetic-field-strength fluctuations $\delta B_\parallel$ anti-correlated with upward displacements $\xi_z > 0$ into regions of larger potential (${\rm d}\Phi_s/{\rm d}z > 0$). This is precisely what is shown in Figure \ref{fig:kydiagram}. \subsubsection{Drift-kinetic limit: Arbitrary wavevector orientation}\label{sec:longwavelength_kprp} Having now considered all simple wavevector geometries, we finally examine the general drift-kinetic dispersion relation, which, after some straightforward but tedious algebra, may be written in the following convenient form: \begin{align}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI} \Biggl\{ \omega^2 &- \bigl( k^2_\parallel + k^2_z \bigr) v^2_A + \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \widetilde{\Upsilon}_s \right] \Biggr\} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\times \left[ \omega^2 - \bigl( k^2_\parallel + k^2_y \bigr) v^2_A + k^2_y \sum_s \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \bigl( 1 + \Upsilon_s \bigr) \right] \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &= k^2_y \left[ \sum_s \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \Upsilon_s \right]^2 + k^2_y k^2_z \left[ \sum_s \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \bigl( 1 + \Upsilon_s \bigr) \right]^2 , \end{align} with $\widetilde{\Upsilon}_s$ given by (\ref{eqn:eta-tilde}). Setting the first term in braces to zero returns the dispersion relation analyzed in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_kz}; it includes the effects of collisionless damping due to the parallel electric field, the magnetic mirror force, and the parallel gravitational force. The second term in brackets (the one on the second line of (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI})) is identical to the second term in (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_ky}), and is related to fluctuations polarized with $\delta\bb{B}$ in the horizontal plane; it includes the contribution from Barnes damping of $\delta B_\parallel \ne 0$ fluctuations. The first term on the right-hand side, responsible for coupling these two branches, was discussed thoroughly in the previous section. The final term on the right-hand side is new, requiring both $k_y \ne 0$ and $k_z \ne 0$. Motivated by the results in the previous section, we take the limit $k^2_y H^2 \gg k_\parallel H$ (while keeping $k_z \lesssim k_y$). Equation (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largekykz} \omega^2 \simeq ( k^2_\parallel + k^2_z ) v^2_A - \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \left[ \D{z}{\ln T_s} + \zeta_s Z_0(\zeta_s) \D{z}{\ln P_s} \widehat{\Upsilon}_s \right] , \end{equation} which, aside from the tension term, is exactly the same as the $k_z = 0$ solution (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largeky})! The stabilization of the drift-kinetic MTI at moderate $k_z$ due to Barnes damping seen in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_kz} has been removed by the same physics as was the focus of the previous section -- the mirror force, by which Landau-resonant particles bleed energy from the magnetic-field-strength fluctuations, is offset by the divergence of the parallel pressure. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width =0.48\textwidth]{general.pdf} \caption{Kinetic MTI (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) as a function of $k_yH$ and $k_zH$, as calculated from the collisionless drift-kinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI}) with $\beta_i = 10^6$, ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$, and $k_\parallel H=61.4$ (corresponding to the fastest-growing $k_\perp=0$ mode). See \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprp} for details.} \label{fig:longwave_general} \end{figure} Such behaviour can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:longwave_general}, which displays the instability growth rate calculated from (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI}) as a function of $k_y H$ and $k_z H$ for $k_\parallel H = 61.4$ (corresponding to the fastest-growing $k_\perp = 0$ mode for $\beta_i = 10^6$). At large $k_y$, the growth rate is maximal and approximately constant with $k_z$, at least until $k_y \sim k_z$. At that point the ordering leading to (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largekykz}) breaks down, and for $k^2_y / k^2_z \ll 1$ we have from (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI}) \begin{equation} \omega^2 \simeq ( k^2_\parallel + k^2_y) v^2_A - \frac{k^2_y}{k^2_z} \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \D{z}{\ln T_s} \end{equation} to leading order in $k^2_y/k^2_z$, i.e.~the growth decreases as $\propto$$k^{-1}_z$. The physical reason for this decrease is that, when $k_z \gg k_y$, the mirror force can no longer be compensated adequately by the divergence of the parallel pressure, and Barnes damping wins out. The mathematical manifestation of this is an additional term in the evolution equation for the vertical displacement of a fluid element due to the perturbed perpendicular pressure (cf.~\ref{eqn:xiky}); neglecting magnetic tension and pressure, \begin{align}\label{eqn:xikykz} \DD{t}{\xi_z} &= - g \sum_s \frac{m_s n_s}{\varrho} \frac{\delta n_s}{n_s} - {\rm i} k_z \sum_s \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \frac{\delta P_{\perp s}}{P_s} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &= - g \D{z}{\ln T} \xi_z - \sum_s \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \left( {\rm i} k_z + \frac{m_s g}{T_s} \right) \bigl[ 1 - \Upsilon_s Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] \left( \frac{q_s}{T_s} \D{z}{\Phi_s} \xi_z + \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \right) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad -{\rm i} k_z \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} \sum_s \frac{P_s}{\varrho} \bigl[ 1 - Z_1(\zeta_s) \bigr] . \end{align} Minimizing the second term in the final equality of (\ref{eqn:xikykz}) by having upward displacements go hand-in-hand with weak magnetic-field strengths -- an arrangement exploited by the $k^2_y H^2 \gg k_\parallel H$ modes in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_ky} -- causes the final term in (\ref{eqn:xikykz}) to strongly damp the fluctuations when $k^2_z H^2 \gg k_\parallel H$. \subsection{Gyroviscous limit: $k^2_\parallel \rho_s H \sim 1$}\label{sec:gyroviscous} Having examined the long-wavelength limit, we now progress to smaller scales, namely, those intermediate between the atmospheric scale height and the species' Larmor radii. To keep things simple at first, we focus only on fluctuations whose wavevectors are aligned with the mean magnetic field, $\bb{k} = k_\parallel \hat{\bb{e}}_x$. A natural question to ask is what would happen to the growth rate of the MTI if the magnetic tension were insufficient to provide a parallel-wavenumber cutoff, thus allowing for growth at relatively small scales. Indeed, many numerical simulations of the (collisional) MTI presented in the published literature had adopted rather large initial plasma beta parameters $\beta \sim 10^8$--$10^{12}$ \citep{ps07,psl08,mccourt11,parrish12}, one of the motivations being to test whether the MTI in its nonlinear phase might act as an efficient dynamo capable of explaining the presence of the $\sim$$\mu{\rm G}$ magnetic fields currently observed in nearby galaxy clusters \citep[e.g.][]{ct02}. At such high $\beta$, the ion Larmor radius can become large enough for the characteristic scale at which FLR effects are important -- roughly the geometric mean of the ion Larmor radius and the scale height, {\it viz.} \begin{equation} k^{-1}_{\rm FLR} \sim (\rho_i H)^{1/2} \approx 10 \left( \frac{\beta_i}{10^{12}} \right)^{1/4} \left( \frac{10^{-3}~{\rm cm}^{-3}}{n} \right)^{1/4} \left( \frac{H}{500~{\rm kpc}} \right)^{1/2} ~{\rm pc} \end{equation} -- to be comparable to the size of some fluctuations, i.e.~$k^2_\parallel \rho_i H \sim 1$. Because FLR effects introduce wave dispersion and thus are typically a stabilizing influence, one might inquire at what magnetic-field strength does such stabilization become more important than that provided by magnetic tension. The answer, as it turns out, is when $\beta_i \gtrsim H/\rho_i$ or, for parameters characteristic of galaxy cluster outskirts, \begin{equation} B \lesssim 0.2 \left(\frac{n}{10^{-3}~{\rm cm^{-3}}}\right)^{1/3} \left( \frac{T}{10~{\rm keV}}\right)^{1/2} \left( \frac{H}{500~{\rm kpc}} \right)^{-1/3} ~{\rm nG} . \end{equation} Such a field is within the range of observationally allowed primordial magnetic-field strengths \citep[e.g.][]{neronov10,planck15}. This short preamble concluded, we begin our reduction of the general dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}) in this ``gyroviscous'' limit by adopting the ordering \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gv_ordering} \frac{\omega}{\Omega_s} \sim \frac{1}{(k_\parallel H )^2} \sim \frac{1}{\beta_s} \sim \frac{\rho_s}{H} \doteq \epsilon \ll 1 , \end{equation} under which the components of the dispersion tensor satisfy $\msb{D}^{(xx)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon)$, $\msb{D}^{(xy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(yy)} \sim \msb{D}^{(yz)} \sim \msb{D}^{(zz)} \sim \mc{O}(\epsilon^2)$. The slight complication to obtaining these estimates is that the $Z_0(\zeta_{n,s})$ function for $n = \pm 1$ must be expanded in its large arguments to third order in $k_\parallel \rho_s$, so that, e.g. \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gyroUyz} \msb{U}^{(yz)}_{n,s} \simeq {\rm i} \frac{k_\parallel \rho_s}{4} \left( 1 + \frac{k^2_\parallel\rho^2_s}{2}\right) \bigl( \delta_{n,1} + \delta_{n,-1} \bigr) . \end{equation} (Recall from \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_kprl} that the first term in (\ref{eqn:gyroUyz}) ultimately vanishes by quasi-neutrality. A similar cancellation occurs for the leading-order term in $\msb{U}^{(xy)}$.) Taking these subtleties into account, the dispersion relation to leading order in $\epsilon$ is \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gy_dsp} \msb{D}^{(xx)} \left[ \msb{D}^{(yy)} \msb{D}^{(zz)} - \msb{D}^{(yz)} \msb{D}^{(zy)} \right] = 0 . \end{equation} Since $\msb{D}^{(xx)}$ is in general non-zero, the term in brackets must vanish, yielding \begin{align}\label{eqn:gyroviscous_kprl_disprel} \bigl(\omega^2 - k^2_\parallel v^2_A \bigr) \left(\omega^2 - k^2_\parallel v^2_A + \sum_s \frac{1}{\varrho} \D{z}{P_s} \D{z}{\ln T_s} \right) = \omega^2 \left( \sum_s \frac{m_s n_s}{\varrho} \frac{k^2_\parallel v^2_{ths}}{2\Omega_s} \right)^2 , \end{align} where we have used the fact that the ordering (\ref{eqn:gv_ordering}) precludes Landau resonances (i.e.~$\zeta_s \sim \mc{O}(\sqrt{\epsilon})$). The first term in parentheses on the left-hand size of (\ref{eqn:gyroviscous_kprl_disprel}) corresponds to Alfv\'{e}n waves ($\omega = \pm k_\parallel v_A$) whose $\delta\bb{B}$ is polarized in the $y$ direction. The second term in parentheses is readily identifiable as the pseudo-Alfv\'{e}n-wave branch, which, in the absence of stabilizing magnetic tension, is unstable to the MTI for ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z < 0$. Its magnetic-field fluctuations are polarized in the $z$ direction, thus enabling rapid field-aligned conduction for vertical displacements. As in Sections \ref{sec:longwavelength_ky} and \ref{sec:longwavelength_kprp}, these two branches are coupled by a non-zero right-hand side, but here the cause is ``gyroviscosity'' \citep{kaufman60,braginskii65,ramos05} -- an FLR-induced dissipationless cross-field transport of momentum that arises from Larmor-scale spatial variations in the guiding-centre $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ drifts. It is dispersive and stabilizing, an effect that can be seen clearly in Figure \ref{fig:kprl}b, which shows the wave frequency versus parallel wavenumber for a variety of $\beta_i$ and thermal-pressure scale heights. For $\beta_i \gtrsim H / \rho_i$, the gyroviscosity is the dominant stabilizing effect (over the magnetic tension), providing a wavenumber cutoff \begin{equation}\label{eqn:kmaxGV} ( k_\parallel H )_{\rm max} \simeq \left( \frac{4H^2}{d^2_i} \frac{1}{\beta_i} \D{\ln P}{\ln T} \right)^{1/4} , \end{equation} where $d_i \doteq ( m_i c^2 / 4\upi e^2 n_i )^{1/2} = \rho_i / \sqrt{\beta_i}$ is the ion skin depth. For $n_i = 10^{-3}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$, $H = 500~{\rm kpc}$, and ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$, (\ref{eqn:kmaxGV}) gives $ (k_\parallel H)_{\rm max} \approx 5\times 10^4 \, ( 10^{12} / \beta_i )^{1/4}$. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{kprl1.pdf} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{kprl2.pdf} \end{minipage} \caption{Real (dashed) and imaginary (solid) parts of the wave frequency (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) for ({\it left}) $\beta_i=\beta_e=10^4$ and ({\it right}) $\beta_i =10^{10}$ for two ratios of ion skin depth $d_i$ and thermal-pressure scale height $H$ (note that the ion Larmor radius $\rho_i = \sqrt{\beta_i} d_i$). Growing modes are stabilised at large $k_\parallel H$ by either magnetic tension ({\it left}) or gyroviscosity ({\it right}). See \S\ref{sec:gyroviscous} for details.} \label{fig:kprl} \end{figure} The physics driving the gyroviscous stabilization of the MTI may be elucidated by examining the leading-order perturbed distribution function (\ref{eqn:df}) in the frame of the perturbed $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ flow under the gyroviscous ordering (\ref{eqn:gv_ordering}): \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gv_df} \delta f_s(v_\parallel, w_\perp) = \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \left[ \left( \pD{z}{\ln f_s} - \D{z}{\ln P_s} \right) \frac{\delta B_z}{B} + 2k_\parallel \frac{\omega}{\Omega_s} \frac{v_\parallel\bb{v}_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \bcdot \biggl(\frac{\delta\bb{B}}{B} \times\hat{\bb{e}}_x \biggr) \right] f_s . \end{equation} The final term in this expression makes the perturbed distribution function $\delta f_s(v_\parallel, w_\perp)$ gyrophase-dependent (a feature absent in the drift-kinetic limit), which endows the pressure tensor with off-diagonal elements: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gvP} \delta\msb{P}= \sum_s \delta\msb{P}_s = \sum_s P_s \,\frac{{\rm i}\omega}{\Omega_s} \left[ \bigl( \hat{\bb{e}}_x\hat{\bb{e}}_y + \hat{\bb{e}}_y\hat{\bb{e}}_x \bigr) \frac{\delta B_z}{B} - \bigl( \hat{\bb{e}}_x\hat{\bb{e}}_z + \hat{\bb{e}}_z\hat{\bb{e}}_x \bigr) \frac{\delta B_y}{B} \right] . \end{equation} Substituting this expression into the perturbed momentum equation and taking the limit $m_e / m_i \rightarrow 0$, we find that the Lagrangian displacement perpendicular to the mean magnetic field $\bb{\xi}_\perp$ evolves according to \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gvmom} \left( \DD{t}{} + k^2_\parallel v^2_A \right) \bb{\xi}_\perp = - g \D{z}{\ln T} \bb{\xi}_z - \frac{k^2_\parallel v^2_{thi}}{2\Omega_i} \D{t}{\bb{\xi}_\perp} \btimes \hat{\bb{e}}_x . \end{equation} The first term on the right-hand side -- the buoyancy term -- drives vertical displacements, which would grow exponentially (provided ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}z < 0$) were it not for the magnetic tension and the final (gyroviscous) term on the right-hand side. The latter rotates a vertical displacement into the horizontal plane (i.e.~vertical momentum is transported in the cross-field $y$ direction). If $k^2_\parallel \rho_i H \gtrsim 1$, this rotation occurs on a faster timescale than buoyancy can grow the displacement and the MTI becomes stabilised. A final note is perhaps in order regarding the gyroviscosity and the contributions to it that sometimes arise in the presence of temperature gradients, the so-called \citet{mt71,mt84} terms \citep[see also][]{cs04}. For an isotropic equilibrium distribution function, the gyroviscous contribution to the pressure tensor of species $s$ is \begin{align}\label{eqn:gyroviscosity} \msb{G}_s = \frac{1}{4\Omega_s} &\Bigl\{ \hat{\bb{b}} \btimes \bigl[ ( P_{\perp s} \grad\bb{u}_s + \grad \bb{Q}_{\perp s}) + ( P_{\perp s}\grad\bb{u}_s + \grad\bb{Q}_{\perp s} )^{\rm T} \bigr] \bcdot \bigl( \msb{I} + 3\hat{\bb{b}}\eb \bigr) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} & - \bigl( \msb{I} + 3\hat{\bb{b}}\eb \bigr) \bcdot \bigl[ ( P_{\perp s}\grad\bb{u}_s + \grad \bb{Q}_{\perp s} ) + ( P_{\perp s} \grad\bb{u}_s + \grad\bb{Q}_{\perp s} )^{\rm T} \bigr] \btimes \hat{\bb{b}} \Bigr\} , \end{align} where the superscript ${\rm T}$ denotes the matrix transpose and $\bb{Q}_{\perp s} = Q_{\perp s} \hat{\bb{b}}$ is the parallel flux of perpendicular heat ({\it viz.}~$Q_{\perp s} = m_s \int {\rm d}^3\bb{v} \, v_\parallel (v^2_\perp / 2 ) f_s$). (We refer the reader to equation 6 and appendix A of \citealt{schekochihin10} for a simple derivation of (\ref{eqn:gyroviscosity})). The $\grad\bb{u}_s$ terms, first obtained (in the collisional limit) by \citet{braginskii65}, simplify considerably for our problem. With $\bb{k} = k_\parallel \hat{\bb{b}}$, they are ${\rm i} k_\parallel (P_s/\Omega_s) ( \hat{\bb{e}}_x\btimes\delta\bb{u}_\perp\hat{\bb{e}}_x - \hat{\bb{e}}_x\ex\btimes\delta\bb{u}_\perp )$, which, using flux freezing (\ref{eqn:fluxfreezing}), returns precisely (\ref{eqn:gvP}). The gyroviscous stress associated with these terms has a non-zero divergence, and therefore exerts a force on the plasma (the final term in (\ref{eqn:gvmom})). The $\grad\bb{Q}_{\perp s}$ terms, on the other hand, vanish identically for $\bb{k} = k_\parallel\hat{\bb{b}}$, and so heat-flux contributions to the gyroviscosity do not affect the modes investigated in this section. For arbitrary wavevector orientation, however, these terms become \begin{equation} {\rm i} k_\perp \frac{\delta Q_{\perp s} }{\Omega_s} \Bigl[ \cos\psi \bigl( \hat{\bb{e}}_x\hat{\bb{e}}_z + \hat{\bb{e}}_z\hat{\bb{e}}_x \bigr) - \sin\psi \bigl(\hat{\bb{e}}_x\hat{\bb{e}}_y+\hat{\bb{e}}_y\hat{\bb{e}}_x \bigr) \Bigr] , \end{equation} where $\delta Q_{\perp s} = m_s \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v} v_\parallel ( v^2_\perp / 2) \delta f_s$. Its divergence is $k_\parallel \bb{k}_\perp(\delta Q_{\perp s}/\Omega_s) \btimes\hat{\bb{e}}_x$, and so the perturbed heat flux exerts a cross-field force on the plasma that is larger at smaller scales. One can show by directly computing \begin{align} \delta Q_{\perp s} = {\rm i} v_{ths} q_s& \int{\rm d}^3\bb{v}\, \frac{v_\parallel}{v_{ths}} \frac{v^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \frac{J_n(a_s) \bb{u}^\ast_{n,s}\bcdot\delta\bb{E}}{\omega + k_y v_{ds} - k_\parallel v_\parallel - n \Omega_s} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\times \left[ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left( \frac{5}{2} - \frac{v^2_\parallel + v^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \right) \right] f_s(z,v_\parallel,v_\perp) \end{align} and taking the relevant limit $\zeta_s \ll 1$, that this force is only important at perpendicular scales of order the ion Larmor scale. This is precisely our next destination. \subsection{Gyrokinetic limit: $k_\parallel \rho_s \ll k_\perp \rho_s \sim 1$}\label{sec:gyrokinetic} We have found that proceeding further to yet smaller parallel scales (e.g., $k_\parallel \rho_i \sim 1$) is not a particularly fruitful venture, and so we now turn our attention to fluctuations with small (i.e.~kinetic-scale) perpendicular wavelengths. To do so in an analytically tractable way, we adopt the gyrokinetic ordering \citep{rf68,th68,al80,ctb81,fc82}: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gkordering} \frac{\omega}{\Omega_s} \sim \frac{k_\parallel}{k_\perp} \sim k_\parallel \rho_s \sim \frac{\rho_s}{H} \doteq \epsilon \ll 1, \end{equation} which selects low-frequency fluctuations that are highly oblique with respect to the magnetic-field direction. Note that, in this ordering, the perpendicular lengthscale of the fluctuations $k^{-1}_\perp$ satisfies $k_\perp \rho_s \sim k_\parallel H \sim 1$, and so the fluctuations are permitted to have (perpendicular) scales on the order of the Larmor radius. As a result, $k_y v_{ds} \sim k_\parallel v_{ths} \sim \omega$, i.e.~drift waves (and the various instabilities typically associated with them) are allowed. In common with the long-wavelength limit taken in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength}, collisionless damping via the Landau resonance is captured (but cyclotron resonances are not). The procedure for deriving the dispersion relation in the gyrokinetic limit is similar to that employed in the long-wavelength and gyroviscous limits: we apply the ordering (\ref{eqn:gkordering}) to the dispersion tensor (\ref{eqn:Maxdispersion}), retain its leading-order terms, and set its determinant to zero. Unfortunately, the resulting equation is rather formidable, requiring myriad algebraic gymnastics to massage into a parseable form. Instead, we have found that a better route -- one suggested by previous work on linear and nonlinear gyrokinetic theory -- is to use (\ref{eqn:potentials}) and (\ref{eqn:linearFaraday}) to shift our independent variables from the field components $(\delta E_\parallel, \delta E_y, \delta E_z)$ to the potentials $(\varphi, A_\parallel, \delta B_\parallel)$ and then variously combine the three rows of the transformed dispersion tensor to obtain as our new rows what amounts to the quasi-neutrality constraint, the parallel component of Amp\`{e}re's law, and the perpendicular component of Amp\`{e}re's law (which, in gyrokinetics, is equivalent to a statement of perpendicular pressure balance). The determinant, and thus the dispersion relation, is of course identical following this profitable change of basis. The technical details of these manipulations are not given here; instead, we provide in Appendix \ref{app:gk} an alternate derivation of the linear gyrokinetic theory starting from a derivation of the nonlinear gyrokinetic theory of a thermally stratified atmosphere. Apart from some tedious bookkeeping and adroit consolidation of terms, the essential ingredients of the calculation are an expansion of the $Z_p(\zeta_{n,s})$ functions about $\zeta_{0,s} = (\omega + k_y v_{ds})/k_\parallel v_{ths}$ and several uses of the identity $\sum_{n=1}^\infty 2\Gamma_n(\alpha_s) = 1 - \Gamma_0(\alpha_s)$. After much effort, (\ref{eqn:DdotE}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gkDdotE} \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} \mc{A} & \mc{A} - \mc{B} & \mc{C} \\ [1.8em] \mc{A} - \mc{B} & \mc{A} - \mc{B} + \mc{F} - {\displaystyle \frac{\alpha_i}{\overline{\omega}^2_i} } & \mc{C} + \mc{E} \\ [1.8em] \mc{C} & \mc{C} + \mc{E} & \mc{D} - {\displaystyle \frac{2}{\beta_i} } \end{array} \right] \negthickspace \left[ \begin{array}{c} \varphi \\ [1.5em] - {\displaystyle \frac{\omega A_\parallel}{k_\parallel c}} \\ [1.5em] {\displaystyle \frac{T_i}{q_i} \frac{\delta B_\parallel}{B} } \end{array} \right] = 0, \end{equation} where $\overline{\omega}_i \doteq \omega / k_\parallel v_{Ai}$ and we have employed the shorthand notation (cf.~\S2.6 of \citet{howes06}) \begin{subequations}\label{eqn:howescoeffs} \begin{align}\label{eqn:howesA} \mc{A} &\doteq \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s / T_s}{q^2_i n_i / T_i} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &+ \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s / T_s}{q^2_i n_i / T_i} \frac{\omega}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{3}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} ,\\* \mc{B} &\doteq \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s / T_s}{q^2_i n_i / T_i}\left\{1 - \Gamma_0(\alpha_s) \left[ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left( 1 - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma_0(\alpha_s)}\right) \right] \right\} \nonumber\\* \mbox{}&- \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s / T_s}{q^2_i n_i / T_i} \frac{\omega_{Ps}}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{3}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} ,\\* \mc{C} &\doteq - \sum_s \frac{q_s n_s}{q_i n_i} \frac{\omega}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma'_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{1}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma''_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} ,\\* \mc{D} &\doteq - \sum_s \frac{n_s T_s}{n_i T_i} \frac{2\omega}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma'_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ -\frac{1}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma''_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} ,\\* \mc{E} &\doteq - \sum_s \frac{q_s n_s}{q_i n_i} \Gamma'_0(\alpha_s) \left[ 1 - \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma''_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &- \sum_s \frac{q_s n_s}{q_i n_i} \frac{\omega_{Ps}}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma'_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{1}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma''_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} , \\* \mc{F} &\doteq \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s / T_s}{q^2_i n_i / T_i} \frac{\omega_{Ps}}{\omega} Z_1(\zeta_{0,s}) \Gamma_0(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{3}{2} - \frac{Z_3(\zeta_{0,s})}{Z_1(\zeta_{0,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma_0(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} , \end{align} \end{subequations} where \begin{equation}\label{eqn:omegaT} \omega_{Ts} \doteq - k_y \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \D{z}{\ln T_s} \quad {\rm and} \quad \omega_{Ps} \doteq k_y v_{ds} = -k_y \frac{cT_s}{q_s B} \D{z}{\ln P_s} \tag{\theequation {\it a,b}} \end{equation} are the temperature-gradient and diamagnetic drift frequencies of species $s$.\footnote{The sign convention employed here is such that $\omega_{Ts}$ and $\omega_{Ps}$ are both positive for the interesting case of ${\rm d}\ln T_s/{\rm d}z < 0$ and ${\rm d}\ln P_s/{\rm d}z < 0$. Note that this is different than that used in most of the literature on temperature-gradient-driven instabilities in tokamaks.} Setting the determinant of the $3\times3$ matrix in (\ref{eqn:gkDdotE}) to zero gives the dispersion relation in the gyrokinetic limit: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gkdsp} \left( \frac{\alpha_i\mc{A}}{\overline{\omega}^2_i} - \mc{A} \mc{F} - \mc{A} \mc{B} + \mc{B}^2 \right) \left( \frac{2\mc{A}}{\beta_i} - \mc{A}\mc{D} + \mc{C}^2 \right) = ( \mc{A}\mc{E} + \mc{B}\mc{C} )^2 . \end{equation} The left-hand side of (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) contains two factors, the first corresponding to the Alfv\'en-wave branch and the second to the slow-wave branch. The right-hand side represents coupling of the two branches that occurs either at finite Larmor radius (see \S 2.6 of \citet{howes06} for a thorough discussion of this effect in a homogeneous plasma) or in pressure-stratified plasmas when $k_y \ne 0$. The latter has already been discussed as part of the long-wavelength limit in \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_ky}. We now examine the short-wavelength regime. As for the previous sections, having the leading-order expression for the perturbed distribution function will serve useful: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gkdf} \delta f_s = - \frac{q_s\varphi}{T_s} f_s + \frac{\omega}{\omega+\omega_{Ps}-k_\parallel v_\parallel} \frac{q_s\langle\chi\rangle_{\!\bs{R}_s}}{T_s} \left[ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left( \frac{5}{2} - \frac{v^2_\parallel+v^2_\perp}{v^2_{ths}} \right) \right] f_s , \end{equation} where $\chi \doteq \varphi - v_\parallel A_\parallel/c - \bb{v}_\perp \bcdot \bb{A}_\perp/c$ is the gyrokinetic potential (see (\ref{eqn:gkpotential})); its ring average $\langle \chi \rangle_{\!\bs{R}_s}$ is given by (\ref{eqn:gkpotentialk}). Equation (\ref{eqn:gkdf}) may be obtained by applying the gyrokinetic ordering to (\ref{eqn:df}) or, alternatively, by consulting Appendix \ref{app:gk}. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{mti.pdf} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{0.46\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{gk.pdf} \end{minipage} \caption{({\it left}) Instability growth rate (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) in the $k_\parallel H$-$k_y\rho_i$ plane, as calculated from the gyrokinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) with ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$, $\beta_i =10^4$, $k_z = 0$ and $m_e/m_i = 1/1836$. ({\it right}) Real (red) and imaginary (black) parts of $\omega / \sqrt{-g\,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$ for $k_\parallel H=5$, which is indicated by the red dotted line in the left panel. At long wavelengths, the plasma is unstable to the Alfv\'{e}nic MTI. As the ion Larmor radius is approached ($k_y \rho_i \sim 1$), the Alfv\'{e}nic MTI becomes coupled to the collisionlessly damped slow mode and thus its growth rate decreases. At sub-ion-Larmor scales, the ion response is nearly Boltzmann, and kinetic Alfv\'{e}n waves are destabilised by the electron temperature gradient. This is the eMTI. The dotted blue line is the approximate analytic solution (\ref{eqn:highbetagk}). At electron Larmor scales, ${\rm Im}(\omega) < 0$ (denoted by the dashed black line) and the eMTI is damped. See \S\ref{sec:gyrokinetic} for details.} \label{fig:gk} \end{figure} In Figure \ref{fig:gk}, we plot solutions of (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) for a hydrogenic plasma with $\beta_i = 10^4$, $\psi = 0$ (i.e.~$k_z = 0$), and ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$. At $k_y \rho_i \ll 1$, the growth rate remains roughly constant with $k_y \rho_i$, an effect discussed in \S\ref{sec:longwavelength_ky}. As $k_y \rho_i$ gets larger, the growth rate decreases and $\omega$ acquires a real part comparable to its imaginary part. The decrease in growth rate may be obtained from (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) by expanding in $\zeta_i, \alpha_i \ll 1$ and $\zeta_e, \alpha_e \rightarrow 0$; in this limit, $\mc{B} \simeq \alpha_i$, $\mc{E} \simeq -(3/2) \alpha_i$, and $\mc{F} \simeq (\omega_{Pi}\omega_{Ti} / \omega^2) (1 + T_e/T_i)$, and so (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gklongwavelength} \omega^2 = \left( k^2_\parallel v^2_A - g \D{z}{\ln T}\frac{k^2_y}{k^2_\perp} \right) \left( 1 + \frac{9}{8} \frac{k^2_\perp \rho^2_i}{\Lambda} \right)^{-1} , \end{equation} where we have employed the shorthand $\Lambda \doteq 2/\beta_i - \mc{D} + \mc{C}^2 / \mc{A}$ to represent the slow-mode piece of (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}). The first term in parentheses is readily identified as the Alfv\'{e}nic MTI (cf.~(\ref{eqn:prelim3})). The second term in (\ref{eqn:gklongwavelength}) captures the FLR stabilization, with the growth rate eventually falling off as $\sim$$(k_\perp \rho_i)^{-1}$. As $k_\perp \rho_i$ approaches unity, the Alfv\'{e}nic MTI becomes more and more coupled to the collisionlessly damped slow-mode branch, and the dispersion relation becomes approximately $(\mc{D} - 2/\beta_i ) \mc{F} \simeq \mc{E}^2$ -- a weakly Barnes-damped slow mode (i.e.~$\omega \simeq -{\rm i} k_\parallel v_A / \sqrt{\pi\beta_i}$) coupled by FLR effects ($\mc{E}^2$) to a weakly unstable Alfv\'{e}nic-MTI mode ($\mc{F}$). This is a result of the ions gyroaveraging over Larmor-scale fluctuations and thus reducing the connection between the electromagnetic fluctuations and the ion distribution function. The destabilised Alfv\'{e}n wave, for example, loses its character altogether, as the ions drift across the magnetic-field lines and the mode becomes dispersive. On the other side of $k_\perp \rho_i \sim 1$, the growth rate begins to increase, eventually attaining values comparable to (and even exceeding!) those achieved at long wavelengths. This trend continues unabated until kinetic effects intervene at the electron Larmor scale, where the wave is ultimately damped. To uncover the physics driving the sub-ion-Larmor-scale growth, we expand (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) in the region $k_\perp \rho_e \ll 1 \ll k_\perp \rho_i$, in which $\Gamma_0(\alpha_i)$ and its derivatives asymptote to zero and $\Gamma_0(\alpha_e) \simeq \Gamma_1(\alpha_e) \simeq 1$, whence $\mc{A} \simeq 1 + T_i/T_e$, $\mc{B} \simeq 1 - (T_i/T_e)(\omega_{Te}/\omega)$, $\mc{C} \simeq 0$, $\mc{E} \simeq -1$, and $\mc{F} \simeq (T_i/T_e)(\omega_{Pe}/\omega)[1+(\omega_{Te}/\omega)]$. As we are generally concerned with $\beta_i \gg 1$, the coefficient $\mc{D}$ warrants some care. Usually, in such sub-ion-Larmor expansions, $\beta_i$ is taken to be order unity relative to the ion-to-electron mass ratio, and $\mc{D}$ can be safely taken to be $\simeq$$0$. Specifically, the ion contribution to $\mc{D}$ scales with $\Gamma'_0(\alpha_i) \sim -1/\sqrt{8\pi\alpha^3_i}$, which is small, and the electron contribution scales with $(m_e/m_i)^{1/2} $, which is small as well. Indeed, this expansion is what, in a homogeneous plasma, leads to the usual dispersion relation describing kinetic Alfv\'{e}n waves \citep[e.g.][]{kingsep90}: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:homoKAW} \omega = \pm \frac{k_\parallel v_A k_\perp \rho_i}{\sqrt{\beta_i + 2 / ( 1 + T_e/T_i )}} . \end{equation} But, with our interest in high-$\beta$ plasmas, $\beta_i$ can be $\sim$$m_i / m_e$ or perhaps even more, and the electron contribution to $\mc{D}$ may be $\gtrsim$$2/\beta_i$ (its main competition in (\ref{eqn:gkdsp})). For that reason, the mass-ratio expansion involved in taking $k_\perp \rho_e \ll 1$ cannot be performed independently of taking $\beta_i \gg 1$. These complications taken into account, we retain both $1/\beta_i$ and $\mc{D}$ in (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) while adopting the asymptotic values of $\mc{A}$, $\mc{B}$, $\mc{C}$, $\mc{E}$, and $\mc{F}$ given in the preceding paragraph. Equation (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eqn:GKasymp} \left( \frac{\alpha_i\mc{A}}{\overline{\omega}^2_i} - \mc{A} \mc{F} - \mc{A} \mc{B} + \mc{B}^2 \right) \left( \frac{2}{\beta_i} - \mc{D} \right) = \mc{A} , \end{equation} or \begin{align}\label{eqn:inhomoKAW} &\omega^2 \left( \frac{2\beta_i}{2-\beta_i \mc{D}} + \frac{2}{1+T_e/T_i} \right) - k^2_\parallel v^2_A k^2_\perp \rho^2_i \nonumber \\* \mbox{} &\qquad= - \frac{2T_i}{T_e} \left[ \omega \left( \omega_{Pe} - \omega_{Te} \, \frac{1 - T_e/T_i}{1+T_e/T_i} \right) + \omega_{Te} \left( \omega_{Pe} - \frac{\omega_{Te}}{1+ T_e/T_i} \right) \right] . \end{align} For $\alpha_i \gg (m_i/m_e)^{1/3}$ -- a limit well-satisfied in the regime of interest -- $\mc{D}$ is dominated by its electron contribution $\simeq$$2{\rm i}\sqrt{\pi} (T_e/T_i) (\omega / k_\parallel v_{the}) [ 1 - (\omega_{Te}/2\omega)]$. The first term in parentheses on the left-hand side of (\ref{eqn:inhomoKAW}) then reduces to either $2/(1+T_e/T_i)$ if $\beta_i \ll 1$, $\beta_i$ if $1 \ll \beta_i \ll (m_i/m_e)^{1/2}$, or $2{\rm i} (T_i/T_e) (k_\parallel v_{the}/\sqrt{\pi}) / ( 2\omega - \omega_{Te} )$ if $\beta_i \gg (m_i/m_e)^{1/2} \gg 1$. (Here, we have taken $k_y \rho_i \sim k_\parallel H$ with respect to the subsidiary expansion in $\beta_i$ and mass ratio.) In all cases, a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for instability is \begin{equation}\label{eqn:eMTIcriterion} k^2_\parallel v^2_A k^2_\perp \rho^2_i - \omega_{Te} \frac{2T_i}{T_e} \left( \omega_{Pe} - \frac{\omega_{Te}}{1+T_e/T_i} \right) < 0 , \end{equation} or, equivalently, \begin{equation} k^2_\parallel v^2_A - c^2_s \frac{k^2_y}{k^2_\perp} \D{z}{\ln T_e} \left( \D{z}{\ln P_e} - \D{z}{\ln T_e} \frac{1}{1+T_e/T_i} \right) < 0 , \end{equation} where $c_s \doteq (T_e / m_i)^{1/2}$ is the ion-acoustic speed. With ${\rm d}\ln P_e/{\rm d}z < 0$, we require ${\rm d}\ln T_e / {\rm d} z < 0$ (as in the drift-kinetic and gyroviscous limits). This is a kinetic-Alfv\'{e}n drift wave, destabilised by rapid electron conduction along perturbed magnetic-field lines; we name this the {\em electron magnetothermal instability}, or eMTI, due to its reliance on the electron temperature gradient and the relatively passive role played by the ion species. Indeed, at these scales, the ion response is nearly Boltzmann, $\delta f_i \approx -(e\varphi/T_i) f_i$ (cf.~(\ref{eqn:gkdf})). \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{mti1.pdf} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{0.46\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{gk1.pdf} \end{minipage} \caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:gk} but with an artificially suppressed electron-to-ion mass ratio ($m_e / m_i = 1/183600$), in order to demonstrate the accuracy of the approximate analytic solution (the dotted blue line, equation (\ref{eqn:highbetagk})) and the effect of electron Landau damping.} \label{fig:gk1} \end{figure} We now obtain some approximate analytic solutions to (\ref{eqn:inhomoKAW}). In the high-$\beta_i$ limit featured in Figures \ref{fig:gk}--\ref{fig:gk2d}, equation (\ref{eqn:inhomoKAW}) becomes \begin{equation} \omega^2 \simeq {\rm i}\sqrt{\pi} \frac{\omega_{Te}}{k_\parallel v_{the}} \biggl[ \omega \bigl( \omega_{Pe} - \omega_{Te} \bigr) - \omega_{Te} \left( \omega_{Pe} - \frac{\omega_{Te}}{1+T_e/T_i} \right) - k^2_\parallel v^2_A k^2_\perp \rho^2_{sound} \biggl( \frac{2\omega}{\omega_{Te}} - 1 \biggr) \biggr] , \end{equation} where $\rho_{sound} \doteq c_s / \Omega_i$ is the ion sound radius. We may expand this solution in the parameter $(k_y \rho_e / k_\parallel H)^{1/2} \sim (m_e/m_i)^{1/4} \ll 1$ to find the leading-order expression \begin{equation}\label{eqn:highbetagk} \omega \simeq (1 + {\rm i} ) \left[ \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} \frac{\omega^2_{Te}}{k_\parallel v_{the}} \left( \frac{\omega_{Te}}{1+T_e/T_i} - \omega_{Pe} \right) \right]^{1/2} ; \end{equation} i.e.~the mode is {\em overstable}, with a growth rate $\sim$$k_y \rho_{sound} (c_s/H) \sqrt{ k_y \rho_e / k_\parallel H}$.\footnote{Equation (\ref{eqn:highbetagk}) is the inhomogeneous counterpart of equation (63) in \citealt{howes06}.} Despite all the approximations, the growth rate agrees rather well with the numerical solution (see Fig.~\ref{fig:gk}). The real part of (\ref{eqn:highbetagk}) differs from that seen in the figure, which is not too surprising -- $(m_e/m_i)^{1/4}$ is not that small of a number! -- but the accuracy of the solution improves as $m_e/m_i \rightarrow 0$. This is shown in Figure \ref{fig:gk1}, which gives the solution to (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) for $m_e/m_i = 1/183600$. The blue dotted line, equation (\ref{eqn:highbetagk}), is a clearly an excellent fit to both the real and imaginary parts of $\omega$. On the other hand, the solution to (\ref{eqn:inhomoKAW}) for $1 \ll \beta_i \ll (m_i/m_e)^{1/2}$ is approximately \begin{align}\label{eqn:GKomega} \omega &\simeq - \frac{1}{\beta_e} \biggl( \omega_{Pe} - \omega_{Te} \, \frac{1 - T_e/T_i}{1+T_e/T_i} \biggr) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad+ {\rm i} \, \sqrt{\frac{2}{\beta_e}} \left[ \omega_{Te} \biggl( \omega_{Pe} - \frac{\omega_{Te}}{1+T_e/T_i} \biggr) - k^2_\parallel v^2_A k^2_\perp \rho^2_{sound} \right]^{1/2} . \end{align} In this regime, the kinetic-Alfv\'{e}nic nature of the mode is readily apparent from the final term in the square root. In all of these limits, the maximum growth rate of the eMTI is set by electron FLR effects (the mode is damped at $k_y \rho_e \sim 1$ -- see right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:gk}) and is generally larger than the growth rate for the (long-wavelength) kinetic MTI. This is shown explicitly in Fig.~\ref{fig:maxgrowth}, which gives the respective maximum growth rates $\gamma_{\rm max}$ evaluated across the full range of $k_\parallel$ and $k_y$ ($k_z = 0$) for fixed temperature gradient and ion-to-electron temperature ratio. The difference is probably related to the relatively mundane role that the inertia-bearing ions play in the eMTI relative to the MTI (recall that the ion response is Boltzmann for the eMTI). It is the electrons which behave similarly in both cases: indeed, (\ref{eqn:gkdf}) with $(k_y \rho_e)^2 \ll 1$ implies \begin{equation} \frac{\delta T_{\perp e}}{T_e} \simeq \frac{e}{T_e} \frac{v_{the} A_\parallel}{c} \frac{\omega_{Te}}{k_\parallel v_{the}} = \frac{{\rm i}}{k_\parallel} \frac{\delta B_z}{B_0} \D{z}{\ln T_e} , \end{equation} which states that the Lagrangian change in a fluid element's perpendicular electron temperature is nearly zero as the flux-frozen electrons carry the magnetic field upwards or downwards. While there appears to be an asymptotic eMTI maximum growth rate as $\beta_i \rightarrow \infty$, which is roughly twice as large as the maximum MTI growth rate, the complicated dependence of $k_\parallel H$ and $k_y \rho_e$ on $\beta_i$ at maximum eMTI growth precludes a straightforward analytic calculation for it. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{maxgrowth.pdf} \caption{Maximum growth rates (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) of sub-ion-Larmor-scale eMTI (stars) and long-wavelength kinetic MTI (crosses) as a function of $\beta_i$ across all $k_\parallel$ and $k_y$ ($k_z = 0$); ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$ and $T_i / T_e = 1$ for all points. See the penultimate paragraph of \S\ref{sec:gyrokinetic} for details.} \label{fig:maxgrowth} \end{figure} We close this section by commenting on the transition between the drift-kinetic solution for $k_y, k_z \ne 0$ explored in Section \ref{sec:longwavelength_kprp} -- see Figure \ref{fig:longwave_general} in particular -- and the gyrokinetic solution. Recall from that section that the growth rate at long wavelengths is maximal and roughly constant for $k_y / k_z \lesssim 1$. In Figure \ref{fig:gk2d} we see that this trend continues to small wavelengths until $k_y \rho_i \sim k_z \rho_i \sim 1$, at which point ion FLR effects sharply reduce the MTI growth rate. Thereafter, the eMTI emerges with an even larger growth rate, which is independent of $k_z$ until $k_z \rho_e \sim 1$. This independence is not particularly surprising: for $k^2_\perp \rho^2_i \gg 1$ the gyrokinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) only depends upon $k_z$ through $\Gamma_0(\alpha_e)$ and its derivatives, the drift frequency depending only upon $k_y$. As with the long-wavelength solution (\ref{eqn:collisionlessMTI_largekykz}), the mirror force, by which Landau-resonant particles bleed energy from the magnetic-field-strength fluctuations, is offset by the divergence of the parallel pressure. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{gk2d.pdf} \caption{Kinetic MTI and eMTI growth rates (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) as a function of $k_y\rho_i$ and $k_z\rho_i$, as calculated from the gyrokinetic dispersion relation (\ref{eqn:gkdsp}) with $\beta_i = 10^4$, ${\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}\ln P = 1/3$, and $k_\parallel H = 5$. See the final paragraph of \S\ref{sec:gyrokinetic} for details.} \label{fig:gk2d} \end{figure} \subsection{Relationship between the magnetothermal and the ion- and electron-temperature-gradient instabilities}\label{sec:ITG} At this point in the manuscript, those readers familiar with drift-wave instabilities in magnetic-confinement-fusion devices might be curious as to the relationship between the various incarnations of the magnetothermal instability elucidated above and the ion- and electron-temperature-gradient instabilities long known to plague fusion plasmas (the so-called ``ITG'' and ``ETG''). Indeed, both the MTI and ITG/ETG are convective instabilities driven by the free energy stored in the background temperature gradient. Their relationship is complicated somewhat by the usual restriction of ITG/ETG analyses to the electrostatic $\beta\rightarrow 0$ limit, in which the magnetic field is assumed rigid, and the geometrical complexity of tokamak magnetic fields, which introduces its own drift-wave instabilities apart from the ``slab'' ITG/ETG instabilities (e.g., toroidal ITG/ETG, trapped electron modes).\footnote{The slab and toroidal ITG and ETG have been generalised to include electromagnetic fields in the limit of small but finite $\beta$, so that $A_\parallel$ is retained while $\delta B_\parallel = 0$ \citep[e.g.][]{khd93,reynders94,sh01}. Finite-beta effects generally stabilize these instabilities due to drift-wave coupling to the shear Alfv\'{e}n wave.} Nevertheless, the transition between the ITG/ETG, on the one hand, and the MTI, on the other, as the plasma beta is increased, is an interesting question. In this section, we explore their connection. Following conventional work on the slab ITG/ETG \citep{rs61,cks91}, we begin by taking the electrostatic limit, in which the electric field $\bb{E} = -\grad\varphi$. The relevant dispersion relation is obtained by substituting the perturbed distribution function (\ref{eqn:linearVlasov2}) with $\delta\bb{B} = 0$ into the quasi-neutrality constraint (\ref{eqn:quasineutrality}), adopting plane-wave solutions, performing the resulting integrals (after conveniently setting $F_s = F_{M,s}(\mc{Z}_s, \mc{E}_s)$ -- see (\ref{eqn:quasimaxwell})), and demanding nontrivial solutions. The result is that \begin{align}\label{eqn:electrostatic} 0 &= \sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s/T_s}{q^2_i n_i/T_i} \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &+\sum_s \frac{q^2_s n_s/T_s}{q^2_i n_i/T_i} \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty \frac{\omega}{k_\parallel v_{ths}} Z_0(\zeta_{n,s}) \Gamma_n(\alpha_s) \left\{ 1 + \frac{\omega_{Ts}}{\omega} \left[ \frac{3}{2} - \frac{Z_2(\zeta_{n,s})}{Z_0(\zeta_{n,s})} - \alpha_s \frac{\Gamma'_n(\alpha_s)}{\Gamma_n(\alpha_s)} \right] \right\} . \end{align} In the low-frequency limit, we need only retain the $n=0$ contributions to the summation above, and (\ref{eqn:electrostatic}) reduces to $\mc{A} = 0$ (cf.~(\ref{eqn:howesA})). We adopt this limit throughout the remainder of this section. Explicit solutions of the dispersion relation $\mc{A} = 0$ may be calculated in the analytically tractable limit $k_\parallel v_{the} \gg \omega,\, \omega_{Pi} > k_\parallel v_{thi}$, whence $Z_0(\zeta_{0,i})$ and $Z_2(\zeta_{0,i})$ can be expanded in their large argument. The result is \begin{align}\label{eqn:generalITG} &\bigl( \omega + \omega_{Pi} \bigr)^3 \left[ \frac{T_i}{T_e} + 1 - \Gamma_0(\alpha_i) \right] - \bigl( \omega + \omega_{Pi} - \omega_{Ti} \bigr) \frac{k^2_\parallel v^2_{thi}}{2} \Gamma_0(\alpha_i) \nonumber\\* \mbox{} &\quad= \Gamma_0(\alpha_i) \Biggl[ \bigl( \omega + \omega_{Pi} \bigr)^2 + \frac{k^2_\parallel v^2_{thi}}{2} \Biggr] \biggl\{ -\omega_{Pi} + \omega_{Ti} \biggl[ 1 - \alpha_i \frac{\Gamma'_0(\alpha_i)}{\Gamma_0(\alpha_i)} \biggr] \biggr\} . \end{align} We now make some standard simplifying assumptions, which are known to be quantitatively imprecise but nevertheless afford a compact analytic solution whose qualitative physics may be readily deduced. Taking ${\rm d}\ln n_i / {\rm d}\ln T_i \ll (k_\parallel H / k_y \rho_i)^{2/3} \ll (T_i/T_e)^{1/3}$, we find that the entire right-hand side of (\ref{eqn:generalITG}) may be dropped. Expanding $\Gamma_0(\alpha_i) \simeq - \Gamma'_0(\alpha_i) \simeq 1$, we find that \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ITG} \omega \simeq - \omega_{Pi} + \bigl( -\omega_{Ti} k^2_\parallel c^2_s \bigr)^{1/3} , \end{equation} which is unstable for $\omega_{Ti} > 0$ or, equivalently, $\bb{k}\bcdot(\hat{\bb{b}}\btimes\grad T_i) > 0$. This is the ITG instability, Doppler-shifted by the equilibrium diamagnetic drift. The physics of the instability is explained in detail by \citet{cks91}, to which we refer the reader. In brief, parallel flow along fields lines compresses the ions. An electrostatic potential is produced in order to enforce quasi-neutrality (the electron response is Boltzmann), which drives an $\bb{E}\btimes\bb{B}$ flow that advects cool ions into the compressed region. This lowers the pressure there, pulling in yet more ions along the field lines and reinforcing the original density enhancement. The result is a feedback loop that leads to instability. The key requirement here is for the mode frequency $\omega$ to be larger than the rate of pressure relaxation along field lines $k_\parallel c_s$, so that the Lagrangian change in an ion fluid element's pressure vanishes to leading order. Other requirements are that the density gradient not be too strong and $k_y \rho_i$ not be too large. These stabilizing effects can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:ITG}a, which shows the growth rate of the electrostatic ITG in the $k_\parallel H$-$k_y \rho_i$ plane obtained from numerically solving (\ref{eqn:electrostatic}) with $m_e/m_i = 0$ (so that ETG is suppressed -- see below). The dashed line shows the marginal stability threshold, which may be obtained analytically by setting ${\rm Im}(\omega) = 0$ in the dispersion relation $\mc{A} = 0$, demanding that ${\rm Im}(\mc{A}) = 0$ (which determines the real frequency of the mode at marginal stability), and substituting the result back into $\mc{A} = 0$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:marginalstability} \frac{k_\parallel H}{k_y \rho_i} \D{\ln T_i}{\ln P_i} = \pm \sqrt{ \frac{1/2 - {\rm d}\ln n_i/{\rm d}\ln T_i - \alpha_i \Gamma'_0(\alpha_i) / \Gamma_0(\alpha_i) }{[ 2 ( 1 + T_i/T_e ) / \Gamma_0(\alpha_i) - 1 ]^2 -1 }} . \end{equation} (Here we have taken ${\rm Re}(\omega) / k_\parallel v_{the} \ll 1$.) Consider the numerator inside the square root on the right-hand side of (\ref{eqn:marginalstability}), which must be positive for a sensible solution. This shows the standard result that, at long wavelengths (i.e.~$\alpha_i \rightarrow 0$), the density gradient can be no steeper than ${\rm d}\ln n_i / {\rm d}\ln T_i = 1/2$, or ${\rm d}\ln T_i/{\rm d}\ln P_i > 2/3$ for instability. (In the fusion literature, this is expressed as $\eta_i \doteq {\rm d}\ln T_i / {\rm d}\ln n_i > 2$.) FLR effects change this slightly: using the asymptotic result $\Gamma_0(\alpha_i) \approx 1/\sqrt{2\pi\alpha_i}$ in (\ref{eqn:marginalstability}) gives a critical density gradient ${\rm d}\ln n_i/{\rm d}\ln T_i \approx 1$, or ${\rm d}\ln T_i/{\rm d}\ln P_i \gtrsim 1/2$. (Note that our fiducial MTI-unstable atmosphere with ${\rm d}\ln T_i/{\rm d}\ln P_i = 1/3$ is stable to ITG/ETG.) \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{itg1.pdf} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{itg0.pdf} \end{minipage} \caption{Electrostatic ITG/ETG instability growth rate (normalised by $\sqrt{-g \,{\rm d}\ln T/{\rm d}z}$) for ${\rm d}\ln T_i / {\rm d}\ln P_i = 1$ using ({\it left}) $m_e=0$ and ({\it right}) $m_e/m_i=1/1836$; massless electrons are used in the left panel to eliminate the ETG and thus accentuate ITG growth. The white dashed (dot-dashed) lines trace the boundary of marginal stability to ITG (ETG). See \S\ref{sec:ITG} for details.} \label{fig:ITG} \end{figure} Equilibrium gradients in the electron species also give rise to instability. A calculation analogous to the ITG may be performed at sub-ion-Larmor scales ($\alpha_i \gg 1$) by assuming $\omega / k_\parallel v_{the} > 1$ and setting $\Gamma_0(\alpha_i) = \Gamma'_0(\alpha_i) = 0$. The dispersion relation is identical to (\ref{eqn:generalITG}), but with the ion and electron subscripts reversed. Accordingly, the electron counterpart to (\ref{eqn:ITG}) is \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ETG} \omega \simeq - \omega_{Pe} + \left( -\omega_{Te} k^2_\parallel \frac{T_i}{m_e} \right)^{1/3} , \end{equation} which is unstable for $\omega_{Te} > 0$ or, equivalently, $\bb{k}\bcdot(\hat{\bb{b}}\btimes\grad T_e) < 0$. This is the ETG instability. The numerical solution to (\ref{eqn:generalITG}) for $m_i/m_e = 1836$ is given in Figure \ref{fig:ITG}b, which shows the ETG peaking at $k_\parallel H \sim 0.1$ and $k_y \rho_e \sim 1$. The common characteristic of both the ITG and ETG instabilities is that the unstable mode drifts across stationary magnetic-field lines. This is allowed because, at the low values of $\beta$ required for the electrostatic approximation to hold, the electron skin depth is at least as large as the ion Larmor radius, and so the ion (and electron) species can slip through the otherwise rigid field lines. By contrast, at large $\beta$, the magnetic field is unfrozen only by electron FLR effects, and so a super-Larmor-scale displacement in the plasma carries the magnetic-field lines with it. It is this displacement of field lines, and the accompanying rapid streaming of particles along it, that both stabilises the plasma to ITG/ETG and destabilises it to the MTI/eMTI. While the physics is markedly different, the end result is the same: the free energy stored in the temperature gradient drives convective instability both at long wavelengths and, more vigorously, at Larmor scales. \section{Summary}\label{sec:summary} Efforts to provide a proper accounting of kinetic effects in high-$\beta$ astrophysical plasmas are still in their infancy, particularly when it comes to the influence of plasma microphysics on the macroscale dynamics -- convection being but one example. In this paper we have studied the linear stability properties of a collisionless, magnetised, thermally stratified atmosphere. This is an extension of previous work on collisional, magnetised, stratified atmospheres \citep{balbus00,balbus01,quataert08,kunz11}, which had shown them to be linearly unstable when the temperature increases in the direction of gravity. This instability -- the magnetothermal instability (MTI) -- is facilitated by rapid, field-aligned conduction obviating adiabatic fluid displacements. In this fast-conduction limit, slow-mode perturbations exhibit almost no (Lagrangian) change in their temperature; for ${\rm d}\ln T / {\rm d}z < 0$, it is thus energetically favourable for vertically displaced fluid elements to continue rising or falling in the gravitational potential. In certain situations, the accompanying field-aligned viscous momentum transport can drive Alfv\'{e}nic fluctuations unstable as well. This paper focuses instead on the case in which the heat and momentum transport that enables these instabilities is not due to collisional processes, but rather stems from the complex interplay between field-aligned particle streaming, collisionless wave damping, and finite-Larmor-radius effects. Because prior work on the MTI relied on the buoyant ion species being thermally equilibrated with the inertialess parallel-conducting electrons, the application of those results to a collisionless system is not by any means straightforward. To what extent they do carry over to the collisionless case is a particularly intriguing question in the context of the hot, diffuse plasma in the outskirts of galaxy clusters -- the intracluster medium -- in which the collisional mean free path can approach the thermal-pressure scale height. Radiatively inefficient black-hole accretion flows, such as that onto Sgr A$^\ast$ at the Galactic center, are also a natural venue for application of our results, although the situation there is further complicated by differential rotation and the consequent kinetic magnetorotational instability \citep{qdh02,shq03,islam14,hq14,qht15}. Our results may be summarized as follows. First, at long wavelengths, the fluid MTI carries over relatively unscathed to the kinetic case, enjoying the same stability criterion (${\rm d}\ln T/ {\rm d}z > 0$) and maximum growth rate. The physics driving the requisite isothermalisation of perturbed field lines is, of course, quite different in each case, but that appears to be of little concern to buoyancy, which does its job regardless. That being said, it is rather important to note that conduction and buoyancy in a collisionless plasma are inextricably linked, a feature not present in a collisional fluid. In a collisionless plasma, approximately isothermal displacements are tandem with the ability of those displacements to maintain pressure balance with their surroundings. Both processes suffer from collisionless damping if an appreciable number of particles are Landau-resonant with the fluctuation. Second, because of adiabatic invariance, changes in temperature go hand-in-hand with changes in magnetic-field strength. Since the latter are collisionlessly damped, this makes the physics of the MTI much richer than in the collisional case, for which $\Delta T \simeq 0$ in the fast-conduction limit (provided $\bb{B}_0 \perp \bb{g}$). One consequence is that fluctuations whose wavevectors have a component along gravity ($k_z\ne 0$) are strongly damped once $k_z H \gtrsim \sqrt{k_\parallel H}$. This damping can be mitigated by allowing $\bb{k}\bcdot(\bb{g}\btimes\bb{B}_0)\ne 0$, which introduces an additional degree of freedom for the magnetic-field perturbations. This freedom allows the magnetic field to seek out favourable arrangements, in which field-strength fluctuations are anti-correlated with upward (downward) displacements into regions of greater (lesser) potential. The result is that the mirror force acts oppositely to the parallel gravitational force, and so the collisionless damping of field-strength fluctuations is reduced (see Fig.~\ref{fig:kydiagram}). Third, for extremely sub-thermal magnetic fields characteristic of those found in primordial galaxy clusters and used in some published (fluid) simulations of the MTI, gyroviscosity -- not magnetic tension -- sets the (parallel) wavenumber cutoff. It does so by providing a dissipationless cross-field transport of momentum, which redirects buoyant motions unfavourably into the horizontal plane. Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, we have shown that the plasma is overstable at sub-ion-Larmor scales ($k_\perp \rho_i \gg 1 \gg k_\perp \rho_e$) to a kinetic-Alfv\'{e}n drift wave instability -- the electron MTI, or eMTI -- which exhibits a growth rate even larger than does the long-wavelength MTI. It is driven by the electron temperature gradient and relies on (approximately) Boltzmann ions and isothermal-along-perturbed-field-lines electrons. To give this last result some context, we briefly reviewed the slab ITG and ETG -- two of the drift-wave instabilities long known to the magnetic-confinement-fusion community for driving the anomalous transport limiting tokamak performance. While our focus throughout the manuscript has been on applications to the high-$\beta$ intracluster medium, these drift-wave instabilities may also find applications in the hot and tenuous coronae of stars. As a closing thought, it is tempting to speculate on the nonlinear evolution in a high-$\beta$ plasma of the instabilities investigated herein. One cannot go too far in extrapolating, of course, if only because the velocity-space anisotropy generated by adiabatic invariance as the instabilities grow will quickly drive secondary Larmor-scale instabilities (firehose, mirror), which have been shown to be efficient at isotropising the distribution function and thus providing an effective ``viscosity'' (\citealt{kss14}, \citealt{riquelme15}, \citealt{sn15}, \citealt{melville16}; in the context of the $\beta\sim 1$ solar wind, e.g., \citealt{ht08,ht15}). If the production of such Larmor-scale parasites also reduces the efficacy of electron conduction (as recently suggested by \citealt{komarov16} and \citealt{riquelme16}), one might imagine a scenario in which the MTI, reliant upon the efficient field-aligned transport of heat, grows only as fast as allowed by the parasites it triggers. However, even without the complications introduced by MTI-driven firehose and mirror instabilities, the linear system itself presents an interesting puzzle. We have a plasma in which the same temperature gradient drives growth simultaneously at large scales (drift-kinetic MTI) and small scales (eMTI), the latter with growth rates larger than the former. This implies that the large-scale MTI will likely be dependent upon the saturation of the eMTI, particularly if the latter greatly impacts the nature and efficacy of electron heat transport. Such speculation awaits well-constructed kinetic simulations. \vspace{0.2in} \noindent We thank Ian Abel for sharing with us his expertise on the gyrokinetic theory of stratified plasmas; Alex Schekochihin, Greg Hammett, and Steve Cowley for useful discussions on the ITG and ETG instabilities; and Henrik Latter and the anonymous referees for comments that lead to an improved presentation.
\subsection{Acknowledgements} The authors thank Fedor Nazarov for a helpful discussion of the subtleties of the Laplace method, and Alexander Borichev and Nikolai Makarov for several useful conversations. \section{Preliminary lemmas} \subsection{Some elementary Gaussian estimates} Suppose that $\zeta$ is a standard complex Gaussian random variable. Then a routine computation shows that for $p>-2$ \begin{equation}\label{eq: p mom 1 normal} \E[\|\zeta\|^p]=\Gamma(1+\tfrac p2), \end{equation} where $\Gamma$ is the Euler gamma function. An immediate consequence of \eqref{eq: p mom 1 normal} is the following. \begin{lemma}\label{lem: poly of normal} Let $\zeta$ be a complex Gaussian random variable and let $Q$ be a polynomial. Then, for $1\leq p<+\infty$, \begin{equation} \E\left[\left\|Q\left(\|\zeta\|^2\right)\right\|^p\right]<+\infty. \end{equation} \end{lemma} The next lemma is also a simple consequence of \eqref{eq: p mom 1 normal}. \begin{lemma}\label{lem: ratio normals} Let $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ be complex Gaussian random variables with $\E[\|\zeta_2\|^2]>0$, and let $1\leq p <2$. Then \begin{equation} \E\left[\Abs{\frac{\zeta_1}{\zeta_2}}^p\right]<+\infty. \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $1<q< \tfrac2p$ and $q'$ is the H\"{o}lder conjugate of $q$ (i.e., $\tfrac1q + \tfrac1{q'}=1$), we have \begin{equation} \E\left[\Abs{\frac{\zeta_1}{\zeta_2}}^p\right]\leq\E[\|\zeta_1\|^{pq'}]^{\tfrac 1{q'}}\E[\|\zeta_2\|^{-pq}]^{\tfrac 1{q}}<+\infty.\qedhere \end{equation} \end{proof} The next lemma is given as an exercise in Kahane's celebrated book, for the reader's convenience we provide a proof. \begin{lemma}[\cite{Kah}{Chapter 12, Section 8, Exercise 3}]\label{lem: Kahane mean} Let $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ be jointly (complex) Gaussian random variables, with $\E[\|\zeta_2\|^2]\neq0$. Then \begin{equation} \E\left[\frac{\zeta_1}{\zeta_2}\right]=\frac{\E[\zeta_1\overline{\zeta_2}]}{\E[\|\zeta_2\|^2]}. \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $Z_1, Z_2$ be two i.i.d. $\cN_\C(0,1)$ random variables. Since $\zeta_1, \zeta_2$ are jointly Gaussian, there are $\alpha,\beta, \gamma \in \C$ such that the pair $(\zeta_1,\zeta_2)$ has the same distribution as $(\alpha Z_1+\beta Z_2,\gamma Z_1)$. In particular, \begin{equation} \frac{\zeta_1}{\zeta_2} \overset{d}{=} \frac{\alpha}{\gamma} + \frac{\beta}{\gamma} \frac {Z_2}{Z_1}. \end{equation} Taking expectation, and recalling that $\E\left[\frac {Z_2}{Z_1} \right] = \E[ Z_2 ]\ \E\left[\frac 1{Z_1}\right] = 0$, we get \begin{equation} \E\left[ \frac{\zeta_1}{\zeta_2} \right]= \frac{\alpha}{\gamma}. \end{equation} All that remains is to note that $\E[\zeta_1\overline{\zeta_2}]= \alpha \overline{\gamma}$ and that $\E[\|\zeta_2\|^2]=\|\gamma\|^2$. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}[\cite{Feld}{Lemma B.2}]\label{lem: -pth mom 2 normals} Let $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ be $\mathcal{N}_\C(0,1)$ random variables with $\E[\zeta_1\bar{\zeta_2}]=\theta$ and suppose that $\|\theta\|\geq c>0$ and $1\leq p<2$. Then \begin{equation} \E[\|\zeta_1\zeta_2\|^{-p}]\leq C(p,c) (1-\|\theta\|^2)^{1-p}. \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{rem} If $\|\theta\|=1$ then the expectation is divergent, even for $p=1$. \end{rem} \subsection{Gradients} For convenience we write $f_R(z)=f(Rz)$, $K_R(z,w) = K(Rz,Rw)=e^{R^2z\overline{w}}$ and define \begin{equation} \widehat{f}_R(z)=\frac{f_R(z)}{\sqrt{K_R(z,z)}} \end{equation} and note that $\widehat{f}_R(z)$ is a $\mathcal{N}_\C(0,1)$ random variable that satisfies \begin{equation} \widehat{K}_R(z,w)=\E[\widehat{f}_R(z)\overline{\widehat{f}_R(w)}]=\frac{K_R(z,w)}{\sqrt{K_R(z,z)K_R(w,w)}}. \end{equation} Furthermore $\|\widehat{K}_R(z,w)\|=e^{-R^2\|z-w\|^2/2}$. To simplify our notation, we define \begin{equation} g_R(z)=\big\|\widehat{f}_R(z)\big\|^2=\Abs{f_R(z)}^2e^{-R^2\|z\|^2}. \end{equation} The next lemma will be important later. \begin{lemma}\label{lem: grad f^} Given a compact $K$ and $1\leq p <+\infty$, we have \begin{equation} \E\big[ \big\|\nabla g_R(z)\big\|^p \big] \leq C(p,K,R) \end{equation} for all $z\in K$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} It is easy to see that \begin{equation} \big\|\nabla g_R(z)\big\| \lesssim \|f'_R(z)f_R(z)\|e^{-R^2\|z\|^2} + R^2\|z\|\|\widehat{f}_R(z)\|^2. \end{equation} Trivially $\E\left[ \|\widehat{f}_R(z)\|^{2p} \right]$ is finite and independent of $z$, and Cauchy-Schwartz implies that \begin{equation} \E\big[ \big\|f'_R(z)f_R(z)e^{-R^2\|z\|^2}\big\|^p \big] \leq \E\big[ \big\|f'_R(z)e^{-R^2\|z\|^2/2}\big\|^{2p} \big]^{1/2} \E\big[ \big\|\widehat{f}_R(z)\big\|^{2p} \big]^{1/2} \leq C(p,K,R), \end{equation} since $f_R'(z)$ is a complex Gaussian with variance $(R^2+R^4\|z\|^2)e^{R^2\|z\|^2}$. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{lem: grad poly} Given a compact $K$, a polynomial $Q$ and $1\leq p <+\infty$, we have \begin{equation} \E\left[ \Abs{\nabla(Q\circ g_R)(z)}^p \right] \leq C(p,K,Q,R) \end{equation} for all $z\in K$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Since $\nabla(Q\circ g_R)(z)= Q'(g_R(z)) \cdot \nabla g_R(z)$ this lemma follows from Cauchy-Schwarz, Lemma~\ref{lem: grad f^} and Lemma~\ref{lem: poly of normal}. \end{proof} \subsection{Interchange of operations} In the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm: main} we will repeatedly need to apply Fubini's Theorem and exchange derivatives with expectation. In this subsection we prove some lemmas that will allow us to do precisely this. Throughout this section $\Gamma_1,\dots\Gamma_N$ will be curves and $\hat{n}_j$ will denote the normal vector to the curve $\Gamma_j$ at the point $z_j\in\Gamma_j$. We begin with a lemma that covers all of the cases we need. \begin{lemma}\label{lem: abstract interchange} Let $\psi_j:\R_+\to\R$ be differentiable functions for $1\leq j\leq N$ and let $\Psi_j=\psi_j\circ g_R$. Suppose that \begin{equation}\label{eq: pth mom grad Lj} \int_{\prod_{j=1}^N\Gamma_j} \E\Big[ \Big\| \prod_{j=1}^N \nabla\Psi_j(z_j) \Big\| \Big] \prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\| <+\infty \end{equation} and that, for almost every tuple $(z_1,\dots,z_N)$ with respect to the measure $\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\|$, there exists $\eps_0>0$ and $1<p<2$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq: bdd grad p mom} \sup_{w_j\in D(z_j,\eps_0)}\E\Big[ \Big\| \prod_{j=1}^N \nabla\Psi_j(w_j) \Big\|^p \Big]<+\infty. \end{equation} Then \begin{align}\label{eq: interch} \E\bigg[ \int_{\prod_{j=1}^N\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) &\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\| \bigg]\notag\\ &=\int_{\prod_{j=1}^N\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \E\left[\prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) \right]\,\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\|. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{rem} Trivially \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} implies that the left-hand side of \eqref{eq: interch} is well defined. However, as will be clear from the proof, we can only infer that the integrand on the right-hand side, that is the term $\frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \E\left[\prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) \right]$, is well-defined at the points where \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} holds. \end{rem} \begin{proof} Note that \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} immediately implies, by Fubini, that \begin{align} \E\bigg[ \int_{\prod_{j=1}^N\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) &\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\| \bigg]\\ &=\int_{\prod_{j=1}^N\Gamma_j} \E\left[ \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) \right]\,\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\|. \end{align} It therefore suffices to show that, for almost every tuple $(z_1,\dots,z_N)$ with respect to the measure $\prod_{j=1}^N \|dz_j\|$, \begin{equation}\label{eq: 1st suff cond} \E\left[ \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) \right] = \frac{\partial^N}{\partial \hat{n}_1\cdots\partial \hat{n}_N} \E\left[ \prod_{j=1}^N \Psi_j(z_j) \right]. \end{equation} Fix a tuple $(z_1,\dots,z_N)$ satisfying \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} for $\eps_0$ and $p$, and define, for $\eps_j<\eps_0$, \begin{equation} h_j(\eps_j)=\frac{\Psi_j(z_j + \eps_j\hat{n}_j) - \Psi_j(z_j)}{\eps_j}. \end{equation} We will show that \begin{equation}\label{eq:2nd suff cond} \lim_{\eps_1,\dots,\eps_N\to0} \E\Big[ \prod_{j=1}^N h_j(\eps_j) \Big] = \E\Big[ \lim_{\eps_1,\dots,\eps_N\to0} \prod_{j=1}^N h_j(\eps_j) \Big] \end{equation} which will imply \eqref{eq: 1st suff cond}, and therefore prove the lemma. We begin by establishing the existence of the inner limit on the right-hand side of \eqref{eq:2nd suff cond}. Notice first that, almost surely, $f_R$ does not vanish on the line intervals joining $z_j$ to $z_j+\eps_0\hat{n}_j$. Therefore, there exist some (random) neighbourhoods of these intervals where the gradient $\nabla\Psi_j$ is a well-defined function. We conclude that the limits \begin{equation} \lim_{\eps_j\to0} h_j(\eps_j) = \bigg\langle \nabla\Psi_j(z_j) , \hat{n}_j \bigg\rangle = \frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_j} \Psi_j(z_j) \end{equation} exist almost surely. Finally we show that \begin{equation}\label{eq:3rd suff cond} \sup_{0<\eps_j<\eps_0} \E\Big[ \Big\|\prod_{j=1}^N h_j(\eps_j)\Big\|^p \Big]\leq C(p). \end{equation} By a standard argument, this implies that $\prod_{j=1}^N h_j(\eps_j)$ for $0<\eps_j<\eps_0$ is a uniformly integrable class of functions, and since we have already showed almost sure convergence (and therefore convergence in measure), we may infer \eqref{eq:2nd suff cond}. Once more we note that, almost surely, $f_R$ does not vanish on the line interval joining $z_j$ to $z_j+\eps_0\hat{n}_j$. This implies that \begin{equation} \|h_j(\eps_j)\| \leq \frac1{\eps_j} \int_0^{\eps_j} \Abs{\nabla\Psi_j(z_j+t_j\hat{n}_i) } \,dt_j, \end{equation} whence, \begin{equation} \|h_j(\eps_j)\|^p \leq \frac1{\eps_j} \int_0^{\eps_j} \Abs{\nabla\Psi_j(z_j+t_j\hat{n}_i) }^p \,dt_j. \end{equation} We get \begin{align} \E\Big[ \Big\| \prod_{j=1}^N h_j(\eps_j) \Big\|^p \Big] & \leq \E\Big[ \frac1{\eps_1\dots\eps_N} \int_0^{\eps_1}\dots\int_0^{\eps_N} \Big\| \prod_{j=1}^N \nabla\Psi_j(z_j+t_j\hat{n}_i) \Big\|^p \prod_{j=1}^N dt_j \Big]\notag\\ &= \frac1{\eps_1\dots\eps_N} \int_0^{\eps_1}\dots\int_0^{\eps_N} \E\left[ \Big\| \prod_{j=1}^N \nabla\Psi_j(z_j+t_j\hat{n}_i) \Big\|^p \right] \prod_{j=1}^N dt_j, \end{align} by Fubini. By \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} we see that this is bounded uniformly in $\eps_1,\dots,\eps_N$, which is precisely \eqref{eq:3rd suff cond}. \end{proof} We now show that the hypothesis of this previous lemma hold in each of the specific cases we will need. \begin{lemma}\label{lem: hypoth sat polys} Suppose that $\psi_j$ are polynomials for $1\leq j\leq N$. Then \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} and \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} hold. \end{lemma} \begin{rem} In this case, \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} holds for every tuple $(z_1,\dots,z_N)$. \end{rem} \begin{proof} First note that, repeatedly applying Cauchy-Schwarz, both \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} and \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} follow if we see that \begin{equation} \E\left[ \Abs{\nabla\Psi_j(z_j) }^p \right] \end{equation} is uniformly bounded for $z_j$ in a compact and any $p\geq1$. But this is precisely the conclusion of Lemma~\ref{lem: grad poly}. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{lem: hypoth sat log poly} Suppose that $\psi_1=\log$ and $\psi_2$ is a polynomial. Then \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} and \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} hold (with $N=2$). \end{lemma} \begin{rem} In this case, \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} holds for every pair $(z_1,z_2)$. \end{rem} \begin{proof} Suppose that $1\leq p<2$, choose $1<q< \tfrac 2p$ and let $q'$ be the H\"{o}lder conjugate of $q$ (i.e., $\tfrac1q + \tfrac1{q'}=1$). Note that \begin{align} \E\Big[ \big\| \nabla\Psi_1(z_1) \nabla\Psi_2(z_2) \big\|^p \Big] \leq \E\Big[ \big\| \nabla\Psi_1(z_1) \big\|^{pq} \Big]^{1/q} \E\Big[ \big\| \nabla\Psi_2(z_2) \big\|^{pq'} \Big]^{1/q'}. \end{align} Once more, applying Lemma~\ref{lem: grad poly}, the term involving $\Psi_2$ is uniformly bounded. It therefore suffices to see that \begin{equation} \E\Big[ \big\| \nabla\Psi_1(z_1) \big\|^{pq} \Big] \end{equation} is uniformly bounded for $z_1$ in a compact and $1<pq<2$. Since \begin{equation} \Psi_1(z_1)= \log \|\widehat{f}_R(z_1)\|^2 = \log \|f_R(z_1)\|^2 + R^2\|z_1\|^2 \end{equation} we have \begin{equation} \big\| \nabla\Psi_1(z_1) \big\| \lesssim \Abs{\frac{f_R'(z_1)}{f_R(z_1)}} + R^2\|z_1\|, \end{equation} and Lemma~\ref{lem: ratio normals} completes the proof. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{lem: hypoth sat 2 logs} Suppose that $\psi_1=\psi_2=\log$. Then (with $N=2$) \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} holds and for every pair $(z_1,z_2)$ with $z_1\neq z_2$, \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} holds. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} First fix $1\leq p<2$, let $1<q<\tfrac2p$ and let $q'$ be the H\"{o}lder conjugate of $q$. Then, for $w_1\neq w_2$, \begin{align} \E\left[\Abs{\frac{f_R'(w_1)}{f_R(w_1)} \frac{f_R'(w_2)}{f_R(w_2)}}^p \right] &\leq \left(\E\Big[ \big\|f_R(w_1) f_R(w_2) \big\|^{-pq}\Big]\right)^{\tfrac1{q}} \left(\E\Big[ \big\|f_R'(w_1) f_R'(w_2) \big\|^{pq'} \Big] \right)^{\tfrac1{q'}}\notag\\ &\leq \left(\E\Big[ \big\| f_R(w_1) f_R(w_2)\big\|^{-pq} \Big] \right)^{\tfrac1{q}} \left(\E\Big[ \big\|f_R'(w_1) \big\|^{2pq'} \Big] \E\Big[ \big\|f_R'(w_2)\big\|^{2pq'} \Big] \right)^{\tfrac1{2q'}}\notag\\ &\leq C \left(\E\Big[ \big\|f_R(w_1) f_R(w_2)\big\|^{-pq} \Big]\right)^{\tfrac1{q}} \end{align} since $f_R'(w)$ is a complex Gaussian with variance $(R^2+R^4\|w\|^2)e^{R^2\|w\|^2}$. (The constant $C$ depends on $p,R$ and, if $w_1$ and $w_2$ are restricted to lie in a compact $K$, on $K$.) Applying Lemma~\ref{lem: -pth mom 2 normals} we have \begin{equation}\label{eq: pth mom log derivs} \E\left[ \Abs{\frac{f_R'(w_1)}{f_R(w_1)} \frac{f_R'(w_2)}{f_R(w_2)}}^p \right] \lesssim (1-\|\widehat{K}_R(w_1,w_2)\|^2)^{\tfrac1{pq}-1}. \end{equation} Once more we note that $\Abs{ \nabla\Psi_j(z)}\lesssim \Abs{\frac{f_R'(z)}{f_R(z)}} + R^2\|z\|$ for $j=1,2$. Therefore to show \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj} it suffices to see that \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_1}\int_{\Gamma_2} \E\left[ \Abs{\frac{f_R'(z_1)}{f_R(z_1)} \frac{f_R'(z_2)}{f_R(z_2)}} \right] \,\|dz_1\|\|dz_2\| \leq C. \end{equation} Now for $z_1\in\Gamma_1$ and $z_2\in\Gamma_2$ we have $1-\|\widehat{K}_R(z_1,z_2)\|^2=1-e^{-R^2\|z_1-z_2\|^2}\gtrsim R^2\|z_1-z_2\|^2$, where the implicit constant depends only on $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$. We conclude that, taking $p=1$ in \eqref{eq: pth mom log derivs}, \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_2}\int_{\Gamma_1} \E\left[ \Abs{\frac{f_R'(z_1)}{f_R(z_1)} \frac{f_R'(z_2)}{f_R(z_2)}} \right] \,\|dz_1\|\|dz_2\| \lesssim \int_{\Gamma_2} \left(\int_{\Gamma_1\setminus\{z_2\}} \|z_1-z_2\|^{2\left(\tfrac1{q}-1\right)} \,\|dz_1\|\right) \|dz_2\|<+\infty, \end{equation} since $2(\tfrac1{q}-1)>-1$. This proves \eqref{eq: pth mom grad Lj}. Now fix $z_1\in\Gamma_1$ and $z_2\in\Gamma_2$ with $z_1\neq z_2$ and $1< p<2$. Since $\|\widehat{K}_R(z_1,z_2)\|=e^{-R^2\|z_1-z_2\|^2/2}<1$ we can find $\eps_0>0$ such that \begin{equation} \sup_{\substack{w_1\in D(z_1,\eps_0)\\w_2\in D(z_2,\eps_0)}}\|\widehat{K}_R(w_1,w_2)\|<1. \end{equation} Then, by \eqref{eq: pth mom log derivs}, \begin{equation} \sup_{\substack{w_1\in D(z_1,\eps_0)\\w_2\in D(z_2,\eps_0)}} \E\left[ \Abs{\frac{f_R'(w_1)}{f_R(w_1)} \frac{f_R'(w_2)}{f_R(w_2)}}^p \right] \lesssim \sup_{\substack{w_1\in D(z_1,\eps_0)\\w_2\in D(z_2,\eps_0)}} (1-\|\widehat{K}_R(w_1,w_2)\|^2)^{\tfrac1{pq}-1}<+\infty. \end{equation} This implies that \eqref{eq: bdd grad p mom} holds, and completes the proof of the lemma. \end{proof} \section{The mean and variance}\label{sec: mean and var} In this section we prove the first part of our theorem, the asymptotic \eqref{eq:var}. We begin by computing the mean of $\Delta_R(\Gamma)$, that is, proving \eqref{eq:mean}; note that by linearity that it's enough to show that \begin{equation} \E[\Delta_R(\Gamma)]=R^2\im\left(\int_{\Gamma}\bar{z}\,dz\right) \end{equation} for a $\mathcal C^1$ regular oriented simple curve $\Gamma$. For such a curve we have (note that almost surely $f_R$ does not vanish on $\Gamma$) \begin{equation} \Delta_R(\Gamma)=\im\left(\int_{\Gamma}\frac{f_R'(z)}{f_R(z)}\,dz\right) \end{equation} which implies that \begin{equation} \E[\Delta_R(\Gamma)]=\im\left(\int_{\Gamma}\E\left[\frac{f_R'(z)}{f_R(z)}\right]\,dz\right); \end{equation} we may apply Fubini by Lemma~\ref{lem: ratio normals}. Applying Lemma~\ref{lem: Kahane mean} we see that \begin{equation} \E[\Delta_R(\Gamma)]=\im\left(\int_{\Gamma}\frac{R^2\bar{z}e^{R^2\|z\|^2}}{e^{R^2\|z\|^2}}\,dz\right)= R^2 \im\left( \int_{\Gamma}\bar{z}\,dz\right), \end{equation} which is precisely \eqref{eq:mean}. \subsection{The variance} Given a chain $\Gamma = \sum_i a_i \Gamma_i$, to prove \eqref{eq:var} it is enough to show that \begin{equation}\label{eq: cov asymptotic} \cov (\Delta_R(\Gamma_i),\Delta_R(\Gamma_j))=\frac{\sqrt\pi} 2\zeta\left(\frac32\right)R \cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j)(1+o(1)) \end{equation} and the rest of this section will be devoted to establishing this asymptotic. First note that we have \begin{equation}\label{eq: def Delta i} \Delta_R(\Gamma_i)=\int_{\Gamma_i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i}\log\|f_R(z)\|\,\|dz\| \end{equation} and that \eqref{eq:mean} may be re-written as \begin{equation}\label{eq: mean Delta i} \E[\Delta_R(\Gamma_i)]=\frac12\int_{\Gamma_i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i}\log K_R(z,z)\,\|dz\|. \end{equation} Recalling that \begin{equation} \widehat{f}_R(z)=\frac{f_R(z)}{\sqrt{K_R(z,z)}}, \end{equation} we see that \begin{equation} \cov (\Delta_R(\Gamma_i),\Delta_R(\Gamma_j))=\E\left[\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\right]. \end{equation} Note that here, and henceforth unless specified otherwise, $\hat{n}_i$ (respectively $\hat{n}_j$) refers to the unit normal vector to the curve $\Gamma_i$ (respectively $\Gamma_j$) at the point $z_i\in\Gamma_i$ (respectively $z_j\in\Gamma_j$). Now Lemma~\ref{lem: hypoth sat 2 logs} allows us to apply Lemma~\ref{lem: abstract interchange} to see that \begin{equation}\label{eq: cov ij} \cov (\Delta_R(\Gamma_i),\Delta_R(\Gamma_j))=\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\E\left[\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\right]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} We add the caveat here (c.f. the remark to Lemma~\ref{lem: abstract interchange}) that the integrand on the right-hand side is defined only for $z_j\neq z_i$. We compute the inner expectation through the following lemma. \begin{lemma}[\citelist{\cite{SZ}{Lemma 3.3} \cite{NS}{Lemma 2.2} \cite{HKPV}{Lemma 3.5.2}}]\label{lem: dilog} If $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ are $\mathcal{N}_\C(0,1)$ random variables with $\E[\zeta_1\bar{\zeta_2}]=\theta$ then \begin{equation} \E[\log\|\zeta_1\|]=-\frac\gamma2 \end{equation} and \[ \cov[\log\|\zeta_1\|,\log\|\zeta_2\|]= \frac14 \dl(\|\theta\|^2) \] where the dilogarithm is defined by \[ \dl(z)=\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty\frac{z^\alpha}{\alpha^2}. \] \end{lemma} Applying the lemma and recalling that \begin{equation} \|\widehat{K}_R(z_j,z_i)\|=\frac{\|K_R(z_j,z_i)\|} {\sqrt{K_R(z_j,z_j)K_R(z_i,z_i)}} = e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2/2} \end{equation} we have \begin{align} \cov (\Delta_R(\Gamma_i),\Delta_R(\Gamma_j))&=\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \left(\cov\left(\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\right) + \frac{\gamma^2}{4}\right) \,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\\ &=\frac14\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\dl(\|\widehat{K}_R(z_j,z_i)\|^2)\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\\ &=\frac14\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty\frac{e^{-R^2\alpha\|z_j-z_i\|^2}}{\alpha^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{align} (Note that since $\dl$ is not differentiable at $1$, the integrand is still only defined for $z_j\neq z_i$.) \begin{lemma}\label{cl:abs int} \begin{equation} \frac1{R}\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\Abs{\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|=O(1) \end{equation} where the implicit constant depends only on $\Gamma_i$ and $\Gamma_j$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{cl:asym of int} \begin{equation} \frac1{R}\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\to2\sqrt{\pi}\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j) \end{equation} as $R\to\infty$. \end{lemma} We postpone the proofs of these lemmas, and proceed. Since the power series defining $\dl$ is absolutely convergent on the unit disc we may differentiate termwise to obtain \begin{equation} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty\frac{e^{-R^2\alpha\|z_j-z_i\|^2}}{\alpha^2}=\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\alpha^2}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}e^{-R^2\alpha\|z_j-z_i\|^2} \end{equation} for all $z_j\neq z_i$. This implies that, using Lemma~\ref{cl:abs int} and dominated convergence, \begin{align} \lim_{R\to\infty} \frac1R \cov (\Delta_R(\Gamma_i),\Delta_R(\Gamma_j))& = \frac14\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty \left( \frac{1}{\alpha^2} \lim_{R\to\infty} \frac1R \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} e^{-R^2\alpha\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\| \right)\\ &\overset{\mathrm{Lemma \ref{cl:asym of int}}}{=} \frac14 \sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty \left( \frac{1}{\alpha^2} \sqrt{\alpha}\cdot 2\sqrt{\pi}\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j)\right)\\ &=\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}2\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\alpha^{3/2}}\right)\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j) \end{align} which is \eqref{eq: cov asymptotic}. It remains to prove Lemmas~\ref{cl:abs int} and \ref{cl:asym of int}. \subsubsection{Proof of Lemmas~\ref{cl:abs int} and \ref{cl:asym of int}}\label{sec: proof of claims} First note that \begin{equation} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}=e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}(2R^2\langle\hat{n}_i,\hat{n}_j\rangle-4R^4\langle\hat{n}_i,z_j-z_i\rangle\langle\hat{n}_j,z_j-z_i\rangle). \end{equation} We will show that \begin{equation}\label{eq:int precise asym bdd} R \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|=O(1), \end{equation} \begin{equation}\label{eq:int precise asym} R \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \langle\hat{n}_i,\hat{n}_j\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\to\sqrt{\pi}\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j), \end{equation} \begin{equation}\label{eq:int to 0 bdd} R^{3} \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|=O(1) \end{equation} and that \begin{equation}\label{eq:int to 0} R^{3} \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \langle\hat{n}_i,z_j-z_i\rangle \langle\hat{n}_j,z_j-z_i\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\to0. \end{equation} This will yield both lemmas, and therefore \eqref{eq:var}. With this in mind, we define, for $z_i\in\Gamma_i$, \begin{equation} I_R(z_i)= R \int_{\Gamma_j} \langle\hat{n}_i,\hat{n}_j\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|, \end{equation} \begin{equation} I_R'(z_i)= R \int_{\Gamma_j} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|, \end{equation} \begin{equation} J_R(z_i)= R^{3} \int_{\Gamma_j} \langle\hat{n}_i,z_j-z_i\rangle\langle\hat{n}_j,z_j-z_i\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \end{equation} and \begin{equation} J_R'(z_i)= R^{3} \int_{\Gamma_j} \|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|. \end{equation} Fix $\beta>3$, define \begin{equation} \eps_R=\frac{\sqrt{\beta\log R}}{R} \end{equation} and split \begin{equation}\Gamma_i=\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''\cup(\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j) \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\Gamma_i'=\{z_i\in\Gamma_i\colon d(z_i,\Gamma_j)\geq \eps_R\} \end{equation} and \begin{equation}\Gamma_i''=\{z_i\in\Gamma_i\colon 0<d(z_i,\Gamma_j)< \eps_R\} \end{equation} (see Figure~\ref{fig: Gamma i decom}); these sets (and all of the sets we define subsequently) may be empty. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Gammaisplit} \caption{Illustration of $\Gamma_i'$ and $\Gamma_i''$} \label{fig: Gamma i decom} \end{figure} \paragraph{{\bf Estimating $J_R'$}}\hspace{0pt} \\ We begin by estimating $J_R'$. We estimate separately the integral of $J_R'$ over each of the sets $\Gamma_i',\Gamma_i''$ and $\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$. Trivially \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_i'}J_R'(z_i)\|dz_i\|\leq CR^{3 - \beta} \end{equation} where the constant $C$ depends only on $\Gamma_i$ and $\Gamma_j$. Next, for $z_i\in\Gamma_i''$, denote by $z_i^$ the closest point on $\Gamma_j$ to $z_i$ (if there is more than one such point, we choose one arbitrarily). Fix $z_i\in\Gamma_i''$ and define the points in $\Gamma_j$ that are ``far'' from $z_i^$ by \begin{equation} \Gamma_j^{(F)}(z_i)=\left\{z_j\in\Gamma_j\colon \|z_j-z_i^\|>\frac2R\right\} \end{equation} and the ``nearby'' points by \begin{equation} \Gamma_j^{(N)}(z_i)=\left\{z_j\in\Gamma_j\colon \|z_j-z_i^\|\leq\frac2{R}\right\}; \end{equation} see Figure~\ref{fig: Gamma j N}. We split \begin{equation} J_R'(z_i)= R \left(\int_{\Gamma_j^{(F)}}+\int_{\Gamma_j^{(N)}}\right) R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \end{equation} and estimate each integral separately. Note that \begin{equation} R \int_{\Gamma_j^{(N)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\lesssim R \;\mathrm{length}(\Gamma_j^{(N)})=O(1). \end{equation} Note also that $\|z_j-z_i\|\geq\|z_j-z_i^\|-\|z_i^-z_i\|\geq\|z_j-z_i^\|-\|z_j-z_i\|$, for any $z_j\in\Gamma_j$, by the definition of $z_i^$. This implies that $R \|z_j-z_i\|\geq\frac {R} 2\|z_j-z_i^\|>1$ for $z_i\in\Gamma_i''$ and $z_j\in\Gamma_j^{(F)}$ and so, since the function $t\mapsto t^2e^{-t^2}$ is decreasing for $t>1$, we have \begin{equation} R \int_{\Gamma_j^{(F)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\leq\frac{R}4\int_{\Gamma_j^{(F)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i^\|^2 e^{-\tfrac{R^2}4\|z_j-z_i^\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|. \end{equation} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{GammajNF} \caption{Illustration of $\Gamma_j^{(F)}(z_i)$ and $\Gamma_j^{(N)}(z_i)$} \label{fig: Gamma j N} \end{figure} We now use some ``Laplace type estimates'' to bound the integral on the right-hand side of this previous inequality. Let $\gamma_j\colon[0,1]\to\C$ be a parameterisation of the curve $\Gamma_j$ satisfying $0<m\leq\|\dot{\gamma}(t)\|\leq M$ for all $t\in[0,1]$. Since $\Gamma_j$ is simple, we see that there exists $m'>0$ such that $m'\|t-s\|\leq\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(s)\|\leq M\|t-s\|$. Denote by $t^$ the (unique) value such that $\gamma_j(t^)=z_i^$ and note that\footnote{Strictly speaking we should write $\left\{z_j=\gamma_j(t)\colon 0\leq t\leq1\text{ and }\|t-t^\|>\frac2{MR}\right\}$; we shall frequently ignore this issue, as it will not affect our upper bounds.} \begin{equation} \Gamma_j^{(F)}(z_i)\subseteq\left\{z_j=\gamma_j(t)\colon \|t-t^\|>\frac2{MR}\right\}. \end{equation} We thus have \begin{align} R\int_{\Gamma_j^{(F)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i^\|^2 &e^{-\tfrac{R^2}4\|z_j-z_i^\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\\ &\leq R\int_{\|t-t^\|>\frac2{MR}} R^2\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(t^)\|^2 e^{-\tfrac {R^2}4\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(t^)\|^2}\Abs{\dot{\gamma_j}(t)}\,dt\\ &\leq R\int_{\|t-t^\|>\frac2{MR}} R^2M^2(t-t^)^2 e^{-\tfrac {R^2}4(m')^2(t-t^)^2}M\,dt, \end{align} and making the change of variables $s=\tfrac{R}2m'(t-t^)$ we have \begin{equation} R\int_{\Gamma_j^{(F)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i^\|^2 e^{-4R^2\|z_j-z_i^\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\leq\frac{8M^3}{(m')^3}\int_{\|s\|>\tfrac{m'}M} s^2 e^{-s^2}\,ds=O(1). \end{equation} This implies that \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_i''}J_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\lesssim\mathrm{length}(\Gamma_i'')\to0 \end{equation} as $R\to\infty$, since the set $\Gamma_i''$ decreases to the empty set as $\eps_R\to0$. We thus have \begin{equation}\label{eq: J' outside int} \int_{\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''}J_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\to0. \end{equation} We now bound $\int_{\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j}J_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|$. Fixing $z_i$, it is clear that we may ignore the points $z_j\in\Gamma_j$ where $\|z_j-z_i\|\geq \eps_R$, since their contribution is uniformly negligible. Denote the points ``close'' to $z_i$ by $\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)=\{z_j\in\Gamma_j\colon \|z_j-z_i\|\leq\eps_R\}$, see Figure~\ref{fig: Gamma j C}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{GammajC} \caption{Illustration of $\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$} \label{fig: Gamma j C} \end{figure} Let $\gamma_j$ be the same parameterisation of $\Gamma_j$ as before and let $\tau(z_i)$ be the (unique) value such that $\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))=z_i$. Arguing similarly we get \begin{align}\label{eq: J' on int } R\int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2 &e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\notag\\ &\leq R\int_{\|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\frac{\eps_R}{m'}} R^2\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))\|^2 e^{- R^2\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))\|^2}\Abs{\dot{\gamma_j}(t)}\,dt\\ &\leq\left(\frac M{m'}\right)^3\int_{\|s\|\leq R\eps_R} s^2 e^{-s^2}\,ds=O(1)\notag, \end{align} which shows that $J_R'(z_i)$ is bounded for $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$ and so, when combined with \eqref{eq: J' outside int} proves \eqref{eq:int to 0 bdd}. \paragraph{{\bf Estimating $J_R$}}\hspace{0pt} \\ We next show \eqref{eq:int to 0}. Since trivially $\|J_R(z_i)\|\leq J_R'(z_i)$ we see that \eqref{eq: J' outside int} implies that \begin{equation} \Abs{\int_{\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''}J_R(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|}\leq\int_{\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''}J_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\to0\quad\text{as }\eps_R\to0. \end{equation} Furthermore, for a fixed $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$, as we noted previously \begin{equation} R\int_{\Gamma_j\setminus\Gamma_j^{(C)}} R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2 e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \end{equation} is uniformly negligible. Finally note that for $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$ and $z_j\in\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$, \begin{align} \left\langle\hat{n}_j(z_j),z_j-z_i\right\rangle&=\|z_j-z_i\|\left\langle\hat{n}_j(z_j),\frac{z_j-z_i}{\|z_j-z_i\|}\right\rangle\\ &=\|z_j-z_i\|\left\langle\hat{n}_j(z_i),\hat{\tau}_j(z_i)\right\rangle(1+o(1))=o(\|z_j-z_i\|)\quad\text{as }\eps_R\to0 \end{align} where $\hat{\tau}_j$ denotes the unit tangent vector to $\Gamma_j$, and the estimate is uniform in $z_i$. This implies that for $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$ we have $\|J_R(z_i)\|=o(J_R'(z_i))=o(1)$, by \eqref{eq: J' on int }. This proves \eqref{eq:int to 0}. \paragraph{{\bf Estimating $I_R'$}}\hspace{0pt} \\ We next show \eqref{eq:int precise asym bdd}, the argument is similar to the proof of \eqref{eq:int to 0 bdd}. It is again easy to see that \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_i'}I_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\leq CR^{1-\beta}\to0 \end{equation} while, for $z_i\in\Gamma_i''$, using the same notation as before, since $\|z_j-z_i\|\geq\tfrac12\|z_j-z_i^\|$ we get \begin{align} I_R'(z_i)&=R\int_{\Gamma_j} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \leq R\int_{\Gamma_j} e^{-\tfrac {R^2}4\|z_j-z_i^\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\\ &=R\int_0^1 e^{-\tfrac {R^2}4\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(t^)\|^2}\Abs{\dot{\gamma_j}(t)}\,dt \leq \frac{2M}{m'}\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-s^2}\,ds = O(1). \end{align} We therefore have \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_i''}I_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\leq C\,\mathrm{length}(\Gamma_i'')\to0\quad\text{as }\eps_R\to0. \end{equation} Finally, for $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$, using again the same notation, it is easy to see once more that the contribution to $I_R'(z_i)$ of $\Gamma_j\setminus\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$ is negligible and that \begin{align} R\int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| &\leq R\int_{\|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\frac{\eps_R}{m'}} e^{- R^2\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))\|^2}\Abs{\dot{\gamma_j}(t)}\,dt\\ &\leq\frac M{m'}\int_{\|s\|\leq R\eps_R} e^{-s^2}\,ds=O(1). \end{align} We have shown that $I_R'(z_i)=O(1)$ for $z_i\in\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j$, which proves \eqref{eq:int precise asym bdd}. \paragraph{{\bf Asymptotic for $I_R$}}\hspace{0pt} \\ It remains to prove \eqref{eq:int precise asym}. Note that \begin{equation} \Abs{\int_{\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''}I_R(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|}\leq\int_{\Gamma_i'\cup\Gamma_i''}I_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\to0\quad\text{as }\eps_R\to0 \end{equation} and so it remains only to compute \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j}I_R(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} If the curve $\Gamma_j$ is not closed we define $z_j^+$ and $z_j^-$ to be the endpoints of the curve and $\Gamma_j^\pm=\{z_j\in\Gamma_j\colon \|z_j-z_j^\pm\|< \eps_R\}$; if the curve is closed we define these sets to be empty. Note once more that \begin{equation} \Abs{\int_{\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j\cap\Gamma_j^\pm}I_R(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|}\leq \int_{\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j\cap\Gamma_j^\pm}I_R'(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|\lesssim\mathrm{length}(\Gamma_j^\pm)\to0\quad\text{as }\eps_R\to0. \end{equation} For $z_i\in(\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j)\setminus(\Gamma_j^+\cup\Gamma_j^-)$ recall that $\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)=\{z_j\in\Gamma_j\colon \|z_j-z_i\|\leq\eps_R\}$ and note that for $z_j\in\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$ we have $\|\hat{n}_j(z_j)-\hat{n}_j(z_i)\|=o(1)$, where the term $o(1)$ is uniform in $z_i$. We therefore have \begin{align}\label{eq: precise without negl} I_R(z_i)&=R\int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} \langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_j)\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\notag\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad+R\int_{\Gamma_j\setminus\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} \langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_i)\rangle e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\notag\\ &=R\langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_i)\rangle\int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|(1+o(1))+O(R^{1-\beta}), \end{align} and we shall compute the asymptotics of this last integral using (more accurate) ``Laplace type estimates''. Let $\gamma_j\colon[0,1]\to\C$ be the same parameterisation of $\Gamma_j$ as before, and let $\tau(z_i)$ be the value such that $\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))=z_i$. Note that \begin{equation} \left\{z_j=\gamma_j(t)\colon \|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\frac{\eps_R}{M}\right\}\subseteq\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)\subseteq\left\{z_j=\gamma_j(t)\colon \|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\frac{\eps_R}{m'}\text{ and }0<t<1\right\}. \end{equation} We remark here that, if $\{t_+,t_-\}=\{0,1\}$, then $\{\gamma_j(t_+),\gamma_j(t_-)\}=\{z_j^+,z_j^-\}$. Since \begin{equation} \eps_R\leq\|\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))-\gamma_j(t_\pm)\|\leq M\|\tau(z_i) - t_\pm\| \end{equation} we have $\tau(z_i)\geq\eps_R/M$ and $\tau(z_i)\leq1-\eps_R/M$ and so the range $\|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\tfrac{\eps_R}{M}$ is contained in $[0,1]$. The above implies that, given $0<\delta<1$, for large enough $R$ (uniformly in $\tau(z_i)$) we have \begin{equation} (1-\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|\|t-\tau(z_i)\|\leq\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))\|\leq(1+\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|\|t-\tau(z_i)\| \end{equation} and \begin{equation} (1-\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|\leq\|\dot{\gamma}_j(t)\|\leq(1+\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\| \end{equation} for $t$ such that $\gamma_j(t)\in\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$. This implies that, defining \begin{equation} \tau_+=\min\{1,\tau(z_i)+\tfrac{\eps_R}{m'}\}\quad\text{ and }\quad\tau_-=\max\{0,\tau(z_i)-\tfrac{\eps_R}{m'}\}, \end{equation} we have \begin{align} \int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|& \leq \int_{\tau_-}^{\tau_+} e^{-R^2\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(\tau(z_i))\|^2}\|\dot{\gamma}_j(t)\| \,dt\\ &\leq (1+\delta) \int_{\tau_-}^{\tau_+} e^{-R^2 (1-\delta)^2 \|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|^2 (t-\tau(z_i))^2} \|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\| \,dt \end{align} and the change of variables $s=R(1-\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|(t-\tau(z_i))$ yields \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \leq(1+\delta)\int_{R(1-\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|(\tau_{-}-\tau(z_i))}^{R(1-\delta)\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|(\tau_{+}-\tau(z_i))} e^{-s^2} \frac{ds}{R(1-\delta)}. \end{equation} Notice that \begin{equation} \tau_{+}-\tau(z_i)=\min\{1-\tau(z_i),\tfrac{\eps_R}{m'}\}\geq\tfrac{\eps_R}{M}\quad\text{ and }\quad\tau_{-}-\tau(z_i)=\max\{-\tau(z_i),-\tfrac{\eps_R}{m'}\}\leq-\tfrac{\eps_R}{M}. \end{equation} Since $R\eps_R\to\infty$ (and $\|\dot{\gamma}_j(\tau(z_i))\|\neq0$) the right hand side of the previous displayed expression equals \begin{equation} \frac{(1+\delta)}{R(1-\delta)}\int_{\R}e^{-s^2}\,ds(1+o(1)) = \frac{(1+\delta)\sqrt{\pi}}{R(1-\delta)}(1+o(1)). \end{equation} Similar computations yield \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| \geq \frac{(1-\delta)\sqrt{\pi}}{R(1+\delta)}(1+o(1)) \end{equation} and since $\delta$ is arbitrary we conclude that \begin{equation} \int_{\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)} e^{-R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\| = \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{R}(1+o(1)). \end{equation} Combining this with \eqref{eq: precise without negl}, and discarding the integration over $\Gamma_j\setminus\Gamma_j^{(C)}(z_i)$, we have \begin{equation} I_R(z_i)=\sqrt{\pi} \langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_i)\rangle(1+o(1)), \end{equation} where the term $o(1)$ is uniform in $z_i$. We conclude that \begin{align} \int_{\Gamma_i}I_R(z_i)\,\|dz_i\|&=\sqrt \pi\int_{(\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j)\setminus(\Gamma_j^+\cup\Gamma_j^-)}\langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_i)\rangle\,\|dz_i\|(1+o(1))\\ &=\sqrt \pi\left(\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j)-\int_{(\Gamma_i\cap\Gamma_j)\cap(\Gamma_j^+\cup\Gamma_j^-)}\langle\hat{n}_i(z_i),\hat{n}_j(z_i)\rangle\,\|dz_i\|\right)(1+o(1))\\ &=(\sqrt \pi+o(1))\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_j), \end{align} which is \eqref{eq:int precise asym}. This completes the proof of the lemmas, and therefore of \eqref{eq:var}. \section{Asymptotic Normality} In this section we show that $\Delta_R(\Gamma)$ is asymptotically normal, which will complete the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm: main}. We first define a random variable $\Delta_R^{(m)}$ that approximates $\Delta_R(\Gamma)$ in $L^2(\Pro)$ and then prove a CLT for $\Delta_R^{(m)}$. Specifically, defining $\overline{\Delta}_R= \Delta_R(\Gamma) - \E[\Delta_R(\Gamma)]$, we will show that: \begin{itemize} \item There exists $R_0$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq: L2 approx for CLT} \E\big[(\overline{\Delta}_R-\Delta_R^{(m)})^2\big]\leq C \frac{R}{\sqrt{m}} \end{equation} for all $R\geq R_0$ and $m\geq1$. \item For each fixed $m$ \begin{equation}\label{eq: CLT m} \frac{\Delta_R^{(m)}}{\sqrt{\var \Delta_R^{(m)}}} \to \cN_\R(0,1) \end{equation} in distribution, as $R\to\infty$. \end{itemize} When combined with our previous asymptotic for the variance, this allows us to conclude asymptotic normality for $\Delta_R(\Gamma)$, by a standard argument. We begin by defining the approximant $\Delta_R^{(m)}$. \subsection{Definition of approximant} Recall that \begin{equation} \overline{\Delta}_R = \sum_{i=1}^N a_i\int_{\Gamma_i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i}\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\,\|dz_i\|, \end{equation} this follows from \eqref{eq: def Delta i} and \eqref{eq: mean Delta i}. We will define \begin{equation} \Delta_R^{(m)} = \sum_{i=1}^N a_i \Delta_i^{(m)} = \sum_{i=1}^N a_i\int_{\Gamma_i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i}\log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\,\|dz_i\| \end{equation} where $\log_m$ is a polynomial that approximates $\log$ in an appropriate sense. To this end we recall the Wiener chaos decomposition (sometimes called the Hermite-It\={o} expansion) of $L^2(\mu)$ where $d\mu(z)=\tfrac1\pi e^{-\|z\|^2}dm(z)$ is the Gaussian measure on the plane; for a more comprehensive treatment we refer the reader to \cite{Jan}{Chapters 2 and 3}. Let $\mathcal P_m$ denote the subspace of $L^2(\mu)$ given by polynomials (in the variables $z$ and $\bar{z}$) of degree at most $m$, and denote $H^{\Wi{0}}=\mathcal P_0$ and $H^{\Wi{m}}=\mathcal P_m\ominus\mathcal P_{m-1}$ for $m\geq1$. Given a monomial $\zeta^\alpha\bar{\zeta}^\beta$ with $\alpha+\beta=m$ we write $\Wi{\zeta^\alpha\bar{\zeta}^\beta}$ to denote its projection to $H^{\Wi{m}}$, which is usually called a Wick product. A computation (see \cite{Jan}{Example 3.32}) shows that the set of all Wick products $\Wi{\zeta^\alpha\bar{\zeta}^\beta}$ with $\alpha+\beta=m$ is an orthogonal basis for $H^{\Wi{m}}$, and moreover $\\|\Wi{\zeta^\alpha\bar{\zeta}^\beta}\\|^2=\alpha!\beta!$ (the norm here is the norm inherited from $L^2(\mu)$). Furthermore \cite{Jan}{Theorem 2.6} \begin{equation} L^2(\mu)=\bigoplus_{m=0}^\infty H^{\Wi{m}}. \end{equation} We now expand $\log\|\zeta\|$ in terms of this orthonormal basis. Since the function is radial, only the terms with $\alpha=\beta$ contribute, and a calculation \cite{NS}{Lemma 2.1} yields \begin{equation}\label{eq: Wick log} \log\|\zeta\|=-\frac \gamma 2 + \sum_{\alpha=1}^\infty \frac{c_\alpha}{\alpha!}\Wiaa{\zeta}{\alpha} \end{equation} where $c_\alpha=\frac{(-1)^{\alpha+1}}{2\alpha}$. \begin{rem} We may alternatively interpret \eqref{eq: Wick log} as an expansion of the logarithm in terms of Laguerre polynomials, by noting that $\Wiaa{\zeta}{\alpha}=(-1)^\alpha L_{\alpha}(\|\zeta\|^2)$ where $L_\alpha(x)=e^x\frac{d^\alpha}{dx^\alpha}(x^\alpha e^{-x})$. \end{rem} We finally define \begin{equation} \log_m\|\zeta\|=-\frac \gamma 2 + \sum_{\alpha=1}^m \frac{c_\alpha}{\alpha!}\Wiaa{\zeta}{\alpha} \end{equation} which defines $\Delta_R^{(m)}$. Note that $\log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z)\|$ approximates $\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z)\|$ in $L^2(\Pro)$. \subsection{Quantifying the approximation} We first define \begin{equation} \Delta_i = \int_{\Gamma_i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i}\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\,\|dz_i\| \end{equation} and note that \begin{equation} \E\big[ ( \overline{\Delta}_R-\Delta_R^{(m)} )^2 \big] = \sum_{i,j=1}^N a_i a_j \E\big[ (\Delta_i - \Delta_i^{(m)})(\Delta_j - \Delta_j^{(m)})\big]. \end{equation} We have already computed (see \eqref{eq: cov ij}) that \begin{equation} \E[ \Delta_i \Delta_j ]= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \E\left[\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\right]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} Also, since \begin{equation} \E[ \Delta_i \Delta_j^{(m)} ]= \E\left[\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\right], \end{equation} Lemma~\ref{lem: hypoth sat log poly} allows us to apply Lemma~\ref{lem: abstract interchange} to see that \begin{equation} \E[ \Delta_i \Delta_j^{(m)} ]= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\E\left[ \log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\right]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} Arguing identically, but using Lemma~\ref{lem: hypoth sat polys} (with $N=2$) instead of Lemma~\ref{lem: hypoth sat log poly}, we get \begin{equation}\label{eq: cov Delta m} \E[ \Delta_i^{(m)} \Delta_j^{(m)} ]= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\E\left[ \log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|\log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\|\right]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} We conclude that \begin{align} \E\big[ (\Delta_i - \Delta_i^{(m)})&(\Delta_j - \Delta_j^{(m)})\big]\\ &= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j}\E\Big[ (\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\| - \log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_j)\|)\cdot\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \cdot(\log\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\| - \log_m\|\widehat{f}_R(z_i)\| ) \Big]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\\ &= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \E\Big[ \bigg(\sum_{\alpha_j>m} \frac{c_{\alpha_j}}{\alpha_j!}\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_j)}{\alpha_j}\bigg)\cdot\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \cdot \bigg(\sum_{\alpha_i>m} \frac{c_{\alpha_i}}{\alpha_i!}\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_i)}{\alpha_i}\bigg) \Big]\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{align} Now since the expansions inside the expectation are valid in $L^2(\Pro)$ we have \begin{align} \E\Big[ \bigg(\sum_{\alpha_j>m} \frac{c_{\alpha_j}}{\alpha_j!}\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_j)}{\alpha_j}\bigg) &\bigg(\sum_{\alpha_i>m} \frac{c_{\alpha_i}}{\alpha_i!}\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_i)}{\alpha_i}\bigg) \Big]\\ &=\sum_{\alpha_i,\alpha_j>m} \frac{c_{\alpha_i}c_{\alpha_j}}{\alpha_i!\alpha_j!}\E\left[\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_j)}{\alpha_j}\, \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_i)}{\alpha_i} \right]. \end{align} Now, by \cite{Jan}{Theorem 3.9}, we have \begin{equation}\label{eq: exp wick prod} \E\left[\Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_j)}{\alpha_j}\, \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_i)}{\alpha_i} \right]= \begin{cases} \alpha_i!\alpha_j!\|\widehat{K}_R(z_j,z_i)\|^{2\alpha_i}&\text{ if }\alpha_i=\alpha_j\\ 0&\text{otherwise} \end{cases} \end{equation} which yields \begin{align} \E\big[ (\Delta_i - \Delta_i^{(m)}) (\Delta_j - \Delta_j^{(m)})\big] &= \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \sum_{\alpha>m} c_{\alpha}^2 \|\widehat{K}_R(z_j,z_i)\|^{2\alpha}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\\ &=\frac14 \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \sum_{\alpha>m} \frac1{\alpha^2} e^{-2\alpha R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{align} \begin{rem} The identity \eqref{eq: exp wick prod} together with \eqref{eq: Wick log} essentially proves Lemma~\ref{lem: dilog}. \end{rem} Using Lemma~\ref{cl:abs int}, we have \begin{align} \|\E\big[ (\Delta_i - \Delta_i^{(m)}) (\Delta_j - \Delta_j^{(m)})\big]\| &\leq \frac14 \int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \Abs{\frac{\partial^2}{\partial \hat{n}_i\partial \hat{n}_j} \sum_{\alpha>m} \frac1{\alpha^2} e^{-2\alpha R^2\|z_j-z_i\|^2}}\,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|\\ &\leq CR \sum_{\alpha>m} \frac1{\alpha^{3/2}} \leq C\frac{R}{\sqrt{m}}. \end{align} Finally \begin{equation} \E\big[ ( \overline{\Delta}_R-\Delta_R^{(m)} )^2 \big] \leq \sum_{i,j=1}^N a_i a_j \Abs{\E\big[ (\Delta_i - \Delta_i^{(m)})(\Delta_j - \Delta_j^{(m)})\big]}\leq C\frac{R}{\sqrt{m}}, \end{equation} which is \eqref{eq: L2 approx for CLT}. \subsection{CLT for the approximant} We finish by proving \eqref{eq: CLT m}. We claim that it's enough to prove that for any non-negative integers $p_1,\dots,p_N$ we have, as $R\to\infty$, \begin{equation}\label{eq: mix mom Delta m} \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N(\Delta_i^{(m)})^{p_i}\Big] = \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N \xi_i^{p_i}\Big] + o(R^{P/2}) \end{equation} where $\xi_i$ is a sequence of jointly (real) Gaussian random variables, with mean $0$ and covariance \begin{equation} \cov (\xi_i,\xi_j)=\E[\xi_i\xi_j]=\cov(\Delta_i^{(m)},\Delta_j^{(m)}), \end{equation} and $P=p_1+\cdots +p_N$. \begin{rem} Notice that \begin{equation} \var\Delta_i^{(m)} = \frac{\sqrt{\pi}} 2\left(\sum_{\alpha=1}^m\frac1{\alpha^{3/2}}\right) \cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_i) R (1+o(1))\quad\text{as }R\to\infty, \end{equation} which follows from combining \eqref{eq: cov Delta m} and Lemma~\ref{cl:asym of int}. By hypothesis, $\Gamma$ is a non-zero $\R$-chain and so we may assume that $\cL(\Gamma_i,\Gamma_i)\neq0$ for each $i$, which means that \begin{equation} \prod_{i=1}^N \big(\var\Delta_i^{(m)}\big)^{p_i/2}\simeq R^{P/2}. \end{equation} Now, defining $\widehat{\xi}_i=\tfrac{\xi_i}{\sqrt{\var\xi_i}}=\tfrac{\xi_i}{\sqrt{\var\Delta_i}}$, we see that \eqref{eq: mix mom Delta m} is equivalent to \begin{equation} \E\Bigg[\prod_{i=1}^N\left(\frac{\Delta_i^{(m)}}{\sqrt{\var\Delta_i^{(m)}}}\right)^{p_i}\Bigg] = \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N \widehat{\xi_i}^{p_i}\Big] +o(1), \end{equation} and note that $\Abs{\E\Big[\prod_{j=1}^N \widehat{\xi_i}^{p_i}\Big]}$ is a bounded quantity. \end{rem} To see that it suffices to show \eqref{eq: mix mom Delta m}, notice that it implies that, for any non-negative integer $p$, \begin{align} \E[ (\Delta_R^{(m)})^{p} ] &= \sum_{i_1,\dots,i_p=1}^N a_{i_1}\dots a_{i_p} \E\Big[ \prod_{k=1}^p \Delta_{i_k}^{(m)} \Big]\\ &\sim \sum_{i_1,\dots,i_p=1}^N a_{i_1}\dots a_{i_p} \E\Big[ \prod_{k=1}^p \xi_{i_k} \Big] = \E\Big[ \big(\sum_{i=1}^N a_{i} \xi_{i}\big)^p \Big]. \end{align} Now since $\sum_{i=1}^N a_{i} \xi_{i}$ is a mean $0$ real Gaussian with the same variance as $\Delta_R^{(m)}$, we see that the moments of $\frac{\Delta_R^{(m)}}{\sqrt{\var \Delta_R^{(m)}}}$ converge to the moments of the standard real Gaussian, which implies \eqref{eq: CLT m}. It remains to establish \eqref{eq: mix mom Delta m}. We begin by re-formulating the right-hand side, and so we introduce some notation. Throughout this computation the integers $p_1,\dots,p_N$ and $m$ are considered to be fixed, and we often ignore the dependence of other parameters on them. We define $\widehat{p}_i=p_1+\dots+p_i$ for $1\leq i \leq N$, and note that $P=\widehat{p}_N$ which we will use interchangeably according to the context. We define a new sequence of random variables $(\widetilde{\xi}_r)_{1\leq r \leq P}$ by \begin{align} \widetilde{\xi}_1& =\widetilde{\xi}_2 = \dots = \widetilde{\xi}_{p_1} = \xi_1,\\ \widetilde{\xi}_{p_1+1}& =\widetilde{\xi}_{p_1+2} = \dots = \widetilde{\xi}_{\widehat{p}_2} = \xi_2,\\ \vdots & \\ \widetilde{\xi}_{\widehat{p}_{N-1}+1}& =\widetilde{\xi}_{\widehat{p}_{N-1}+2} = \dots = \widetilde{\xi}_{\widehat{p}_{N}} = \xi_N. \end{align} A \emph{partition $\cP=\biguplus_k\{r_k,s_k\}$} is a partition of the set $\{1,\dots,P\}$ into pairs $\{r_k,s_k\}$. We always label the partition so that $r_k<s_k$ and $r_k<r_{k'}$ for $k<k'$. Of course if $P$ is odd then no such partition exists. Now \cite{Jan}{Theorem 1.28} implies that \begin{equation}\label{eq: RHS rewritten} \E\Big[\prod_{j=1}^N \xi_i^{p_i}\Big]=\sum_\cP\prod_k\E[\widetilde{\xi}_{r_k}\widetilde{\xi}_{s_k}]. \end{equation} In particular this expectation is zero if $P$ is odd. We now consider the left-hand side of \eqref{eq: mix mom Delta m}. Since \begin{equation} \Delta_i^{(m)} = \int_{\Gamma_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i} \left(-\frac\gamma2+\sum_{\alpha=1}^m \frac{c_\alpha}{\alpha!} \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z)}{\alpha}\right)\,\|dz_i\| = \sum_{\alpha=1}^m \frac{c_\alpha}{\alpha!} \int_{\Gamma_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{n}_i} \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z)}{\alpha} \,\|dz_i\| \end{equation} we see that, denoting by $\Gamma_i^{p_i}$ the Cartesian product of $p_i$ copies of $\Gamma_i$, \begin{equation} \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N(\Delta_i^{(m)})^{p_i}\Big] = \sum_{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{P}=1}^N \prod_{r=1}^{P} \frac{c_{\alpha_r}}{\alpha_r!} \E\Big[ \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} \prod_{r=1}^{P} \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_r)}{\alpha_r} \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\| \Big]. \end{equation} Lemma~\ref{lem: hypoth sat polys} allows us to apply Lemma~\ref{lem: abstract interchange} to see that \begin{equation}\label{eq: B1} \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N(\Delta_i^{(m)})^{p_i}\Big] = \sum_{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{P}=1}^m \prod_{r=1}^{P} \frac{c_{\alpha_r}}{\alpha_r!} \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} \E\Big[ \prod_{r=1}^{P} \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_r)}{\alpha_r}\Big] \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\|. \end{equation} We will compute the asymptotics of this expression via the diagram formula. For $1\leq i,j\leq N$ and $1\leq\alpha\leq m$ we write \begin{equation} \rho_{ij}(\alpha)=\int_{\Gamma_i}\int_{\Gamma_j} \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \hat{n}_i \partial \hat{n}_{j}} \Abs{\widehat{K}_R(z_i,z_j)}^{2\alpha} \,\|dz_j\|\|dz_i\|. \end{equation} We then have, from \eqref{eq: exp wick prod}, \begin{equation}\label{eq: m cov ij} \cov(\Delta_i^{(m)},\Delta_j^{(m)}) = \sum_{\alpha=1}^m c_{\alpha}^2 \rho_{ij}(\alpha). \end{equation} \subsubsection{Diagrams} Given non-negative integers $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_P$, a \emph{diagram $\cD$} is a graph with $2(\alpha_1+\dots+\alpha_P)$ vertices such that: \begin{itemize} \item For each $1\leq r \leq P$ there are $\alpha_r$ vertices labelled $r$ and $\alpha_r$ vertices labelled $\bar{r}$. \item Each vertex has degree exactly $1$. \item Each edge joins a vertex labelled $r$ to a vertex labelled $\bar{s}$ for $r\neq s$. \end{itemize} Note that there are choices of $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_P$ such that no such diagram exists, for example if $\alpha_1>\alpha_2+\cdots+\alpha_P$. We denote the edges (respectively the vertices) of $\cD$ by $e(\cD)$ (respectively $v(\cD)$). Recall that \begin{equation} \widehat{K}_R(z_r,z_s)=\frac{K_R(z_r,z_s)}{\sqrt{K_R(z_r,z_s)K_R(z_r,z_s)}} = \exp\{R^2(z_r\bar{z}_s -\tfrac12\|z_r\|^2 -\tfrac12\|z_s\|^2)\}. \end{equation} The \emph{value} of a diagram is \begin{equation} V(\cD)=\prod_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} \widehat{K}_R(z_r,z_s). \end{equation} The diagram formula \cite{Jan}{Theorem 3.12} implies that \begin{equation}\label{eq: diagram formula} \E\Big[ \prod_{r=1}^{P} \Wiaa{\widehat{f}_R(z_r)}{\alpha_r}\Big]=\sum_\cD V(\cD). \end{equation} We say that a diagram is \emph{regular} if the set $\{1,\dots,P\}$ can be partitioned into pairs $\{r_k,s_k\}$ such that each edge of the diagram is of the form $(r_k,\overline{s}_k)$ or $(s_k,\overline{r}_k)$ for some $k$; otherwise the diagram is said to be irregular, see Figure~\ref{fig: diags}. Note that if $P$ is odd then all diagrams are irregular. We again label the partition so that $r_k<s_k$ and $r_k<r_{k'}$ for $k<k'$. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Diagrams} \caption{An irregular and a regular diagram for $P=4$, $\alpha_1=\alpha_2=2$ and $\alpha_3=\alpha_4=1$.} \label{fig: diags} \end{figure} Combining \eqref{eq: B1} and \eqref{eq: diagram formula} we have \begin{equation}\label{eq: full moment expansion} \E\Big[\prod_{i=1}^N(\Delta_i^{(m)})^{p_i}\Big] = \sum_{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{P}=1}^m \prod_{r=1}^{P} \frac{c_{\alpha_r}}{\alpha_r!} \sum_\cD \int_{\prod_{r=1}^{P}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} V(\cD) \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\|. \end{equation} We now split this sum into two pieces, by splitting $\displaystyle{\sum_\cD = \sum_{\mathrm{regular}\,\cD} + \sum_{\mathrm{irregular}\,\cD}}$. We estimate each contribution separately - we shall see that the regular contribution will give us the main term on the right-hand side of \eqref{eq: mix mom Delta m} while the irregular contribution will give the error term. We begin by computing the regular part exactly. \paragraph{{\bf The regular contribution}}\hspace{0pt} \\ We define the \emph{multiplicity vector} $\overrightarrow{B}=(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_{Q})$ of a regular diagram by $\beta_k=\alpha_{r_k}=\alpha_{s_k}$; here $P=2Q$. Notice that for a regular diagram \begin{equation} V(\cD)=\prod_k \|\widehat{K}_R(z_{r_k},z_{s_k})\|^{2\beta_k}. \end{equation} Given a regular diagram $\cD$ with partition $\cP$ and multiplicity vector $\overrightarrow{B}$, we have \begin{align} \int_{\prod_{r=1}^{P}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} V(\cD) \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\| &= \int_{\prod_{r=1}^{P}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} \prod_{k=1}^Q \|\widehat{K}_R(z_{r_k},z_{s_k})\|^{2\beta_k} \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\|\\ &= \prod_{k=1}^Q \int_{\Gamma_{r_k}}\int_{\Gamma_{s_k}} \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \hat{n}_{r_k} \partial \hat{n}_{s_k}} \|\widehat{K}_R(z_{r_k},z_{s_k})\|^{2\beta_k} \,\|dz_{s_k}\|\|dz_{r_k}\|\\ &= \prod_{k=1}^Q \rho_{r_k,s_k}(\beta_k). \end{align} We now need to count the number of regular diagrams with partition $\cP$ and multiplicity vector $\overrightarrow{B}$. The ordering of the partition we specified, combined with the multiplicity vector $\overrightarrow{B}$ uniquely defines the values $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_P$. Given these values we may permute the $\alpha_r$ vertices labelled $r$, independently for each $r$, to get all of the regular diagrams corresponding to these values, $\cP$ and $\overrightarrow{B}$. There are $\prod_{r=1}^P \alpha_r!$ such permutations. Noting that $\prod_{r=1}^P c_{\alpha_r}= \prod_{k=1}^Q c_{\beta_k}^2$, we get that the regular contribution is \begin{align} \sum_{\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{P}=1}^m \prod_{r=1}^{P} \frac{c_{\alpha_r}}{\alpha_r!} \sum_{\mathrm{regular}\,\cD} \prod_{k=1}^Q \rho_{r_k,s_k}(\beta_k) &= \sum_{\beta_1,\dots,\beta_{Q}=1}^m \prod_{k=1}^{Q} c_{\beta_k}^2 \sum_{\cP} \prod_{k=1}^Q \rho_{r_k,s_k}(\beta_k)\\ &= \sum_{\cP} \sum_{\beta_1,\dots,\beta_{Q}=1}^m \prod_{k=1}^{Q} c_{\beta_k}^2 \rho_{r_k,s_k}(\beta_k)\\ &= \sum_{\cP} \prod_{k=1}^{Q} \left(\sum_{\beta=1}^m c_{\beta}^2 \rho_{r_k s_k} (\beta) \right)\\ &\overset{\eqref{eq: m cov ij}}{=} \sum_{\cP} \prod_{k=1}^{Q} \cov(\Delta_{r_k}^{(m)},\Delta_{s_k}^{(m)})\\ &\overset{\eqref{eq: RHS rewritten}}{=} \E\Big[\prod_{j=1}^N \xi_i^{p_i}\Big]. \end{align} \paragraph{{\bf The irregular contribution}}\hspace{0pt} \\ It remains to see only that the irregular contribution is $o(R^{P/2})$. Further, from \eqref{eq: full moment expansion}, we see that it is enough to bound \begin{equation} \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} V(\cD) \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\| \end{equation} for each irregular diagram $\cD$. Recalling that \begin{equation} V(\cD)= \prod_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} \widehat{K}_R(z_r,z_s) = \prod_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} \exp\{R^2(z_r\bar{z}_s -\tfrac12\|z_r\|^2 -\tfrac12\|z_s\|^2)\} \end{equation} we have \begin{equation} \log V(\cD)= R^2 \sum_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} (z_r\bar{z}_s -\tfrac12\|z_r\|^2 -\tfrac12\|z_s\|^2). \end{equation} Now there are $\alpha_r$ edges in the sum of the form $(r,\bar{s})$ for some $s$, and $\alpha_r$ edges of the form $(s,\bar{r})$ for some $s$. We therefore have \begin{equation} \log V(\cD)= R^2 \sum_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} (z_r(\bar{z}_s -\bar{z}_r)) = R^2 \sum_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} (\bar{z}_s(z_r -z_s)) \end{equation} from which we conclude that, for $1\leq t \leq P$, \begin{equation} \frac{\partial}{\partial z_t}V(\cD) = R^2 V(\cD)\sum_{s:(t,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} (\bar{z}_s -\bar{z}_t) \end{equation} and \begin{equation} \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{z}_t}V(\cD) = R^2 V(\cD)\sum_{r:(r,\bar{t})\in e(\cD)} (z_r - z_t). \end{equation} By iterating this argument we see that we may bound \begin{equation} \Abs{\frac{\partial^{P}}{\partial \hat{n}_1\dots \partial \hat{n}_{P}} V(\cD)} \end{equation} by a (finite) linear combination of terms of the form \begin{equation} \Abs{V(\cD)} R^{2(P-\gamma)}\fp_{P-2\gamma}, \end{equation} where $0\leq\gamma\leq\lfloor\tfrac P2\rfloor$ is an integer and $\fp_{P-2\gamma}$ is a product of $P-2\gamma$ factors (not necessarily distinct) of the form $\|z_r-z_s\|$ with $(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)$. To finish the proof it therefore suffices to see that \begin{equation} R^{2(P-\gamma)} \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \Abs{V(\cD)} \fp_{P-2\gamma} \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\| = o(R^{P/2}) \end{equation} for any choice of $\gamma$ and $\fp_{P-2\gamma}$. We now fix $\gamma$ and $\fp_{P-2\gamma}$ and make a reduction to allow us to estimate this quantity. From the irregular diagram $\cD$ we form the reduced diagram $\cD^$ (see Figure~\ref{fig: red diag}) with $P$ vertices (labelled $1$ to $P$) such that: \begin{itemize} \item For each $1\leq r,s \leq P$ there is at most one edge $(r,s)$. \item $(r,s)\in e(\cD^)$ if $(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)$ or $(s,\bar{r})\in e(\cD)$. \end{itemize} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{ReducedDiagrams} \caption{A diagram and its reduced diagram.} \label{fig: red diag} \end{figure} In other words we form $\cD^$ from $\cD$ by glueing together the $2\alpha_r$ vertices labelled $r$ or $\bar{r}$ for each $r$, and ignoring the multiplicity of the edges of the resultant diagram. We decompose \begin{equation} \cD^=\bigcup_{u=1}^n \cD_u \end{equation} into $n$ connected components that contain $a_u$ vertices and contribute $\ell_u$ factors to $\fp_{P-2\gamma}$. Notice that $n<\tfrac P2$ since $\cD$ is irregular, and that \begin{equation} \sum_{u=1}^n a_u=P\qquad\text{ and }\qquad \sum_{u=1}^n \ell_u = P-2\gamma. \end{equation} Moreover, since \begin{equation} \|V(\cD)\|=\prod_{(r,\bar{s})\in e(\cD)} \exp\{-\tfrac{R^2}2 \|z_r-z_s\|^2 \} \leq \prod_{(r,s)\in e(\cD^)} \exp\{ -\tfrac{R^2}2 \|z_r-z_s\|^2 \} \end{equation} we may factorise the expression we seek to bound as \begin{align} R^{2(P-\gamma)} \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \Abs{V(\cD)} &\fp_{P-2\gamma} \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\|\\ &\leq R^{2(P-\gamma)} \prod_{u=1}^n \int_{\prod \widetilde{\Gamma}_r} \prod_{(r,s)\in e(\cD_u)}e^{-\tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_s\|^2 } \fp_{\ell_u} \,\prod_{r\in v(\cD_u)}\|dz_r\| \end{align} where, $\widetilde{\Gamma}_r = \Gamma_i$ for some $i$, $\prod \widetilde{\Gamma}_r = \prod_{r\in v(\cD_u)}\widetilde{\Gamma}_r$ and $\fp_{\ell_u}$ means a product of $\ell_u$ factors of the form $\|z_r-z_s\|$ with $(r,s)\in e(\cD_u)$. We will show that \begin{equation}\label{eq: bound irr diag} \int_{\prod \widetilde{\Gamma}_r} \prod_{(r,s)\in e(\cD_u)} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_s\|^2 } \fp_{\ell_u} \,\prod_{r\in v(\cD_u)}\|dz_r\|\lesssim (\log R)^{\ell_u /2}R^{-(\ell_u + a_u -1)} \end{equation} which will yield \begin{align} R^{2(P-\gamma)} \int_{\prod_{i=1}^{N}\Gamma_i^{p_i}} \Abs{V(\cD)} \fp_{P-2\gamma} \,\prod_{r=1}^{P}\|dz_r\| &\lesssim R^{2(P-\gamma)} (\log R)^{\sum_u\ell_u /2} R^{-\sum_u(\ell_u + a_u -1)}\\ &=(\log R)^{\tfrac P2 -\gamma} R^{2P-2\gamma-(P-2\gamma + P -n)}\\ &= (\log R)^{\tfrac P2 -\gamma} R^{n}=o(R^{P/2}) \end{align} as claimed, since $n<\tfrac P2$. \paragraph{{\bf Proof of estimate \eqref{eq: bound irr diag}}}\hspace{0pt} \\ It remains only to prove \eqref{eq: bound irr diag}. We formulate it as follows: Let $G$ be a connected graph with $a$ vertices, let $\{\widetilde{\Gamma}_1,\dots,\widetilde{\Gamma}_a\} \subset \{\Gamma_1,\dots,\Gamma_N\}$ be a collection of curves (we allow repition) and let $\fp_{\ell}$ be a product of $\ell$ factors of the form $\|z_r-z_s\|$ with $1\leq r,s\leq a$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eq: simple bound irr diag} \int_{\prod \widetilde{\Gamma}_r} \prod_{(r,s)\in e(G)} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_s\|^2 } \fp_{\ell} \,\prod_{r=1}^a\|dz_r\|\lesssim (\log R)^{\ell /2}R^{-(\ell + a -1)}. \end{equation} First note that since $e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_s\|^2 }\leq 1$ we may delete some of the edges of $G$ to form a tree. By re-labelling the vertices we may assume that deleting the vertices labelled $1,\dots,r$ yields a connected a graph, for every $r$. We denote by $s(r+1)$ the vertex that is joined to $r+1$ in this reduced graph. See Figure~\ref{fig: tree}. Note that \begin{equation} \prod_{(r,s)\in e(G)} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_s\|^2 }\leq \prod_{r=1}^{a-1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|^2 }. \end{equation} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{TreeReduction} \caption{A connected graph and a tree formed by deleting some edges. The vertices are also re-labelled so that successively deleting the vertices labelled $1,2,\dots$ yields a connected graph at every step, $s(1)=s(4)=s(5)=6$ and $s(2)=s(3)=4$.} \label{fig: tree} \end{figure} Define $\eps_R=\frac{\sqrt{(\ell+a-1)\log R}}R $ and note that if $\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|>\eps_R$ for some $r$ then \begin{equation} \prod_{r=1}^{a-1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|^2 }\leq R^{-(\ell + a -1)}. \end{equation} Since $\fp_{\ell}$ is uniformly bounded on $\prod \widetilde{\Gamma}_r$, and the curves have finite length, to show \eqref{eq: simple bound irr diag} it suffices to bound \begin{equation} \int_{\widetilde{\Gamma}_a\times\prod_{r=1}^{a-1} C_r} \prod_{r=1}^{a-1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|^2 } \fp_{\ell} \,\prod_{r=1}^a\|dz_r\|, \end{equation} where $C_r=\{z_r\in\widetilde{\Gamma}_r\colon \|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|\leq\eps_R \}$. Note that in this new domain of integration we have $\|z_r-z_s\|\leq a\eps_R$, which implies that $\fp_{\ell} \lesssim \eps_R^\ell \lesssim \left( \frac{\sqrt{\log R}} R \right)^\ell$. It therefore suffices to see that \begin{equation} \int_{\widetilde{\Gamma}_a\times\prod_{r=1}^{a-1} C_r} \prod_{r=1}^{a-1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|^2 } \,\prod_{r=1}^a\|dz_r\|\lesssim R^{1-a}. \end{equation} We claim that \begin{equation}\label{eq: irr estimate one int} \int_{C_1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_1-z_{s(1)}\|^2 } \,\|dz_1\|\lesssim R^{-1}, \end{equation} uniformly in the remaining variables. Applying this estimate $a-1$ times (replacing the index $1$ by $2,\dots,a-1$) yields \begin{equation} \int_{\widetilde{\Gamma}_a\times\prod_{r=1}^{a-1} C_r} \prod_{r=1}^{a-1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_r-z_{s(r)}\|^2 } \,\prod_{r=1}^a\|dz_r\|\lesssim R^{1-a}\int_{\widetilde{\Gamma}_a}\|dz_a\|\lesssim R^{1-a}. \end{equation} \paragraph{{\bf Proof of estimate \eqref{eq: irr estimate one int}}}\hspace{0pt} \\ It remains to show \eqref{eq: irr estimate one int}. Fix $(z_2,\dots,z_a)\in \prod_{r=2}^{a-1} C_r\times\widetilde{\Gamma}_a$ and define $z_1^$ to be the point in $\widetilde{\Gamma}_1$ closest to $z_{s(1)}$. (If there are many points we choose one arbitrarily; it might be the case that $z_1^=z_{s(1)}$.) We have $\|z_1-z_{s(1)}\|\geq\tfrac12\|z_1-z_1^\|$ since $\|z_1-z_{s(1)}\|\geq\|z_1-z_1^\|-\|z_1^-z_{s(1)}\|\geq\|z_1-z_1^\|-\|z_1-z_{s(1)}\|$. This yields \begin{equation} \int_{C_1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}2\|z_1-z_{s(1)}\|^2 } \,\|dz_1\|\leq\int_{C_1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}8\|z_1-z_1^\|^2 } \,\|dz_1\|, \end{equation} which we bound exactly as in Section~\ref{sec: proof of claims}. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to\C$ be a parameterisation of $\widetilde{\Gamma}_1$ satisfying $M_1\leq\|\dot{\gamma}(t)\|\leq M_2$ and $M_1'\|t-s\|\leq\|\gamma_j(t)-\gamma_j(s)\|\leq M_2\|t-s\|$ with $M_1,M_1'>0$. Denote by $t^$ the (unique) value such that $\gamma(t^)=z_1^$. Notice that \begin{equation} C_1\subseteq\left\{z_1=\gamma(t)\colon \|t-t^\|\leq\frac{\eps_R}{M_1'}\right\}. \end{equation} We then bound \begin{align} \int_{C_1} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}8\|z_1-z_1^\|^2 } \,\|dz_1\|&\leq \int_{\|t-t^\|\leq\tfrac{\eps_R}{M_1'}} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}8\|\gamma(t)-\gamma(t^)\|^2 } \|\dot{\gamma}(t)\|\,dt\\ &\leq M_2 \int_{\|t-t^\|\leq\tfrac{\eps_R}{M_1'}} e^{- \tfrac{R^2}8 (M_1')2(t-t^)^2 } \,dt\\ &=\frac{2\sqrt2M_2}{RM_1'}\int_{\|s\|\leq\tfrac{R\eps_R}{2\sqrt2}} e^{- s^2 } \,ds\\ &\lesssim R^{-1}. \end{align} This completes the proof. \begin{bibdiv} \begin{biblist} \bib{DE}{article}{ author={Diaconis, Persi}, author={Evans, Steven N.}, title={Linear functionals of eigenvalues of random matrices}, journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.}, volume={353}, date={2001}, number={7}, pages={2615--2633}, issn={0002-9947}, review={\MR{1828463}}, doi={10.1090/S0002-9947-01-02800-8}, } \bib{Feld}{article}{ author = {Feldheim, Naomi}, title = {Variance of the number of zeroes of shift-invariant Gaussian analytic functions}, date = {2015}, note = {arXiv: 1309.2111 [math.PR]} } \bib{HKPV}{book}{ author={Hough, John Ben}, author={Krishnapur, Manjunath}, author={Peres, Yuval}, author={Vir{\'a}g, B{\'a}lint}, title={Zeros of Gaussian analytic functions and determinantal point processes}, series={University Lecture Series}, volume={51}, publisher={American Mathematical Society}, place={Providence, RI}, date={2009}, pages={x+154}, isbn={978-0-8218-4373-4}, review={\MR{2552864 (2011f:60090)}}, } \bib{HKO}{article}{ author={Hughes, Christopher P.}, author={Keating, Jonathon P.}, author={O'Connell, Neil}, title={}, journal={Comm. Math. Phys.}, volume={220}, date={2001}, number={2}, pages={429--451}, issn={0010-3616}, review={\MR{1844632}}, doi={10.1007/s002200100453}, } \bib{HNY}{article}{ author={Hughes, Christopher P.}, author={Nikeghbali, Ashkan}, author={Yor, Marc}, title={An arithmetic model for the total disorder process}, journal={Probab. Theory Related Fields}, volume={141}, date={2008}, number={1-2}, pages={47--59}, issn={0178-8051}, review={\MR{2372965}}, doi={10.1007/s00440-007-0079-9}, } \bib{Jan}{book}{ author={Janson, Svante}, title={Gaussian Hilbert spaces}, series={Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics}, volume={129}, publisher={Cambridge University Press, Cambridge}, date={1997}, pages={x+340}, isbn={0-521-56128-0}, review={\MR{1474726 (99f:60082)}}, doi={10.1017/CBO9780511526169}, } \bib{Kah}{book}{ author={Kahane, Jean-Pierre}, title={Some random series of functions}, series={Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics}, volume={5}, edition={2}, publisher={Cambridge University Press, Cambridge}, date={1985}, pages={xiv+305}, isbn={0-521-24966-X}, isbn={0-521-45602-9}, review={\MR{833073 (87m:60119)}}, } \bib{KM}{article}{ author={Kang, Nam-Gyu}, author={Makarov, Nikolai G.}, title={Gaussian free field and conformal field theory}, language={English, with English and French summaries}, journal={Ast\'erisque}, number={353}, date={2013}, pages={viii+136}, issn={0303-1179}, isbn={978-2-85629-369-0}, review={\MR{3052311}}, } \bib{Leb}{article}{ author={Lebowitz, Joel L.}, title={Charge fluctuations in Coulomb systems}, journal={Phys. Rev. A}, volume={27}, date={1983}, number={3}, pages={1491--1494}, doi={10.1103/PhysRevA.27.1491}, } \bib{MPRW}{article}{ author = {Marinucci, Domenico}, author = {Peccati, Giovanni}, author = {Rossi, Maurizia}, author = {Wigman, Igor}, title = {Non-Universality of Nodal Length Distribution for Arithmetic Random Waves}, journal = {Geom. Funct. Anal.}, date = {2016}, doi={10.1007/s00039-016-0376-5}, note={Available online}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00039-016-0376-5} } \bib{Mon}{book}{ author={Montgomery, Hugh L.}, title={Ten lectures on the interface between analytic number theory and harmonic analysis}, series={CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics}, volume={84}, publisher={Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC; by the American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI}, date={1994}, pages={xiv+220}, isbn={0-8218-0737-4}, review={\MR{1297543}}, doi={10.1090/cbms/084}, } \bib{NS}{article}{ author={Nazarov, Fedor}, author={Sodin, Mikhail}, title={Fluctuations in random complex zeroes: asymptotic normality revisited}, journal={Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN}, date={2011}, number={24}, pages={5720--5759}, issn={1073-7928}, review={\MR{2863379 (2012k:60103)}}, } \bib{NSV}{article}{ author={Nazarov, Fedor}, author={Sodin, Mikhail}, author={Volberg, Alexander}, title={The Jancovici-Lebowitz-Manificat law for large fluctuations of random complex zeroes}, journal={Comm. Math. Phys.}, volume={284}, date={2008}, number={3}, pages={833--865}, issn={0010-3616}, review={\MR{2452596}}, doi={10.1007/s00220-008-0646-7}, } \bib{NP}{article}{ author={Nualart, David}, author={Peccati, Giovanni}, title={Central limit theorems for sequences of multiple stochastic integrals}, journal={Ann. Probab.}, volume={33}, date={2005}, number={1}, pages={177--193}, issn={0091-1798}, review={\MR{2118863}}, doi={10.1214/009117904000000621}, } \bib{PT4mom}{article}{ author={Peccati, Giovanni}, author={Tudor, Ciprian A.}, title={Gaussian limits for vector-valued multiple stochastic integrals}, conference={ title={S\'eminaire de Probabilit\'es XXXVIII}, }, book={ series={Lecture Notes in Math.}, volume={1857}, publisher={Springer, Berlin}, }, date={2005}, pages={247--262}, review={\MR{2126978}}, } \bib{SZ}{article}{ author={Shiffman, Bernard}, author={Zelditch, Steve}, title={Number variance of random zeros on complex manifolds}, journal={Geom. Funct. Anal.}, volume={18}, date={2008}, number={4}, pages={1422--1475}, issn={1016-443X}, review={\MR{2465693 (2009k:32019)}}, doi={10.1007/s00039-008-0686-3}, } \bib{ST1}{article}{ author={Sodin, Mikhail}, author={{Ts}irelson, Boris}, title={Random complex zeroes. I. Asymptotic normality}, journal={Israel J. Math.}, volume={144}, date={2004}, pages={125--149}, issn={0021-2172}, review={\MR{2121537 (2005k:60079)}}, doi={10.1007/BF02984409}, } \bib{W}{article}{ author={Wieand, Kelly}, title={Eigenvalue distributions of random unitary matrices}, journal={Probab. Theory Related Fields}, volume={123}, date={2002}, number={2}, pages={202--224}, issn={0178-8051}, review={\MR{1900322}}, doi={10.1007/s004400100186}, } \end{biblist} \end{bibdiv} \end{document}
\section{Introduction} The so-called Elko spinors are a new set of spinors with a complex and interesting structure on its own. Historically, they were proposed by Ahluwalia and Grumiller when studying properties of the Majorana spinor. Similar to them, Elko spinors are eingenspinors of the charge conjugation operator, $C$, but they have dual helicity and can take positive (self-conjugated) and negative (anti-self-conjugated) eigenvalues of $C$, whilst the Majorana ones take only the positive value and carry single-helicity. From the physical point of view, Elko spinors are constructed to be invisible to the other particles (i.e., it does not couple with the fields of the Standard Model, except for the Higgs boson), becoming a natural candidate to dark matter \cite{jcap}. Mathematically, the dual helicity peculiarity forces to a redefinition of the dual spinor structure, as can be seem in \cite{jcap}. This idiosyncrasy reflects itself when constructing the spin sums for the Elko spinors, which breaks Lorentz symmetry. However, the spin sums are invariant under transformations of the Very Special Relativity (VSR) \cite{horvath, cohen, ahluwaliahorvath}. There are several areas in which Elko spinors have been studied, from accelerator physics \cite{fen1,fen2,fen3,fen4} to cosmology \cite{co1,co2,co3,co4,co5,co6,co7,co8,co9,co10,co11}. In particular, the appreciation of new dual structures bring interesting possibilities within the algebraic scope \cite{cjr,rcd}. As it is well known, much of the physics associated to spinor fields is unveiled from its bilinear covariants by the simple reason that single fermions are not directly experienced. In this context it is indeed important to pay special attention to the subtleties of Clifford algebra when associating real numbers to the bilinear covariants \cite{lounesto}. It may sound as an secondary issue, but in fact the opposite is true. In two outstanding papers in the ninetieths \cite{crawford1,crawford2}, Crawford worked out several important formalizations concerning the bispinor algebra. Among these, a rigorous procedure to obtain real bilinear covariants was developed. The general aim of this paper is to make use of this procedure to envisage what (if any) bilinear covariants are real when dealing with mass dimension one spinors. To the best of our hope, the results to be shown here may shed some light on the observables associated to these spinors. With suitable, but important, changes we take advantage of the formalism developed in \cite{crawford1} in order to study the bilinear covariants associated to the Elko spinor case. After a complete analysis, including the right observance of the Fierz-Pauli-Kofink (FPK) \cite{FPK, beres} relations, we arrive at the subset of real bilinear covariants. Quite recently, new possibilities concerning the field adjoint possibilities was investigated in deep \cite{1305,nosso}. These formalizations may lead to a local and full Lorentz spin $1/2$ field also endowed with mass dimension one, evading, thus, the Weinberg's no-go theorem \cite{Ahluwa2}. We also have investigated the bilinears to this case, and in some extent the aforementioned program may be applied, leading to similar conclusions. This paper is organized as follows: in Section II we introduce the bilinears covariant and proceed with the Clifford algebra basis deformation then, in Section III we analyze its covariant structure. Both these sections are related to Elko spinors as objects whose spin sums break Lorentz symmetry. The natural background symmetry is, then, encoded into the orthochronous proper Lorentz subgroup, leaving for the Appendix B an analogous investigation taking into account VSR Elko spinors. In Section IV, we conclude with some remarks about the results we found. \section{Bilinear analysis} Let $\psi$ be a given spinor field belonging to a section of the vector bundle $\mathbf{P}_{Spin^{e}_{1,3}}(\mathcal{M})\times\, _{\rho}\mathbb{C}^4$ where $\rho$ stands for the entire representation space $D^{(1/2,0)}\oplus D^{(0,1/2)}$, or a given sector of such. The bilinear covariants associated to $\psi$, as usual, reads \begin{eqnarray} \label{covariantes} \sigma=\psi^{\dag}\gamma_{0}\psi, \hspace{1cm} \omega=-\psi^{\dag}\gamma_{0}\gamma_{0123}\psi, \hspace{1cm} \mathbf{J}=\psi^{\dag}\mathrm{\gamma_{0}}\gamma_{\mu}\psi\;\gamma^{\mu}, \nonumber\\ \mathbf{K}=\psi^{\dag}\mathrm{\gamma_{0}}\textit{i}\mathrm{\gamma_{0123}}\gamma_{\mu}\psi\;\gamma^{\mu},\hspace{1cm} \mathbf{S}=\frac{1}{2}\psi^{\dag}\mathrm{\gamma_{0}}\textit{i}\gamma_{\mu\nu}\psi\gamma^{\mu}\wedge\gamma^{\nu}\,, \end{eqnarray} where the Dirac matrices are written in the Chiral (or Weyl) representation \begin{eqnarray} \gamma_0 = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \mathbb{O} & \mathbb{I} \\ \mathbb{I} & \mathbb{O} \end{array} \right), \qquad \gamma_i = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \mathbb{O} & \sigma_{i} \\ -\sigma_{i} & \mathbb{O} \end{array} \right). \end{eqnarray} In general grounds, it is always expected to associate (\ref{covariantes}) to physical observables. For instance, in the usual case, bearing in mind the relativistic description of the electron, $\sigma$ the invariant length, $\boldsymbol{J}$ is associated to the current density, $\boldsymbol{K}$ is the spin projection in the momentum direction, and $\boldsymbol{S}$ is the momentum electromagnetic density. The bilinear covariants, as well known, obey the so-called Fierz-Pauli-Kofink (FPK) identities, given by \cite{baylis} \begin{eqnarray}\label{fpkidentidades} \boldsymbol{J}^2 = \sigma^2+\omega^2, \quad J_{\mu}\!\!&K_{\nu}&\!\!-K_{\mu}J_{\nu} = -\omega S_{\mu\nu} - \frac{\sigma}{2}\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}S^{\alpha\beta}, \nonumber \\ J_{\mu}K^{\mu} &=& 0, \quad \boldsymbol{J}^2 = -\boldsymbol{K}^2. \end{eqnarray} It can be seen that the physical requirement of reality can always be satisfied for Dirac spinors bilinear covariants \cite{crawford1}, by a suitable deformation of the Clifford basis leading to physical appealing quantities. Unfortunately, the same cannot be stated for mass dimension one spinors, as Elko spinors. Actually, a straightforward calculation shows an incompatibility in the usual construction of bilinear covariants. In fact, one of the FPK identities is violated. The reason rests upon the new dual structure associated to these spinors. It is worth to mention that the main difference between the Crawford deformation \cite{crawford1, crawford2} and the one to be accomplished here is that in the former case, the spinors are understood as Dirac spinors, i. e., spinorial objects endowed with single helicity. Therefore, the dual structure is the usual one $\bar{\psi}(\boldsymbol{p}) = \psi^{\dag}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_0$ and the required normalization is also ordinary. On the other hand Elko spinors, due to its own formal structure, need a dual redefinition $\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}^{S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}) = [\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda^{S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})]^{\dag}\gamma_0$. This redefinition leads, ultimately, to a new normalization culminating in a basis deformation satisfying the FPK identities. Let us make these assertions more clear by explicitly showing the mentioned problem. In order to guarantee the sequential readability of the paper we leave for the Appendix A a brief, but self contained, overview on the spinorial formal structure of Lorentz breaking Elko fields. Taking advantage of what was there defined, we use as an example the spinor $\lambda^{S}_{\lbrace -,+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})$ and its dual given by, respectively \begin{eqnarray}\label{3} \lambda^{S}_{\lbrace -,+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p}) = \Upsilon_{-} \left(\begin{array}{c} -i\sin\theta/2 e^{-i\phi/2} \\ i\cos\theta/2 e^{i\phi/2} \\ \cos\theta/2 e^{-i\phi/2} \\ \sin\theta/2 e^{i\phi/2} \end{array} \right), \end{eqnarray} and \begin{eqnarray}\label{14} \stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}^{S}_{\lbrace -,+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p}) =\Upsilon_{+}\left( \begin{array}{cccc} -i\sin\theta/2 e^{i\phi/2} & i\cos\theta/2 e^{-i\phi/2} & -\cos\theta/2 e^{i\phi/2} & -\sin\theta/2 e^{-i\phi/2} \end{array} \right)\!. \end{eqnarray} We reinforce once again that the dual structure associated to Elko spinors are obtained in a very judicious fashion \cite{1305}, leaving no space to modifications, exception made to the generalizations found in Ref. \cite{jcap,1305}. Using (\ref{3}) and (\ref{14}), as a direct calculation shows, Eqs. (\ref{covariantes}) give \begin{eqnarray} \sigma &=& -2m,\label{cov1}\\ \omega &=& 0,\label{cov2}\\ J_0 &=& 0, \nonumber\\ J_1 &=& 2im\cos\theta\cos\phi,\nonumber \\ J_2 &=& 2im\cos\theta\sin\phi,\nonumber\\ J_3 &=& -2im\sin\theta, \label{cov3}\\ K_0 &=& 0,\nonumber\\ K_1 &=& -2m\sin\phi,\nonumber\\ K_2 &=& 2m\cos\phi,\nonumber\\ K_3 &=& 0,\label{cov4} \end{eqnarray} and \begin{eqnarray} S_{01} &=& -2im\sin\theta\cos\phi,\nonumber\\ S_{02} &=& -2im\sin\theta\sin\phi,\nonumber\\ S_{03} &=& -2im\cos\theta,\nonumber\\ S_{12} &=& S_{13} = S_{23} = 0.\label{cov5} \end{eqnarray} As it can be verified, the above bilinear covariants do not obey the FPK equations. More specifically, the relation containing $S_{\mu\nu}$ is not satisfied. In view of this problem, we revisited the formulation performed in \cite{crawford1} in order to find out an appropriated Clifford basis upon which the bilinear covariants can be constructed, leading to the right verification of the FPK relations. The price to be paid is that only a subset of bilinear covariants comprises real quantities. \subsection{Deformation of the Clifford algebra basis} As it is well known, the very constitutive relation of the Clifford algebra is given by \begin{eqnarray}\label{eita} \lbrace \gamma_{\mu}, \gamma_{\nu}\rbrace = 2g_{\mu\nu}\mathrm{I}, \quad \mu,\nu = 0,1,2,...,N-1, \end{eqnarray} where $g_{\mu\nu}$ is a $N=2n$ even-dimensional space-time metric, which in Cartesian coordinates has the form $diag(1,-1,...,-1)$. The generators of the Clifford algebra are, then, the identity $\mathrm{I}$ and the vectors $\gamma_\mu$, usually represented as square matrices. The standard approach dictates the complementation of the Clifford algebra basis, in order to guarantee real bilinear covariants. This complement is performed by the composition of the vector basis, used as building blocks \cite{crawford1} \begin{eqnarray}\label{gammatil} \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-M}} \equiv \frac{1}{M!}\epsilon_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N}}\gamma^{\mu_{N-M+1}}\gamma^{\mu_{N-M+2...}}\gamma^{\mu_{N}}. \end{eqnarray} As it is easy to see, the lowest $M$ value is two (the smallest combination), nevertheless, it runs in the range $M=2,3,...,N$. In this respect, the elements that form the (real) Clifford algebra basis are \begin{eqnarray}\label{set} \lbrace \Gamma_{i}\rbrace \equiv \lbrace \mathrm{I}, \gamma_{\mu}, \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-2}},..., \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu},\tilde{\gamma}\rbrace, \end{eqnarray} where $\tilde{\gamma}\equiv \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-N}}$. In view of the new elements appearing in the definition of the Elko dual, it is necessary to adequate the Clifford algebra basis complementation. As shown previously, it is absolutely necessary for the right appreciation of the FPK relations. We shall stress that for the Dirac spinorial case, the set (\ref{set}) is suitable deformed (by a slightly different normalization) in order to provide real bilinear covariants. We shall pursue something similar here, and we are successful in correction the problem related to the FPK relations. Notwithstanding, only a subset of bilinear covariants ends up real in the Elko spinorial case. The first two bilinear arising from the Clifford algebra basis are \begin{eqnarray} \sigma &\equiv&\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\mathrm{I}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}),\label{sig}\\ J_{\mu} &\equiv&\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\mu}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\label{jota}, \end{eqnarray} where $\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}) = [\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})]^{\dag}\gamma_0$ is identified as the Elko dual spinor\footnote{We once again refers the reader to the Appendix A for the definition of the dual, as well as its necessity.}. The operator $\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$ is responsible to change the spinor ``helicity'' (better said, the type of Elko spinor), here labeled by $h$. All the details concerning such an operator can be found in Ref. \cite{1305}. The requirement $\sigma=\sigma^\dagger$ leads automatically to $\gamma_0 = \Xi^{\dag}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_0^{\dag}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$ since $\Xi^{2}(\boldsymbol{p})=1$. This constraint is readily satisfied, in such a way that (\ref{sig}) is real\footnote{Notice that it must be proved that the bilinear composed with $\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$'s are covariants. We shall investigate this issue in the next section.}. By the same token, one should require $J_{\mu} = J_{\mu}^{\dag}$. This imposition leads to the constraint $\gamma_0\gamma_{\mu} = \Xi^{\dag}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\mu}^{\dag}\gamma_0^{\dag}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$ which, however, cannot be fulfilled. This is an important point. In fact, the counterpart associated to Dirac spinors is simply $\gamma_0^{-1}\gamma_{\mu}^\dagger\gamma_0=\gamma_\mu$, a constraint naturally achieved. The new dual structure, therefore, has forced a new interpretation of the bilinear covariants. Firstly, as a matter of fact, for mass dimension one spinors $J^\mu$ cannot be associated to the conserved current. Obviously, in order to have $\partial_\mu J^\mu=0$ it is necessary the use of the Dirac equation. This truism has lead to interesting algebraic possibilities \cite{cjr}, but the point to be emphasized here is that there is no problem in having a complex quantity related to the bilinear $J^\mu$. The additional important consequence of an imaginary $J^\mu$ is that in order to satisfy the FPK equations one must have $K^\mu$ or $S^{\mu\nu}$ also imaginary. Notice that, instead of the usual Crawford deformation, here we do not arrive at an entire real bilinear set. In fact, in trying to implement the full reality condition it is mandatory to change the building block of the Clifford basis $\gamma_\mu$. It would inevitably lead, however, to a change in the constitutive algebraic relation of the Clifford algebra (\ref{eita}). Therefore, this change must be excluded. It is important to emphasize, moreover, that even being willing to accept a modification of (\ref{eita}) the resulting constraint to get a real set of bilinears cannot be fulfilled. Having said that, we may proceed deforming the usual basis in order to redefine bilinear covariants which satisfy the FPK identities. Making use of Eq. \eqref{gammatil} and considering that the norm for the Elko spinor is real we have \begin{eqnarray} [\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-M}}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})]^{\dag}= (-1)^{M(M-1)/2}\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-M}}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}). \label{urru} \end{eqnarray} It can be readily verified that the following redefinition of $\tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-M}}$ is appropriate to ensure $K^\mu$ as a real quantity: \begin{eqnarray}\label{gammatil2} \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}...\mu_{N-M}}= (i^{M(M-1)/2}/M!)\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\epsilon_{\mu_{1}...\mu_{N}}\gamma^{\mu_{N-M+1}...}\gamma^{\mu_{N}}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}). \end{eqnarray} With the redefinition above, one is able to define the bispinor Clifford algebra basis as in (\ref{set}), but with the gammas given by (\ref{gammatil2}). As an example, consider the four-dimensional space-time. In this case the basis is given, accordingly, by \begin{eqnarray} M &=& 4 \quad\Rightarrow\quad \tilde{\gamma} = -i \Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}), \\ M &=& 3 \quad\Rightarrow\quad \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu} = -\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\gamma_{\mu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}),\\ M &=& 2 \quad\Rightarrow\quad \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu\nu} = \frac{i}{2}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}) \gamma_{\mu}\gamma_{\nu} \Xi(\boldsymbol{p}), \end{eqnarray} where $\gamma_5=-i\gamma_0\gamma_1\gamma_2\gamma_3$. Now, with the real Clifford algebra basis at hands, it is possible to construct the bilinear forms, given by \begin{eqnarray}\label{Elkonewbilinear} \mathrm{I}&\quad\Rightarrow\quad&\sigma_{E} = \stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\mathrm{I}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}), \nonumber \\ \gamma_{\mu}&\quad\Rightarrow\quad& J_{\mu_{E}}= \stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\mu}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}),\nonumber\\ \tilde{\gamma}&\quad\Rightarrow\quad& \omega_{E} = -i\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}),\\ \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu}&\quad\Rightarrow\quad& K_{\mu_{E}}= -\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\gamma_{\mu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}),\nonumber\\ \tilde{\gamma}_{\mu\nu}&\quad\Rightarrow\quad& S_{\mu\nu_{E}} = i\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}) \Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\mu}\gamma_{\nu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}).\nonumber \end{eqnarray} From above construction, after a simple but tedious checking process, one ensures that the slight modifications of the bilinear covariants are enough to guarantee that the FPK identities \eqref{fpkidentidades} are satisfied. After all, we arrive at $\sigma$ and $K^\mu$ as real non null quantities. As remarked in the Introduction, to the best of our hope these quantities shall be considered in the determination of possible experimental outcomes of the Elko construction. \section{Covariant structure} So far we have worked out quantities defined as (\ref{Elkonewbilinear}) claiming that they must be faced as bilinear covariants. While they are bilinear quantities, their covariant structure must be evinced. All the issue is related to the (necessary) presence of the $\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$ operator. Supposing that the Elko spinor belongs to a linear representation of the symmetry group in question, in such a way that seen in another frame the field undergoes a transformation as \begin{eqnarray}\label{tl} \lambda^{\prime S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}}) = S(\Lambda) \lambda_{h}^{S/A}(\boldsymbol{p}). \end{eqnarray} There is a Dirac-like operator that annihilates Elko \cite{1305} (no related to the field dynamics) given by \begin{eqnarray}\label{eqdiracElko} \big(\gamma_{\mu}p^{\mu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}) \pm m\big)\lambda^{S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})=0, \end{eqnarray} from which we shall investigate the covariance. Applying the transformation \eqref{tl} for the fields in the equation \eqref{eqdiracElko}, we find \begin{eqnarray} \big(\gamma_{\mu}p^{\prime\mu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}) \pm m\big)\lambda^{\prime S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})=0. \end{eqnarray} The momentum can be written as $p^{\mu}\leftrightarrow i\partial^{\mu}$ and the partial derivative transforms usually as $\partial^{\prime\mu} = \Lambda^{\mu}_{\;\;\;\beta}\partial^{\beta}$. Therefore, in order to ensure covariance of Eq. (\ref{eqdiracElko}) it is necessary the following behavior of the Dirac matrices and the $\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$ operator, respectively \begin{eqnarray} \gamma^{\prime}_{\beta} &=& S(\Lambda)\gamma_{\mu}S^{-1}(\Lambda)\Lambda^{\mu}_{\;\;\;\beta},\label{gamma1}\\ \Xi^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{p}) &=& S(\Lambda)\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}) S^{-1}(\Lambda).\label{xi1} \end{eqnarray} Equation (\ref{gamma1}) is the usual requirement to be imputed to the gamma matrices in order to achieve a covariant Dirac equation. The requirement (\ref{xi1}) is the new ingredient of the Elko theory, which must be investigated. Interestingly enough, from the expression \eqref{XI}, along with \eqref{gamma1}, it is possible to see that \cite{1305,speranca} \begin{eqnarray} \Xi^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{p}) &=&\frac{1}{2m}\Big( \lambda^{\prime S}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\bar{\lambda}^{\prime S}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}}) + \lambda^{\prime S}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\bar{\lambda}^{\prime S}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}}) - \lambda^{\prime A}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\bar{\lambda}^{\prime A}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})-\lambda^{\prime A}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\bar{\lambda}^{\prime A}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}}) \Big), \\ &=& \frac{1}{2m}S(\Lambda)\Big( \lambda^{S}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})\bar{\lambda}^{S}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p}) + \lambda^{S}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})\bar{\lambda}^{S}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p}) - \lambda^{A}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})\bar{\lambda}^{A}_{\lbrace +-\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})-\lambda^{A}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p})\bar{\lambda}^{A}_{\lbrace -+\rbrace}(\boldsymbol{p}) \Big)\gamma_0 S^{\dag}(\Lambda)\gamma_0, \end{eqnarray} and therefore \begin{eqnarray} \Xi^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{p}) = S(\Lambda)\Xi(\boldsymbol{p}) S^{-1}(\Lambda), \end{eqnarray} as expected. Once verified the right transformations, we are able to evince the bilinear quantities. Starting from $\sigma$, we have \begin{eqnarray} \sigma_{E}^{\prime} &=& \stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}^{\prime S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\lambda^{\prime S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p^{\prime}})\\ &=&\lambda^{\dag S/A}_h(\boldsymbol{p}) S^{\dag}(\Lambda)S^{-1\dag}(\Lambda)\Xi^{\dag}(\boldsymbol{p}) S^{\dag}(\Lambda)\gamma_0 S(\Lambda)\lambda^{S/A}_h(\boldsymbol{p}) \\ &=& \stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}^{S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda^{S/A}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}),\\ &=& \sigma_{E}, \end{eqnarray} implying $\sigma$ a scalar. Repeating the same procedure for the remaining bilinear forms, we obtain \begin{eqnarray} J^{\prime}_{\mu_{E}}&\rightarrow & \Lambda^{\nu}_{\mu}\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\nu}\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}), \quad \mbox{(Vector)},\\ \omega^{\prime}_{E} &\rightarrow & det(\Lambda)i\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}), \quad \mbox{(Scalar)},\\ K^{\prime}_{\mu_{E}}&\rightarrow & -det(\Lambda)\Lambda^{\nu}_{\;\;\;\mu}i\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p})\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_5\gamma_{\nu}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}), \quad \mbox{(Vector)},\\ S^{\prime}_{\mu\nu_{E}} &\rightarrow & \frac{i}{2} \Lambda^{\alpha}_{\;\;\;\rho} \Lambda^{\beta}_{\;\;\;\vartheta}\stackrel{\neg}{\lambda}_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}) \Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\lambda_{h}(\boldsymbol{p}), \quad \mbox{(Bivector).} \end{eqnarray} Therefore, the nomenclature previously adopted is indeed adequate to the case at hands. We shall finalize pointing out that the investigation of covariance in which concerns $SIM(2)$, $HOM(2)$ Lorentz subgroups is taken into account in Appendix B. The analysis is quite analogous, and the physical statements are essentially the same. \section{Final Remarks} In this paper we have shown that it is necessary to deform the usual Clifford algebra in order to ascertain the right observance of the Fierz-Pauli-Kofink identities, regarding Elko spinor fields. As a result, only a subset of bilinear covariants are real. After have found the proper deformation, and observed its dependence on the new dual operator, we study the covariance of the relevant quantities showing explicitly its behavior under a typical transformation of the relativistic group in question. We would like to finalize this paper by returning to the point raised at the end of the introductory Section. As already mentioned, in Refs. \cite{1305,Ahluwa2} it is described a subtle way to evade Weinberg's no-go theorem, by exploring another possibility of the dual structure, this time constructing the dual with the additional requirement of Lorentz invariant spin sums. Additional mathematical support was given in \cite{nosso}. In the formulation presented in \cite{1305}, it was taken a great care in the new dual structure in order not to jeopardize the simplest bilinear $\sigma$, i. e., it was required the spinor as an eigenspinor of the new operator, say $\mathcal{O}$ \footnote{in this context, we work in an abstract way, calling the new operators $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$, defined in \cite{1305}, by $\mathcal{O}$ aiming to simplify the notation.}, entering into the dual redefinition. By assuming associativity between $\mathcal{O}$ and $S$, whose meaning is the same of Section III (except that the full Lorentz group is the relativistic group at hands), and that Eq. (\ref{eqdiracElko}) still holding, we have \begin{eqnarray} (i\gamma_\mu \Lambda^{\mu}_{\beta}\partial^{' \beta}\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\pm m)(S(\Lambda)\mathcal{O})^{-1}\mathcal{O}^{'}\lambda_\alpha^{'S/A}=0, \end{eqnarray} which can be recast into the form \begin{eqnarray} (i\gamma^{'}_{\beta}\partial^{'\beta}S(\Lambda)\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})\mathcal{O}^{-1}S^{-1}(\Lambda)\mathcal{O}^{'}\pm m S(\Lambda)(S(\Lambda)\mathcal{O})^{-1}\mathcal{O}^{'})\lambda_\alpha^{'S/A}=0. \end{eqnarray} Therefore the following identifications immediately hold \begin{eqnarray} S(\Lambda)\mathcal{O}^{-1}S^{-1}(\Lambda)\mathcal{O}^{'}=1, \label{ulti} \\ \Xi^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{p})=S(\Lambda)\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})(S(\Lambda)\mathcal{O})^{-1}\mathcal{O}^{'}. \label{ma} \end{eqnarray} From (\ref{ulti}) one sees that the new operator must transform as $\mathcal{O}^{'}=S(\Lambda)\mathcal{O}S^{-1}(\Lambda)$, leading to the same transformation rule of (\ref{xi1}) for the operator $\Xi(\boldsymbol{p})$. In this vein the covariance of (\ref{eqdiracElko}) is ensured. The whole covariant analysis of the corresponding bilinear quantities, then, follow immediately leading essentially to the same results. \section*{Acknowledgements} JMHS thanks to CNPq (445385/2014-6; 304629/2015-4) for partial financial support. CHCV thanks to PEC-PG and RJBR thanks to CAPES for partial financial support.
\section{Introduction} \label{secIntroduction} Oceans, terrestrial systems, and the atmosphere form the three primary carbon reservoirs on the earth (\citealp{Batjes1996}). The amount of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems is nearly three times that of the atmosphere, and while its size is dwarfed by the ocean's carbon storage, terrestrial carbon is much more dynamic (\citealp{Batjes1996}). Soil organic carbon (SOC), a generic term for the carbon found in soil's organic matter, constitutes approximately two-thirds of the carbon in terrestrial ecosystems and is an important component in the earth's carbon cycle (\citealp{Nature}). The carbon in soil is in continuous interaction with the atmosphere via processes such as plant growth and decomposition (\citealp{Bliss2014}), and SOC helps mitigate the negative consequences of global changes in climate by sequestering carbon released into the atmosphere by fossil fuel combustion (\citealp{EcoApp}; \citealp{Nature}). In addition to its relevance to the earth's climate, SOC is important in forestry and agriculture, as organic matter contributes to soil fertility by helping retain moisture and supply plant nutrients (\citealp{Bliss2014}; \citealp{Post2000}). Furthermore, SOC is one of the soil properties used by hydrologists to better understand how precipitation is processed by different land surfaces and contributes to surface and ground water quality (\citealp{Bliss2014}). Because of the broad relevance of SOC to climate and agriculture, the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) initiated the Rapid Carbon Assessment (RaCA) project in 2010 (\citealp{RaCA_Data}). The goal of the RaCA project was to collect measurements of the carbon content of soil across the conterminous United States at a single point in time. Specifically, the project emphasized collecting spatially-referenced SOC measurements or ``stocks", i.e., the amount of SOC in a volume (area and depth of soil) to produce ``statistically reliable quantitative estimates of amounts and distribution of carbon stocks for U.S. soils under various land covers'' (\citealp{RaCA_Data}). Since the collection of SOC data is highly limited by time and cost constraints (\citealp{Sleutel2003}; \citealp{Goidts2007}), SOC is measured only at limited locations. Thus, there is a need for statistical methods to predict SOC concentration at unobserved locations using the RaCA data. In this paper, we consider the problem of spatial prediction of SOC concentration based on RaCA measurements. While geostatistical methods have previously been used for this purpose (albeit not for the RaCA data set; see \citealp{Simbahan2006}), these analyses have relied on an assumption of second-order stationarity in SOC over space. As we demonstrate in Section \ref{secData}, this assumption is inappropriate because SOC shows evidence of second-order nonstationary behavior on regional scales. However, existing methods (both stationary and nonstationary) with off-the-shelf software are inadequate for spatial prediction of SOC, as they yield either unrealistic prediction maps or a noninformative characterization of prediction error. Since it is well-documented that SOC is influenced by covariate information such as land use (\citealp{EcoApp}) and soil properties (\citealp{Mishra2009}), we propose a novel approach for spatial prediction of SOC that uses these spatially-referenced covariates to describe the second-order nonstationarity in SOC. Existing approaches for covariate-driven nonstationary spatial modeling (\citealp{calder08}; \citealp{schmidt11}; \citealp{reich2011}; \citealp{ViannaNeto}; \citealp{spde13}; \citealp{Risser15}) require fully-observed spatial covariates, however, in this case the relevant covariates are not observed everywhere a prediction is desired. To address this limitation, we propose a covariate-partitioning approach to nonstationary spatial modeling that uses spatially-referenced covariate information to divide the spatial domain into distinct ``segments." Once defined, these segments partition the domain such that every location is contained in exactly one of these segments, and the SOC process within each segment is assumed to be locally stationary conditional on a particular segmentation. Since it is the segment membership that will be used in our statistical model, not the value of the covariate, spatial prediction does not require covariates to be observed at the prediction location. In spite of the fact that the SOC data display meaningful nonstationarities on regional scales, we acknowledge that quantitative evaluation criteria do not indicate a strong preference for our nonstationary statistical model, relative to approaches with off-the-shelf software. This is not surprising (see, e.g., \citealp{Fuglstad2015}); in any case, another important feature of our approach is that we are able to capture spatial variation in the uncertainty associated with SOC concentration predictions. Unlike traditional geostatistical methods where, for a fixed set of monitoring sites, spatial variation in prediction uncertainty is driven primarily by variation in the geographical distribution of the data (e.g., uncertainty is greatest at locations far from the observations), our approach readily captures how covariates such as land use and soil properties impact the strength of spatial dependence in SOC, which directly informs the assessment of soil carbon stocks. The paper proceeds as follows: in Section \ref{secData}, we introduce the RaCA data in more detail and conduct exploratory analyses, and in Section \ref{secCovtPar} we introduce relevant explanatory variables and their subsequent partitioning. Section \ref{secModel} outlines our covariate-partitioning approach for nonstationary spatial prediction of SOC, and in Section \ref{secResults} we present the results of our fitted model, predictions, and implications for carbon stock assessment. Section \ref{secDiscussion} concludes the paper. \section{RaCA data and exploratory analyses} \label{secData} \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Figure1_socSubset.pdf} \caption{Great Lakes subset of the soil organic carbon stocks data set. } \label{SOCsubset} \end{center} \end{figure} The RaCA data and additional variables such as land use-land cover (LULC) classes, soil series, and soil moisture are available through the {\tt soilDB} package in {\tt R} (\citealp{R_soilDB}), and a summary report of the sampling methods and data description is provided in \cite{RaCA_Data}. While measurements of SOC stocks are available for each site to depths of five, ten, twenty, thirty, fifty, and one hundred centimeters (in Mg C ha$^{-1}$), we use the one hundred centimeter depth measurement since our focus is on estimating total SOC, not a soil depth profile (e.g., \citealp{Minasny2006}; \citealp{Mishra2009}). Our study focuses on a subset of the RaCA SOC measurements collected in the Great Lakes region of the midwestern United States, shown in Figure \ref{SOCsubset}, which contains $790$ observations. \subsection{Variogram analysis} As discussed in Section \ref{secIntroduction}, accurate estimation of the spatial distribution of SOC is hindered by costly and time-consuming data collection, and we are thus motivated to consider spatial statistical methods to predict SOC concentration at unobserved locations. Focusing on the Great Lakes region, we begin with a simple variogram analysis of the SOC data, first calculating the empirical semivariogram and corresponding fitted exponential semivariogram for the entire region. Here and throughout the remainder of the paper, the SOC data is transformed to the $\log$ scale; for the variogram analyses, we use the ordinary least squares (OLS) residuals from a regression of log SOC on latitude, longitude, and the longitude/latitude interaction. Exploratory analysis indicates that the exponential correlation model fits the data well; the fitted exponential semivariogram is shown in Figure \ref{fullVario}(b) with 95\% confidence band (using the parametric bootstrap). \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[trim={65 0 93 0mm}, clip, width=\textwidth]{Figure2_variograms.pdf} \caption{Fitted exponential semivariograms for the entire Great Lakes region (top) and for four arbitrary subregions (bottom), with 95\% confidence bands.} \label{fullVario} \end{center} \end{figure} A simple way to assess the presence of second-order nonstationary behavior in a spatial data set is to split up the spatial domain into subregions and conduct a variogram analysis separately for each subregion. Arbitrarily dividing the Great Lakes region into four parts, we fit an exponential semivariogram to the OLS residuals in each subregion. The subregion-specific semivariograms {with 95\% confidence bands} (again using the parametric bootstrap) are shown in Figure \ref{fullVario}(d): the fitted semivariograms indicate that the subregions display quite different spatial dependence patterns. These differences are significant, as indicated by the non-overlapping uncertainty bands, which motivates a nonstationary spatial model for the SOC data where the spatial dependence properties vary over the spatial domain. \subsection{Off-the-shelf spatial prediction} \label{subsecOffshelf} {Various packages in \texttt{R} are readily available for the analysis of spatial data, some developed for stationary processes and some accommodating nonstationary ones. Here, we summarize and report on the prediction results obtained by applying different models with off-the-shelf software to our SOC data.} All models were fitted using 20,000 MCMC iterations with the first 10,000 discarded as burn-in and with no thinning of the chain. All the spatial models use an exponential correlation structure, {as this was deemed to provide a good representation of the dependence structure in the data, and all use uninformative, most times uniform, priors on model parameters.} \vskip2ex \noindent {\textit{Bayesian additive regression trees}}. Bayesian additive regression trees (BART; \citealp{chipman:etal:2010}) is a Bayesian sum-of-trees model that has been shown to perform well in a variety of settings, particularly for prediction \citep[see, for example,][]{bonato:etal:2011, ding:etal:2012, green:kern:2012}. Because of its predictive skill, {we spatially predict (log) SOC using BART as implemented in the} \texttt{BayesTree} package for \texttt{R}. In {applying} BART {to the SOC data, we use} latitude and longitude as covariates for the mean function. \vskip2ex \noindent {\textit{Treed Gaussian process}}. {Related to BART is the non-stationary treed Gaussian process (TGP) model of \cite{GramacyLee} in which tree partitions are defined by segmenting the coordinate axes, and partitioning uncertainty is accounted for through a model averaging approach (\citealp{BMA1999}). The TGP model is implemented in the {\tt tgp} package for {\tt R} (\citealp{tgp}), which we use with all the defaults on (log) SOC. As in BART, latitude and longitude are used as main effects in the mean function.} \vskip2ex \noindent {\textit{Gaussian predictive process}}. {Given the moderately large dimension of the RaCA dataset}, {we also consider} an off-the-shelf implementation of the Gaussian predictive process (PP) model of \cite{Banerjee2008}, which is specifically designed to account for large spatial data sets. The PP works by constructing an approximation to a Gaussian process {by} projecting realizations of the process of interest onto a lower dimensional space spanned by the predictive process knots, thereby reducing the computational burden. {By construction, the PP is technically non-stationary, and the PP model provides a non-stationary approximation to any stationary covariance function.} We fit a PP {model to our SOC data using the {\tt spBayes} package for {\tt R} (\citealp{Finley2007}; \citealp{Finley2013}) specifying $103$ knots and a constant mean.} \vskip2ex \noindent {\textit{Bayesian stationary Gaussian process}}. {The PP model reduces to a Bayesian stationary Gaussian process model if the predictive process knots are taken to be exactly the observation locations. Using the {\tt spBayes} package and the {\tt spLM} function with default prior settings, we generate spatial predictions of log SOC using a traditional Bayesian stationary (isotropic) spatial Gaussian process model with mean (log) SOC specified as a linear function of longitude and latitude.} \begin{table}[!t] \caption{A summary of the models fit to the SOC data. (GP indicates a Gaussian process; lat/lon refers to latitude/longitude.) All spatial models use an exponential correlation function. Computational times correspond to fitting the model to the full data set ($n = 790$).} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|p{1.15cm}\|p{3.5cm}\|p{1.5cm}\|p{1.6cm} \| p{2.35cm}\|} \hline \textbf{Label} & \textbf{Details} & \textbf{Mean function} & \textbf{\texttt{R} package} & \textbf{Computational time} \\ \hline\hline BART$^\ddagger$ & Bayesian additive regression trees & Lat/lon as inputs & \texttt{BayesTree} & 12.4 minutes$^\dagger$ \\ \hline TGP$^\ddagger$ & Bayesian treed GP & Lat/lon for inputs and mean & \texttt{tgp} & 13.1 minutes$^\dagger$ \\ \hline PP$^\ddagger$ & Bayesian Predictive Process (r = 103 knots) & Constant & \texttt{spBayes} & 2.4 minutes$^\dagger$ \\ \hline SGP$^\ddagger$ & Bayesian stationary GP & Lat/lon & \texttt{spBayes} & 19.4 minutes$^\dagger$ \\ \hline \hline NSGP & Bayesian nonstationary GP & Constant & n/a & 7.0 (max), 3.4 (avg.) minutes$^\dagger$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \label{modelComp} \begin{flushleft} \vskip-2ex {\scriptsize $^\dagger$Time given for an Intel Core i7 3.1 GHz machine (16 GB memory) for 20000 MCMC iterations.}\\ {\scriptsize $^\ddagger$Methods using available off-the-shelf software.}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{table}% \vskip2ex \noindent {Rows 2-5 in Table \ref{modelComp} summarize the different models applied to the (log) SOC data, with details on the mean function specification, the \texttt{R} package used to implement the model, and the computational time that it takes to fit each model. Surfaces of (log) SOC obtained by generating predictions on a fine grid covering the entire spatial domain using each of the aforementioned methods are presented in Figure \ref{otherPreds}. Specifically, from left to right, the panels show the posterior mean (top) and standard deviation (bottom) of the predictions using BART, TGP, SGP, and PP. Clearly, none of these models appear to be appropriate for the data: BART does not yield scientifically meaningful predictions with the artificial horizontal and vertical lines, and while the three other spatial models produce prediction maps that are generally smooth they are characterized by uncertainty prediction maps that are either unrealistic for an environmental process like log SOC (see TGP), or uninformative since they are almost constant in space.} \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figure8_OthermodelavgdPreds.pdf} \caption{Posterior mean predictions (top) and corresponding posterior standard deviations (bottom) for log SOC in the Great Lakes region, using the models BART (left), TGP (left-center), PP (right-center), and SGP (right). (Note: both color bars have the same limits as in Figure \ref{maPreds}.)} \label{otherPreds} \end{center} \end{figure} {To address the limitations of these off-the-shelf methods, and to model the globally non-stationary but locally stationary nature of the SOC data highlighted in Section~\ref{secData}, in Sections \ref{secCovtPar} and \ref{secModel} we move on to introduce a novel segmentation-based model for non-stationary spatial processes with partitions informed by covariates.} \section{Covariate-driven partitioning} \label{secCovtPar} \sloppypar{ Returning to the exploratory analysis in Section \ref{secData}, it is clear that partitioning the domain captures {the} nonstationary behavior in SOC for the Great Lakes region. However, there are three problems associated with the subregion-specific variogram analyses. First, the arbitrary partitioning of our domain as in Figure \ref{fullVario} is not scientifically meaningful: in other words, it provides no way of understanding why the different subregions exhibit nonstationarities. Second, generating predictions of SOC based only on separately or independently fitted variograms for each subregion does not comprise an appropriate spatial model, because no information is shared across the subregions. Third, the fitted semivariogram estimates are likely sensitive to the specific partition used in Figure \ref{fullVario}; in other words, we might want to account for uncertainty in the partition itself.} \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[trim={0 0 40 0mm}, clip, width=\textwidth]{Figure3_covariates.pdf} \caption{The Great Lakes region subset of the Rapid Carbon Assessment (RaCA) land use-land cover classes (left) and drainage classes. For land use, CRP refers to a Conservation Reserve Program cropland site. For drainage class, the labels are as follows: VPD = very poorly drained, SPD = somewhat poorly drained, PD = poorly drained, MWD = moderately well drained, WD = well drained, SED = somewhat excessively drained, ED = excessively drained. } \label{LU_DC} \end{center} \end{figure} A solution to the first problem is to partition the spatial domain based on {covariate information}. As discussed in Section \ref{secIntroduction}, there are well-documented relationships between SOC and a number of covariate variables, for example, land use-land cover (LULC) class and drainage class. Both of these categorical variables are available in the {\tt soilDB} package in {\tt R} (\citealp{R_soilDB}). According to \cite{RaCA_Data}, the LULC classes were developed specifically for the RaCA project to correspond to the classes and definitions of the Natural Resources Inventory. RaCA designated five specific LULC classes (four of which are represented in the Great Lakes region subset), namely cropland, farmland, pastureland, rangeland, and wetland, with one additional category for any cropland site that was also known to correspond to a Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The drainage class variable refers to ``the frequency and duration of wet periods under conditions similar to those under which the soil developed. Alteration of the water regime by man, either through drainage or irrigation, is not a consideration unless the alterations have significantly changed the morphology of the soil'' (NRCS Soil Survey Manual, chapter 3). Plots of the subsetted LULC and drainage class variables are shown in Figure \ref{LU_DC}. Given the known relationships between SOC and these variables as well as the rich literature on covariate-driven nonstationary modeling, we are motivated to use these covariates to describe the second-order nonstationary behavior exhibited by SOC over the Great Lakes region. In other words, our hypothesis is that both the first- and second-order properties of SOC might be similar in areas where the covariates are homogeneous. {H}owever, measurements of LULC and drainage class are not available for every prediction location of interest, {which render} the nonstationary models of \cite{reich2011}, \cite{ViannaNeto}, \cite{spde13}, and \cite{Risser15} {unusable in this situation}. {Hence, here we propose} to partition the spatial domain based on the multivariate spatial distribution of LULC and drainage class. This provides scientifically meaningful partitioning, and also accounts for the fact that we are dealing with incompletely observed covariates. {Having defined a partitioning of the spatial domain, we can use an} approach {similar to one} outlined in \cite{fuentes2001} (see Section \ref{secModel}) {to define a globally non-stationary, locally-stationary spatial process}. Finally, to both account for uncertainty in the partitioning \textit{and} introduce spatial dependence in SOC across subregions{, we propose to use a Bayesian model averaging framework (\citealp{BMA1999})}. There are a variety of methods in the statistics literature for obtaining partitions of a multivariate space (here, geographic space, i.e., latitude and longitude) based on multivariate inputs (here, LULC and drainage class). For this paper, we use multivariate cluster-wise regression, also called multivariate latent class regression (see, e.g., \citealp{Leisch2004}; \citealp{Muller2011}). Before describing this approach, we establish some terminology: we define a \textit{partition} of the spatial domain $\mathcal{D}$ as the assignment of each location in the geographical space to a particular subregion. In a partition, each location is assigned to exactly one subregion and collectively the subregions comprise the entire spatial domain. Also, we define a \textit{segment} as an individual subregion: therefore, a partition is made up of a set of segments. We use $\mathcal{P}$ to denote a generic partition, made up of segments $\{ \mathcal{S}_1, \dots, \mathcal{S}_K \}$. By definition, $\mathcal{P} = \cup_k \mathcal{S}_k$ and $\mathcal{S}_k \cap \mathcal{S}_{k'} = \varnothing$ for $k \neq k'$. \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figure4_mixtures.pdf} \caption{Finite mixture models used to generate the candidate partitions. The plotted points represent locations with a non-missing observation of both the drainage class and land use variables.} \label{mixtures} \end{center} \end{figure} It is trivial to note that determining the segments of a partition $\mathcal{P}$ of the spatial domain $\mathcal{D}$ is equivalent to clustering the geographical coordinates of points within $\mathcal{D}$. In particular, if the segments of the partition are to be characterized by the fact that the covariate processes are similar within each segment, then the clustering mechanism ought to be informed by the covariates. \cite{Leisch2004} and \cite{Muller2011} propose two different approaches to achieve covariate-informed clustering: the first approach falls in the model-based clustering category, and the second falls in the class of product partition models (thus, specified in a Bayesian nonparametric framework). For computational simplicity, we follow \cite{Leisch2004} and use a model-based clustering approach. Working with a two-dimensional spatial domain (i.e., latitude and longitude of locations) we model the bivariate vector of coordinates $(s_1, s_2)$ for each point $\mathbf{s}\in \mathcal{D}$ as arising from a mixture of bivariate normal distributions where the mean and the covariance matrix are mixture-component specific. In other words, given a pre-specified and finite number $K$ of clusters, we assume \begin{equation} {\bf s} = \left( s_1, s_2 \right) \sim \sum_{k=1}^{K} \pi_k(\mathbf{s}) \cdot N_{2} ({\bf s}; \mathbf{m}_k, \mathbf{D}_k), \label{eq:clusters} \end{equation} {where $N_{d} (x; m, V)$ is the $d$-variate Gaussian density with mean $m$ and covariance $V$ evaluated at $x$.} The \texttt{flexmix} package in \texttt{R} allows us to fit this class of models for fixed $K$ using the EM algorithm. Taking the observation locations of the two spatial covariates (LULC and drainage class) as data for model (\ref{eq:clusters}) and using the \texttt{flexmix} package with $K$ ranging from 2 to {6}, we obtain multiple potential partitions of the observation locations of the covariate processes, shown in Figure \ref{mixtures}. The mixture for a specified number of segments is non-unique (in other words, the EM algorithm converges to several different local modes), and after re-starting the algorithm several times for each $K$ we selected the best mixture(s) based on EM convergence and the log-likelihood. However, note that Figure \ref{mixtures} only provides partitions for locations where we have a measurement of the spatial covariates. As will be seen in Section \ref{secModel}, we require partitions of the locations where we have SOC measurements (which differ from the covariate measurement locations) as well as all locations on a fine grid for generating predictions. When fitting model (\ref{eq:clusters}) to the latitude and longitude coordinates of the covariate locations using the package \texttt{flexmix}, we obtain as a byproduct the {bivariate Gaussian densities from (\ref{eq:clusters}), which can be defined for any location $\mathbf{s}\in \mathcal{D}$. Based on the $K$ segment probabilities, we assign each location to a segment by taking the maximum of the bivariate Gaussian densities, i.e., the segment for location ${\bf s}$ is defined as $\max_k \{ N_{2} ({\bf s}; \mathbf{m}_k, \mathbf{D}_k) \}$. Thus the eight mixtures in Figure \ref{mixtures} yield eight partitions of the spatial domain (not shown), denoted $\{ \mathcal{P}_j: j = 1, \dots, 8 \}$, with segments denoted $\{ \mathcal{S}_{jk} : k = 1, \dots, K_j\}$.} \section{A partition-based nonstationary spatial Gaussian process model} \label{secModel} The covariate partitions $\{ \mathcal{P}_j: j = 1, \dots, 8 \}$ {defined in Section~\ref{secCovtPar}} can be used to model {both} first- and second-order nonstationarities in SOC as follows. Let $Z(\cdot)$ represent observed log SOC, where we model $Z(\cdot)$ as a spatial stochastic process defined for all ${\bf s}\in\mathcal{D}$ (here, $\mathcal{D}$ denotes the Great Lakes region of the United States). For all ${\bf s} \in \mathcal{D}$, let \begin{equation} \label{model} Z({\bf s}) = \mu({\bf s}) + Y({\bf s}) + \varepsilon({\bf s}), \end{equation} where $E[Z({\bf s})] = \mu({\bf s})$ is a deterministic mean function, $Y(\cdot)$ is a mean-zero latent spatial Gaussian process, and $\varepsilon(\cdot)$ is an error process that is assumed to be independent of $Y(\cdot)$. We observe the value of $Z(\cdot)$ at a fixed, finite set of locations $\{ {\bf s}_1, {\bf s}_2, \dots, {\bf s}_n \} \in \mathcal{D}$ (see Figure \ref{SOCsubset}) and wish to use these observations to learn about the underlying processes and generate predictions at unobserved locations. In Section \ref{subsecCond}, we outline a statistical model for log SOC conditional on a single partition $\mathcal{P}_j$, and in Section \ref{subsecMCMC} we outline the model fitting for each conditional model. Then, in Section \ref{subsecBMA} we describe a model-averaging approach to posterior prediction that incorporates all candidate partitions. \subsection{Conditional model specification} \label{subsecCond} Conditional on the $K_j$ segments $\{ \mathcal{S}_{jk} : k = 1, \dots, K_j\}$ of partition $\mathcal{P}_j$, we first model $Y(\cdot)$ as a mixture of stationary processes (\citealp{fuentes2001}), i.e., \begin{equation}\label{discretesum} Y({\bf s}) = \sum_{k=1}^{K_j} w_{jk}({\bf s})\widetilde{Y}_{jk}({\bf s}), \end{equation} where the $\widetilde{Y}_{jk}(\cdot)$ are orthogonal and stationary, and $w_{jk}(\cdot)$ is a positive kernel weight function such that $w_{jk}({\bf s}) \geq 0$ and $\sum_{k=1}^{K_j }[w_{jk}({\bf s})]^2 = 1$ for all ${\bf s} \in \mathcal{D}$ (following \citealp{reich2011}). Define the covariance function of each $\widetilde{Y}_{jk}(\cdot)$ to be $\widetilde{C}_{jk}$; then, the covariance function of $Y(\cdot)$ is \begin{equation} \label{discSumCF} \Cov\big(Y({\bf s}), Y({\bf s}')\big) \equiv C({\bf s}, {\bf s}') = \sum_{k=1}^{K_j} w_{jk}({\bf s}) w_{jk}({\bf s}') \widetilde{C}_{jk}({\bf s} - {\bf s}'), \end{equation} which is a valid nonstationary covariance function. For each $\widetilde{C}_{jk}$, we use an anisotropic version of the parametric Mat\'ern model \begin{equation} \label{maternMod} \widetilde{C}_{jk}({\bf s} - {\bf s}'; {\boldsymbol \theta}_{jk}) = \frac{ \sigma_{jk}^2 }{\Gamma(\nu_{jk})2^{\nu_{jk} - 1}} \left[ \sqrt{Q_{jk}({\bf s}-{\bf s}')} \right]^{\nu_{jk}} \mathcal{B}_{\nu_{jk}} \left( \sqrt{Q_{jk}({\bf s}-{\bf s}')} \right). \end{equation} In (\ref{maternMod}), $\mathcal{B}_{\nu_{jk}}(\cdot)$ denotes the modified Bessel function of the third kind of order $\nu_{jk}$, $Q_{jk}({\bf s} - {\bf s}') = \|\|{\bf \Sigma}^{-1/2}_{jk} ({\bf s} - {\bf s}')\|\|^2$ is a squared Mahalanobis distance with anisotropy matrix ${\bf \Sigma}_{jk}$ parameterized according to its spectral decomposition, i.e. (for $d=2$), \begin{equation} \label{anisoMatrix} {\bf \Sigma}_{jk} = \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \cos(\eta_{jk}) & - \sin(\eta_{jk}) \\ \sin(\eta_{jk}) & \cos(\eta_{jk}) \end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \phi^{(1)}_{jk} & 0 \\ 0 & \phi^{(2)}_{jk} \end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{cc} \cos(\eta_{jk}) & \sin(\eta_{jk}) \\ -\sin(\eta_{jk}) & \cos(\eta_{jk}) \end{array} \right], \end{equation} and ${\boldsymbol \theta}_{jk} = (\sigma^2_{jk}, \nu_{jk}, \phi^{(1)}_{jk}, \phi^{(2)}_{jk}, \eta_{jk})$ is a vector of parameters that control the variance, smoothness, and anisotropy of $\widetilde{Y}_{jk}(\cdot)$. In the anisotropy matrices (\ref{anisoMatrix}), $\phi^{(1)}_{jk}$ and $\phi^{(2)}_{jk}$ represent directional ``ranges'' (i.e., inverse decay parameters) and $\eta_{jk}$ represents an angle of rotation; these parameters allow for locally elliptical correlation patterns. In general, we might propose a similar model for the mean behavior $\mu(\cdot)$, i.e., $\mu({\bf s}) = \sum_{k=1}^{K_j} w_{jk}({\bf s})\widetilde{\mu}_{jk}({\bf s})$, where $\widetilde{\mu}_{jk}({\bf s})$ can accommodate any mean structure, including (in the case of a linear mean) fully observed covariates and segment-specific intercepts. For log SOC, we considered a variety of segment-specific mean functions involving latitude and longitude, but found that using a constant mean across all segments performed as well as a model with a global mean latitude and longitude coefficients. {Furthermore, a model with constant spatial mean performed as well as a model with a different intercept in each segment.} Thus, we set $\widetilde{\mu}_{jk}({\bf s}) \equiv \mu_j$ for all $k$. To complete the specification of our model (\ref{model}), we suppose that the error process $\varepsilon({\bf s})$ is spatially independent and Gaussian. Similar to (\ref{discretesum}), we model $\varepsilon({\bf s}) = \sum_{k=1}^{K_j} w_{jk}({\bf s})\widetilde{\varepsilon}_{jk}({\bf s})$, where each $\widetilde{\varepsilon}_{jk}({\bf s}) \stackrel{\text{iid}}{\sim} N(0, \tau^2_{jk})$. Thus, we expand the ${\boldsymbol \theta}_{jk}$ vector to include the variance $\tau^2_{jk}$; collect all of the variance/covariance parameters across segments into a single vector \[ {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} = \{ {\boldsymbol \theta}_{j1}, \dots, {\boldsymbol \theta}_{jK_j} \}. \] In this paper, the weight functions $w_{jk}(\cdot)$ for partition $\mathcal{P}_j$ are chosen to be indicator functions for segment $\mathcal{S}_{jk}$, i.e., $w_{jk}({\bf s}) = \mathbbm{1}({\bf s} \in \mathcal{S}_{jk})$ (following, e.g., \citealp{GramacyLee}). In this case, for partition $\mathcal{P}_j$, the process $Y(\cdot)$ and therefore $Z(\cdot)$ is now locally stationary within each $\mathcal{S}_{jk}$ and independent across the $\mathcal{S}_{jk}$, conditional on $\mathcal{P}_j$. For the random observed vector ${\bf Z} \equiv ( Z({\bf s}_1), \dots, Z({\bf s}_n) )^\top$, the indicator weight function implies a conditional likelihood for ${\bf Z}$, \begin{equation} \label{likelihood} p({\bf Z}\| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j) \propto \prod_{k=1}^{K_j} \Big\|{\bf V}_{jk} + {\bf \Omega}_{jk}\Big\|^{-1/2} \hskip27ex \end{equation} \[ \hskip15ex \times \exp\left\{ -\frac{1}{2} ({\bf Z}_{jk} - \mu_j{\bf 1}_{jk})^\top ({\bf V}_{jk} + {\bf \Omega}_{jk})^{-1} ({\bf Z}_{jk} - \mu_j{\bf 1}_{jk}) \right\}, \] which is the product of segment-specific multivariate Gaussian likelihoods. In (\ref{likelihood}), the ``$jk$'' subscript partitions each term into its partition- and segment-specific components, e.g., ${\bf Z}_{jk} = \{ Z({\bf s}_i): {\bf s}_i \in \mathcal{S}_{jk}\}$; ${\bf V}_{jk} = \tau^2_{jk} {\bf I}$ captures a partition-/segment-specific measurement error variance; the elements of ${\bf \Omega}_{jk}$ come from $\widetilde{C}_{jk}$. Note that the likelihood for ${\bf Z}$ in (\ref{likelihood}) is \textit{conditional} on $\mathcal{P}_j$. As a result, the partition controls the second-order properties of $Z(\cdot)$ by determining independent regions of local stationarity. As mentioned previously, the partition could also specify first-order properties, although for SOC we have not used this property. Still conditional on $\mathcal{P}_j$, we factor the prior distribution as $p(\mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \|\mathcal{P}_j) = p(\mu_j \|\mathcal{P}_j) \times p({\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \|\mathcal{P}_j)$. The prior on $\mu_j$ is proper but noninformative and conjugate for the likelihood (\ref{likelihood}), i.e., $p(\mu_j \|\mathcal{P}_j) = N({ 0}, 100^2)$. The prior for ${\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}$ is conditional on the partition since $\mathcal{P}_j$ controls the dimension of ${\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}$. Based on the variogram analysis in Section \ref{secData}, we choose to use a smoothness ($\nu$) which is constant across segments and fixed to be $\nu = 0.5$ (true for all partitions), corresponding to an exponential correlation structure in (\ref{maternMod}). Otherwise, \begin{equation} \label{theta_Prior} p({\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \|\mathcal{P}_j) = \prod_{k=1}^{K_j} p( \tau_{jk}^2) p( \sigma_{jk}^2) p( \phi^{(1)}_{jk} ) p( \phi^{(2)}_{jk} ) p( \eta_{jk}) \end{equation} (the conditioning on $\mathcal{P}_j$ on the right hand side is suppressed). Each component of (\ref{theta_Prior}) is noninformative and proper: for $k=1, \dots, K_j$, \begin{equation} \begin{array} {c} p(\tau_{jk}^2) = \text{Uniform}(0, 100), \hskip3ex p(\sigma_{jk}^2) = \text{Uniform}(0, 100), \\[1ex] p(\phi^{(1)}_{jk}) = \text{Uniform}(0, \sqrt{2}), \hskip3ex p(\phi^{(2)}_{jk}) = \text{Uniform}(0, \sqrt{2}), \\[1ex] p(\eta_{jk}) = \text{Uniform}[0, \pi/2]. \end{array} \end{equation} Uniform priors for the variance parameters $\tau^2$ and $\sigma^2$ are used in place of more traditional conjugate inverse-Gamma priors to avoid prior bias in the case where an individual segment contains a small number of observations (following \citealp{Gelman2006}). For this analysis, the longitude/latitude coordinates of locations within each cluster were rescaled to lie in $[0,1] \times [0,1]$ to improve mixing of the MCMC; therefore, the upper limits for the priors on the anisotropy matrix eigenvalues, $\phi^{(1)}_{jk}$ and $\phi^{(2)}_{jk}$ (which correspond to squared ranges of dependence) are set to $\sqrt{2}$, which is the maximum distance on $[0,1] \times [0,1]$. The reasoning behind this choice is that the squared spatial range of the process within a segment is not expected to exceed the size of the segment. The limits on the prior for $\eta_{jk}$ are set to ensure identifiability (following, e.g., \citealp{Katzfuss2013}). \subsection{Model fitting and MCMC} \label{subsecMCMC} Conditional on partition $\mathcal{P}_j$, the posterior distribution is \begin{equation} \label{condPost} p(\mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \| \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z}) \propto p({\bf Z}\| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j) \cdot p(\mu_j \|\mathcal{P}_j) \cdot p({\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \|\mathcal{P}_j), \end{equation} which combines (\ref{likelihood}) and priors defined in Section \ref{subsecCond}. As usual, (\ref{condPost}) is not available in closed form, and we must resort to Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. Posterior samples from (\ref{condPost}) are generated using the {\tt nimble} package for $\R$ (\citealp{nimble_jcgs}): the MCMC for $\mathcal{P}_j$ is run for 20,000 total iterations with 10,000 iterations discarded as burn-in. A univariate Metropolis Hastings sampling step is conducted for the overall mean ($\mu_j$), and adaptive random walk samplers are conducted for the segment-specific variance/covariance parameters ($[\tau^2_{jk}, \sigma^2_{jk}, \phi^{(1)}_{jk}, \phi^{(2)}_{jk}, \eta_{jk}]$, sampled as a block). \subsection{Model-averaged posterior prediction} \label{subsecBMA} Recall from Section \ref{secIntroduction} that our primary goal for using this model is prediction. Define a collection of locations $\{ {\bf s}^_1, \dots, {\bf s}^_m\} \subset \mathcal{D}$ for which we would like to obtain predictions of the corresponding (log) SOC values ${\bf Z}^* = ( Z({\bf s}^_1), \dots, Z({\bf s}^_m) )$. While the statistical model outlined in Section \ref{subsecCond} is conditional on a single partition $\mathcal{P}_j$, using a Bayesian framework we can average over the partitions $\{ \mathcal{P}_j: j = 1, \dots, 8 \}$ from Section \ref{secCovtPar} to obtain the full posterior predictive distribution for ${\bf Z}^$ conditional on observed ${\bf Z=z}$: \begin{equation} \label{postPred} p({\bf Z}^ \| {\bf Z=z} ) = \sum_{j=1}^{8} \int \int p({\bf Z}^, \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j \| {\bf Z=z}) d\mu_j d{\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}. \end{equation} The properties of conditional probabilities allow us to re-write (\ref{postPred}) as \begin{equation} \label{postPred2} p({\bf Z}^ \| {\bf Z=z} ) = \sum_{j=1}^{8} \int \int p({\bf Z}^* \| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z}) \hskip15ex \end{equation} \[ \hskip25ex \times \>\> p(\mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \| \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z}) \times p(\mathcal{P}_j \| {\bf Z=z}) d\mu_j d{\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}. \] This factorization of (\ref{postPred}) greatly simplifies posterior prediction, as follows. Since we are using a Gaussian process model, $p({\bf Z}^* \| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z})$ is multivariate Gaussian: with \begin{equation} \left[ \begin{array}{c} {\bf Z} \\ {\bf Z^} \end{array} \Bigg\| \hskip1ex \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j \hskip1ex \right] \sim {N}_{n+m} \left( \mu_j {\bf 1}_{n+m} , \left[ \begin{array}{cc} {\bf V}_j + {\bf \Omega}_j & {\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf ZZ^} \\ {\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf Z^Z} & {\bf V}_j^* + {\bf \Omega}^_j \end{array} \right] \right), \end{equation} where ${\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf Z^Z} \equiv \text{Cov}_j({\bf Z^, Z})$, it follows that \begin{equation} \label{Zstar} p({\bf Z}^* \| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z}) = {N}_m \left(\boldsymbol{\mu}^{(j)}_{\bf Z^\|z} , {\bf \Sigma}^{(j)}_{\bf Z^\|z} \right), \end{equation} where \[ \boldsymbol{\mu}^{(j)}_{\bf Z^\|z} = \mu_j {\bf 1}_{m} + {\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf Z^Z} ({\bf V}_j + {\bf \Omega}_j)^{-1} ({\bf z} - \mu_j {\bf 1}_{n}), \] \[ {\bf \Sigma}^{(j)}_{\bf Z^\|z} = ( {\bf V}_j^ + {\bf \Omega}_j^* ) - {\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf Z^Z} ({\bf V}_j + {\bf \Omega}_j)^{-1} {\bf \Omega}_j^{\bf ZZ^}. \] The next component in (\ref{postPred2}) is the conditional posterior distribution (\ref{condPost}), while the final component of (\ref{postPred2}) is the posterior probability of each partition $\mathcal{P}_j$ conditional on the data. From Bayes' Theorem, the latter is \begin{equation} \label{modelPost} p(\mathcal{P}_j \| {\bf Z=z}) = \frac{ p({\bf Z} \| \mathcal{P}_j) p(\mathcal{P}_j) }{ \sum_{i=1}^{8} p({\bf Z} \| \mathcal{P}_i) p(\mathcal{P}_i) } = \frac{ p({\bf Z} \| \mathcal{P}_j) }{ \sum_{i=1}^{8} p({\bf Z} \| \mathcal{P}_i) }. \end{equation} The last equality follows from our use of a uniform prior over the different partitions, i.e., $p(\mathcal{P}_j) = 1/8$, $j = 1, \dots, 8$, which is appropriate in this setting because the partitions are defined by the covariates and not SOC. In any case, the important quantity here is the marginal likelihood \begin{equation} \label{margLik} p({\bf Z} \| \mathcal{P}_j) = \int \int p({\bf Z} \| \mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}, \mathcal{P}_j) p(\mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \| \mathcal{P}_j) d\mu_j d{\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}. \end{equation} Estimation of the marginal likelihood is a well-known problem in Bayesian analysis (for more details on our approach, see Appendix \ref{appdxMargLikEstimation}). Combining all of the above, (\ref{postPred2}) suggests the following algorithm to sample from $p({\bf Z}^* \| {\bf Z=z} )$: \begin{enumerate} \item Draw $\mathcal{P}_j $ according to the $p(\mathcal{P}_j \| {\bf Z=z}), j = 1,\dots, 8$. \item Draw $(\mu_j^, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}_)$ from $p(\mu_j, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} \| \mathcal{P} = \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z})$, which is the posterior distribution for the mean and covariance parameters conditional on $\mathcal{P}_j$ (the sampling of which is described in Section \ref{subsecMCMC}). \item Draw ${\bf Z}^$ from $p({\bf Z}^ \| \mu_j = \mu_j^, {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)} = {\boldsymbol \theta}^{(j)}_, \mathcal{P} = \mathcal{P}_j, {\bf Z=z})$ as defined in (\ref{Zstar}). \end{enumerate} \section{Results} \label{secResults} \subsection{Posterior prediction maps} \label{subsecPredMap} Before showing the prediction maps, recall that the sampling algorithm requires estimates of the marginal likelihood. A variety of methods for estimating the marginal likelihoods (\ref{margLik}), outlined in Appendix \ref{appdxMargLikEstimation}, were applied to the {eight} partitions. The resulting log marginal likelihood estimates (scaled to have mean zero and variance one) and normalized probabilities (\ref{modelPost}) are plotted in Figure \ref{postModelProbs} of Appendix \ref{appB3}. {The scaled log marginal likelihood estimates show agreement between all of the estimators except BICM, which we henceforth exclude from consideration. Otherwise, on the probability scale, the estimators collectively give non-zero weight to the same three or four partitions (4, 6, 7, and 8) and none of the methods suggest that the model probabilities should be evenly distributed across all eight partitions. Given this relative agreement and for simplicity, we decided to use the HM estimator for generating posterior predictions of log SOC.} \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figure7_NSmodelavgdPreds.pdf} \caption{Model-averaged posterior mean predictions (left) and corresponding posterior standard deviations (right) for log SOC (units = log Mg/ha to 100cm).} \label{maPreds} \end{center} \end{figure} The resulting model-averaged posterior prediction maps and corresponding standard deviations for the Great Lakes region are shown in Figure \ref{maPreds}. {By averaging over the partitions, which individually consist of independent segments, we are able to obtain a relatively ``smooth'' posterior mean surface, although artifacts of the individual segments are visible in the posterior standard deviation map. While the standard deviation map is not smooth, we note that this non-smoothness is what the SOC data select as the best model fits (based on the marginal likelihood estimates), and other marginal likelihood estimators give qualitatively similar results (see Figure 8). Regardless, the standard deviation map characterizes how the variability in predictions of log SOC varies over space; see Section \ref{subsecImpl} for further discussion.} {Comparing both the predicted (log) SOC surface obtained using our non-stationary Gaussian process model (Figure \ref{maPreds}) as well as its standard deviation map to those obtained using other off-the-shelf methods (Figure \ref{otherPreds}) we can conclude that SOC is much more flexibly modeled with our proposed nonstationary model, as the prediction variances are better described by our model.} {Additionally}, {another} major benefit of using our nonstationary method with covariate-partitioning {for the SOC data} is the significant reduction in computational time relative to fitting a stationary Bayesian spatial model (as well as other related Bayesian models). Recall that the {eight} candidate partitions are generated ahead of time, and then, for each partition, the nonstationary models can be fit at the same time in parallel. For a dataset of size $n \approx 800$ observations, the maximum time required for an individual partition was {7} minutes (for 20,000 MCMC iterations), and the average time across all partitions was just {3.4} minutes (see Table \ref{modelComp}). A traditional stationary model (e.g., SGP; see Section \ref{subsecOffshelf}) took approximately 20 minutes (computational times given are for an Intel Core i7 3.1 GHz machine with 16 GB memory). This major improvement in computational time is due to the fact that the likelihood conditional on a partition is the product of independent multivariate Gaussian likelihoods (see Section \ref{subsecCond}). \subsection{Model comparison} \label{subsecModelComp} {Besides the qualitative comparison of the predictive SOC maps generated by our} model-averaged, covariate-partitioned nonstationary model {(henceforth NSGP)} {and the other off-the-shelf models, we also compare} {the predictive performance of the various models quantitatively. To this goal, we first} use 10-fold cross validation in which the full data set ($n = 790$) is split into ten equally sized test data sets with $m=79$ observations. For each subset, we fit all models using the other nine subsets as training data and obtain predictions at the test locations. The continuous rank probability score ($\CRPS$; \citealp{PropScoring}) is used to evaluate the sharpness and calibration of predictions for the held-out data. \cite{Kruger2016} outline several methods for estimating the $\CRPS$ for individual predictions based on the output from MCMC algorithms (i.e., $\widehat{\CRPS}_t$ for $t = 1, \dots, m$). Mean scores are calculated for the test set using $ \widehat{\CRPS} = m^{-1} \sum_{t=1}^m \widehat{\CRPS}_t $ and compared across models. Since the conditional predictive cumulative distribution functions (conditional on the true parameter state, i.e., the likelihood) are not available for BART and TGP, we use what \cite{Kruger2016} call the empirical CDF method (ECDF) for calculating $\CRPS$ for each model. ECDF is based on samples drawn from the posterior predictive distribution and is a consistent approximation for the $\CRPS$ for every predictive distribution with finite mean (\citealp{Kruger2016}). The ECDF estimate of $\CRPS$ is calculated using the {\tt scoringRules} package for \texttt{R} (\citealp{scoringRules}). {For the 10-fold cross validation, the CRPS for each fold is the average of univariate CRPS across the test data. Given that the our approach targets second-order properties of log SOC, we would also like to evaluate the models with respect to a multivariate criteria, e.g., the energy score. However, in other work we have found it difficult to implement the energy score, because deviations in the energy score are challenging to diagnose. Instead, we evaluate the models' predictive capability for spatial \textit{averages} of log SOC. {We choose to work with spatial averages because while spatial averages are still univariate variables (and can thus be evaluated using the aforementioned methods), by being functionals of the joint predictive distribution, their second moment depends on the covariance structure of the (log) SOC process. Additionally, spatial averages are more compelling and useful quantities to examine from a soil management perspective.} To this end, we fit all models to two additional groups of holdout sets, block and circular. Each block holdout set (12 total) creates a test data set out of a contiguous $\approx 3.3^\circ$ longitude by $\approx 1.7^\circ$ latitude box (the holdout sets range in size from 29 to 79 locations; see Figure \ref{blockHdt} in the Appendix). Each circular holdout set (10 total) creates a test data set using the 29 nearest neighbors of a randomly selected station (so that the holdout sets consist of 29 + 1 = 30 stations; see Figure \ref{circHdt} in the Appendix). For each holdout set (block and circular), the other sets are used as training data to predict the spatial average corresponding to the test data locations. Then, we calculate the univariate CRPS for the spatial average, again using the {\tt scoringRules} package as described previously.} \begin{table}[!t] \caption{ Mean continuous rank probability scores (averaged over holdout sets) for each group of holdout sets. The best model for each holdout set is in bold.} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \textbf{Holdout sets} & \textbf{NSGP} & \textbf{SGP} & \textbf{BART}$^\dagger$ & \textbf{TGP} & \textbf{PP} \\ \hline\hline 10-fold & \textbf{0.3912} & 0.3959 & 0.4067 & 0.3988 & 0.3978\\ \hline Block & 0.1674 & 0.1851 & 0.1679 & \textbf{0.1357} & 0.1883\\ \hline Circular & \textbf{0.1784} & 0.2293 & 0.1505 & 0.1889 & 0.2227\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \label{outCV_table} \begin{flushleft} \vskip-2ex {\scriptsize $^\dagger$BART is excluded from consideration based on its unrealistic prediction map.}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{table}% {The CRPS for each model in Table \ref{modelComp} and each group of holdout sets are summarized in Table \ref{outCV_table}. Our covariate segmentation nonstationary model yields the best CRPS when averaging the univariate CRPS over locations in each fold, but the improvement relative to the other models is modest. The two nonstationary models (NSGP and TGP) perform well for the block holdout sets, although TGP maintains a clear advantage over NSGP. This is not completely surprising, since TGP (which uses rectangular partitions of the domain) is expected to perform well for rectangular holdout sets. When looking at the circular holdout sets, NSGP is preferred to TGP, which again is expected since NSGP uses non-rectangular partitions of the domain. BART outperforms both TGP and NSGP for the circular holdout sets, although recall that we previously decided to exclude BART from consideration based on its unrealistic prediction map.} One limitation of using CRPS to compare models is that it is difficult to evaluate the relative improvement for one model versus another. Clearly, NSGP yields only modest (at best) improvements in CRPS relative to the other fitted models; however, we note that other papers that focus on non-stationary modeling (e.g., \citealp{Paciorek2006}; \citealp{Fuglstad2015}) also find very small improvements in out-of-sample evaluation criteria relative to stationary models, even when exploratory analyses indicate the presence of nonstationarity in the data. \cite{Fuglstad2015} note that, in their experience, ``non-stationary models do not lead to much difference in the predicted values, [but] that the differences are found in the prediction variances'' -- this is also noted by \cite{schmidt11} and \cite{ViannaNeto}, and is certainly true for our application as well. As in \cite{Fuglstad2015}, we would like to point out that whether or not we have improved the CRPS is not the only question worth asking: in this case, we argue that our more flexible characterization of the prediction variances yields increased insight into the spatial distribution of SOC (we expound upon this further in the next section). \subsection{Implications for decision making} \label{subsecImpl} Gridded prediction maps and corresponding standard deviations such as those shown in Figures \ref{otherPreds} and \ref{maPreds} are extremely important to soil scientists, and (as mentioned in Section \ref{secIntroduction}) are used for a wide variety of purposes, including benchmarking mechanistic models of soil carbon (e.g., \citealp{ToddBrown2014}), identifying target areas for soil restoration projects (e.g., \citealp{Ryals2014}; \citealp{Ryals2015}), and informing carbon sequestration projects that seek to determine the limits of soils' carbon storing capacity (e.g., \citealp{Angers2011}; \citealp{Wiesmeier2014}). For each of these purposes, it is very important to account for spatial variation in the uncertainty of the resulting predictions: as discussed in Section \ref{subsecModelComp}, note that the NSGP model can account for this (e.g., right panel of Figure \ref{maPreds}) while the stationary (or approximately stationary) models cannot (e.g., bottom row of Figure \ref{otherPreds}). Thus, while the posterior mean predictions look quite similar (for example, NSGP, SGP, and PP) and {the quantitative cross validation results do not yield overwhelming evidence in support of the nonstationary model,} the clear differences in standard deviations are a strong argument for using NSGP. \begin{figure}[!t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figure9_CompareSEs.pdf} \caption{Comparison of the posterior standard deviations across SGP, PP, TGP, and NSGP. The plotted colors represent the ratio of standard deviations for SGP (left), PP (center), and TGP (right) divided by the standard deviations for NSGP. Red areas correspond to regions where NS-GP provides more precise predictions relative to the other models; blue areas represent regions where the other models likely underestimate the standard deviations.} \label{stdErrRatio} \end{center} \end{figure} To emphasize this point, we plot the ratio of standard deviations in Figure \ref{stdErrRatio}, specifically showing the posterior standard deviations for SGP, PP, and TGP divided by the corresponding quantity for NSGP. In this plot, red areas correspond to regions where NSGP provides much more precise predictions relative to the other models; blue areas represent regions where posterior standard deviations from the other models are smaller. Using the results from the nonstationary model, a practitioner seeking to identify target areas for a new soil restoration project may want to focus their efforts in the Ohio River Valley (Kentucky, southern Indiana, and southern Illinois), as this is an area where both the soil carbon predictions are low and the uncertainty associated with these predictions is small. Alternatively, while soil carbon appears to be low along the Mississippi River in Wisconsin, the uncertainty in these measurements is much larger. Neither SGP nor PP provide this information. \section{Discussion} \label{secDiscussion} In this paper, we have proposed a novel method for obtaining predictions of soil organic carbon at unobserved locations using a covariate-driven nonstationary spatial Gaussian process model. Our approach uses covariate partitioning to divide the geographic space according to the within-segment distribution of the covariates (here, land use-land cover and drainage class), so that the covariates indirectly inform the modeled first- and second-order properties of SOC as well as the resulting predictions. This approach extends existing covariate-driven nonstationary approaches in that the information a covariate provides on SOC can be used for prediction even if the covariate is not fully observed over the spatial domain. Bayesian model averaging accounts for uncertainty in the partitioning, and while our approach yields only modest improvements in terms of out-of-sample evaluation criteria, it provides a more appropriate characterization of the spatial variation in prediction uncertainty. Furthermore, while many nonstationary spatial approaches are computationally intensive, our approach results in computational times that are significantly faster than the time required to fit a corresponding second-order stationary model. Of course, there are limitations to our nonstationary model. For example, the marginal likelihood estimation seems to be fairly sensitive to individual likelihood values, resulting in a few non-zero and many nearly zero posterior model probabilities. Regardless of which marginal likelihood method was used (see Appendix \ref{appdxMargLikEstimation}), the estimates always put nearly all the weight on a single model. In a general setting, this may not be problematic; however, in our approach, we rely on model averaging to produce a scientifically meaningful (i.e., smooth) fitted surface, and we are well aware that the individual models, which specify independence across segments, are not on their own appropriate for modeling an environmental process like SOC. In light of the variability in the marginal likelihood estimates, we might also consider a {second} approach to model averaging, {which} could involve identifying a subset of the partitions that are in some sense ``good'' (as indicated by the data) and uniformly weighting over the reduced set. The resulting surface would likely be more scientifically meaningful while also using the data to indicate which of the partitions provide a better fit to the observed SOC. Finally, an additional extension that might address the non-smooth mean predictions in Figure \ref{maPreds} would be to use different weighting functions for the partition-specific likelihood in (\ref{likelihood}). Recall that we use indicator weight functions; more generally, we might use weight functions without sharp boundaries. In this case, the transition between segments for a particular partition would be smoother, resulting in a more realistic specification for the individual models. In fact, we implemented such an approach, using the bivariate Gaussian densities from (\ref{eq:clusters}) as the unnormalized weights combined with the nearest neighbor Gaussian process likelihood (NNGP; \citealp{Datta2016}) to speed up the computation. Unfortunately, such an approach did not improve the CRPS criteria relative to NSGP with indicator weights, and the computational times for fitting the individual partitions increased to as much as 2 hours (even with the NNGP likelihood; without NNGP the computational times were much longer, exceeding 10 hours for an individual partition). In general, the primary benefit of using indicator weight functions is computational: the product nature of (\ref{likelihood}) greatly reduces the computational time for fitting each model. The decision to use a different weight function should be balanced with the computational limitations of model fitting for a general data set. \section*{Acknowledgements} The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Katerina Georgiou, a soil scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, for helpful discussion regarding soil organic carbon. This work was supported in part by the Statistical Methods for Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (STATMOS) research network (NSF-DMS awards 1106862, 1106974, and 1107046). C. A. Calder was also partially supported by NSF-DMS award 1209161. \bibliographystyle{imsart-nameyear}
\section{Introduction} \label{Intro} With the advent of quantum information science and the desire to build a quantum computer, the study of quantum algorithms have become an integral part of quantum information theory \cite{NC00}. Quantum walks have played a special role in quantum computing by providing a platform on which quantum algorithms may be analysed \cite{VA08,Por13}. Moreover, they have served as a useful mechanism to describe and explain coherent transport processes in photosynthesis \cite{ECR+07,MRLAG08} and the breakdown of a driven system in an electric field \cite{OKAA05}. This has in turn stimulated much experimental effort to realise quantum walks, see e.g. Refs.~\cite{PLP+08,KFC+09,SMS+10,ZKG+10}. Theoretical quantum optics on the other hand has had fruitful applications in the analyses of quantum technologies \cite{BEZ01,KL10,WM10}. In this paper we will apply the well-known theory of quantum jumps developed in quantum optics to define and calculate the distribution of hitting times in open (i.e.~non-unitary) quantum walks. The paper is organised as follows. We first review quantum jumps and motivate its application to hitting problems in quantum walks in Sec.~\ref{QuantumJumps}. The theory of quantum walks and some existing works related to quantum jumps are then reviewed in Sec.~\ref{QuantumWalks}. We then introduce the necessary background in Sec.~\ref{Background} with the presentation of the quantum-jump formalism in Sec.~\ref{MCW}, followed by our approach to continuous-time open quantum walks in Sec.~\ref{QWDefined}. In Sec.~\ref{HTDdefn} we explain how the quantum-jump method is to be applied to quantum walks and obtain our first result---the hitting-time distribution. Then in Sec.~\ref{AvgHittingTime} we derive explicit expressions for the hitting-time statistics. We then relate our result to a previous definition of the hitting time devised for a discrete-time measured walk in Sec.~\ref{SEC_COMPARISON}. Here the hitting-time statistics of the discrete-time measured walk is shown to converge to the quantum-jump approach in the continuous-time limit. A problem with the quantum-jump definition of hitting times is that it becomes inaccurate when there are coherent transitions to the final state. We overcome this problem in Sec.~\ref{N+1Model}, extending the quantum-jump approach to arbitrary graphs. We then conclude with a summary of our results and analyses in Sec.~\ref{Conclusion} and also comment on the relationship of our work with other studies not mentioned in the literature review of Secs.~\ref{QuantumJumps} and \ref{QuantumWalks}. \subsection{Quantum jumps---from photon counting to hitting times} \label{QuantumJumps} The quantum-jump approach to dissipative quantum dynamics has traditionally been used for efficiently solving master equations \cite{DCM92,DZR92,DPZG92,MCD93}, or calculating photon statistics in photon counting \cite{CSVR89,Car93}. It also goes by the name of Monte Carlo wavefunctions or quantum trajectories due to the different contexts in which it was invented (although quantum jumps correspond only to a subset of unravellings within quantum-trajectory theory\footnote{We have devoted a separate discussion to the use of other unravellings in hitting problems in Sec.~\ref{FurtherDiscussions}. If the reader is already familiar with quantum-trajectory theory then this may be read now, but otherwise should be left till the end for the nonexperts.}). We refer the reader to Ref.~\cite{PK98} for a comprehensive review of how the quantum-jump method was developed. Figure \ref{Photodetection} illustrates a typical scenario where quantum jumps are applied e.g.~Refs.~\cite{HYK97,GW01,DFVKW08,KM15}. There is usually a system (described by a master equation \cite{Car08}), say a lossy cavity or a two-level atom which dissipates energy into the environment in the form of photons. The emitted photons are then measured by a photodetector. Each count, or photodetector ``click'' appears as a spike in the photodetection record. The quantum-jump formalism then allows one to compute the system evolution conditioned on a given photodetection record where each detector click is associated with a ``jump'' in the system Hilbert space. Periods of no clicks then correspond to system evolution with no jumps. The quantum-jump method states that an average over a large number of such conditioned states will reproduce the solution to the master equation. Thus in solving the master equation, one also gains access to the statistics of photon arrival times at the detector. Photon statistics are therefore often calculated using the quantum-jump method \cite{KM15,JGCRP99,KLM13}. In fact, Carmichael derived the quantum-jump method \cite{CSVR89,Car93} from the photon-counting distribution due to Kelley and Kleiner \cite{KK64}. It is this intuition between photodetector clicks and quantum jumps that we will exploit for deriving the hitting-time statistics in quantum walks. To see this we need to first explain what hitting times are: In quantum-walk theory the system, usually called the walker, has a Hilbert space spanned by a countable set of orthonormal states $\{\ket{\psi_n}\}_n$, called sites, nodes, or vertices. The hitting time is defined as the time required for the walker to reach (or ``hit'') some ``final'' state $\ket{\psi_N}$ for the first time given that initially it was at $\ket{\psi_m}$. The hitting time is a random variable since the first time that the walker arrives at $\ket{\psi_N}$ will vary from one realisation of the quantum walk to another. It therefore makes sense to speak of the average hitting time and its higher-order statistics. We will often call the hitting-time distribution simply as the hitting distribution for ease of reference. Similarly, hitting statistics (as in the title) refers to the statistics of hitting times. It should be noted that the problem we have defined here has an analogue in classical Markov chains, where the orthonormal set $\{\ket{\psi_n}\}_n$ is replaced by a set of probabilities. The temporal evolution of the classical walker is then governed by a set of rate equations for the site probabilities \cite{KMT12} which plays the role of the master equation in the quantum case. In fact, one of the quantum-walk models that we will discuss two paragraphs down is based on this idea. We should also mention that hitting times are usually called first-passage times in the classical theory of Markov chains and most areas of science where this concept appears, see e.g.~Refs.~\cite{Red01,TM12,CBTVK07}. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=14cm]{Photodetection}} \caption{\label{Photodetection} Typical scenario where quantum-jumps are applied in quantum optics. Usually an atomic system or an optical cavity with a lossy end mirror acts as a source of photons. The output light is measured by a photodetector. It is well known in quantum optics that the photodetection record contains information about the state of the light. The photodetection record can also be used to gain information about the photoemissive source. References \cite{HYK97,GW01,DFVKW08,KM15} are some examples.} \end{figure} The quantum-jump method lends itself naturally to a hitting problem because the question one is asking, starting from the initial time, is whether the system has made a transition to the final state or not. This leads to a very natural division of the system evolution into two types---either a transition to the final state occurred, or it has not, and this corresponds to a system evolution conditioned on ``jumps'' and ``no jumps''. We illustrate this idea on an arbitrarily chosen quantum walk in Fig.~\ref{JumpsOnGraph}. The walker can move between any two vertices connected by a line, usually called an edge (edges and vertices together form a graph as shown). We are not defining the edges precisely for the moment but one may think of each edge as given by a completely-positive trace-preserving map, i.e.~a Kraus channel of some sort \cite{NC00,Kra71}. Consider the hitting problem defined by the initial and final states shown as $\ket{\psi_1}$ and $\ket{\psi_N}$ respectively on the graph. Imagine now that each transition on the graph emits a photon. Then we can find out when the quantum walker will arrive at $\ket{\psi_N}$ by associating photodetectors with the edges connected to $\ket{\psi_N}$ (assuming our photodetectors only measure photons emitted from transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$). If we superimpose the photodetection records from these detectors then we will observe an overall record shown on the right of Fig.~\ref{JumpsOnGraph}. In this case a photodetector click signifies that our walker is at $\ket{\psi_N}$, and the first such click provides the hitting time. We will not be able to distinguish which channel the quantum walker took to reach $\ket{\psi_N}$ but this does not matter if we only care about when the walker visits $\ket{\psi_N}$. This analogy makes clear how the quantum-jump method can be applied to calculate the distribution of hitting times in quantum walks. The theory of quantum walks is more than two decades old so let us briefly review some of the key developments in this field and then discuss where our work stands in relation to the literature on this topic. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=14cm]{JumpsOnGraph}} \caption{\label{JumpsOnGraph} An example graph to illustrate the quantum-jump approach to hitting times. We place imaginary detectors that can only detect transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ along the edges connected to $\ket{\psi_N}$. We then lump all the detection records obtained from these photodetectors into one record. A click in the superimposed record therefore corresponds to a transition to $\ket{\psi_N}$. This can be described by a jump in the Hilbert space of the walker as prescribed by the quantum-jump method. When viewed as such, the hitting time, labelled $T$, is therefore the time at which the first click occurs.} \end{figure} \subsection{Quantum walks and quantum trajectories} \label{QuantumWalks} The concept of a quantum walk was first introduced by Aharonov and coworkers in 1993 \cite{ADZ93}. Quantum walks can be categorised into one of two classes---either a walk in discrete time, or a walk in continuous time \cite{VA12}. Quantum walks in discrete time follow the idea originally prosposed by Aharonov and colleagues where a quantum coin is introduced. Classically, a random walk on a line involves a coin toss, the result of which determines whether the walker moves one step to the left, or one step to the right. In the quantum version the coin is simply a two-state system. The movement of the walker is then effected by a (quantum) coin toss implemented as a Hadamard gate $\hat{C}$, followed by applying a shift operator $\hat{S}$ to change the walker's position conditioned on the coin state \cite{Kem03a}. Each application of the unitary operator $\hat{U}\equiv\hat{S}\hat{C}$ then evolves the walker in one time step. For a unitary quantum walk, the notion of hitting becomes fuzzy due to the walker's ability to be in a superposition of sites. As a result, multiple definitions of hitting have been proposed \cite{Kem03b,KB06}. Among these, the definition of hitting based on repeated measurements proposed by Krovi and Brun in Ref.~\cite{KB06} will be useful for our analysis. Applications of discrete-time quantum walks include the design of search algorithms \cite{SKW03,AKR05}, and implementing universal quantum computation \cite{LCETK10}. Continuous-time quantum walks on the other hand do not use a coin. Instead, the quantum walker evolves according to a unitary operator generated by a Hamiltonian, i.e.~$\hat{U}(t)=\exp(-i\hat{H}t)$ with $\hat{H}$ parametrised by hopping rates to adjacent nodes. Quantum walks in continuous time were first introduced by Farhi and Gutmann \cite{FG98} in close analogy to continuous-time Markov chains \cite{FG98,CFG02}. Their hitting properties were then studied by Varbanov and colleagues \cite{VKB08} who defined hitting times through jumplike weak measurements. The quantum-jump treatment in the present paper can also be seen as a weak measurement of the walker position in that most of the time one gets a null result (no jumps) which does not modify the walker state very much but once in a while a collapse (a jump) happens which changes the walker state drastically \cite{Bru02}. As with the discrete-time case, continuous-time quantum walks have also been shown to give rise to exponential speedups over classical algorithms for searching \cite{CG04} and solving black-box problems \cite{CCD+03}. It has also been shown that universal quantum computation can be achieved using continuous-time quantum walks \cite{Chi09}. Discrete-time quantum walks were then generalised to allow for non-unitary evolution. These are known as open quantum walks and were first introduced by Attal and collaborators \cite{APS12,APSS12}. Here the coin changes its state according to a completely-positive trace-preserving map and the evolution operator $\hat{U}$ for the unitary walk is also replaced by a completely-positive trace-preserving map. A continuous-time model was subsequently proposed by Pellegrini as the continuous-time limit of the discrete-time open quantum walk \cite{Pel14}. Most recently, Liu and Balu proposed yet another continuous-time model of open quantum walks by starting with a master equation in the Lindblad form \cite{LB16}. This approach to defining quantum walks is in the same spirit as Farhi and Gutmann's for unitary walks as already alluded to above. They (Farhi and Gutmann) viewed the \sch\ equation as the analogue of the rate equation for probabilities in classical Markov chains. Generalising this to allow for non-unitary dynamics naturally leads to a master equation. We also consider here continuous-time open quantum walks described by a master equation. Of particular interest for our work is the application of quantum trajectories in Refs.~\cite{APS12,APSS12,Pel14}. These works were motivated by the fact that quantum trajectories offer an efficient means of simulating quantum walks and have the advantage of providing a visualisation of the walk. Lardizabal and Souza have recently defined hitting times using quantum trajectories \cite{LS16}, but for the discrete-time model due to Attal and colleagues \cite{APS12,APSS12}. Given that quantum trajectories were invented in the context of Lindblad-form master equations the latter is in fact the most natural setting in which to consider them. For such non-unitary graphs one can therefore bypass the formalism of positive operator-valued measures (as in Ref.~\cite{VKB08} for example) and give a quantum-trajectory treatment of the hitting problem. Our aim in this paper is to define the hitting time for open quantum walks as the time for the first jump to occur and use this as the basis for calculating the distribution of hitting times and its statistical moments. Our result also corrects Ref.~\cite{QDX12} which claims to have calculated the average hitting time for continuous-time open quantum walks. However, an inspection of Ref.~\cite{QDX12} shows their model to be purely classical. A summary of the relevant literature is given in Fig.~\ref{Literature}. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=14cm]{Literature}} \caption{\label{Literature} Representative works of different quantum-walk models and their corresponding hitting-time proposals: Aharanov\,+ (1993) Ref.~\cite{ADZ93}; Kempe (2003) Ref.~\cite{Kem03b}; Krovi and Brun (2006) Ref.~\cite{KB06}; Farhi and Gutmann (1998) Ref.~\cite{FG98}; Varbanov\,+ (2008) Ref.~\cite{VKB08}; Attal\,+ (2012) Refs.~\cite{APS12,APSS12}; Lardizabal and Souza (2017) Ref.~\cite{LS16}; Liu and Balu (2017) Ref.~\cite{LB16}; Pelligrini (2014) Ref.~\cite{Pel14}.} \end{figure} \section{Background} \label{Background} \subsection{Quantum jumps} \label{MCW} Here we will explain the method of quantum jumps as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Photodetection}, i.e.~in the context of photon counting. This makes the basic structure of the formalism intuitive. Assume for simplicity that the system in Fig.~\ref{Photodetection} is a single-mode field in an optical cavity with one slightly lossy mirror. The lossy mirror allows the single-mode light to couple to the field outside the cavity which we assume is in a vacuum state. This is described by a master equation which has only one dissipative channel, given by \begin{align} \label{L} \dot{\rho}(t) = {\cal L} \rho(t) \equiv -i \big[\hat{H},\rho(t)\big] + \hat{c} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger \hat{c}, \rho(t) \big\} \;, \end{align} where $\hat{c}=\rt{\gamma}\hat{a}$ with $\gamma$ being a damping coefficient and $\hat{a}$ a bosonic annihilation operator. We are using the notation $\{\hat{A},\hat{B}\}$ for the anticommutator of any two operators $\hat{A}$ and $\hat{B}$. The terms containing $\hat{c}$ modify the usual unitary dynamics (which conserves the system's energy) to include a dissipative process (here being the loss of photons to the vacuum outside the optical cavity). The quantum-jump formalism provides a way to understand these terms as follows. The system state $\rho(t)$ can evolve over an infinitesimal time interval $dt$ conditioned on two types of detection events---a count, and no count (Fig.~\ref{Photodetection}). Given an initial state $\rho(t)$, the probability of registering a count in the interval $[t,t+dt)$ is given by \begin{align} \label{ProbJump} \wp_1(dt) = {\rm Tr}\big\{ {\cal J} \rho(t) \big\} dt = {\rm Tr}\big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger \hat{c} \, \rho(t) \big\} dt \;, \end{align} where we have defined \begin{align} {\cal J} \rho \equiv \hat{c} \, \rho \, \hat{c}^\dagger \;. \end{align} Here we are assuming our detector in Fig.~\ref{Photodetection} is ideal. The state change conditioned on observing a count (a spike in the photodetection record in Fig.~\ref{Photodetection}) is effected by \begin{align} \label{Jump} \rho_1(t+dt) = \frac{{\cal J} \rho(t)}{{\rm Tr}\big\{ {\cal J} \rho(t) \big\}} \;. \end{align} Equation \eqref{Jump} is called a quantum jump and $\hat{c}$ is referred to as a jump operator. A quantum jump causes $\rho(t)$ to change discontinuously in time. The second type of evolution is conditioned on the event that no counts were registered in $[t,t+dt)$. This is commonly referred to as the no-jump evolution and occurs with probability \begin{align} \label{ProbNoJump} \wp_0(dt) = 1 - \wp_1(dt) \;. \end{align} The state at time $t+dt$ conditioned on a no-count observation is \begin{align} \label{NoJump} \rho_0(t+dt) = \frac{e^{\bar{\cal L}dt} \rho(t)}{{\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{\cal L}dt} \rho(t) \big]} \;, \end{align} where \begin{align} \label{NoJumpGenerator} \bar{\cal L} \, \rho(t) \equiv -i \big[\hat{H},\rho(t)\big] - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger \hat{c},\rho(t) \big\} \;. \end{align} Note that $\wp_0(dt)$ can be written explicitly in terms of \eqref{NoJumpGenerator} as \begin{align} \label{wp0} \wp_0(dt) = {\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{\cal L} dt} \rho(t) \big] \;. \end{align} It helps to consider two generalisations of the basic structure given by \eqref{ProbJump}--\eqref{NoJumpGenerator} for the application of quantum jumps to quantum walks coming up later. \subsubsection{Generalisation 1: Non-unit detection efficiency} The above formulation assumes that every jump in the system is observed with probability one. Therefore the first generalisation that we will consider is to allow for an non-ideal observation, or non-unit detection efficiency where only a fraction $\eta$ (between zero and one) of the jumps are actually detected \cite{WM10}. This means that the probablity of detecting a jump in time $dt$ (when it occurs) should be \eqref{ProbJump} multiplied by $\eta$. This can be effected in the quantum-jump approach by letting \begin{align} {\cal J} \rho(t) \; \longrightarrow \; {\cal J}(\eta) \;\!\rho(t) \equiv \eta \, \hat{c} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger \;. \end{align} The probability of detecting a jump in the time interval $[t,t+dt)$ is now \begin{align} \wp_1(\eta;dt) = \eta \, {\rm Tr}\big[ \hat{c}^\dagger \hat{c} \, \rho(t) \big] dt \;. \end{align} The remaining fraction of jumps that went unnoticed then contributes to the no-count evolution and we have \begin{align} \bar{\cal L} \rho(t) \; \longrightarrow \; \bar{\cal L}(\eta) \, \rho(t) \equiv -i \big[\hat{H},\rho(t)\big] - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger \hat{c}, \rho(t) \big\} + (1-\eta) \, \hat{c} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger \;. \end{align} It is not difficult to show that this gives the probability of no counts in $[t,t+dt)$ to be \begin{align} \wp_0(\eta;dt) = {\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{\cal L}(\eta) dt} \rho(t) \big] = 1 - \wp_1(\eta;dt) \;, \end{align} as one would expect. \subsubsection{Generalisation 2: Multiple decay channels} \label{MultichannelQuantumJumps} The second generalisation that we shall consider is to include the possibilility of multiple decay channels in the system. Assuming there are $L$ such channels, the master equation in \eqref{L} is generalised to \begin{align} \label{MultichannelL} \dot{\rho}(t) = -i \big[\hat{H},\rho(t)\big] + \sum_{k=1}^L \bigg[ \hat{c}_k \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger_k - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger_k \hat{c}_k, \rho(t) \big\} \bigg] \;. \end{align} If we now assume that each channel has a detection efficiency $\eta_k$ ($k=1,2,\ldots L$), the new superoperator effecting a jump conditioned on a detection in $[t,t+dt)$ is given by \begin{align} \label{JumpEta} {\cal J}({\bm \eta}) \, \rho(t) \equiv \sum_{k=1}^L \, \eta_k \, \hat{c}_k \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger_k \;, \end{align} where we have defined ${\bm \eta}\equiv (\eta_1,\eta_2,\ldots,\eta_L)$. The probability of observing a jump in any one of the $L$ channels in duration $dt$ is \begin{align} \label{MultichannelCountProb} \wp_1({\bm \eta};dt) = \sum_{k=1}^L \, \eta_k \, {\rm Tr}\big[ \hat{c}^\dagger_k \hat{c}_k \, \rho(t) \big] \, dt \;. \end{align} The no-count superoperator is now \begin{align} \label{MultichannelNoCountL} \bar{\cal L}({\bm \eta}) \, \rho(t) \equiv -i \big[\hat{H},\rho(t)\big] + \sum_{k=1}^L \bigg[ (1-\eta_k) \, \hat{c}_k \, \rho(t) \, \hat{c}^\dagger_k - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{c}^\dagger_k \hat{c}_k, \rho(t) \big\} \bigg] \;, \end{align} and the corresponding probability for no detections in the interval $[t,t+dt)$ is \begin{align} \wp_0({\bm \eta};dt) = {\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{\cal L}(\bm \eta) dt} \rho(t) \big] = 1 - \wp_1({\bm \eta};dt) \;. \end{align} The generalisation to multiple decay channels allows us to selectively tune the detection efficiency of channel $k$ by choosing a value for $\eta_k$. In particular we can choose to ignore jumps for selected channels by setting the detection efficiency for those channels to zero. The multichannel theory of quantum jumps with non-unit detection efficiency has been used to show that quantum jumps are more robust to measurement inefficiencies in disproving the existence of objective pure-state dynamical models \cite{DW14}. The same formalism has also been used to study parameter estimation from multichannel photon counting\footnote{Analogies between photon counting and quantum walks in connection to Ref.~\cite{KM15} are discussed further in Sec.~\ref{FurtherDiscussions}.} \cite{KM15}. \subsection{Open quantum walks} \label{QWDefined} We now define the problem to which we would like to apply the quantum-jump formalism. Our problem can be set up in analogous fashion to a classical Markov chain problem in continuous time. We are given a quantum system that makes transitions between a set of discrete states \begin{align} \label{SpaceS} \mathbb{S}_N \equiv \{ \ket{\psi_1},\ket{\psi_2},\ldots,\ket{\psi_N} \} \;. \end{align} The set $\mathbb{S}_N$ forms an orthonormal basis for the system. The space in which the system resides is thus spanned by $\mathbb{S}_N$. In the language of quantum-walk theory, each state in $\mathbb{S}_N$ is referred to as a vertex and the system is referred to as a quantum walker. We shall also refer to the elements of $\mathbb{S}_N$ as states, or sites. We must therefore also define the exact manner in which the system makes transitions between different states (analogous to specifying a transtion matrix in classical Markov chains). We assume that our system is undergoing dynamics that can be composed from three basic processes. They are coherent transitions, incoherent population transfer, and dephasing. These processes are represented schematically in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses} for two vertices and are explained below. \begin{figure} \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{BasicProcessesNew}} \caption{\label{BasicProcesses} Different types of edges considered in the quantum walk. (a) Coherent transition. (b) Incoherent transition. (c) Loop (dephasing).} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Coherent transition} \label{[Hmn,Rho]} The ability to be in a superposition of states is what differentiates the random walk of a quantum system from a classical one, so coherent evolution, i.e.~any evolution that adds coherences to our system, is indispensable in our theory. Coherent evolution between any two states $\ket{\psi_j}$ and $\ket{\psi_k}$ can be described by \begin{align} \label{CoherentEvo} \frac{d}{dt} \, \rho(t) = -i \big[ \hat{H}_{jk},\rho(t) \big] \;. \end{align} This is the familiar unitary evolution with a Hamiltonian given by \begin{align} \hat{H}_{jk} = \omega_j \, \hat{Q}_j + \omega_k \, \hat{Q}_k + \Omega_{jk} \big( \hat{Q}_{jk} + \hat{Q}_{kj} \big) \;, \end{align} where $\omega_k=\bra{\psi_k}\hat{H}_{jk}\ket{\psi_k}$ is the expectation of $\hat{H}_{jk}$ in the state $\ket{\psi_k}$, and \begin{align} \hat{Q}_{jk} = \op{\psi_j}{\psi_k}, \quad \hat{Q}_{j} = \op{\psi_j}{\psi_j}. \end{align} We are assuming \begin{align} \Omega_{jk} = \Omega^_{jk} = \Omega_{kj} \;, \end{align} so that $\hat{H}_{jk}$ is represented by a real and symmetric matrix. We can define the rate at which coherent evolution occurs by how quickly the transition probability varies in time under \eqref{CoherentEvo}. The transition probability for a system evolving according to \eqref{CoherentEvo} is \begin{align} \alpha_{jk}(t) \equiv \big\| \bra{\psi_j} \;\! e^{-i\hat{H}_{jk}t} \;\! \ket{\psi_k} \big\|^2 \;. \end{align} It can be shown, see e.g.~\cite{CGKPK16}, that this evaluates to \begin{align} \label{CoherentTransitionProb} \alpha_{jk}(t) = \frac{2\,\Omega^2_{jk}}{\nu^2_{jk}} \, \big[ 1 - \cos(\nu_{jk}\,t) \big] \;, \end{align} where \begin{align} \label{CoherentFreq} \nu_{jk} = \rt{(\omega_j-\omega_k)^2 + 4\Omega^2_{jk}} \;. \end{align} An inspection of \eqref{CoherentTransitionProb} suggests that we should define the frequency of a coherent transition between any two states $\ket{\psi_j}$ and $\ket{\psi_k}$ to be $\nu_{jk}$. The symbol that we shall assign to coherent transitions is shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}(a). \subsubsection{Incoherent population transfer} \label{DmnRho} This is a process which transfers a fraction of the population in one state to another. It is shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}(b) for the case of two states with the direction of the arrow indicating the direction of population transfer. For a system with $N$ states, the incoherent population transfer between any two states, say $\ket{\psi_m}$ and $\ket{\psi_n}$, occurring at a rate $k_{mn}$ is described by \begin{align} \label{IncohPopTrans} \frac{d}{dt} \, \rho(t) = k_{mn} \, {\cal D}_{mn} \, \rho(t) \equiv k_{mn} \bigg[ \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} - \frac{1}{2} \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \rho(t) - \frac{1}{2} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \bigg]. \end{align} Note the order of the indices defines the direction of the process so ${\cal D}_{mn} \ne {\cal D}_{nm}$ for $m \ne n$. Equation \eqref{IncohPopTrans} can be understood by considering an arbitrary state and propagating it over an infinitesimal interval $dt$. For simplicity let us consider the $N=2$ scenario. The result is then most apparent if we use the matrix representation in the basis $\mathbb{S}_2$. Assuming the process to occur with a rate $k_{21}$ and in the direction shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}(b) we have \begin{align} \label{ADmatrix} \rho(t+dt) = \tbt{\rho_{11}(t)-k_{21}\,\rho_{11}(t)\,dt}{\rt{1-k_{21}\,dt}\,\rho_{12}(t)} {\rt{1-k_{21}\,dt}\,\rho_{21}(t)}{\rho_{22}(t)+k_{21}\,\rho_{11}(t)\,dt} \;, \end{align} where the matrix elements of $\rho(t)$ are abbreviated by \begin{align} \label{RhoMatrixElements} \rho_{mn}(t) = \bra{\psi_m} \rho(t) \ket{\psi_n} \;. \end{align} From \eqref{ADmatrix} we can see that a fraction of the population in $\ket{\psi_1}$ has been transferred to $\ket{\psi_2}$ and that this amount is given by $k_{21}\,\rho_{11}(t)\,dt$. We can interpret $\rho_{11}(t)$ as the prior probability of finding the system in state $\ket{\psi_1}$ at time $t$ and $k_{21}\,dt$ as the probability that the system will transition to $\ket{\psi_2}$ during $dt$ given that it is in $\ket{\psi_1}$ at time $t$. Notice that in transferring the population from $\ket{\psi_1}$ to $\ket{\psi_2}$ we also drive the system to a less coherent state. This is seen in \eqref{ADmatrix} as the off-diagonal terms of $\rho(t+dt)$ are less than the off-diagonal terms in $\rho(t)$ by a factor of $\rt{1-k_{21}\,dt}$. This is the sense in which we call the process modelled by \eqref{IncohPopTrans} incoherent population transfer. The usual rate-equation model of continuous-time Markov chains appears as a special case of incoherent population transfer with $\rho_{21}(t)=\rho_{12}(t)=0$. \subsubsection{Loop (dephasing)} \label{DephasingME} We saw above that incoherent population transfer leads to a reduction of the system coherences. However, a system can also lose coherences without the simultaneous loss of populations. Such processes are called dephasing. In general we can control how classical (or quantum) a state $\ket{\psi_n}$ is by tuning its ability to share coherences with other states in the graph. Assuming a dephasing rate of $q_{n}$ for $\ket{\psi_n}$, the corresponding equation of motion for this process is \begin{align} \label{DephasingDefn} \frac{d}{dt} \, \rho(t) = q_{n} \, {\cal D}_{n} \, \rho(t) \equiv q_{n} \bigg[ \hat{Q}_{n} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{n} - \frac{1}{2} \, \hat{Q}_{n} \, \rho(t) - \frac{1}{2} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{n} \bigg] \;. \end{align} Again, we illustrate this process for the simplest case of a two-state graph shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}(c). Allowing state $\ket{\psi_1}$ to dephase with a rate of $q_1$, we can show that \eqref{DephasingDefn} changes only the system coherences by looking at the matrix representation of an arbitrary state in $\mathbb{S}_2$: \begin{align} \label{DephasingMatrix} \rho(t+dt) = \tbt{\rho_{11}(t)}{\rt{1-q_{1}\,dt}\,\rho_{12}(t)} {\rt{1-q_{1}\,dt}\,\rho_{21}(t)}{\rho_{22}(t)} \;. \end{align} It is clear that \eqref{DephasingMatrix} has off-diagonal elements with the same form as the off-diagonal elements in \eqref{ADmatrix}, but now there is no transfer of populations. In fact, \eqref{DephasingDefn} is a special case of \eqref{IncohPopTrans} when $n=m$, and \begin{align} k_{nn} \equiv q_n \;. \end{align} That is, the population transfer is from state $\ket{\psi_n}$ back to itself so we expect the population of $\ket{\psi_n}$ to be unchanged. However, we saw above that incoherent population transfer also reduces the coherences in the graph so dephasing can be viewed simply as a loop shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}(c). \section{Distribution of hitting times} \label{HTDdefn} We are now in position to apply the quantum-jump prescription to calculate the distribution of hitting times. Consider now a graph where each state is connected to another by either one or all of the processes shown in Fig.~\ref{BasicProcesses}. The question that we would like to answer is how long it takes the system (or a quantum walker) to reach a particular state $\rho_{\rm f} \in \mathbb{S}_N$ for the first time assuming some initial state $\rho_{\rm i}$. This length of time is called the hitting time. However, each time we run the quantum walk the time taken to reach $\rho_{\rm f}$ for the first time will be different, so the hitting time is actually a random variable. We denote the hitting time by $T(\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i})$. What we would like to know is actually the distribution of hitting times if we were to run the quantum walk on the same graph many times. Since the hitting time here is a continuous variable, its distribution is governed by a probability density. The hitting probability density is a function $h(t;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i})$ such that \begin{align} \label{GeneralHTD} h(t;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i}) \, dt = {\rm Pr} \Big\{ \rho(\tau) = \rho_{\rm f} \; \text{for} \; \tau \in [t,t+dt) \,, \, \rho(\tau) \ne \rho_{\rm f} \; \text{for} \; \tau \in (0,t)\; \Big\| \; \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \;. \end{align} We are using the notation ${\rm Pr}\{ A \| B \}$ for the probability of event $A$ occurring given that event $B$ has occurred and an equation like ${\rm Pr}\{\rho(t)=\rho'\}$ is to be read as the probability of finding the system in the state $\rho'$ at time $t$. The hitting distribution depends on the choice of $\rho_{\rm i}$ and $\rho_{\rm f}$ for a given graph but once chosen they are fixed so $\rho_{\rm i}$ and $\rho_{\rm f}$ are to be thought of as parameters in \eqref{GeneralHTD}. Without loss of generality we shall define the final state as the $N$th state in $\mathbb{S}_N$ as it is just a matter of labelling whereas the initial state will be left unspecified. That is \begin{align} \rho_{\rm f} = \op{\psi_N}{\psi_N}=\hat{Q}_N \;. \end{align} Since $\rho_{\rm i}$ and $\rho_{\rm f}$ are fixed we will not write these out explicitly as arguments of $h$ unless it is helpful to do so. \subsection{Derivation without dephasing} We now derive a closed-form expression for the hitting time distribution on an arbitrary graph using quantum-jump formalism. For simplicity we first consider a graph where there are no loops, i.e.~no dephasing: \begin{align} \label{GeneralGraphNoDeph} \frac{d}{dt} \, \rho(t) = {\cal L} \, \rho(t) \equiv - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\rho(t) \big] + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \, k_{mn} \, {\cal D}_{mn} \, \rho(t) \;. \end{align} Note that we have divided the sum over commutators by half to compensate for double counting. This is because $\hat{H}_{mn}=\hat{H}_{nm}$. In general not every state will be connected to every other state via all possible processes. When this is the case we can simply choose which processes to switch off in \eqref{GeneralGraphNoDeph} by setting the relevant rates zero. One may have also noticed that the sums over the coherent transitions (the commutator terms) do not include transitions to the final state $\ket{\psi_N}$. This is because only the incoherent transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ are detectable in the quantum-jump formalism. Later on (in Sec.~\ref{N+1Model}) we will show how the hitting probability density can be obtained when there are coherent transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ by introducing an artifical dissipative channel. In order to apply the quantum-jump technique we first note that \eqref{GeneralHTD} can also be rewritten using Bayes's rule as \begin{align} \label{HittingBayes} h(t) \, dt = {}& {\rm Pr} \Big\{ \rho(\tau) = \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in [t,t+dt) \; \Big\| \; \rho(\tau) \ne \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in (0,t) \,, \, \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \nn \\ & \times {\rm Pr} \Big\{ \rho(\tau) \ne \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in (0,t) \; \Big\| \; \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \;. \end{align} Each factor on the right-hand side in \eqref{HittingBayes} can now be calculated using the prescription laid out in Sec.~\ref{MCW}. To do this we map \eqref{MultichannelL} directly to \eqref{GeneralGraphNoDeph} by making the following identification \begin{gather} \label{c=Q} \big\{ \hat{c}_q \big \}_q = \big\{ \rt{k_{mn}} \hat{Q}_{mn} \big\}_{m,n} \;, \\ \label{H} \hat{H} = \frac{1}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \hat{H}_{mn} \;. \end{gather} In terms of the multichannel theory of quantum jumps in Sec.~\ref{MultichannelQuantumJumps}, each channel is now labelled by an ordered pair $(m,n)$ where $m=1,2,\ldots N$, and $n=1,2,\ldots N$, and a quantum jump is simply the detection of a transition between any two nodes, say $\ket{\psi_m}$ and $\ket{\psi_n}$. The measurement efficiency for this quantum jump can then be labelled by $\eta_{mn}$, and is a number which corresponds to the fraction of jumps observed in the $\ket{\psi_n} \to \ket{\psi_m}$ incoherent transition. The actual number of jumps from $\ket{\psi_n}$ to $\ket{\psi_m}$ will always be greater than the observed number of jumps unless $\eta_{mn}=1$. We can then express the probability of finding the system in the final state $\ket{\psi_N}$ using the probability of detecting a jump to $\ket{\psi_N}$ provided that all transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ are monitored with unit efficiency. This identification then dictates how we should set $\eta_{mn}$ for all $m$ and $n$, namely that $\eta_{Nn}=1$ for any $n$. Transitions to states other than $\ket{\psi_N}$ are irrelevant so we simply do not monitor these transitions. Therefore we set $\eta_{mn}=0$ for every $m \ne N$. We must use this set of detection efficiencies in the formalism outlined in Sec.~\ref{MultichannelQuantumJumps} in order for it to be applicable for hitting-time calculations. This prompts us to assign a special label, $\bm{\eta}_\star$, for the detection efficiencies to be used: \begin{align} \label{EtaStar} \bm{\eta}_\star \, \Longleftrightarrow \, \eta_{mn} = \delta_{mN} \;. \end{align} The jump superoperator \eqref{JumpEta} on using \eqref{c=Q} and \eqref{EtaStar}, becomes \begin{align} \label{Jstar} {\cal J}({\bm \eta}_\star) \, \rho \equiv \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nn} \, \hat{Q}_{Nn} \, \rho \; \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nn} \;. \end{align} An application of ${\cal J}({\bm \eta}_\star)$ effects an instantaneous collapse of the system to the state $\ket{\psi_N}$. From \eqref{MultichannelCountProb} and \eqref{c=Q}, the probability of detecting a jump in time $dt$ given $\rho(t)$ is thus \begin{align} \label{JumpProb} \wp_1(\bm{\eta}_\star;dt) = {\rm Tr}\big[ {\cal J}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \, \rho(t) \big] \, dt = \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nn} \, \bra{\psi_n} \rho(t) \ket{\psi_n} \, dt \;. \end{align} If $\rho(t)$ in \eqref{JumpProb} is a state where no transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ are observed in the time interval $[0,t)$ given some initial state $\rho(0)$, then \eqref{JumpProb} is exactly the first factor on the right-hand side of \eqref{HittingBayes}. Such a state can be directly obtained by solving the no-jump evolution defined by \eqref{MultichannelNoCountL}, \eqref{c=Q}, and \eqref{H}: \begin{align} \label{NoJumpEvolution} \frac{d}{dt} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \equiv \bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) = {}& - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\bar{\rho}(t)\big] + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, (1-\delta_{mN}) \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \nn \\ & - \frac{1}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \hat{Q}_{mn}, \bar{\rho}(t) \big\} \;. \end{align} It helps to rewrite $\bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star)\;\! \bar{\rho}(t)$ so that its meaning is more obvious. Expanding the sum containing $(1-\delta_{mN})$ we get \begin{align} \label{EtaStarL} \bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) = {}& - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\bar{\rho}(t)\big] + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \nn \\ & - {\cal J}({\bm \eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) - \frac{1}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \hat{Q}_{mn}, \bar{\rho}(t) \big\} \;. \end{align} It is simple to see that \begin{align} \label{DoubleSumJumps} \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} = {\cal J}({\bm \eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \;, \end{align} and similarly \begin{align} \label{DoubleSumAnticomm} \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \hat{Q}_{mn}, \bar{\rho}(t) \big\} = \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nn} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nn} \hat{Q}_{Nn}, \bar{\rho}(t) \big\} + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{mn} \hat{Q}_{mn}, \bar{\rho}(t) \big\} \;. \end{align} Substituting \eqref{DoubleSumJumps} and \eqref{DoubleSumAnticomm} into \eqref{EtaStarL} gives \begin{align} \label{SimpleFormLbar} \bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) ={}& - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\bar{\rho}(t)\big] + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, {\cal D}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) + \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nn} \, \bar{{\cal D}}_{Nn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \;, \end{align} where we have defined \begin{align} \label{DbarDefn} \bar{{\cal D}}_{Nn} \, \rho = - \frac{1}{2} \, \big\{ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nn} \hat{Q}_{Nn}, \rho \big\} \;. \end{align} As already described at the outset, the first term in \eqref{SimpleFormLbar} describes coherent population transfer between states other than the final state $\ket{\psi_N}$ (recall Sec.~\ref{[Hmn,Rho]}). The second term in \eqref{SimpleFormLbar} describes incoherent transitions that either move populations out of $\ket{\psi_N}$, or between any two states except for $\ket{\psi_N}$ (see Sec.~\ref{DmnRho}). The last term in \eqref{SimpleFormLbar} is similar in form to ${\cal D}_{mn}$ except that terms of the form $\hat{Q}_{Nn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nn}$ have been removed. But these are the terms which describe jumps to the final state. Therefore $\bar{{\cal D}}_{Nn}$ is a superoperator which describes how the system evolves conditioned on no jumps to $\ket{\psi_N}$. Substituting the formal solution of \eqref{NoJumpEvolution} into \eqref{JumpProb} we thus obtain \begin{align} {}& {\rm Pr} \Big\{ \rho(\tau) = \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in [t,t+dt) \; \Big\| \; \rho(\tau) \ne \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in (0,t) \,, \, \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \nn \\ \label{ConditionedHTD} {}& = \sum_{n=1}^{N} \; k_{Nn} \, \frac{\bra{\psi_n} \;\! e^{\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)\,t} \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_n}}{{\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)\,t} \rho_{\rm i} \big]} \; dt \;. \end{align} Note that \eqref{NoJumpEvolution} produces a trace-decreasing state, which is why we have used an overbar for the density operator and the generator of time evolution. Following Sec.~\ref{MultichannelQuantumJumps} we see that the norm of $\bar{\rho}(t)$ is precisely the probability of no jumps in the interval $[0,t)$, given some initial state i.e. \begin{align} \label{NoJumpProbability} {\rm Pr} \Big\{ \rho(\tau) \ne \hat{Q}_N \; \text{for} \; \tau \in [0,t) \; \Big\| \; \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} = {\rm Tr}\big[ e^{\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)\,t} \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \big] \;. \end{align} The product of \eqref{ConditionedHTD} and \eqref{NoJumpProbability} simply cancels the norm of $\bar{\rho}(t)$ giving the final expression for the hitting probability density as \begin{align} \label{FinalHTD} h\big( t;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i} \big) = \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nn} \, \bra{\psi_n} \, e^{\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)\,t} \, \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_n} \;. \end{align} This completes our derivation of the hitting distribution using the quantum-jump method. \subsection{Examples} \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{HTDwithoutDephasingA}} \caption{\label{HTDwithoutDephasingA} Recall from Sec.~\ref{[Hmn,Rho]} that a Hamiltonian, say $\hat{H}_{21}$ is parameterised by the three numbers $\omega_1$, $\omega_2$, and $\Omega_{21}$, which correspond to the diagonal and off-diagonal matrix elements of $\hat{H}_{21}$ in the site basis. Here we set $\omega_1=1$, $\omega_2=3$, and $\omega_3=5$ which are kept constant throughout. We then set the transition rates to be $\Omega_{32}=k_{42}=k_{43}=5$ and change only $\Omega_{21}$ whose value is shown in the plot. Note that $\| \omega_1-\omega_2 \| \ll 2 \Omega_{21}$, so according to \eqref{CoherentFreq} of Sec.~\ref{[Hmn,Rho]} $\nu_{21} \approx 2\Omega_{21}$.} \end{figure} We now illustrate \eqref{FinalHTD} with a simple example. Consider the graph shown in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(a). This is an example with $N=4$ so by our convention the final state is $\rho_{\rm f}=\op{\psi_4}{\psi_4}$. We will let the initial state be $\rho_{\rm i}=\op{\psi_1}{\psi_1}$. In Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(b), (c), and (d), we plot the hitting distribution for various amounts of coherence between states $\ket{\psi_1}$ and $\ket{\psi_2}$ while keeping other parameters constant (see figure caption for their values). We observe that as $\Omega_{21}$ is increased from 5 [Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(b)] to 50 [Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(d)], the hitting distribution starts to show more and more oscillations due to the increased level of coherence. Classically, only incoherent transitions are permitted so hitting distributions do not exhibit oscillations. We can see from Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(b) that for $\Omega_{21}=5$ the oscillations in the hitting distribution are dying out and the quantum walk is in transition to the classical regime. Furthermore, the oscillations in the hitting distribution can actually reach zero (or near zero) at its minimum meaning that there are times at which it is impossible to find the walker at $\ket{\psi_4}$. Again, such features would not appear in a purely classical walk since incoherent transitions cannot produce any interference effects. For variation we show in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingB} what happens when we change $\Omega_{32}$ instead of $\Omega_{21}$ while keeping every other parameter constant (see the figure caption for the actual values). Like Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}, the amount of oscillations increases as $\Omega_{32}$ is increased, but now this is accompanied by a lengthening of the tail of the hitting distribution. The shape of the hitting distribution depends on the exact manner in which the probability amplitudes for the different paths of the quantum walk interfere. A comparison of Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA} with Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingB} illustrates that hitting times of a given graph can be much more sensitive to one coherent transition but not others. We will have more to say about this in Sec.~\ref{AvgHittingTime}. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{HTDwithoutDephasingB}} \caption{\label{HTDwithoutDephasingB} Hitting distributions for various values of $\Omega_{32}$ (shown in the plots). We fix $\Omega_{21}=5$ while keeping the remaining parameters the same as in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA} ($k_{42}=k_{43}=5$ and $\omega_1=1$, $\omega_2=3$, $\omega_3=5$). Note that (c) and (d) are for identical parameters just that (c) plots the hitting distribution for short times.} \end{figure} \subsection{Including dephasing} \label{IncludingDephasing} We obtained \eqref{FinalHTD} based on \eqref{GeneralGraphNoDeph} which does not have the dephasing processes defined in \eqref{DephasingDefn}. The omission of dephasing connections was simply to make the derivation easier to follow. If we include dephasing in ${\cal L}$ then the dephasing terms will simply carry through to $\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)$. The expression for the hitting-time probability density will still be given by \eqref{FinalHTD}, just with an $\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)$ that includes dephasing connections. Stated more formally, we can consider a graph defined by \begin{align} \label{GeneralGraphWithDeph} \frac{d}{dt} \, \rho(t) = {\cal L} \, \rho(t) \equiv - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\rho(t) \big] + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^N \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, {\cal D}_{mn} \, \rho(t) + \sum_{n=1}^N \; q_{n} \, {\cal D}_{n} \, \rho(t) \;. \end{align} Note that the total number of incoherent channels in this case is given by $L=N^2$ and we can make the following identification for the Lindblad operators in \eqref{MultichannelL}: \begin{gather} \label{DephasingHatc} \big\{ \hat{c}_q \big \}_{q=1}^{N^2-N} = \big\{ \rt{k_{mn}} \, \hat{Q}_{mn} \big\}_{m,n} \;, \quad \big\{ \hat{c}_q \big \}_{q=N^2-N+1}^{N^2} = \big\{ \rt{q_{n}} \, \hat{Q}_{n} \big\}_{n} \;. \end{gather} The Hamiltonian in \eqref{MultichannelL} is still given by \eqref{H}. The detection efficiencies should now be set according to \begin{align} \bm{\eta}_\star \, \Longleftrightarrow \, \eta_{mn}=\delta_{mN} \;, \quad n=1,2,\ldots,L/2 \;. \end{align} This then gives \begin{align} \label{SimpleFormLbarWithDeph} \bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \, \bar{\rho}(t) = {}& - \frac{i}{2} \, \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1}} \, \big[ \hat{H}_{mn},\bar{\rho}(t)\big] + \sum_{n=1}^N \; q_{n} \, {\cal D}_{n} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \nn \\ & + \underset{m \ne n}{\sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N} \; k_{mn} \, {\cal D}_{mn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) + \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nn} \, \bar{{\cal D}}_{Nn} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \;. \end{align} Replacing $\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)$ in \eqref{FinalHTD} with \eqref{SimpleFormLbarWithDeph} then gives the distribution of hitting times for the general graph. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{HTDwithDephasing}} \caption{\label{HTDwithDephasing} $\Omega_{32}=k_{42}=k_{43}=5$, $\Omega_{21}=50$, $\omega_1=1$, $\omega_2=3$, and $\omega_3=5$. See Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(d) for comparison.} \end{figure} The reason why adding dephasing connections to the graph does not change the form of hitting distribution as a function of $\bar{{\cal L}}(\bm{\eta}_\star)$ is because the quantum-jump method works by detecting transitions to the final state $\ket{\psi_N}$. Of the three types of connections that we consider, only two can induce transitions between states---coherent and incoherent population transfer. The third type, i.e~dephasing, changes only the coherences in the system. Of course changing coherences in the graph does affect how quickly the final state is reached. That is to say, the distribution of hitting times for a state diagram with dephasing will be a different function of $t$ compared to one without dephasing but otherwise identical in all respects. For illustration we include in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithDephasing} hitting distributions for the graph with dephasing of $\ket{\psi_2}$, see Fig.~\ref{HTDwithDephasing}(a). The plots in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithDephasing} are identical to Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(d) except with various amounts of dephasing added as indicated in the plots. Here the dephasing rate is $q_2$ and as we increase this rate the quantum walk becomes more classical. This can be seen in passing from Fig.~\ref{HTDwithDephasing}(b) to (d) where the oscillations which we attributed to the quantum-mechanical nature of the walk in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA} gradually die out. This is to be expected since by increasing $q_2$ we are making the walk more classical, in other words, making it more and more difficult to share coherences between $\ket{\psi_2}$ and other nodes in the graph. Next we calculate the moments of $h\big( t;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i} \big)$. \section{Hitting statistics} \label{AvgHittingTime} \subsection{The $n$th moment} \label{nthMomentResult} The $n$th raw statistical moment of the hitting time $T(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})$ is defined as \begin{align} \label{nthMomentDefn} {\rm E}\big[T^n(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})\big] = \int_0^\infty dt \; t^n \; h(t;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i}) \;, \end{align} where we are using the notation ${\rm E}[X]$ to mean the ensemble average of an arbitrary random variable $X$. Although having the hitting-time distribution is formally equivalent to knowing the statistics of $T(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})$, deriving a closed-form expression for \eqref{nthMomentDefn} is still a nontrivial task. We will show in Sec.~\ref{nthMomentProof} that \eqref{nthMomentDefn} evaluates to \begin{align} \label{M(x)Final} {\rm E}\big[T^n(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})\big] = (-1)^{n+1} \, n! \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^{(n+1)} \, \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_m} \end{align} where we have defined the shorthand \begin{align} \bar{\Ls}_\star = \bar{\cal L}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \;, \end{align} and $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$ is the Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse of $\bar{\Ls}_\star$, defined by \begin{align} \label{Lstar+Defn} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+\, \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ = \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \;, \quad \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \, \bar{\Ls}_\star = \bar{\Ls}_\star \;, \quad \big[ \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \, \bar{\Ls}_\star \big]^\dagger = \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \, \bar{\Ls}_\star \;, \quad \big[ \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \big]^\dagger = \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \;. \end{align} Note the superoperator Hermitian conjugate in \eqref{Lstar+Defn} is defined with respect to the Hilbert--Schmidt inner product ${\rm Tr}[\hat{X}^\dagger\hat{Y}]$ between any two bounded operators $\hat{X}$ and $\hat{Y}$. We say an arbitrary superoperator ${\cal A}$ is Hermitian, i.e.~${\cal A}={\cal A}^\dagger$ if and only if \begin{align} \Big( {\rm Tr}\big[\hat{X}^\dagger {\cal A} \hat{Y} \big] \Big)^ = {\rm Tr}\big[\hat{Y}^\dagger {\cal A} \hat{X} \big] \quad \forall \; \hat{X} \,, \hat{Y} \;. \end{align} The Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse always exists, is unique, and recovers the standard inverse when $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ is invertible. One may wonder how $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$ can actually be computed for a given graph. To find the pseudoinverse it will be most convenient to use a matrix representation for $\bar{\Ls}_\star$. This can be accomplished by using $\{\hat{Q}_{mn}\}_{m,n}$ as an operator basis, in which case the Hilbert--Schmidt inner product allows us to represent an arbitrary state $\rho$ by a vector $\bm{\rho}$ whose elements are $\rho_{mn}$. Note in this representation each row of $\bm{\rho}$ is labelled by two indices so $\bm{\rho}$ is a $N^2 \times 1$ vector. Similarly $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ can be represented by an $N^2 \times N^2$ matrix $(\bar{\Ls}_\star)$ whose elements are \begin{align} \label{MatRepLstar} (\bar{\Ls}_\star)_{jk,mn} = {\rm Tr}\big[ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{jk} \bar{\Ls}_\star \hat{Q}_{mn} \big] \;. \end{align} The superoperator pseudoinverse $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$ will then be faithfully represented by the Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse of $(\bar{\Ls}_\star)$, i.e.~$(\bar{\Ls}_\star^+)=(\bar{\Ls}_\star)^+$. Equation \eqref{MatRepLstar} will be useful in Sec.~\ref{Examples} when we consider simple examples. There, we will consider one example where $\bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1}$ does not exist and another where it does. This will explicitly illustrate the use of the Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse in \eqref{M(x)Final}. The two most considered hitting statistics are the average and variance. We therefore pay special attention to these two quantities. On setting $n=1$ in \eqref{M(x)Final} we obtain the average hitting time: \begin{align} \label{E[t]MPInv} {\rm E}[\;\!T(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})\;\!] = \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_m} \;. \end{align} Setting $n=2$ in \eqref{M(x)Final} and using the result for the average we arrive at an expression for the variance \begin{align} \label{V[T]Final} {\rm V}\big[T(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})\big] = - 2 \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^3 \rho_{\rm i} \ket{\psi_m} - \Bigg( \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_m} \Bigg)^2 \;. \end{align} Our expression for the $n$th moment makes the evaluation of the hitting statistics a simple and efficient procedure given $\bar{\Ls}_\star$. For example, evaluating the average hitting time by setting $n=1$ in \eqref{nthMomentDefn} and evaluating the resulting integral requires the determination of an optimal upper limit to truncate the integral in order to balance the amount of simulation time and numerical precision. In particular, when $h(t)$ has a long tail, the calculation of the average hitting time via \eqref{nthMomentDefn} can be cumbersome. Equation \eqref{E[t]MPInv} has the advantage that it avoids these issues. \subsection{Proof of the $n$th moment} \label{nthMomentProof} To derive \eqref{M(x)Final} we consider the moment-generating function $M_T(x)$ defined by \begin{align} \label{M(x)def} M_T(x) = {\rm E}\big[ e^{xT} \big] \;. \end{align} Given $M_T(x)$, all higher-order moments of $T$ can be calculated as \begin{align} \label{nthMoment} {\rm E}\big[ T^n \big] = \bigg[ \frac{d^n}{dx^n} \; M_T(x) \bigg\|_{x=0} \;. \end{align} A formula for $M_T(x)$ is simple to derive by substituting the expression for $h(t;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})$ from \eqref{FinalHTD} into \eqref{M(x)def}. We obtain \begin{align} M_T(x) = {}& \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \int_0^\infty dt \; e^{(x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star)t} \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_m} \\ = {}& \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \big( x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \big)^{-1} \Big[ e^{(x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star)t} \Big\|_0^\infty \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_m} \\ \label{limM(x)} = {}& \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \big( x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \big)^{-1} \, \Big( \lim_{t\to\infty} e^{xt} \, e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star t} - \mathbbm{1} \Big) \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_m} \;. \end{align} Here we are using $\mathbbm{1}$ for the superoperator identity. We now need to evaluate the $t \longrightarrow \infty$ limit in \eqref{limM(x)}. To do so we first note that \begin{align} \label{ZeroSteadyState} \lim_{t \to \infty} e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star t} \rho_{\rm i} = 0 \;. \end{align} This simply says that the steady state for the dynamics defined by the generator $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ is the zero state (represented by a matrix with all elements equal to zero). We can prove this by showing that \eqref{SimpleFormLbar} produces a trace-decreasing density operator. It is simple to check from \eqref{IncohPopTrans} that ${\cal D}_{mn}$ is a traceless superoperator: \begin{align} {\rm Tr}\big[ {\cal D}_{mn} \;\!\rho \big] = 0 \;, \; \forall \; m,n \;. \end{align} It is also simple to see that the trace of a commutator is always zero. Therefore taking the trace of \eqref{SimpleFormLbar} we get \begin{align} \frac{d}{dt} \, {\rm Tr}\big[ \bar{\rho}(t) \big] = {}& \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, {\rm Tr}\big[ \bar{{\cal D}}_{Nm} \;\! \bar{\rho}(t) \big] \\ = {}& - \frac{1}{2} \, \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, {\rm Tr}\big[ \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nm} \, \hat{Q}_{Nm} \, \bar{\rho}(t) \big] \;. \end{align} The traces on the right-hand side are positive since they are averages of positive operators in the state $\bar{\rho}(t)$. They are in fact just the diagonal elements of the unnormalised density operator $\bar{\rho}(t)$. Since the rates $k_{Nm}$ must also be positive for every value of $m$, ${\rm Tr}[\bar{\rho}(t)]$ has a negative rate of change, which means that $\bar{\rho}(t)$ will eventually decay to zero. We now assume the evolution under $\exp(\bar{\Ls}_\star t)$ dominates over $\exp(xt)$ [i.e.~the approach to zero under $\exp(\bar{\Ls}_\star t)$ is faster than the rise of $\exp(xt)$] then the $t\longrightarrow\infty$ limit can be dropped to give \begin{align} M_T(x) = - \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \; k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \big( x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \big)^{-1} \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_m} \;. \end{align} It is easy to see that \begin{align} \frac{d^n}{dx^n} \, \big( x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \big)^{-1} = (-1)^n \, n! \, \big( x \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \big)^{-(n+1)} \;. \end{align} Using \eqref{nthMoment} we therefore arrive at \begin{align} \label{E[Tn]Linv} {\rm E}\big[T^n(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})\big] = (-1)^{n+1} \, n! \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^{-(n+1)} \, \rho_{\rm i} \;\! \ket{\psi_m} \;. \end{align} We assumed that $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ has an inverse in our proof and it is natural to ask what if $\bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1}$ does not exist? If the inverse of $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ does not exist then one can replace $\bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1}$ by $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$, the Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse. As mentioned in Sec.~\ref{nthMomentResult}, $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$ always exists, is unique, and coincides with $\bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1}$ if it can be found. The replacement of $\bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1}$ by $\bar{\Ls}_\star^+$ in \eqref{E[Tn]Linv} then gives \eqref{M(x)Final}. Equations \eqref{E[t]MPInv} and \eqref{V[T]Final} are obtained from \eqref{M(x)Final} which we have derived using the moment-generating function but they should also be derivable by directly doing the integral in \eqref{nthMomentDefn} with $n=1$ and $n=2$ respectively. We show that this is indeed possible in Appendices~\ref{AppA} and \ref{AppB}, which serve as independent proofs for the mean and variance of the hitting time. Let us now illustrate how these results work with a few simple examples below. We consider only the mean and variance of $T$. \subsection{Examples} \label{Examples} \subsubsection{Example 1: An absorbing state for $N=2$} For our first example we consider the case of a simple incoherent transition between two states shown in Fig.~\ref{TwoStateExample} with $k_{12}=0$. It is clear that $\ket{\psi_2}$ is an absorbing state and we will see that our hitting statistics says so as well. The graph is defined by \begin{align} {\cal L} \, \rho(t) = k_{21} \bigg[ \, \hat{Q}_{21} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{21} - \frac{1}{2} \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \rho(t) - \frac{1}{2} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \bigg] \;, \end{align} where we have used $\hat{Q}^\dagger_{21}\hat{Q}_{21}=\hat{Q}_1$. The average and variance of $T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i})$ according to \eqref{E[t]MPInv} and \eqref{V[T]Final} are thus \begin{gather} \label{TwoStateE[T]} {\rm E}[\;\!T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i})\;\!] = k_{21} \, \bra{\psi_1} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_1} \;, \\ \label{TwoStateV[T]} {\rm V}[\;\!T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i})\;\!] = - 2 \, k_{21} \, \bra{\psi_1} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^3 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_1} - \big( k_{21} \, \bra{\psi_1} \, \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \ket{\psi_1} \big)^2 \;. \end{gather} This then gives $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ as \begin{align} \label{TwoStateLbar1} \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \rho(t) = - \frac{k_{21}}{2} \, \bigg[ \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \rho(t) + \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \bigg] \;. \end{align} Using \eqref{MatRepLstar} the matrix representing $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ reads: \begin{align} (\bar{\Ls}_\star) = \left( \begin{array}{cccc} -k_{21} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & -k_{21}/2 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & - k_{21}/2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) \;. \end{align} This is clearly not an invertible matrix since the last row has only zeros. However, it has a Moore--Penrose pseudoinverse given by the same matrix with the first three diagonal entries inverted. In operator form we have \begin{align} \label{LstarPMInv} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+ \rho = - \, k^{-1}_{21} \, \big( \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_1 + 2 \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_2 + 2 \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_1 \big) \;. \end{align} \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{TwoStateExample}} \caption{\label{TwoStateExample} A simple example with $N=2$. We are concerned with the hitting time for state $\ket{\psi_2}$ so we are only detecting the $\ket{\psi_1} \longrightarrow \ket{\psi_2}$ transition.} \end{figure} Repeated application of \eqref{LstarPMInv} then gives \begin{align} \label{Lstar2rhoi} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \rho_{\rm i} = {}& k^{-2}_{21} \big( \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 + 4 \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 + 4 \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 \big)\;, \\ \label{Lstar3rhoi} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^3 \rho_{\rm i} = {}& - k^{-3}_{21} \big( \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 + 8 \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 + 8 \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 \big) \;. \end{align} Taking the average of \eqref{Lstar2rhoi} and \eqref{Lstar3rhoi} against $\ket{\psi_1}$ we get \begin{align} \bra{\psi_1} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^2 \rho_{\rm i} \ket{\psi_1} = \frac{1}{k^2_{21}} \; \rho_{11} \;, \quad \bra{\psi_1} \bar{\Ls}_\star^+{}^3 \rho_{\rm i} \ket{\psi_1} = -\frac{1}{k^3_{21}} \; \rho_{11} \;, \end{align} where we have defined $\rho_{mn}=\bra{\psi_m}\rho_{\rm i}\ket{\psi_n}$. The average and variance of $T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i})$ according to \eqref{TwoStateE[T]} and \eqref{TwoStateV[T]} are thus \begin{gather} {\rm E}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i}) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k_{21}} \; \rho_{11} \;, \\ {\rm V}\big[ T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i}) \big] = \frac{1}{k^2_{21}} \; ( 2 \rho_{11} - \rho^2_{11} ) \;. \end{gather} Note the mean and variance are independent of any initial coherences in the graph so the random walk is classical. This can be expected because incoherent transitions do not couple the site populations to its coherences [see \eqref{ADmatrix} of Sec.~\ref{DmnRho}]. For $\rho_{\rm i}=\op{\psi_1}{\psi_1}$ we have $\rho_{11}=1$ and \begin{align} {\rm E}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_1) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k_{21}} \;, \quad {\rm V}\big[ T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_1) \big] = \frac{1}{k^2_{21}} \;. \end{align} This says the average amount of time we would have to wait to see the walker reach $\ket{\psi_2}$ starting at $\ket{\psi_1}$ is the inverse of the incoherent transition rate and this has a spread equal to the square of the mean as expected. If on the other hand $\rho_{\rm i}=\op{\psi_2}{\psi_2}$, then $\rho_{11}=0$, and we obtain \begin{align} \label{AbsRecurrenceTime} {\rm E}[T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2)] = {\rm V}\big[ T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2) \big] = 0 \;. \end{align} When the initial and final states coincide, i.e.~$\rho_{\rm f}=\rho_{\rm i}$, the quantity $T(\rho_{\rm i},\rho_{\rm i})$ is known as the recurrence time of $\rho_{\rm i}$ \cite{KMT12}. It is the time taken by a walker starting at $\rho_{\rm i}$ to return to it. If $\rho_{\rm i}$ has an infinite recurrence time then it is referred to as a null-recurrent state, and positive recurrent if its recurrence time is finite. An absorbing state $\rho_{\rm i}$ can thus be seen as a special case of a positive-recurrent state with zero recurrence time since the walker never leaves $\rho_{\rm i}$. This is precisely what \eqref{AbsRecurrenceTime} says. The variance should also be zero as there should be no spread in the recurrence time of an absorbing state. Although simple, this example illustrates the fact that we actually just require the inverse of the nonzero block in $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ that describes the transitions between $\ket{\psi_1}$ and $\ket{\psi_2}$. The reason why the last row (and column) in $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ is zero is simply because there are no transitions out of $\ket{\psi_2}$. \subsubsection{Example 2: A recurrent state for $N=2$} \label{Recurrent} We contrast the example above with the graph shown in Fig.~\ref{TwoStateExample} where another incoherent transition from $\ket{\psi_2}$ to $\ket{\psi_1}$ has been added. In this case we modify \eqref{TwoStateLbar1} to \begin{align} \label{TwoStateLbar2} \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \rho(t) = - \frac{k_{21}}{2} \, \bigg[ \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \rho(t) + \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{1} \, \bigg] + k_{12} \, \bigg[ \hat{Q}_{12} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{12} \,- \frac{1}{2} \, \hat{Q}_{2} \, \rho(t) -\frac{1}{2} \, \rho(t) \, \hat{Q}_{2} \, \bigg]\;. \end{align} The matrix representation of $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ can be shown to be \begin{align} \label{Lstar12} (\bar{\Ls}_\star) = \left(\begin{array}{cccc} -k_{21} & 0 & 0 & k_{12} \\ 0 & -(k_{21}+k_{12})/2 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & -(k_{21}+k_{12})/2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & -k_{12} \end{array} \right) \;. \end{align} It is clear that $(\bar{\Ls}_\star)$ has linearly independent columns. Therefore $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ has a standard inverse which in operator form is given by \begin{align} \label{Lstar12Inv} \bar{\Ls}_\star^{-1} \rho = - \big[ k^{-1}_{21} \, \hat{Q}_1 + 2 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-1} \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_2 + 2 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-1} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_1 + k^{-1}_{12} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho \, \hat{Q}_2 \big] \;. \end{align} As before, repeated application of \eqref{Lstar12Inv} gives \begin{align} \bar{\Ls}_\star^{-2} \,\rho_{\rm i} = {}& - \big[ k^{-2}_{21} \, \hat{Q}_1 + (k_{12} \, k_{21})^{-1} \, \hat{Q}_{12} \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_{12}^\dagger + 4 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-2} \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 \nn \\ & + 4 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-2} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 + k^{-2}_{12} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 \big] \;, \\[0.25cm] \bar{\Ls}_\star^{-3} \,\rho_{\rm i} = {}& - \big[ k^{-3}_{21} \, \hat{Q}_1 + (k^{-1}_{12} \, k^{-2}_{21} + k^{-2}_{12} \, k^{-1}_{21}) \, \hat{Q}_{12} \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_{12}^\dagger + 8 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-2} \, \hat{Q}_1 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 \nn \\ & + 8 \,(k_{12}+k_{21})^{-2} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_1 + k^{-3}_{12} \, \hat{Q}_2 \, \rho_{\rm i} \, \hat{Q}_2 \big] \;. \end{align} Substituting these into \eqref{TwoStateE[T]} and \eqref{TwoStateV[T]} and simplifying we get \begin{gather} \label{TwoStateExampleE[T]} {\rm E}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i}) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k_{21}} \; \rho_{11} + \left( \frac{1}{k_{21}} + \frac{1}{k_{12}} \right) \, \rho_{22} \;, \\ \label{TwoStateExampleV[T]} {\rm V}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\rho_{\rm i}) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k^2_{12}} \; \big( 2 \rho_{22} - \rho^2_{22} \big) + \frac{1}{k^2_{21}} \;. \end{gather} Looking at Fig.~\ref{TwoStateExample}, we can see that if $\rho_{\rm i}=\op{\psi_1}{\psi_1}$ then we would expect the average hitting time to be identical to the case without the transition from $\ket{\psi_2}$ to $\ket{\psi_1}$. This is indeed what we find on setting $\rho_{11}=1$ and $\rho_{22}=0$ in \eqref{TwoStateExampleE[T]} and \eqref{TwoStateExampleV[T]}. If instead we now set $\rho_{\rm i}=\op{\psi_2}{\psi_2}$ so that $\rho_{11}=0$ and $\rho_{22}=1$, we obtain the mean and variance for the recurrence time of $\ket{\psi_2}$, \begin{align} \label{AvgRecTime} {\rm E}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k_{21}} + \frac{1}{k_{12}} \;, \quad {\rm V}\big[ \, T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2) \, \big] = \frac{1}{k^2_{21}} + \frac{1}{k^2_{12}} \;. \end{align} Intuitively we would say the round trip time $T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2)$ should be the sum of the hitting times for each direction: \begin{align} \label{T21+T12} T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_2) = T(\hat{Q}_1,\hat{Q}_2) + T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_1) \;. \end{align} Taking the average of \eqref{T21+T12} then reproduces the average in \eqref{AvgRecTime}. Physically we also expect $T(\hat{Q}_1,\hat{Q}_2)$ to be independent of $T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_1)$, so taking the variance of \eqref{T21+T12} we get ${\rm V}[T(\hat{Q}_1,\hat{Q}_2)] + {\rm V}[T(\hat{Q}_2,\hat{Q}_1)]$ which is precisely the variance seen in \eqref{AvgRecTime}. \subsubsection{Example 3: Effects of coherence for $N=4$} So far we have only illustrated our formula for the average hitting time for the simplest of examples---graphs with only incoherent transitions and with the minimum number of nodes. Although they are oversimplified, these examples allow us to get a handle on \eqref{E[t]MPInv} by using our intuition from classical random walks. Now that we are somewhat more comfortable with \eqref{E[t]MPInv} we consider a more nontrivial example. We return to the graph discussed in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(a) and examine how different amounts of coherence in the graph can change the average of $T(\hat{Q}_4,\hat{Q}_1)$. We have deliberately chosen the graph parameters so they match those used in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}. The parameters which are held constant have their values shown in the caption of Fig.~\ref{AverageHittingTime}. In Fig.~\ref{AverageHittingTime}(a) we plot the average hitting time as a function of $\Omega_{21}$ for three different values of $\Omega_{32}$ [corresponding to the three values chosen in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(b), (c), and (d)]. It can be seen from Fig.~\ref{AverageHittingTime}(a) that the average hitting times all behave, qualitatively the same as $\Omega_{21}$ is varied for the three values of $\Omega_{32}$ considered: They all start at infinity at $\Omega_{21}=0$, decay to some minimum, and then increase again to some constant value. From Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA}(a) we see that if $\Omega_{21}=0$ then $\ket{\psi_1}$ becomes an absorbing state and the quantum walker stays at its initial position forever. This is why ${\rm E}[T(\hat{Q}_4,\hat{Q}_1)] \longrightarrow \infty$ as $\Omega_{21} \longrightarrow 0$. Thus as we increase $\Omega_{21}$ from zero, we allow the quantum walker to access the rest of the graph and the average hitting time must drop from infinity. In particular it reaches the minimum when there is non-negligible population in both states $\ket{\psi_2}$ and $\ket{\psi_3}$. Increasing $\Omega_{21}$ further makes the $\ket{\psi_1} \longleftrightarrow \ket{\psi_2}$ transition dominant which leads to a small probability of finding the walker in $\ket{\psi_3}$. Hence when $\Omega_{21} \gg \Omega_{32}$, essentially all first transitions to the final state are from $\ket{\psi_2}$ and the hitting time becomes independent of the actual values of $\Omega_{21}$ and $\Omega_{32}$. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{AverageHittingTime}} \caption{\label{AverageHittingTime} The average hitting time for the graph in Fig.~\ref{HTDwithoutDephasingA} with the parameter values $k_{42}=k_{43}=5$, $\omega_1=1$, $\omega_2=3$, and $\omega_3=5$. (a) We set $\Omega_{32}=5,20,50$ as shown and change only $\Omega_{21}$. (b) $\Omega_{21}=5,20,50$.} \end{figure} A much less trivial feature is present in Fig.~\ref{AverageHittingTime}(b). This time we fix the value of $\Omega_{21}$ and plot the hitting time as a function of $\Omega_{32}$. Again, all the curves are qualitatively the same and show that $\Omega_{32} \gg \Omega_{21}$ also \emph{increases} the hitting time and can even make it diverge. We emphasise that diverging hitting times are a purely quantum phenomenon as a classical walker always reaches the final state in a finite time (assuming of course that there are no absorbing states). We can shed some light on this quantum effect by solving the eigenvalue problem of the Hamiltonian driving the $\ket{\psi_1} \longleftrightarrow \ket{\psi_2}$ and $\ket{\psi_2} \longleftrightarrow \ket{\psi_3}$ transitions. Since $\omega_1$, $\omega_2$, and $\omega_3$ are of the same order, let us assume they are all equal to zero for simplicity. In this case one can easily show that for $\Omega_{32} \gg \Omega_{21}$ the state $\ket{\psi_1}$ becomes the eigenstate of the Hamiltonian and hence it is a stationary state. In other words, by increasing the rate of coherent transitions $\ket{\psi_2} \longleftrightarrow \ket{\psi_3}$ we are trapping the population in the initial state $\ket{\psi_1}$, and thereby increasing the hitting time. This new mechanism leading to diverging hitting times should be contrasted with two other mechanisms known previously in the context of measured quantum walks \cite{VKB08}: (i) When the measurement frequency tends to zero (since the walk is essentially not measured at all the hitting time tends to infinity); (ii) when the measurement frequency tends to infinity (quantum Zeno effect freezes the population in the initial state). \section{Comparison with a discrete-time measured walk} \label{SEC_COMPARISON} \subsection{Generalised Krovi--Brun definition} There are a few noteworthy differences between what we have considered thus far and what is usually considered in the standard theory of quantum walks: First, much of quantum-walk theory considers only closed systems i.e.~systems undergoing unitary evolution whereas the theory presented here allows for non-unitary evolution (although open quantum walks are starting to attract some attention recently as already mentioned in Sec.~\ref{Intro}). Second, time is often discrete. In this case the hitting time is simply measured in the number of steps that the system takes to reach the final state. The hitting probability is then defined analogously to \eqref{GeneralHTD} to be \begin{align} \label{f(n)Defn} f(n;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i}) \equiv {\rm Pr}\big[ \rho(t_n) = \rho_{\rm f}, \rho(t_m) \ne \rho_{\rm f} \;\forall \; m \le n-1 \, \| \, \rho(0) = \rho_{\rm i} \big] \;. \end{align} Lastly, as we said already for quantum walks with only unitary dynamics, the notion of a quantum walker actually being in a particular state is not well defined. One way around this issue is to introduce a measurement of the final-state population at the end of every step. Given that our hitting distribution is founded on measurement theory, it is most natural to compare our calculation with this version of the hitting distribution from the quantum-walk literature. In particular, we use the definition stated in Krovi and Brun's paper \cite{KB06} but replace, in their definition of the hitting distribution, the unitary time-evolution operator by a non-unitary map ${\cal K}(t)$. Taking $\rho_{\rm f}=\hat{Q}_N$ as before, the expression for $f(n;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i})$ from Ref.~\cite{KB06} gives \begin{align} \label{f(n)} f(n;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i}) = {\rm Tr}\big\{ {\cal Q}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \big[ {\cal P}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \big\} \end{align} where the quantum-walk is defined by ${\cal K}(\delta t)=\exp({\cal L}\,\delta t)$. The superoperators ${\cal Q}_N$ and ${\cal P}_N$ are defined by \begin{align} \label{QandP} {\cal Q}_N \, \rho = \hat{Q}_N \, \rho \,\hat{Q}_N \;, \quad {\cal P}_N \, \rho = \hat{P}_N \, \rho \, \hat{P}_N \;, \end{align} and \begin{align} \label{PhatN} \hat{P}_N = \hat{1} - \hat{Q}_N \;. \end{align} The effect of ${\cal Q}_N$ is thus to project the system into $\ket{\psi_N}$ while ${\cal P}_N$ projects the system into the subspace \begin{align} \bar{\mathbb{H}}_N \equiv {\rm Span}\big(\bar{\mathbb{S}}_N \big) \;, \end{align} where $\bar{\mathbb{S}}_N \equiv \mathbb{S}_N - \{ \ket{\psi_N} \}$. Their effects on an arbitrary state $\rho$ can most easily be seen when \eqref{QandP} are in their matrix representations \begin{align} \label{QandPMatrixForm} {\cal Q}_N \, \rho = \left(\begin{array}{ccccc} 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\ \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots & \vdots \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & \rho_{NN} \end{array} \right) \;, \quad {\cal P}_N \, \rho = \left(\begin{array}{ccccc} \rho_{11} & \rho_{12} & \cdots & \rho_{1,N-1} & 0 \\ \rho_{21} & \rho_{22} & \cdots & \rho_{2,N-1} & 0 \\ \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots & \vdots \\ \rho_{N-1,1} & \rho_{N-1,2} & \cdots & \rho_{N-1,N-1} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) \;, \end{align} where we have made use of \eqref{RhoMatrixElements} for the matrix elements of $\rho$ (sometimes with a comma in the subscript when the indices of $\rho$ are otherwise difficult to differentiate). Note that we have written the time step in \eqref{f(n)} as a small but finite number $\delta t$ to remind ourselves that \eqref{f(n)} was derived in discrete time. Therefore the comparison of $h(t;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i})$ to $f(n;\rho_{\rm f},\rho_{\rm i})$ has to be made in the limit of $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$. As a matter of fact, we will show next that the two distributions converge in the continuous-time limit, expressed as \begin{align} \lim_{\delta t \to 0} f(n;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i}) = h(t_{n-1}) \, \delta t \;. \end{align} \subsection{Convergence of the generalised Krovi--Brun and quantum-jump distributions} To show the equivalence between the two hitting distributions in the $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$ limit it helps to separate the full generator for the Markov chain into jump and no-jump terms: \begin{align} {\cal L} = \bar{\Ls}_\star + {\cal J}_\star \;, \end{align} where $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ is given by \eqref{SimpleFormLbarWithDeph} and we have also defined the shorthand \begin{align} {\cal J}_\star \equiv {\cal J}(\bm{\eta}_\star) \;. \end{align} Recall that we defined ${\cal J}(\bm{\eta}_\star)$ in \eqref{Jstar}. We will assume that initially there is no population in the final state, \begin{align} \label{InitialCondition1} \bra{\psi_N} \rho_{\rm i} \ket{\psi_N} = 0 \;. \end{align} This condition then implies that $\ket{\psi_N}$ cannot share coherences with the remaining states in $\bar{\mathbb{S}}_N$. The initial state is thus confined to be in $\bar{\mathbb{H}}_N$, which can be formally expressed as \begin{align} \label{InitialCondition2} {\cal P}_N \, \rho_{\rm i} = \rho_{\rm i} \;. \end{align} The idea of writing ${\cal L}$ as the sum of $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ and ${\cal J}_\star$ is that the no-jump and jump superoperators have the following useful properties which can be used to show the consistency between the discrete-time and continuous-time hitting distributions. The first thing to note is that the no-jump evolution of an $\rho_{\rm i}$ defined by \eqref{InitialCondition2} is confined to $\bar{\mathbb{H}}_N$. This automatically means that any future evolution of $\rho_{\rm i}$ under $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ has zero projection onto $\ket{\psi_N}$. We can express these observations formally as \begin{align} \label{LstarIdentity} {\cal Q}_N \, \bar{\Ls}_\star = 0 \;, \quad {\cal P}_N \, \bar{\Ls}_\star = \bar{\Ls}_\star \, {\cal P}_N = \bar{\Ls}_\star \;. \end{align} Remember that these are superoperator identities assuming they act on states satisfying \eqref{InitialCondition2}. Jumps, on the other hand, take the system state out of its confinement in $\bar{\mathbb{H}}_N$ and into $\ket{\psi_N}$. This means that \begin{align} \label{JstarIdentity} {\cal Q}_N \, {\cal J}_\star = {\cal J}_\star \;, \quad {\cal P}_N \, {\cal J}_\star = 0 \;. \end{align} We then have, in the limit of $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$, \begin{align} {\cal P}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) = {}& {\cal P}_N \, e^{{\cal L} \delta t} \\ = {}& {\cal P}_N \big( \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \delta t + {\cal J}_\star \, \delta t \big) \\ = {}& \big( \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \delta t \big) \, {\cal P}_N \;. \end{align} On rewriting the expansion in $\delta t$ back in exponential form we arrive at \begin{align} {\cal P}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \, \rho_{\rm i} = e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star \, \delta t} \, \rho_{\rm i} \;. \end{align} This then permits us to write \begin{align} \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) =\big[ {\cal P}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} = e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star (n-1) \delta t} \rho_{\rm i} \;. \end{align} This is again a state which satisfies \eqref{InitialCondition2} [with $\rho_{\rm i}$ replaced by $\bar{\rho}(t_{n-1})$] so the superoperator identities \eqref{LstarIdentity} and \eqref{JstarIdentity} still apply and we have \begin{align} {\cal Q}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \, \big[ {\cal P}_N {\cal K}(\delta t) \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} = {}& {\cal Q}_N \, {\cal K}(\delta t) \, \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) \\ = {}& {\cal Q}_N \, \big( \mathbbm{1} + \bar{\Ls}_\star \, \delta t + {\cal J}_\star \, \delta t \big) \, \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) \\ = {}& {\cal J}_\star \, \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) \, \delta t \;, \end{align} where we have also noted that ${\cal Q}_N \,\bar{\rho}(t_{n-1})=0$. Taking the trace then gives \begin{align} \label{DiscreteTimeJumpProb} f(n)= {\rm Tr}\big[ {\cal J}_\star \, \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) \big] \, \delta t \;, \end{align} which we recognise as the jump probability \eqref{JumpProb} with an unnormalised state, but we showed in \eqref{ConditionedHTD} and \eqref{NoJumpProbability} that this is precisely the hitting distribution. The only difference is that time is discretised. Substituting the definition of ${\cal J}_\star$ from \eqref{Jstar} into \eqref{DiscreteTimeJumpProb} we get \begin{align} f(n) = {}& {\rm Tr}\Bigg[ \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \hat{Q}_{Nm} \, \bar{\rho}(t_{n-1}) \; \hat{Q}^\dagger_{Nm} \Bigg] \, \delta t \\ = {}& \sum_{m=1}^{N-1} \, k_{Nm} \, \bra{\psi_m} \, e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star (n-1) \delta t} \rho_{\rm i} \; \ket{\psi_m} \, \delta t = h(t_{n-1}) \, \delta t \;. \end{align} Note that $f(n)$ corresponds to the quantum-jump distribution evaluated at time $t_{n-1}$. This makes sense since there are only $n$ time steps so what we want is the probability that a jump occurs in the interval from $t_{n-1}$ to $t_n$ and that none occurred from $t_0$ to $t_{n-1}$---which is precisely $h(t_{n-1})\,\delta t$. \section{Including coherent transitions to the final state} \label{N+1Model} \subsection{The $N+1$ model} \label{NewModel} The theory above does not allow for coherent transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ in the graph. The quantum-jump approach works by detecting transitions to the final state but only incoherent transitions can be detected. That is to say, if there are coherent transitions from $\bar{\mathbb{H}}_N$ to $\ket{\psi_N}$, then the hitting statistics calculated from the quantum-jump approach will not reflect the true statistics, which contains a contribution from the coherent transitions to the final state. On the other hand the Krovi--Brun formula \eqref{f(n)} works by detecting the on-site populations and therefore applies to arbitrarily complicated graphs. We will now remedy this problem so that the quantum-jump approach can be applied to arbitrarily complicated graphs as well. Let us introduce one extra state, a fictitious state, to the quantum walk. We will denote this extra state as $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$. By introducing an incoherent transition from $\ket{\psi_N}$ to $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ we can expect to recover the original hitting time (i.e.~the time to reach $\ket{\psi_N}$ for the first time) by making the transition rate $k_{N+1,N}$ large in the extended graph. Since the rate $k_{N+1,N}$ is an important quantity in this section, and is also a bit cumbersome to write repeatedly, we shall set \begin{align} v \equiv k_{N+1,N} \;. \end{align} It is then intuitive to see that \begin{align} \lim_{v \to \infty} T\big( \hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i} \big) = T\big( \hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i} \big) \;, \end{align} since in the limit of large $v$, the time taken to go from $\ket{\psi_N}$ to $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ becomes negligible. In fact, in the limit of large $v$, we can also expect $T(\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i})$ and $T(\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})$ to be identically distributed. This is because as we make $v$ larger and larger, we are also making the probability of reaching $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ from $\ket{\psi_N}$ tend to one. When this probability is one, the quantum walker is as likely to be in $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ as $\ket{\psi_N}$, or more formally, \begin{align} \label{EquivalenceOfHTDs} \lim_{v \to \infty} h(t;\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, dt = \lim_{\delta t \to 0} f(n;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i}) \;. \end{align} Note the hitting distribution to reach $\ket{\psi_N}$ is written using the Krovi--Brun formula since the existence of coherent transitions to $\ket{\psi_N}$ limits the use of the quantum-jump method. We refer to the Krovi--Brun formula $f(n;\hat{Q}_N,\rho_{\rm i})$ simply as the $N$ model and the quantum-jump formula $h(t;\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, dt$ in the limit of large $v$ as the $N+1$ model. We prove \eqref{EquivalenceOfHTDs} below. \subsection{Convergence of the $N$ and $N+1$ models} By adding one extra state and an incoherent connection from $\ket{\psi_N}$ to $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ we may decompose the dynamics of the $N+1$ graph into jump and no-jump terms as we have been doing, \begin{align} \label{OldNotation} {\cal L} = \bar{\Ls}_\star + {\cal J}_\star \;. \end{align} Note that \eqref{OldNotation} now acts on density operators in an $N+1$-dimensional space where $\bar{\Ls}_\star$ describes the evolution of the quantum walk constrained to the original $N$-dimensional subspace. The superoperator ${\cal J}_\star$ now describes a jump from $\ket{\psi_N}$ to $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$, defined by \begin{align} {\cal J}_\star \, \rho = v \: \hat{Q}_{N+1,N} \, \rho \, \hat{Q}^\dagger_{N+1,N} \;. \end{align} In order to make the connection with the $N$ model, it helps to introduce \begin{align} \label{NewNotation} {\cal L} = {\cal L}_{N+1} \;, \quad \bar{\Ls}_\star = {\cal L}_N \;. \end{align} The proof of \eqref{EquivalenceOfHTDs} can be made easier if we discretise time into steps of size $\delta t$ and express $h(t)\,dt$ in the limit of $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$. In this case an arbitrary $t$ is equivalent to $t_n\equiv n\,\delta t$ for an arbitrary $n$. The hitting distribution calculated using quantum jumps is thus \begin{align} h(t_n,\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, \delta t = {}& {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal J}_\star \big[ e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star \delta t} \big]^n \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \, \delta t \\ = {}& {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal J}_\star \, e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star \delta t} \big[ e^{\bar{\Ls}_\star \delta t} \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \, \delta t \\ = {}& {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal J}_\star \, e^{{\cal L}_N \,\delta t} \big[ {\cal P}_{N+1} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} \, \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \, \delta t \;, \end{align} where ${\cal P}_{N+1}$ is defined in the same way as \eqref{QandP}, \eqref{PhatN}, and \eqref{QandPMatrixForm} with $N \longrightarrow N+1$ [recall also that we have defined $\hat{Q}_n=\op{\psi_n}{\psi_n}$]. The last line simply makes use of the proof in Sec.~\ref{SEC_COMPARISON} to express the conditional evolution in terms of ${\cal P}_{N+1}$ and ${\cal L}_{N+1}$. As we will be taking the limit of large $v$ it makes sense to plug in the definition of ${\cal J}_\star$ to make $v$ explicit in the hitting distribution: \begin{align} \label{h(tn)} h(t_n,\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, \delta t = v \, \delta t \; {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal Q}_N \, e^{{\cal L}_N \,\delta t} \big[ {\cal P}_{N+1} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} \, \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \;. \end{align} There are in fact two places where $v$ appears in \eqref{h(tn)}: One in the product $v \, \delta t$, and the other implicitly in $\exp({\cal L}_{N+1}\,\delta t)$. The first limit is simple to see. All we have to do is note that \eqref{h(tn)} is already in the $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$ limit and that $v \longrightarrow \infty$ must be consistent with the interpretation of $v \, \delta t$ as the probability to jump from $\ket{\psi_N}$ to $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ in $\delta t$. This means that $v \, \delta t \longrightarrow 1$ as we make $v$ ever so large but $\delta t$ ever so small. This immediately gives \begin{align} \label{vLimit} \lim_{v \to \infty} h(t_n,\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, \delta t = {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal Q}_N\, e^{{\cal L}_N \,\delta t} \Big[ {\cal P}_{N+1} \, \lim_{v \to \infty} e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} \, \Big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \;. \end{align} The only nontrivial part now resides in what happens to the evolution of the $N+1$ graph for large $v$: The larger we make $v$, the more difficult it is for the population of $\ket{\psi_N}$ to build up. Then, as $v$ tends to infinity there is simply no appreciable population in $\ket{\psi_N}$ for all time. Since $\bra{\psi_N}\rho(t)\ket{\psi_N}=0$ implies no coherences can be shared between $\ket{\psi_N}$ and any other state, we can write, in the $v \longrightarrow \infty$ limit, \begin{align} \label{AdiabaticApprox} e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} = {}& {\cal P}_{N} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} \;. \end{align} This simply says that the $N^{\rm th}$ row and $N^{\rm th}$ column of the density operator at all times is zero when $v \longrightarrow \infty$. Now we note that the only sensible initial state is one satisfying \begin{align} {\cal P}_{N+1} \, \rho_{\rm i} = \rho_{\rm i} \;, \end{align} since the original hitting problem is defined only for the $N$-state graph. From this initial condition it is easy to see that \begin{align} \label{ConditionsOnPN+1} {\cal P}_{N+1} \, {\cal L}_N = {\cal L}_N \, {\cal P}_{N+1} = {\cal L}_N \;, \quad {\cal P}_{N+1} \, {\cal J}_\star = 0 \;. \end{align} The properties in \eqref{ConditionsOnPN+1} are simple to see since the action of ${\cal P}_{N+1}$ just says that we find the system to be in a state in the subspace spanned by $\mathbb{S}_N$. The first condition in \eqref{ConditionsOnPN+1} then follows since ${\cal L}_N$ only evolves the system within the subspace spanned by $\mathbb{S}_N$. The second condition in \eqref{ConditionsOnPN+1} is true because ${\cal J}_\star$ puts the quantum walker in the state $\ket{\psi_{N+1}}$ so that one finds the population of every other state to be zero. These are the same conditions as those appearing in \eqref{LstarIdentity} and \eqref{JstarIdentity}, just extended to $N+1$ states. We can use \eqref{ConditionsOnPN+1} to simplify the limit in \eqref{vLimit} by noting that \begin{align} \label{Commutability} {\cal P}_{N+1} \, {\cal P}_N = {\cal P}_N \, {\cal P}_{N+1} \;. \end{align} We therefore have, upon using \eqref{ConditionsOnPN+1} and \eqref{Commutability}, \begin{align} {\cal P}_{N+1} \, {\cal P}_{N} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} = {}& {\cal P}_{N} \, {\cal P}_{N+1} \big( \mathbbm{1} + {\cal L}_N \, \delta t + {\cal J}_\star \, \delta t \big) \\ = {}& {\cal P}_{N} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N} \, \delta t}\, {\cal P}_{N+1} \;. \end{align} Since ${\cal P}_{N+1}$ can be commuted through ${\cal P}_N$ and ${\cal L}_N$, it is simple to see that \begin{align} \big[ {\cal P}_{N+1} \, {\cal P}_{N} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N+1} \, \delta t} \big]^{n-1} = \big[ {\cal P}_{N} \, e^{{\cal L}_{N} \, \delta t} \, \big]^{n-1} \, {\cal P}_{N+1} \;. \end{align} Substituting this back into \eqref{vLimit} then gives, for $v \longrightarrow \infty$ and $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$, \begin{align} h(t_n,\hat{Q}_{N+1},\rho_{\rm i}) \, \delta t = {\rm Tr}\Big\{ {\cal Q}_N\, e^{{\cal L}_N \,\delta t} \big[ {\cal P}_N \, e^{{\cal L}_{N} \, \delta t} \, \big]^{n-1} \rho_{\rm i} \Big\} \;. \end{align} As this equation already assumes $\delta t \longrightarrow 0$, this is precisely the right-hand side of \eqref{EquivalenceOfHTDs}. This therefore shows the equivalence between the $N$ and $N+1$ models. \begin{figure}[t] \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{KBComparison}} \caption{\label{NandN+1} Hitting-time distributions for the $N+1$ and $N$ models for the $N=4$ graph shown in (a) ($\ket{\psi_5}$ being a fictitious state). The parameter values are $\Omega_{43}=\Omega_{32}=k_{42}=k_{43}=5$, $\Omega_{21}=50$, $\omega_1=1$, $\omega_2=3$, and $\omega_3=5$. The convergence between the $N+1$ and $N$ models is clearly seen as $v$ is increased from $v=5$ in (b) to $v=500$ in (d).} \end{figure} We now illustrate \eqref{EquivalenceOfHTDs} for the graph in Fig.~\ref{NandN+1}(a) where we are interested in the hitting time for vertex $\ket{\psi_4}$ starting at $\ket{\psi_1}$. All the graph parameters except for $v$ are fixed and have values stated in the figure caption. In this case we consider the hitting-time distribution for $\ket{\psi_5}$ under the quantum-jump approach and compare it to the generalised Krovi--Brun distribution taking the final state to be $\ket{\psi_4}$. The hitting distribution calculated from the quantum-jump approach is shown as the (blue) solid line while the generalised Krovi--Brun approach is shown as (red) dots. The value of $v$ is gradually increased as we pass from Fig.~\ref{NandN+1}(b) to (d), and as can be seen, the hitting distribution from the quantum-jump approach (solid curve) changes until it eventually coincides exactly with the generalised Krovi--Brun hitting distribution (dots). \section{Discussion} \label{Conclusion} The most essential result of this paper is the explicit expression for the statistics of hitting times for a model of continuous-time open quantum walks given in \eqref{M(x)Final}. This is a finite sum and in principle can be entered into a computer to extract meaningful quantities about the quantum walk such as the average hitting time and its variance. Below we summarise our results in conjunction with other findings obtained in this paper. We also explain the relationship between our work and some other literature which we have not mentioned so far but are nevertheless worthy of a discussion. \subsection{Summary} We have shown here how the quantum-jump method lends itself naturally to the hitting problem in continuous open quantum walks. In this language the hitting time for the walker to reach a prescribed state $\rho_{\rm f}$ from some fixed $\rho_{\rm i}$ in an $N$-state graph is defined by the time of the first jump. Based on this, the hitting distribution is just the distribution of times for the first jump, given in \eqref{FinalHTD}. Simple examples of this result were considered. We then derived expressions for the statistical moments of the hitting time in terms of the graph dynamics. The results are given by \eqref{E[t]MPInv}, \eqref{V[T]Final}, and \eqref{M(x)Final}. Again, some simple examples were used to illustrate the final results. In the process we showed analytically how the quantum expression simplifies to the expected classical result when the graph has only incoherent transitions. We then generalised the hitting distribution for the discrete-time unitary quantum walk in Ref.~\cite{KB06} to allow for non-unitary evolution and showed that this is equivalent to the quantum-jump distribution if the time step of the discrete walk approached zero. A caveat of the quantum-jump method is that it assumes the edges connected to $\rho_{\rm f}$ are incoherent. The hitting time becomes much less straightforward to define when coherent transitions to $\rho_{\rm f}$ are present. Thus open quantum walks have an intrinsic advantage over unitary walks in that there is a set of graphs for which hitting times can be unambiguously defined (i.e.~graphs where $\rho_{\rm f}$ only shares incoherent edges with other nodes). We then proposed a solution to this problem by adding one fictitious state to the graph giving us a model with $N+1$ states. We then proved that our $N+1$ model predicts the same hitting statistics as the $N$ model according to the generalised definition of Ref.~\cite{KB06}. This is illustrated for a simple graph where the convergence of the $N+1$ model to the $N$ model can be seen ``explicitly'' (Fig.~\ref{NandN+1}). It is interesting to point out that the $N$ and $N+1$ models differ qualitatively in that the former decides if the final state has been hit or not by detecting the walker's presence \emph{at} the final state, whereas the $N+1$ model works by detecting if the walker is \emph{in transit} to the final state. \subsection{Relation to other work and possible future explorations} \label{FurtherDiscussions} Our appeal to photon counting as a way of thinking about quantum jumps for the hitting problem raises another interesting question related to the use of measurements in quantum walks. This is related to our allusion to other unravellings made earlier in Sec.~\ref{QuantumJumps}. In general, an unravelling is a specific decomposition of the master equation into stochastic trajectories such that the ensemble average of them recovers the dynamics of the master equation. Two classes of unravellings have special significance in quantum optics---the jump unravellings used in our paper, and the so-called diffusive unravellings---because they turn out to have concrete interpretations in terms of quantum optical measurements (as already seen with the jump unravellings in our work) \cite{WM10}. Canonical examples of quantum-optical measurements that give rise to (or essentially realise) diffusive unravellings are the homodyne and heterodyne detection schemes \cite{WD01,CW11}. Since we are defining the graph of a continuous-time open quantum walk by a master equation, and we know that a master equation can be unravelled in different ways, one might wonder if another type of unravelling can be used to study a hitting problem. Given that diffusive unravellings form the second major class of unravellings in quantum optics we might then ask if they can be used for the hitting problem in this paper. The short answer is that there is not much motivation to do so because they are unhelpful for solving hitting problems with discrete-state quantum walks. To understand this we recall that in our quantum-jump approach we imagined the incoherent transitions in the graph gave off photons which were measured by photodetectors. Using a diffusive unravelling is equivalent to superimposing the stream of photons coming from an incoherent transition with a local-oscillator field (a laser in a coherent state) on a beam splitter before it is detected by the photodetector. In this case the photodetector actually measures a quadrature of the stream of photons determined by the phase of the local oscillator. A diffusive unravelling thus gives us information about a continuous variable that does not directly reveal to us if the walker has reached a prescribed state or not. To get around this one can then try to introduce the fidelity between $\rho_{\rm f}$ (here taken to be a parameter) and the walker's state to define when $\rho_{\rm f}$ is reached or not. As one can see, this already introduces an extra step into the analysis, not to mention that the fidelity for a fixed $\rho_{\rm f}$ is a nonlinear function of the density operator. The jump unravelling on the other hand does give us direct information about whether the walker has reached $\rho_{\rm f}$, and is much more natural for our quantum-walk problem. If one wants to think about applying diffusive unravellings one could start with a completely different quantum-walk model altogether where diffusive unravellings would appear to be natural. A suitable quantum-walk model would be one in which the state space is continuous. To this end, it might be interesting to use quantum Brownian motion as a model. A diffusive unravelling of this can then be expected to reveal the walker's position directly. There is in fact an example of a hitting-time calculation for a diffusively unravelled quantum master equation in the context of rapid purification \cite{Jac03,Jac04,CJ06}. The basic idea is to purify qubits as quickly as possible by using a continuous diffusive measurement and feedback. There are two approaches to rapid purification---one can either maximize the average purity of a qubit in a fixed time, or minimize the average time for a qubit to reach a fixed purity \cite{WR06}. It is the latter approach that is a hitting problem where the hitting time is simply the time to reach a predefined purity. In this case, the average time to reach a predefined purity (i.e.~the average hitting time) is calculated by first converting the qubit dynamics under a diffusive measurement into a set of stochastic Bloch equations, and then from these, the equivalent classical Fokker--Planck equation. Once the classical Fokker--Planck equation is known, standard techniques for calculating the average time to reach a given purity can be applied \cite{Gar04} (where the hitting time is known as the first-passage time). Aside from the difference in the unravelling that is employed, there is another difference between the calculation of the average first-passage time in the rapid purification work and our results here: Our average hitting-time calculation (and in fact all higher statistics) uses a quantum method---quantum jumps---and hence our results are expressed explicitly in terms of the quantum evolution equation of the random process. The rapid-purification work on the other hand re-expresses the evolution of the random process in terms of the equivalent classical equation first (the Fokker--Planck equation), from which the average hitting/first-passage time can then be obtained using a method invented for classical diffusive processes. In light of this, a noteworthy point of our paper is that the nature of our problem, and the ensuing method used, allows us to bypass the extra step of making a quantum-classical correspondence as in rapid purification before the hitting problem can be solved. We have seen that in the language of photon counting, the hitting time is the analogue of the time of the first count. In fact, our calculation of the hitting-time distribution follows much the same strategy as what a quantum optician would do to derive the distribution of waiting times (the time interval between successive photon counts). Is the hitting-time distribution in our quantum-walk problem therefore equivalent to the waiting-time distribution of photon counting? The answer is no, and to see this we just have to refer back to Fig.~\ref{JumpsOnGraph}. If we look at the record of jumps shown on the right in Fig.~\ref{JumpsOnGraph}, the waiting time is the interval between successive jumps. However, from the graph on the left we can see that this is the amount of time the walker spends being away from the final state before returning to it again. The time taken for a random walker to start in a given node and return to it turns out to be an interesting quantity as well. It is known as the recurrence time (recall Examples 1 and 2 in Sec.~\ref{Examples}). The recurrence time in a hitting problem is thus the quantity that one should regard as analogous to the waiting time of quantum optics and it is not difficult to see that it is different to the hitting time. It is in fact simple to construct a graph for which the hitting time is very different to the recurrence time. We summarise this in Table~\ref{Analogies}. \begin{table} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|} \hline Hitting problem & Photon counting \\ \hline Hitting time & Time of first count \\ Recurrence time & Waiting time \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{Analogies} Analogies between different quantities in a hitting problem of quantum walks and photon counting in quantum optics.} \end{table} It is then interesting to ask whether there is additional knowledge from photodetection statistics that one might be able to borrow for quantum walks. One potential application is the use of the waiting-time distribution for estimating an unknown parameter in a quantum emitter that one is interested in characterising \cite{KM15,KM14}. The simplest model being a driven two-level atom whose Rabi frequency is not known to an experimenter. Kiilerich and M{\o}lmer have shown that the waiting-time distribution of the photodetection record obtained from monitoring the atomic fluorescence is useful for estimating the Rabi frequency \cite{KM14}. This idea may have applications to quantum walks where one has only a partially characterised graph---e.g.~the frequency of one of the coherent transitions in the graph is not known. It might then be possible to identify a recurrent state whose distribution of recurrence times can be used for identifying the unknown transition frequency. Clearly, one will need the multichannel extension of this idea described in Ref.~\cite{KM15}. A successful application of this theory would then extend the quantum-walk--quantum-optics analogy further. \section{Acknowledgements} We would like to thank an anonymous referee who stimulated us into thinking about continuous-time quantum walks. This paper is an outgrowth of the exchange we had with the referee. We thank also many others who we have discussed this project with in the past: Itai Arad, Marcin Karczewski, Dagomir Kaszlikowski, Pawe{\l} Kurzy\'{n}ski, Zakarya Lasmar, Gerard Milburn, Ranjith Nair, Changsuk Noh, and Miklos Santha. This research is supported by the MOE grant number RG 127/14, and the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore under its Competitive Research Programme (CRP Award No. NRF-CRP-14-2014-02).
\section{Appendix A: Proofs} \label{sec:mainproof} Here we restate and prove the Main Result and Corollary.\footnote{Below and in the main Letter, we assume the following slightly ambiguous convention: For any three recorded observables $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$, $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_c$, they are recorded respectively by the regions $\{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}, \ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}',\cdots\}$, $\{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}',\cdots\}$, and $\{\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}',\cdots\}$. Likewise, $i$, $j$, and $k$ index the eigenvalues of $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$, $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_c$, respectively. This avoid an additional layer of subscripts, e.g., $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_a^\prime$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_b$, $i_b$, etc.} \begin{mainthm}Suppose $\{\Obs_a=\{\Obs_a^\Frag,\Obs_a^\Fragp,\dots\}\}$ is a set of redundantly recorded observables for $\ket{\psi}$. If none of the recorded observables pair-covers another, then they are all compatible, and so define a joint branch decomposition of simultaneous eigenstates of all records.\end{mainthm} \begin{proof} We will show that a product of record projectors ($\Pi$'s), when acting on the state $\ket{\psi}$, is independent of both the order of the projectors and of the choice of recording regions for each particular recorded observable. That is, we show \begin{align} \label{eq:canrelabel} \left(\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\cdots \right)\ket{\psi} = \left(\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i}\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j}\cdots \right)\ket{\psi} \end{align} for any $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\Omega}_a^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'} \in \ensuremath{\Omega}_a$, and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}},\ensuremath{\Omega}_b^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'} \in \ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, and so on, and that furthermore this object is unchanged when the $\Pi$'s are commuted with one another. The strategy used here is simple but laborious, essentially arising from repeated application of the two basic identities defining local records, \begin{align}\begin{split} \forall \ensuremath{\Omega}_a^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\Omega}_a^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'} \!\in\! \ensuremath{\Omega}_a, \forall i, \qquad \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\ket{\psi} = \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i}\ket{\psi}, \end{split}\end{align} and the failure to pair-cover \begin{align}\begin{split} \forall \ensuremath{\Omega}_a^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\Omega}_a^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'} \!\in\! \ensuremath{\Omega}_a ,\, \exists &\ensuremath{\Omega}_b^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}} \!\in\! \ensuremath{\Omega}_b, \forall i, \forall j, \\ &\left[ \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i},\Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j}\right]=0=\left[ \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i},\Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j}\right], \end{split}\end{align} where $\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}} = \Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}')$. The proof is by induction. First, we need to demonstrate that if we have just a pair of local record projectors acting on the state, $\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\ket{\psi}$, the object is unchanged if we send $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}} \to \ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}} \to \ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'$ for arbitrary new $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'} \in \ensuremath{\Omega}_a,\ensuremath{\Omega}_b^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'} \in \ensuremath{\Omega}_b$. That is, we must prove \begin{align} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\ket{\psi} &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \ket{\psi}. \end{align} This is shown by repeated application of our two basic identities: \begin{align}\begin{split} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\ket{\psi} &= \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j}\ket{\psi} \\ &= \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\ket{\psi} \\ &= \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \ket{\psi} \\ &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \ket{\psi} \\ \label{eq:pair-relabel} &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \ket{\psi}. \end{split}\end{align} Similarly, we can swap the order: \begin{align}\begin{split} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\ket{\psi} &= \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}}}_{a:i} \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \ket{\psi}\\ &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}}}_{a:i} \ket{\psi}\\ &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \ket{\psi} \end{split}\end{align} where the first line follows from \eqref{eq:pair-relabel} and we have used $\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}} = \Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}')$. Note that this works when $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}=\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}=\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'$, or both. Now assume we have shown that we can change the record locations ($\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}\to \ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}} \to \ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}'$, etc.)\ and do arbitrary operator re-orderings for some string of $M$ record projectors acting on the state: \begin{align} \label{eq:assump} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\cdots\,\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k}\ket{\psi} &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j}\cdots\,\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}'}_{c:k}\ket{\psi}. \end{align} Then we must prove that if we left-multiply by an additional record projector $\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}$ then this property holds for the longer string of $M+1$ record projectors: \begin{align} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\cdots\,\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \right)\ket{\psi} &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j}\cdots\,\Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}'}_{c:k} \right) \ket{\psi}. \end{align} To show that, we just apply the inductive assumption \eqref{eq:assump} with the choices $\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}} = \Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}')$, $\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}} = \Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}')$, etc.: \begin{align}\begin{split} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \right) \ket{\psi} &= \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}}_{c:k} \right) \ket{\psi} \\ &= \left( \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}}_{c:k} \right) \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \ket{\psi} \\ &= \left( \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}}_{c:k} \right) \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \ket{\psi} \\ &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}}_{c:k} \right) \ket{\psi} \\ \label{eq:mrelabel} &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'}_{b:j} \cdots\, \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}'}_{c:k} \right) \ket{\psi}. \end{split}\end{align} Similarly, it's easy to check that the $M+1$ record projectors can be arbitrarily re-ordered. To do this, all we need to note is that the left-most two projectors can be commuted: \begin{align}\begin{split} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \cdots \right) \ket{\psi} &= \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \cdots \right) \ket{\psi}\\ &= \Pi^{\Disj{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}}_{b:j} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \cdots \right) \ket{\psi}\\ &= \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}_{b:j} \Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i} \left( \Pi^{\ensuremath{\mathcal{J}}}_{c:k} \cdots \right) \ket{\psi} \end{split}\end{align} where the first and last lines follows from \eqref{eq:mrelabel}. Commuting the two left-most operators, combined with the inductive assumptions, is sufficient to then re-order the entire product. By induction, this proves that we can relabel a product of any length, with arbitrary re-orderings. It's then easy to see that the recorded observables are compatible. The branch decomposition is given by \begin{gather} \ket{\psi} = \sum_{i,j,k,\ldots} \ket{\psi_{i,j,k,\ldots}},\\ \ket{\psi_{i,j,k,\ldots}} = \left(\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}_{a:i}\Pi^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}_{b:j}\cdots \right)\ket{\psi} \end{gather} where the branches are unambiguously defined since they do not depend on the choices $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}$, etc., nor the order of the projectors. It follows that each branch is an eigenvector of every record. \end{proof} \begin{cor}Fix a characteristic spatial distance $\ell$ and consider the set of all recorded observables $\{\Obs_a\}$ on $\ket{\psi}$ satisfying the following requirement: each $\Obs_a$ is recorded on at least $3$ regions, with each region fitting in a sphere of radius $\ell$ and pairwise separated by the distance $\ell$. [See Fig.~\ref{fig:figure}(d)]. Then none of the $\Obs_a$ pair-covers another, and they are all therefore compatible and define a joint branch decomposition.\end{cor} \begin{proof} For any two of the observables, $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$ and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, consider the three records $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'$, and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}''$ of $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$ that are pairwise separated by the distance $\ell$. Any pair of regions $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}'$ holding records of $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$, which each have diameter at most $\ell$, can together overlap with at most two of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}'$, and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}''$ by virtue of that triplet's spatial separation. Therefore, $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$ does not pair-cover $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, for all $a$ and $b$, so by the main theorem all observables are compatible. That this bound is tight is demonstrated by considering a Bell state, $\ket{\Phi^{+}} \propto \ket{\uparrow} \ket{\uparrow} + \ket{\downarrow}\ket{\downarrow} = \ket{\odot}\ket{\odot} + \ket{\otimes} \ket{\otimes}$. The observables $\ensuremath{\Omega}_\updownarrow$ and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_{\odot,\otimes}$ may each be recorded on arbitrarily small regions separated by an arbitrary long distance, yet are incompatible. \end{proof} \section{Appendix B: Insufficiency of pair-covering} \label{sec:insuff} Even when one recorded observable pair-covers another, it may still be possible to prove that the two observables are compatible using only the spatial layout of their records. In other words, pair-covering, as a condition on spatial regions, is not sufficient to guarantee the existence of a wavefunction with incompatible observables recorded on those regions. A simple counterexample can be constructed on a tripartite Hilbert space $\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}} = \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}} \otimes \ensuremath{\mathcal{B}} \otimes \ensuremath{\mathcal{C}}$ where $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$ is recorded separately on all three regions and $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$ on just $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}$. Although $\ensuremath{\Omega}_a$ pair-covers $\ensuremath{\Omega}_b$, one can use the commutation of disjoint records to directly check that $\Pi_{a:i}^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}} \Pi_{b:j}^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}} \ket{\psi}$ is unchanged for any choice of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}} \in\{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{C}}\}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}} \in\{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}},\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}\}$, and after swapping the order of $\Pi_{a:i}^\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}$ and $\Pi_{b:j}^\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}$. \section{Appendix C: Shor code example} \label{sec:shor} Quantum codes are classes of quantum states used to encode quantum information in a noisy, correctable memory. One of the important examples are the Shor codes, especially the special case of the 9-qubit code. Here we show that the Shor codes are useful counterexamples when considering the mutual compatibility of recorded observables. In particular, two incompatible observables can each be recorded with arbitrary redundancy using the Shor code. For two integers $M,M'>1$, consider a many-body system with $MM'$ parts organized with the tensor structure \begin{align} \ensuremath{\mathcal{H}} = \bigotimes_{m=1}^M \bigotimes_{m'=1}^{M'} \ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}^{(m,m')}, \end{align} where each subsystem $\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}^{(m,m')}$ has the same dimension $d$. For our purposes, we will work with just qubits, $d=2$. \begin{widetext} For an arbitrary single-qubit state $\ket{\psi} = \alpha\ket{0}+\beta\ket{1}$, let the isometry $\Lambda$ be defined to map $\ket{\psi}$ to the many-body state \begin{align}\begin{split} \ket{\Psi} &= \Lambda(\ket{\psi}) \\ &= \alpha \left[ \ket{0}^{\otimes M'} + \ket{1}^{\otimes M'} \right]^{\otimes M} + \beta \left[ \ket{0}^{\otimes M'} - \ket{1}^{\otimes M'} \right]^{\otimes M}\\ &= \alpha \left[ \ket{00 \cdots 0} + \ket{11 \cdots 1} \right]\otimes \cdots \otimes \left[ \ket{00 \cdots 0} + \ket{11 \cdots 1} \right] + \beta \left[ \ket{00 \cdots 0} - \ket{11 \cdots 1} \right]\otimes \cdots \otimes \left[ \ket{00 \cdots 0} - \ket{11 \cdots 1} \right] \end{split}\end{align} It can be shown that this state is a redundant encoding of two complementary observables, $\sigma_z = \projector{0}-\projector{1}$ and $\sigma_x = \ketbra{0}{1} + \ketbra{1}{0}$, for the original state $\ket{\psi}$. This is instructive to see in the special case of $M=M'=3$, for which the state reduces to the 9-qubit code. For clarity, we label the subsystems $A$, $B$, $C$, etc.: \begin{align}\begin{split} \ket{\Psi} = \alpha &\left[ \ket{000}_{ABC} + \ket{111}_{ABC} \right]\otimes \left[ \ket{000}_{DEF} + \ket{111}_{DEF} \right]\otimes \left[ \ket{000}_{GHI} + \ket{111}_{GHI} \right] \\ + \beta &\left[ \ket{000}_{ABC} - \ket{111}_{ABC} \right]\otimes \left[ \ket{000}_{DEF} - \ket{111}_{DEF} \right]\otimes \left[ \ket{000}_{GHI} - \ket{111}_{GHI} \right] \end{split}\end{align} It's clear that by making a measurement on just $ABC$ in the basis $\{\ket{000}+\ket{111},\ket{000}-\ket{111}\}$ we get the outcomes with respective probabilities $\abs{\alpha}^2$ and $\abs{\beta}^2$, and that this provides as much information as measuring the original state $\ket{\psi}$ in the computational basis $\{\ket{0},\ket{1}\}$, i.e., measuring the observable $\sigma_z$. Likewise is true for observers who have access to only $DEF$ or $GHI$. Now we can rewrite this code state as \begin{align}\begin{split} \ket{\Psi} = (\alpha +\beta) \big[ &\ket{000}_{ADG} \ket{000}_{BEH}\ket{000}_{CFI} +\ket{011}_{ADG} \ket{011}_{BEH}\ket{011}_{CFI} \\ + &\ket{101}_{ADG} \ket{101}_{BEH}\ket{101}_{CFI} + \ket{110}_{ADG} \ket{110}_{BEH}\ket{110}_{CFI} \big] \\ + (\alpha -\beta) \big[ &\ket{001}_{ADG} \ket{001}_{BEH}\ket{001}_{CFI} +\ket{010}_{ADG} \ket{010}_{BEH}\ket{010}_{CFI} \\ + &\ket{100}_{ADG} \ket{100}_{BEH}\ket{100}_{CFI} + \ket{111}_{ADG} \ket{111}_{BEH}\ket{111}_{CFI} \big] \end{split}\end{align} and consider an alternate observer who instead measures the subset $ADG$ in the computational basis $\{\ket{000},\ket{001},\ldots\}$, or any other basis that distinguishes whether there is an even or odd number of 1's. The outcome will be an even or odd number of 1's with respective probabilities $\abs{\alpha+\beta}^2$ and $\abs{\alpha-\beta}^2$. This provides as much information as measuring the original state $\ket{\psi}$ in the complementary basis $\{\ket{0}+\ket{1}, \ket{0}-\ket{1}\}$, i.e., measuring the observable $\sigma_x$. Likewise is true for observers who have access to only $BEH$ or $CFI$. \end{widetext} In fact, there is a symmetry between $\sigma_z$ and $\sigma_x$, so it's also possible to measure $\sigma_z$ using only single-qubit measurements on one of the record regions. One can distinguish $\ket{000}_{ABC}+\ket{111}_{ABC}$ from $\ket{000}_{ABC}-\ket{111}_{ABC}$ by measuring each qubit in the basis $\ket{\pm} \propto \ket{0}\pm \ket{1}$ and taking the parity. Of course, if $\sigma_z$ is first determined by measuring $ABC$, then the information about $\sigma_x$ is destroyed and cannot be obtained through a measurement on $ADG$, and vice versa. These measurements work just as well for arbitrary $M,M'>3$. Therefore, if we have $M$ observers and have them each make a measurement on $\ensuremath{\mathcal{F}}^{[m]} = \bigotimes_{m=1}^{M'} \ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}^{(m,m')}$, then $\sigma_z$ is recorded redundantly ($M$-fold times), with a local copy at each observer. On the other hand, we could have $M'$ observers each make a measurement on $\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}^{[m']} = \bigotimes_{m=1}^M \ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}^{(m,m')}$, so that $\sigma_x$ is recorded redundantly ($M'$-fold times), with a local copy at each observer. \end{document
\section{Introduction} Stellar spots, a ubiquitous manifestation of magnetic activity on late-type stars, are thought to be the fingerprints of magnetic lines on their photospheres. Spots size and distribution patterns on the surface are important constraints for stellar dynamo mechanism \citep{stra2009}. Additionally, spots can inhibit exoplanet detection and characterization, since they can create noise in light curve \citep{aigr2004}, and radial velocity (RV) perturbations \citep{deso2007,meun2013}, e.g., the RV `jitter' \citep{ande2015}. The spot-induced noise in light curve or RV variation are also related to spot configuration (size, shape and temperature) on the photosphere. Many observational studies showed larger radii of fast rotating and active K/M-type stars (thus lower effective temperatures) compare to model predictions, no matter whether they are binary members \citep[e.g.][]{torr2002,riba2006,lope2007} or single stars \citep[e.g.][]{mora2008}. Similar features were found in cool members of young open clusters, e.g., NGC 2516 \citep{an++2007,jack2009} and Pleiades \citep{hart2010}. The discrepancies of the radii and effective temperatures between observations and models are thought to be due to presence of magnetic activities at high level \citep{torr2013}, e.g., existence of large and cool magnetic starspots \citep{chab2007}, and/or strong magnetic fields inhibiting convection \citep{mull2001,feid2012}. \citet{jack2014} found the validity of starspot model by comparing the loci of active cool members of NGC 2516 and Pleiades, and inactive field stars in color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs); if starspots are the sole cause for radius inflation detected in these highly magnetically active cool stars, it needs a very large spot coverage (e.g., 0.35-0.51). Starspots can cause light variation due to its rotational modulation. However, some young low-mass stars with high levels of chromospheric activity show no spot modulation. \citet{jack2012} showed detail analysis on 210 low-mass stars with detected periods and 144 low-mass stars without detected periods in the young open cluster NGC 2516, found no significant differences in their positions on CMDs, the distribution of their $v\sin i$, and their levels of chromospheric activity, suggested that the lack of spot modulation may be due to high axi-symmetric distributions of starspots being in very small angular length scale \citep[e.g. $\sim 3^{\circ}$,][]{jack2013}, although the coverage fraction is probably very large, e.g., up to about 0.4 or even larger \citep{jack2014}. Large spots may exist in late type active stars, mainly in fast rotating low-mass (K/M-type) stars, and probably locate randomly on the surface in very small length scale. To understand this issue, the key is to derive the real spot coverage for active stars, especially for those stars showing absence or very small spot rotational modulation, since they may provide important clues to the spot distribution and hence dynamo mechanism \citep{jack2012}. Traditionally, starspots are detected using the observational techniques, e.g., light-curve inversion \citep[e.g.][]{budd1977,sava2008} and Doppler imaging \citep[e.g.][]{coll1994,stra2002}, based on the fact that spot rotational modulation can result in photometric (broad-band fluxes) and spectroscopic (line profiles) variability. However, these techniques are sensitive only to the asymmetric part of the starspot distribution, in other words, if the spots are highly axi-symmetric the techniques of light-curve and line profile modelling will underestimate the spot coverage. Molecular band absorptions are the primary features in the spectra of M-type stars, e.g., the energy distributions of M dwarfs in optical spectra are entirely governed by TiO and CaH bands. TiO bands are sensitive to the temperature, and formed in the region where $T_{eff} < 4000$ K \citep{chab2000}, thus being used to classify M-dwarf spectral types \citep{kirk1991}. \citet{vogt1979,vogt1981} and \citet{rams1980} are the first studies that gave an idea to use TiO bands as starspot indicators. \citet{vogt1979} reported that the single-line spectroscopic binary HD 224085 (=II Peg; spectral type $\sim$K2 IV-V) showed VO and the $\gamma$ system TiO molecular absorption features in their spectrum. By comparing the ratio of spectra of II Peg obtained at minimum (spot in view) and maximum (spot out of view) with standards, \citet{vogt1981} estimated the spot's equivalent spectral type as M6 or later. \citet{rams1980} observed enhanced absorption of TiO band near 8860 \AA\ in the RS CVn binary HR~1099 (K1 IV + G5 V) during light minimum, and they concluded that the TiO feature is resulted from spotted regions which is about 1000 K cooler than the quiescent photosphere on the active K1-subtype component. More quantitative attempts towards deriving spot coverages from the TiO molecular absorption bands were carried out later. \citet{huen1987} found the spot coverage of 35\%-50\% and 35\%-40\% from the analysis of TiO bands at 7127 \AA\ and 8860 \AA, respectively, for II~Peg. \citet{neff1995} made independent measurements of the area and the temperature of starspots for several stars using the TiO bands at 7055 \AA\ and 8860 \AA. In previous studies, the spot coverages of several active dwarfs and giants have been derived from the TiO molecular absorption bands \citep{onea1996, onea1998, onea2004}. As pointed out by \citet{onea2004}, molecular absorption bands such as TiO bands are used to study spots properties regardless of their distribution patterns, even on slowly rotating stars. Up to date, the number of active stars whose spot coverages have been studied is still limited and a very few systematic studies about the properties of stellar activities on atmosphere, which could be due to lack of observational data for active stars, particularly the spectroscopic observations. LAMOST (Large sky Area Multi-Object fiber Spectroscopic Telescope), a quasi-meridian reflecting Schmidt telescope \citep{cui+2012}, survey on Galactic stars observed few million stellar spectra with signal-to-noise ratio $SNR > 10$ \citep{liu+2015}, allows us to initiate systematic study of magnetic activities in low mass stars. By using the results from large photometric surveys (e.g., from HATNet and KEPLER) we aim to make full use of LAMOST spectral data to characterize stellar magnetic activities in cool member stars of open clusters and cool active field stars including spot configuration (e.g., spot coverage and distribution pattern), and chromospheric activity property, and further check for correlations between activity and stellar parameters. For this study we started with Pleiades, an open cluster, which is thought to be an analogue of NGC 2516 and a good laboratory to make systematic study of stellar activity for its proximity, richness, youth, and solar metallicity. In this paper, we estimated the spot fractional coverage for 304 Pleiades candidate members by modelling their TiO molecular bands near 7050~\AA. Further, we have characterized the spot coverages and spot distribution patterns, and showed the effect of stellar rotation on spot coverage with the help of results (rotation periods and amplitudes of light variation) from the HATNet survey data \citep[e.g.][]{hart2010}. \section{Data and Target selection} \subsection{LAMOST Data} The LAMOST telescope (also called the Guo Shou Jing Telescope), characterized by both a wide field of view (5 deg in diameter) and a large aperture (effective aperture of $\sim$4 m), is a reflecting Schmidt telescope located at the Xinglong station of NAOC, China. A total of 4000 fibers are mounted on its focal plane. The theoretical resolution of the spectrograph setup is $R\approx1000$ with the spectral wavelength coverage of $3700-9000$ \AA. In practice, the resolution increased to $R\approx1800$ ($\sim 3.9$ \AA~at 7100 \AA) by narrowing the slit to 2/3 of the fiber width \citep{zhao2012,luo+2015}. Two separate CCDs with 4K $\times$ 4K pixels are used to record blue and red part of the spectra, and each Angstrom has been sampled in two pixels in the original data. The final output LAMOST spectra (blue and red channels are combined) have been re-sampled with the same difference in wavelength between two adjacent 'pixels' ($\Delta \log(\lambda)=0.0001$, e.g., $\sim$1.6 \AA~at 7100 \AA) \citep[see][]{luo+2015}. The LAMOST was planned to perform Galactic and extra-galactic surveys for first five years \citep{zhao2012}. In the pilot survey (from autumn 2011 to summer 2012), both Galactic and extra-galactic targets were observed, and then regular surveys were started from autumn 2012 which are mainly focused on Galactic stars survey \citep{luo+2015}. By May 2015, the LAMOST collected $\sim$ 4.5 million stellar spectra with SNRs larger than 10 in the Galaxy \citep{liu+2015}. The LAMOST Date Release~2 (DR2) was made available to the Chinese astronomical community and international partners during January 2015, containing more than 4 million spectra collected from autumn 2011 to summer 2014, among them nearly 3.8 million are stellar spectra. LAMOST stellar parameter pipeline (LASP) provides the stellar parameters like effective temperature ($T_{eff}$), surface gravity ($\log g$), metallicity ([Fe/H]) and radial velocity (RV) for $\sim$ 2.2 million stellar spectra of AFGK stars whose spectra are relative flux calibrated and the signal-to-noise ratio criterion \citep{wu++2011,luo+2015}, Besides the AFGK star catalogue, DR2 also include a catalogue of 0.2 million M-type stars, whose stellar parameters are not derived by LASP. \subsection{Pleiades} Pleiades is a famous and quintessential open cluster, due to its proximity, richness, youth, and solar metallicity. It has a distance in the range of $120-136$ pc \citep{pins1998,sode2005,vanl2009,meli2014}, and thus a very small reddening $E(B-V)=0.03-0.04$ \citep{stau1987,an++2007}, an age of 100-125 Myr \citep{meyn1993,stau1998,vanl2009}, a metallicity of $[Fe/H]=0.03^{+0.02}_{-0.05}$ \citep{sode2009}. A large number of stars have been identified as probable members of Pleiades in the literature, e.g., \citet{stau2007} compiled a catalogue of 1471 Pleiades member candidates (hereafter S07), \citet{lodi2012} identified $\sim$1000 Pleiades member candidates based on UKIDSS GCS survey data. More recently, new 812 stars were found to be probable members by \citet{bouy2015}, who compiled a catalogue of 2109 high-probability members (hereafter B15), which is the most completed census of the cluster to the date. In addition, \citet{hart2010} detected rotation periods for 368 Pleiades stars using the HATNet transit survey data, and compiled a catalogue of rotation periods for 383 Pleiades members. Cross-matching S07 with LAMOST DR2 stellar catalogue, we identified 271 spectra with $SNRr>10$ of 238 probable members of Pleiades (hereafter sample-1). In addition, we identified 79 spectra of 66 probable Pleiades members which were not included in S07 but in B15 with probability more than 0.75, as a complementary sample (hereafter sample-2). In total, we selected 304 probable Pleiades members with 350 LAMOST spectra having $SNRr>10$ (a small fraction have multi-observations), most of which are K and M dwarfs, as listed in Table~\ref{tab:objects_list}. \begin{table} \caption{Basic stellar parameters of sample Pleiades members observed by LAMOST. Full table is available online.} \label{tab:objects_list} \begin{tabular}{lccccccccccccccccccc} \hline Object name & V & $r^{a}$ & $I_{c}$ & $K_{s}$ &$T_{VI}$ &$T_{VK}$&$T_{rK}$&$T_{IK}$&Period&$A_{r}$ &$R_{o}^{b}$&B$^{c}$\\ & (mag) & (mag) & (mag) & (mag) & (K) & (K) & (K) & (K) & (day) & (mag) & & \\ \hline Melotte 22 174 & 11.620 & 11.358 & & 9.374 & & 5093 & 4982 & & 0.474297 & 0.0645 & 0.0258 & 0 \\ Melotte 22 HCG 39 & 12.857 & 12.307 & 11.618 & 10.134 & 4710 & 4687 & 4772 & 4664 & 6.461243 & 0.0169 & 0.2949 & 0 \\ Melotte 22 DH 166 & 14.045 & 13.154 & 12.407 & 10.631 & 4190 & 4192 & 4166 & 4197 & 9.867441 & 0.0221 & 0.3765 & 0 \\ Melotte 22 1100 & 12.250 & 11.851 & 10.970 & 9.400 & 4653 & 4597 & 4518 & 4539 & 7.502517 & 0.0233 & 0.3362 & 1 \\ Melotte 22 DH 075 & 15.068 & 14.473 & 12.992 & 10.842 & 3716 & 3648 & 3658 & 3520 & 0.324622 & 0.0279 & 0.0097 & 0 \\ Melotte 22 HHJ 295 & 17.600 & & 14.500 & 12.218 & 3035 & 3130 & & 3335 & & & & 1 \\ J033754.79+252631.2 & & 15.242 & & 11.265 & & & 3467 & & & & & 0 \\ J040443.86+253333.0 & & 14.906 & & 11.715 & & & 3931 & & & & & -1 \\ Melotte 22 1173 & 15.100 & 14.637 & 13.050 & 10.996 & 3739 & 3717 & 3653 & 3675 & 8.215426 & 0.0751 & 0.2476 & 0 \\ \hline \multicolumn{13}{l}{$^a$ Sloan $r$-band magnitudes}\\ \multicolumn{13}{l}{$^b$ Rossby number}\\ \multicolumn{13}{l}{$^c$ Candidate single members (0); probable binary members (1); }\\ \multicolumn{13}{l}{ ~~ Fainter probable non-members (-1); brighter probable non-members (10). }\\ \end{tabular} \end{table} \section{Methodology} \subsection{Spectrum synthesis modelling technique} \label{sec:maths} The spectra of M-type stars are dominated by molecular bands, oxides (mainly TiO, VO), metal hydrides (e.g., CaH), and metal hydroxides (CaOH). \citet{reid1995} defined a number of narrow band flux ratios, so called indices (e.g., TiO2, TiO5, CaH2, CaH3) to measure the strength of molecular features in the spectra of M dwarfs. \citet{hawl1996} found that TiO band indices from magnetically active dMe stars differ systematically from old M dwarfs, specifically stronger TiO2 band depths in active dMe stars compare to inactive counterparts. In this work, we showed that Pleiades low mass members have TiO2 (and TiO5) depths stronger than field stars of same temperature, and then used those data to infer spot fractional area coverage as a function of spectral type, based on the idea that TiO could be the indicator of photospheric temperature inhomogeneities \citep{vogt1979,rams1980}. Later papers by \citet{huen1987} and \citet{neff1995} expanded on this spectrum synthesis modelling technique. For illustrative purpose, here we give a simple description of this technique. The observed total flux from a star with inhomogeneous temperature photosphere (e.g., two-temperature structure: cool spotted region and hot quiescent region) can be expressed by \begin{equation} f_{t}(\lambda)=(\frac{R}{D})^{2} \lbrack S_{q}(\lambda)(G_{\ast}-G_{s})+S_{s}(\lambda)G_{s} \rbrack ~, \end{equation} where $R$ is the stellar radius, $D$ is the distance from us, $S_{s}(\lambda)$ and $S_{q}(\lambda)$ are the specific intensity of spotted and quiescent photosphere, respectively. $G$ is a geometrical quantity depending upon the limb-darkening effect (equivalently flux weighted area), and for a homogeneous hemisphere $G_{\ast}=\iint(1-\beta+\beta \cos \gamma)\cos \gamma \sin \theta d\theta d\phi=\pi(1-\beta/3)$ \citep{huen1987}, assuming a limb darkening law with the form of $1-\beta+\beta \cos\gamma$; $G_{s}$ means the flux weighted area of spotted region. Correspondingly, the observed relative flux (with nearby pseudo continuum band $\lambda_{c}$) can be predicted as \begin{equation} F_{t} = \frac{f_{t}(\lambda)}{f_{t}(\lambda_{c})}= \frac{f_{s}R_{\lambda_{c}}F_{s}+(1-f_{s})F_{q}}{f_{s}R_{\lambda_{c}}+(1-f_{s})} ~, \label{equ:Ftotal} \end{equation} assuming that $G$ is independent of wavelength, where $F_{s}=S_{s}(\lambda) / S_{s}(\lambda_{c})$ and $F_{q}=S_{q}(\lambda) / S_{q}(\lambda_{c})$ are the relative strength of spotted and quiescent photosphere, respectively, and $R_{\lambda_{c}} = S_{s}(\lambda_{c}) / S_{q}(\lambda_{c})$ denotes the contrast of continuum surface flux between the spotted and quiescent photosphere. $f_{s}=G_{s}/G_{\ast}$ is the fractional coverage (projected area) of spotted region on the observed hemisphere (also called spot filling factor). So, based on the idea of spectrum synthesis we can derive the spot filling factor $f_{s}$ for a spotted star via modelling the observed relative flux spectrum as the weighted sum of the reference spectra of suitable inactive stars with $T_{eff}=T_{q}$ and $T_{eff}=T_{s}$ and similar luminosity class. For example, if an active K dwarf star with quiescent photosphere having $T_{eff}=4800$ K is covered by a spotted region with $T_{eff}=3500$ K, we can use the observed TiO2 band strength $F_{t}$ to derive the spot filling factor $f_{s}$, based on the TiO2 strength $F_{q}$ and $F_{s}$ of an inactive K dwarf star ($T_{eff}=4800$ K) and an inactive M dwarf star ($T_{eff}=3500$ K), respectively, and the continuum surface flux contrast $R_{\lambda_{c}}$ between these two stars using the following expression, \begin{equation} f_{s}=\frac{1}{1+r_{\lambda}R_{\lambda_{c}}} , ~~~r_{\lambda}=\frac{F_{t}-F_{s}}{F_{q}-F_{t}}. \label{equ:fs} \end{equation} In this case, determination of spot coverage by modelling the observed TiO2 strength, $F_{t}$, of a spotted star needs standard values of $F_{q}$ and $F_{s}$, the TiO2 strength of the spotted and quiescent photosphere, respectively. Also required is corresponding continuum surface flux contrast $R_{\lambda_{c}}$ between the spotted and quiescent photosphere. \subsection{Estimation of continuum surface flux contrast} \label{sec:contrast} PHOENIX stellar atmosphere models \citep{huss2013} are used to estimate continuum surface flux contrast ($R_{\lambda_{c}}$). We have selected model spectra with $log$g=4.5, [Fe/H]=0.0, and effective temperatures from 2600 K to 6500 K, and obtained the corresponding average continuum surface flux over the wavelength region of 7042 to 7048 \AA. Fig.~\ref{fig:contrast} shows relative continuum surface flux (normalized by setting continuum surface flux to be 1 at $T_{eff}=5000$ K), equivalently being the contrast between a given star and the star with $T_{eff}=5000$ K. To check the agreement of these contrasts from models with those from the observations, we used the flux calibrated SDSS spectra of the members of NGC~2420, M~67 and Praesepe open clusters to estimate continuum surface flux, by measuring the average observed flux $f_{t}(\lambda_{c})$ over the bandpass of 7042-7048~\AA, together with their radii and distances (e.g., $S(\lambda_{c}) \propto (R/D)^{-2} f_{t}(\lambda_{c})$). 140 members of NGC~2420 with $\log g >4.0$ and 52 dwarfs in M~67 were selected from the catalogue of \citet{lee+2008}. We estimated their radii using the temperatures from \citet{lee+2008}, based on PARSEC models \citep{chen2014}. For NGC 2420, we adopted the PARSEC model with a metallicity of [Fe/H]$\sim-0.2$ \citep{jaco2011} and an age of $\log t \sim9.0$ (WEBDA, http://www.univie.ac.at/webda/); for M 67, the model with a solar metallicity \citep{jaco2011} and an age of $\log t \sim9.4$ (WEBDA) was adopted. In Praesepe, we selected 36 probable members and collected SDSS spectra of good quality ($SNR>10$) by cross-matching the catalogue of Praesepe candidate members \citep{doug2014} with SDSS DR12 SSPP output catalog \citep{lee+2008,smol2011}. We estimated their effective temperatures using the colors $r-J$ and $r-K_{s}$, and then derived corresponding radii using PARSEC model adopting a metallicity of [Fe/H]$\sim+0.16$ \citep{carr2011} and an age of about 600 Myr \citep{foss2008}. The distances adopted from WEBDA for NGC 2420, M 67 and Praesepe are 3085, 908 and 187 $pc$, respectively. Based on the SDSS spectra of these members of open clusters and corresponding radii and distances, we corrected the effect of radius and distance on observed continuum flux and obtained the average continuum surface flux in the bandpass of 7042-7048~\AA. Using the values of NGC 2420 members with $T_{eff}$ around 5000 K as reference, we normalized the derived continuum surface fluxes, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:contrast}, wherein the error bar is equivalent to its uncertainty due to 10\% error of distance. One can see that there exists slight offset between members in NGC 2420 and M 67 at the same effective temperatures, which might be due to their uncertainties of distance (e.g., this offset is equivalent to $\sim10\%$ distance error for M 67), and/or the difference of basic physical parameters (e.g., metallicity and age) between these two clusters. As a supplementary check, we derived the R-band surface flux at a given $T_{eff}$ using the empirically determined Barnes-Evans relationship between visual surface-brightness parameter and the $V-R$ color index \citep{barn1978}, as shown by black dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig:contrast}, where the $T_{eff}$ was estimated from the corresponding color $V-R$ adopting the relationship between $T_{eff}$ and $V-R$ color of \citet{john1966}. From Fig.~\ref{fig:contrast} we noticed that continuum surface fluxes in the bandpass of 7042-7048~\AA\ derived from SDSS spectra are in good agreement with predicted values from model spectra and the R-band surface fluxes of stars cooler than $\sim5200$ K. \subsection{Scaling TiO2 band strength} In principle, we could get the relative strength of any TiO band based on the spectra of stellar atmosphere models. In practice, probably due to incompleteness of the spectral line lists and/or the performance of LAMOST spectral data, there exist discrepancies between model spectrum and LAMOST spectrum on some molecular bands (see Fig.~\ref{fig:teff_ewha} and Fig.~\ref{fig:tio2_tio5}). Thus, we have taken a large sample of inactive dwarfs with solar metallicities as reference stars, and used their LAMOST spectra to establish the ``standard'' scales of TiO2 band strength over a wide effective temperature range. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/cflux_teff.eps} \caption{Measurements of relative continuum surface flux over the bandpass of 7042-7048 \AA\ for the sample and model spectra is shown. Note the flux is normalized at $T_{eff}=5000$ K. Black solid line and red dashed line denotes the PHOENIX spectra with [Fe/H]=0.0 \& $\log g=4.5$, and [Fe/H]=0.0 \& $\log g=5.0$, respectively. Squares, triangles and circles represent members of NGC 2420, M 67 and Praesepe, respectively. Black dotted line indicates the R-band surface flux.} \label{fig:contrast} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Sample of reference stars} In this study, main targets are the spectra of 304 candidate members of Pleiades from LAMOST DR2. As analogues of the spotted and quiescent photosphere of an active star in Pleiades, we chose the reference stars with similar metallicities and surface gravities: the spectra of reference stars (FGK) are selected based on following criteria, $\log g > 4.0$, -0.1 < [Fe/H] < 0.1, and $T_{eff}$ in range of 4000-6500 K. Since the number of hotter dwarfs is much larger than cooler ones in LAMOST DR2 archive, to accommodate similar number of stars in each $T_{eff}$ bin (e.g., bin-width of 50 K), we used hotter stars with relatively higher SNR. Thus our selected spectra in different temperature region have different SNR in r-band (hereafter SNRr) over the range of 30-100, e.g., for stars in the range of $4500\leq T_{eff}<5000$ K and $5000\leq T_{eff}< 5300$ K have $SNRr > 35$, and $SNRr > 40$, respectively. Finally, the total sample of reference stars is about $132600$ with effective temperature range from 4000 K to 6500 K. The situation is different for M-type stars. The energy distribution of M-type stars are strongly deviate from blackbody due to absorption of molecular bands, and is essentially shaped by the opacities of those molecules \citep{alla2000}. Thus, it is not straight forward to obtain their atmospheric parameters from the low resolution spectra. Fortunately, TiO is know to be sensitive to temperature and metallicity but weakly depends on gravity \citep{wool2006,lepi2007}, while CaH is sensitive to temperature and gravity, but less sensitive to metallicity \citep{mann2012}, making the combination of TiO and CaH be a good indicator of gravity and metallicity. \citet{lepi2007} found that the ratio between TiO and CaH is a function of both gravity and metallicity for M-type stars, however, this ratio is believed to be mostly affected by metallicity for the higher gravity stars such as M dwarfs/subdwarfs. Besides CaH, Na~{\sc i} doublet (8172-8197~\AA) are usually used as luminosity classification indicators \citep[e.g.][]{mann2012}, since they are quite shallow in giants and relatively deep in dwarfs. In the current work, we selected M dwarfs with solar metallicities using the TiO and CaH molecular bands, and Na~{\sc i} doublet. \begin{table} \centering \caption{Definition of spectral indices} \label{tab:index_defin} \begin{tabular}{lcccccc} \hline Index & Numerator & Denominator & Reference \\ \hline CaH2 & 6814-6846 & 7042-7046 & \citet{reid1995}\\ CaH3 & 6960-6990 & 7042-7046 & \citet{reid1995}\\ TiO5 & 7126-7135 & 7042-7046 & \citet{reid1995}\\ TiO2n & 7057-7064 & 7042-7048 & this work\\ TiO3n & 7090-7097 & 7077-7083 & this work\\ TiO4n & 7126-7135 & 7115-7120 & this work\\ TiO5n & 7126-7135 & 7042-7048 & this work\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} We initially picked the spectra of about 110900 M-type stars with $SNRr >10$ from LAMOST DR2 M stars catalogue, and measured the strength of molecular bands (CaH2, CaH3, and TiO5), Na~{\sc i} doublet, and $H_{\alpha}$. The strengths of molecular bands are measured using spectral band indices defined by \citet{reid1995} (See Table~\ref{tab:index_defin} for the indices and their definitions). We measured the equivalent widths of Na~{\sc i} doublet and $H_{\alpha}$ using the following formula, \begin{equation} EW = \int \frac{f(\lambda)-f(\lambda_{c})}{f(\lambda_{c})}d\lambda, \end{equation} where $f(\lambda_{c})$ denotes the nearby pseudo continuum flux. Note that the equivalent width of an emission line measured using above formula has a positive value. To measure the equivalent width of Na~{\sc i} doublet ($EW_{Na}$), we integrated the line flux from 8176 \AA~to 8202 \AA, and the continuum flux $f(\lambda_{c})$ was estimated based on the flux between 8165-8175~\AA~and 8225-8235~\AA. The error propagation in each measurement was from the flux uncertainty per pixel of the spectrum. Since the wavelength region for these indices measurements is relatively narrow (e.g., the continuum of TiO5), it is important to correct all spectra for any significant shift in wavelengths. Therefore, all spectral measurements for M-type stare were carried out using the RV-corrected spectra. RVs were measured by cross-correlating each spectrum with the \citet{boch2007} M dwarf template of the best matched subtype (see Appendix~\ref{sec:rv_m}). To further select M-type stars with solar metallicity, we used the metallicity-dependent parameter $\zeta$, a ratio of CaH and TiO indices defined by \citet{lepi2007}, \begin{equation} \zeta = \frac{1-TiO5}{1-[TiO5]_{Z_{\odot}}}~, \label{equ:zeta_defin} \end{equation} where $[TiO5]_{Z_{\odot}}$ is a function of [CaH] (= CaH2 + CaH3), representing the expected value of the TiO5 index in stars with solar metallicities for a given value of [CaH]. Using their newly corrected spectral index values (the measurements from the Palomar-MSU spectroscopic survey of \citet{reid1995} are used as standards), \citet{lepi2013} re-calibrated $[TiO5]_{Z_{\odot}}$ as \begin{equation} [TiO5]_{Z_{\odot}}=0.622-1.906[CaH]+2.211([CaH])^{2}-0.588([CaH])^{3}. \label{equ:zeta_scale} \end{equation} We compared our initial measurements of TiO5, CaH2 and CaH3 from LAMOST spectra with the corrected (standard) values for the same stars provided by \citet{lepi2013}, and found small but evident systematic differences. We then corrected our measurements of these indices using the correspondingly derived corrections (see Appendix~\ref{sec:correct_m}). Based on new $\zeta$ from corrected indices (TiO5$_{c}$, CaH2$_{c}$ and CaH3$_{c}$), we then selected $69600$ spectra of M-type stars with $0.9\leq \zeta \leq1.1$. The CaH bands and Na~{\sc i} doublet are especially sensitive to gravity and thus are used as luminosity class indicator \citep{mann2012,gaid2014}, e.g., the M dwarfs and giants lie in two branches in the [CaH] versus TiO5 diagram, although for late K- and early M-type stars the locus of dwarfs and giants tend to overlap, creating a region of ambiguity (see Fig.~\ref{fig:zeta_m}). As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:zeta_m}, though the region between $\zeta=0.9$ and $\zeta=1.1$ always includes the majority of the M dwarfs, to further exclude the M giants among the stars with $0.9\leq \zeta \leq1.1$, we culled objects with larger [CaH] values (e.g., above the straight line displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:zeta_m}) and shallower Na~{\sc i} doublet (e.g., $EW_{Na}>-1.0$). Moreover, we refined the sample by selecting higher SNRr (15-30) for early sub-type M dwarfs (because the LAMOST archive includes a large number of such stars). Finally, we got 32200 spectra of M dwarfs (with spectral type earlier than M6) having solar metallicities. We then estimated their effective temperatures for these M dwarfs from their spectral types using a correlation between $T_{eff}$ and spectral sub-types (see Appendix~\ref{sec:teff_m}). In total, we selected the spectra of about 164800 reference dwarfs (FGKM) with solar metallicities over the temperature range of 3000-6500 K. To remove active stars from the selected reference dwarfs sample, we considered $H_{\alpha}$ line as the activity indicator and measured the equivalent width of $H_{\alpha}$ line ($EW_{H_{\alpha}}$), where the line was centered at 6563~\AA~over 12~\AA~bandpasses, the continuum flux was taken to be the average flux between 6547-6557~\AA~and 6570-6580~\AA. We binned the stars on $T_{eff}$ with a bin-width of 50 K, and then got mean value of $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ in each bin, as well as corresponding standard deviation ($\sigma$), by fitting the distribution (histogram) of $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ with a Gaussian function. We then culled sample stars with slight loose limits: about 10000 stars with $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ larger than $3.5\sigma$ were identified to be active stars, several hundreds ($\sim$800) spectra with $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ lower than $4.0\sigma$ (might be due to bad measurements). In this study, we used $\sim154000$ spectra of FGKM dwarfs as inactive reference stars, shown with grey dots in Fig.~\ref{fig:teff_ewha}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/tio5c_cah23c_all.eps} \caption{Corrected indices (CaH2$_{c}$, CaH3$_{c}$ and TiO5$_{c}$) are shown for M-type stars (dot), Hyades (cross), and Pleiades (plus). Grey dotted line separates M-dwarfs (below the line) and M-giants (above the line). Black dashed lines represent model values for $\zeta$ = 0.9 \& 1.1. Color gradient indicates the values of $\zeta$. Grey colour points indicate selected sample of M dwarfs with solar metallicity. } \label{fig:zeta_m} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Standard TiO2 strength} In this analysis, all the measurements were carried out using RV corrected spectra. For FGK dwarfs, we adopted RV values derived by LASP, while for M dwarfs we measured their RVs in the manner described previously (but see also Appendix~\ref{sec:rv_m}). In order to reduce the uncertainty of measurements due to RV corrections, we slightly broadened the continuum and molecular band region, as listed in Table~\ref{tab:index_defin} (added ``n'' to the index name to designate modified indices). Based on those selected inactive reference stars, we then got the binned mean TiO2n by Gaussian fitting to the distribution in each $T_{eff}$ bin (50 K), and finally got the standard relation of TiO2n versus $T_{eff}$, as shown by large black dots with error bars and further a smoothed black line in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:teff_ewha}. As a comparison, we also plotted the scales of TiO2n predicted by PHOENIX model spectra with solar metallicity and $\log g=4.5-5.0)$, after degrading their high spectral resolutions by convolving a Gaussian profile to match LAMOST spectra. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teff_ewha_all.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teff_tio2n_all.eps} \caption{Left panel shows the distribution of $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ of reference sample dwarfs. Black dots with error bars are the mean values with standard deviations of Gaussian $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ distributions in individual $T_{eff}$ bins. Black solid line represents the smoothed fit to the binned mean values. Upper $3.5\sigma$ and lower $4.0\sigma$ to the mean value are shown with green dashed and dotted lines, respectively. Note final inactive reference sample selected between these two lines are shown in grey points. Right panel shows derived standard relation between TiO2n and $T_{eff}$ for these inactive reference sample. Black solid line represents the smoothed fitting to the binned mean values of TiO2n, and black dot-dashed line represents a linear extrapolation of TiO2n with $2600<T_{eff}< 3000$ K. Green dashed and blue dotted lines indicate relations from PHOENIX models with $\log g$ =4.5\&5.0, respectively. } \label{fig:teff_ewha} \end{figure} \subsection{Determination of spot filling factor } In fact, besides the cool spots, there might also be hot spots (e.g., faculae) on the surface of an active star, thus the contribution from hot spots to the total flux should be considered as well. For simplicity, in this work, we assumed the photometric properties of hot spots are similar to those of quiescent photosphere. In this case, we could derive the cool spot filling factor $f_{s}$ with a two-temperature model using the modelling technique mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:maths}. This technique need independent determination of the quiescent photosphere temperature $T_{q}$ for active stars. We estimated $T_{q}$ for Pleiades candidates using $V-I$ color index, which is least influenced by spottedness \citep{stau2003}, or adopted a corrected $T_{eff}$ value from other colors (see Appendix~\ref{sec:teffq} for more details). Besides $T_{q}$, determining the spot filling factor also need an estimate of the cool spot temperature $T_{s}$. Our current understanding about cool spot temperature includes several techniques, e.g., simultaneous modelling of brightness and color variations, Doppler imaging, modelling of molecular bands, and modelling of atomic line-depth ratios \citep[see a review by][]{berd2005}. However, due to various limitations in these current methods, only few measurements of absolute spot temperatures are available, which show method dependency \citep{stra2009}. Now we only know that the spot temperature contrast with respect to the quiescent photospheric temperature ($\Delta T = T_{q} -T_{s}$) seems to be a function of $T_{q}$, e.g., $\Delta T$ have values near 2000 K for early G stars and drops to 200 K for the late M stars \citep{berd2005}. In principle, we could simultaneously determine the spot coverage and spot temperature by fitting two TiO bands with different temperature sensitivity, e.g., \citet{neff1995} estimated spot filling factor and spot temperature by fitting TiO bands near 7055 \AA\ and 8860 \AA. In practice, we found such method would result in large uncertainties, mainly due to large uncertainties in observed continuum flux and weak strength of TiO near 8860 \AA~band that falls in the red end of LAMOST spectra, and partly due to weak dependency of spot coverage on the spot temperature near 3500-3600 K (thought to be the spot temperature for late G- and K-type stars). In this study, for simplicity, we fixed the quiescent photosphere temperature $T_{q}$ (thus the $F_{q}$ of quiescent reference star), and then modelled TiO2n band strength $F_{t}$ of a target star using $F_{s}$ arrays of spot reference stars spanning the range, 2600 K $\leq T_{s} < T_{q}$ (e.g., equivalently $T_{s}/T_{q}$ $\sim 0.5-1.0$). Among these derived $f_{s}$, we adopted the minimum value as the ``real'' spot fractional coverage. Further analysis showed that such procedure would not result in large deviations (see Sec.~\ref{sec:uncertain}). In this analysis, for stars with larger TiO2n compare to their inactive counterparts, we simply set their cool spot filling factors to be zero. \begin{table} \caption{Spectroscopic measurements of sample Pleiades members. Full table is available online.} \label{tab:objects_results} \begin{tabular}{lccccccccccccccccccc} \hline Object name &$T_{spec}$& RV&$EW_{H_{\alpha}}$&TiO2n&TiO5n &$T_{q}$ &$f_{s1}^{a}$ &$T_{s1}^{a}$ &$f_{s2}^{b}$ & $T_{s2}^{b}$ & Flag$^{c}$\\ & (K) &(km\,s$^{-1}$)& (\AA)& & & (K) & & (K) & & (K) & \\ \hline Melotte 22 174 & 5022 & -4.50 & 0.0090 & 0.9763 & 0.9432 & 5152 & 0.110 & 3525 & 0.126 & 3595 & 1-1-2-0-0 \\ Melotte 22 HCG 39 & 4708 & 3.14 & -0.2760 & 0.9766 & 0.9417 & 4710 & 0.000 & & 0.059 & 3595 & 1-1-1-0-0 \\ Melotte 22 DH 166 & 4044 & 12.19 & 0.0291 & 0.9361 & 0.8773 & 4190 & 0.179 & 3390 & 0.198 & 3500 & 1-1-1-1-1 \\ Melotte 22 1100 & 4513 & 1.90 & 0.3080 & 0.9615 & 0.9125 & 3653 & 0.236 & 3480 & 0.309 & 3555 & 1-1-1-0-0 \\ Melotte 22 DH 075 & 3731 & 11.48 & 3.8819 & 0.8143 & 0.7054 & 3716 & 0.221 & 3120 & 0.000 & & 1-1-1-1-1 \\ Melotte 22 HHJ 295 & 3145 & -11.83 & 9.2937 & 0.5357 & 0.4000 & 3145 & 0.573 & 2740 & 0.062 & 2835 & 1-1-6-1-1 \\ J033754.79+252631.2 & 3496 & 4.12 & 2.0233 & 0.7240 & 0.5824 & 3479 & 0.308 & 3000 & 0.000 & & 2-1-3-1-1 \\ J040443.86+253333.0 & 3980 & -32.82 & -0.4746 & 0.9068 & 0.8356 & 3977 & 0.100 & 3280 & 0.003 & 3445 & 2-1-3-1-1 \\ Melotte 22 1173 & 3672 & 8.48 & 2.1087 & 0.8093 & 0.6712 & 3739 & 0.318 & 3115 & 0.287 & 3212 & 1-3-1-1-1 \\ \hline \multicolumn{12}{l}{$^a$ Spot filling factor ($f_{s1}$) and spot temperature ($T_{s1}$) from TiO2n }\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{$^b$ Spot filling factor ($f_{s2}$) and spot temperature ($T_{s2}$) from TiO5n }\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{$^c$ Flag N1-N2-N3-N4-N5: }\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~ N1: 1 = sample-1, 2 = sample-2;}\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~ N2: number of LAMOST observations; }\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~~N3: $T_{q}$ from $T_{color}$: 1 = $T_{VI}$, 2 = corrected $T_{VK}$, 3 = corrected $T_{rK}$, 4 = corrected $T_{IK}$;}\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~~~~~ N3 = original N3 + 5 for $T_{color}-T_{spec} < -100$ K;}\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~ N4: $T_{spec}$ from LAMOST pipeline (0) or our measurement (1); }\\ \multicolumn{12}{l}{~~~ N5: RV from LAMOST pipeline (0) or our measurement (1) }\\ \end{tabular} \end{table} \section{Limitations and uncertainties} \label{sec:uncertain} In this work, we modeled TiO2 band strength for an active star using different pairs of spot/quiescent reference stars over a wide range of spot temperatures, and finally adopted the results with minimum spot filling factors as the ``real" spot fractional coverage. We displayed the spot temperatures corresponding to the $f_{s}$ minima in Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_ts_tq}, showing that the spot temperatures $T_{s}$ fall in the range of 2800-3600 K, equivalent spot temperature contrast ratios ($T_{s}$/$T_{q}$) are in the range of 0.6-0.9. Previous studies showed $T_{s}$/$T_{q}$ is around 0.8 \citep[see][and reference therein]{berd2005,stra2009}, shown in the lower left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_ts_tq}, wherein we present the spot temperature contrast ratios for several active dwarfs and sub-giants that were derived based on different techniques and collected by \citet{berd2005} from literature. We found that the spot temperatures corresponding to $f_{s}$ minima are similar to those values previously derived for spotted stars, just being slightly cooler for earlier type stars. To check how the spot temperature affect the derived spot coverage, we showed five examples in right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_ts_tq}, where we displayed behaviour of $f_{s}$ with different spot temperatures $T_{s}$ for five Pleiades candidate members with spectral types from late G- to medium M-type. We noticed $f_{s}$ varies very slowly over a wide $T_{s}$ range around the minimum of $f_{s}$ for K-type stars, indicating $f_{s}$ is insensitive to $T_{s}$ in the temperature region around adopted $T_{s}$. e.g., for PELS 162 spot coverage have nearly constant values over $T_{s}$ of 3200-3800 K (equivalent $T_{s}$/$T_{q}$ $\sim$0.63-0.75). In Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_ts_tq} the plus and cross symbols, respectively, represent the cooler and hotter spot temperatures corresponding to the spot filling factor 5\% larger than the adopted minima, defining a $T_{s}$ region with $f_{s}$ uncertainty of 5\%. The spot temperatures of active dwarfs and sub-giants, derived by previous studies, are found almost within this region, which indicates that our adopted minima of spot filling factors could be a good indicator of real spot coverages. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teffph_tspt_m22_tf1.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/sptcov_ts_one_sim_10.eps} \caption{ Left panels show the relations between $T_{q}$ and adopted $T_{s}$ (corresponding to $f_{s}$ minima) (top), and ratio of $T_{s}$ to $T_{q}$ (bottom). Lower and higher spot temperatures corresponding to spot filling factors 5\% larger than minimum value are shown in grey plus and cross symbols, respectively. Filled circles represent probable single members and open circles with dots denote probable binary members or non-members. Filled and open squares with dots indicate the spot temperatures from previous studies for dwarfs and sub-giants, respectively. Black solid lines are drawn connecting symbols of same star. Right panel presents five examples showing the dependence of $f_{s}$ on spot temperature $T_{s}$. For each object, we show five cases corresponding to five quiescent photosphere temperatures: $T_{q}$, $T_{q}\pm50$ K, $T_{q}\pm100$ K.} \label{fig:sfs_ts_tq} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/fit_gas_sfs_hii1883.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/fit_gas_sfs_hcg101.eps} \caption{Distribution of spot filling factors ($f_{s}$) for Pleiades members HII 1883 and HCG 101 are shown in left and right panel, respectively. Dashed line represents the Gaussian fit to the $f_{s}$ distribution. Resulting mean ($\mu$) and standard deviations ($\sigma$) are given in respective panels. } \label{fig:sfs_mc_example} \end{figure} The uncertainties of spot filling factors measurements mainly propagates from the observed spectra (errors of observed TiO band flux, uncertainties in RV, and rotational broadening), the models (continuum surface flux ratio $R_{\lambda_{c}}$, and TiO2 scaling based on reference dwarfs), and the estimates of quiescent photosphere temperature. we discussed these issues as follows. The spectral resolution of LAMOST spectra (R$\sim$1800), and the large rotational broadening are two factors that limits the accuracy of RV measurements for Pleiades candidates. To check how RV uncertainties affect TiO2n measurements, we have taken PHOENIX spectra (R$\sim$500000) and degraded the resolution to 1800 by convolving a Gaussian profile, and found the differences of TiO2n ($\Delta$TiO2n) due to RV shifts of $\pm$ 20 km\,s$^{-1}$ are less than 0.002, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:diff_rv_rot}. In addition, many Pleiades K and M dwarfs are found to be rapid rotators, e.g., HII 2208 have a $v\sin i$ value of 73 km\,s$^{-1}$ \citep{stau1987}, and HII 1883, the almost extreme case, have a $v\sin i$ of 140 km\,s$^{-1}$ \citep{stau1984}. We thus evaluated the affects of rotational broadening to TiO2n measurements, as shown in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:diff_rv_rot}, and found the difference of TiO2n due to $v\sin i$ of $\sim100$ km\,s$^{-1}$ are typically less than 0.002, which is comparable with errors due to RV uncertainties, and even less than typical errors of TiO2n measurements propagated from the uncertainties of observed flux (For GK members, the typical value of uncertainty of TiO2n is less than 0.005, in case of fainter members it is slight larger than 0.005). Our analysis showed that the error of 0.002~in TiO2n would not result in large deviation of spot filling factors (see Table~\ref{tab:results_mc}). The spot coverage depends strongly on the quiescent photosphere temperature, particularly for very cool stars, as shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_ts_tq}. The errors of colors used in this paper are typically less than 0.05 mag, which corresponds to the uncertainties of $T_{eff}$ around 100 K. For early K-type stars, 100 K deviation in $T_{q}$ will lead to a spot coverage difference of about $2\%-3\%$, while for a medium M-type star such a temperature deviation results in very large ($15\%-20\%$) variation, since TiO2 is strongly temperature-sensitive, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:teff_ewha}. To estimate the uncertainties on the determinations of $f_{s}$, a Monte Carlo approach was used. For simplicity, we performed the Monte Carlo simulation 1000 times for five example stars using the target TiO2n strength $F_{t}$ with standard deviation corresponds to measurement error (typically 0.005), and quiescent photosphere temperature $T_{q}$ with standard deviation of 100 K, as listed in Table~\ref{tab:results_mc}. Figure \ref{fig:sfs_mc_example} gives two examples of $f_{s}$ simulations (HII 1883 and HCG 101). From the Table~\ref{tab:results_mc}, one can see that the uncertainties of $f_{s}$ of hotter stars, compare to K dwarfs, are mainly comes from the errors of $F_{t}$ because of the sharp continuum flux contrast between spot and quiescent photosphere ($R_{\lambda_{c}}$ is smaller, the same error of $F_{t}$ result in larger $f_{s}$ uncertainty). For cooler stars (e.g., M stars), the uncertainty in quiescent photosphere temperature dominates the $f_{s}$ uncertainty, since the TiO2 strength have strong temperature-sensitivity when $T_{eff}<4000$ K. In other words, comparing hotter and cooler stars, K dwarfs have smaller uncertainties in spot coverage. For M dwarf stars, we estimated their effective temperatures from spectral characteristics. By comparing the temperatures from spectroscopy with those from photometry for M dwarf reference stars, we found that the effective temperatures from spectral features are underestimated about 50 K (see Appendix~\ref{sec:teff_m}), which would overestimate the spot filling factors, especially for very cool stars. To evaluate the deviation of $f_{s}$ due to any systematic deviation in the standard relation of TiO2n vs. $T_{eff}$, we derived spot filling factors for five example members using the standard relation of TiO2n vs. $T_{eff}$ but with shifted $T_{eff}$ of 50 K, and found that the resultant differences of $f_{s}$ are about 0.02, 0.03, 0.04, 0.11 and 0.13 for PELS 162, HII 1883, HII 335, HCG 101 and HCG 219, respectively. Therefore, for GK-type stars, the underestimation of $T_{eff}$ by about 50 K in TiO2n vs. $T_{eff}$ standard relation would affect spot filling factors marginally, but for M-type members, especially medium and late M-type members, the derived spot filling factors might be overestimated (up to 0.1 or above). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/phoenix_test_rv_rot_tio2n.eps} \caption{Estimated differential TiO2n values due to wavelength shifts, RV$=\pm 10$, $\pm 20$ km\,s$^{-1}$ (upper panel), and rotational broadenings, $v\sin i=30,~60,~90,~120$ km\,s$^{-1}$ (lower panel). Note grey color solid line represent ratio of $\Delta$TiO2n to TiO2n at shift of +10 km\,s$^{-1}$ (upper panel) and broadening of 60 km\,s$^{-1}$ (lower panel).} \label{fig:diff_rv_rot} \end{figure} \begin{table} \caption{Estimated parameters from Monte Carlo simulations for 5 Pleiades members} \label{tab:results_mc} \begin{tabular}{lccccccccccccccccccc} \hline Object &$T_{q}$ &$\sigma(T_{q})$ &$F_{t}$ &$\sigma(F_{t})$& $\sigma_{1}^a$&$\sigma_{2}^b$&$\sigma_{3}^c$\\ \hline PELS 162 &5118 &100 & 0.969 & 0.005 & 0.024 & 0.086 & 0.093 \\ HII 1883 &4722 &100 & 0.951 & 0.003 & 0.037 & 0.030 & 0.045 \\ HII 335 &4224 &100 & 0.900 & 0.003 & 0.071 & 0.020 & 0.077 \\ HCG 101 &3609 &100 & 0.740 & 0.004 & 0.159 & 0.022 & 0.161 \\ HCG 291 &3399 &100 & 0.658 & 0.010 & 0.160 & 0.051 & 0.160 \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{l}{$^a$ standard deviation of $f_{s}$ due to $\sigma(T_{q})$ }\\ \multicolumn{8}{l}{$^b$ standard deviation of $f_{s}$ due to $\sigma(F_{t})$ }\\ \multicolumn{8}{l}{$^c$ standard deviation of $f_{s}$ due to both $\sigma(F_{q})$ \& $\sigma(F_{t})$ }\\ \end{tabular} \end{table} It is important to point out that our derived standard TiO2n scales cut off at $T_{eff}\sim3000$ K, because of the paucity of LAMOST spectra of M dwarfs later than M6. However, in the procedure of searching for minimum of spot coverage, we simply linearly extrapolated the TiO2n when $T_{s} < 3000$ K, as shown by black dot-dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:teff_ewha}. We noticed such a linear extrapolation would not affect the final results significantly, since the PHOENIX models predict that TiO2 of M dwarfs later than M6 still decreases with temperature in a similar way like hotter M dwarfs, until $T_{eff}\sim2600$ K at which the TiO2 overturns (probably due to the formation of grains and to the veiling effect by dust scattering). Finally, we note that there might exist discrepancies between the derived spot coverages and the real values for very cool Pleiades members (approximately mass < 0.5$M_{\sun}$ or $T_{eff}<3500$ K), since these stars in Pleiades with an age of $\sim120$ Myr are still in their pre-main-sequence phase, gravity effect would affect the TiO2 strength and thus the final results. Any features shown for these very cool stars in this paper should be only qualitative in nature. \section{Results and Discussion} \subsection{Manifestation of activity on TiO band strengths} $H_{\alpha}$ line is the strongest and widely studied activity indicator for low mass dwarf stars \citep[e.g.][]{west2004}. We measured $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ for Pleiades members, in which most of them show extra $H_{\alpha}$ emission features ($\Delta EW_{H_{\alpha}} > 0$) relative to their inactive counterparts, indicating they are chromospherically active (see left panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:ewha_tio2_active}). The corresponding TiO2n measurements for Pleiades members along with previously selected $\sim 10000$ active dwarfs, from the right panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:ewha_tio2_active}, showed that the active stars and Pleiades candidate members including hotter stars (e.g., early K-type dwarfs) are found to have deeper TiO2 absorption ($\Delta$TiO2n < 0) compare to their inactive counterparts, indicating the presence of cool spots. In fact, besides TiO2, large cool spots could produce measurable signals of many molecular bands in observed spectra. To illustrate, we computed the flux ratio spectra of 11 rapidly rotating K and early M Pleiades members (potentially single stars). For these 11 stars, we divided each spectra by a range of inactive template spectra and found the best matched template through visual check in several wavelength regions with relatively free of molecular bands. Note during matching the spectra with the templates, the templates were wavelength-shifted and rotationally broadened. To assemble the inactive template spectra, high quality spectra of a subsample of reference stars with similar temperatures (e.g., about 100 stars in each 50 K bin) were first shifted to a zero-velocity rest frame, then normalized at band of 7040-7050~\AA\ and co-added. The ratio spectra, in Fig.~\ref{fig:ratio_pleiades}, shows blue continuum rising to shorter wavelength and slight rise of red continuum towards red, confirming the finding of \citet{stau2003} about anomaly of spectral energy distributions (SEDs) of Pleiades K dwarfs. Also, the spectra show residual emission lines of Balmer lines, Ca~{\sc ii} H\&K, and Ca~{\sc ii} IRT lines ($\lambda$8498, 8542 and 8662), and several neutral metal quasi-emission lines that are strongly temperature-sensitive such as Ca~{\sc i} $\lambda 4226$, Mg~{\sc i} b triplet lines, Fe~{\sc i} $\lambda 5208$, and Na~{\sc i} D lines, indicates the presence of chromospheric activity in these stars. Particularly, these spectra show well-defined molecular absorption features, e.g., CaOH ($\sim$6230~\AA), CaH ($\sim$6380, 6800 and 6900~\AA), and TiO ($\sim$7055, 7088, 7126 and 7600~\AA), in combine with anomalous SEDs and neutral metal quasi-emission lines indicate that these Pleiades K stars are hotter than inactive counterparts in the blue band which may be due to the presence of hot spots like faculae, but cooler than inactive counterparts in the red that provides unambiguous proof of the presence of cool spots. The spectral division process could give estimate of quiescent temperatures, e.g., the temperature of best-matched inactive template spectrum. In these 11 Pleiades stars, we found the difference between the quiescent temperatures from division process and the temperatures derived based on broad-band colors are in range of $-$93 to 105 K. On an average, the temperature from division process is slight hotter. In addition, different molecular bands have different temperature-sensitivity, thus the relative strengths and overall appearances of different band features could lead to possible estimates of spot temperatures. However, we discuss these issues elsewhere (Fang et al, in preparation), including detailed spectral division procedure, methods to estimate quiescent temperature and spot temperature, and the schemes of estimating spot filling factors, e.g., instead of simply fitting the strength of one band, we try to make simultaneous fits to multiple spectral regions containing molecular bands using inactive template spectra . In Fig.~\ref{fig:tio2_tio5}, we showed the correlations among TiO2n, TiO3n, TiO4n and TiO5n for active M-type stars and Pleiades M-type candidates, comparing with the mean relation for inactive counterparts. We noticed that these active dwarfs have stronger (deeper) TiO2 and weaker TiO4 at a given TiO5 value, showing opposite behaviour. The large offset of TiO2 at a given TiO4 value for active stars, in upper right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:tio2_tio5}, confirmed the anomalous behaviour of TiO4 found by \citet{hawl1996} and \citet{boch2007}. However, unlike TiO2 and TiO4, there exist no evident difference in TiO3 between active stars and inactive counterparts (though slightly weaker for medium- and late-M type active stars than inactive counterparts). These differences may arise partly due to combined effect of presence of cool spots and their different temperature-sensitivities. Our preliminary check of these indices using PHOENIX models ($\log g\sim4.5-5.5$) show that they have different temperature-sensitivities, namely, different strength gradient as a function of temperature, and different saturate onset or overturn temperature, e.g., TiO4 tends to overturn at $T_{eff}\sim2800$ K, TiO3 overturns at slight lower temperature, TiO2 shows a reversal relation at $T_{eff}\sim2600$ K. TiO5, measured full depth of these three subbands, have the combinational characteristics, e.g., \citet{reid1995} found that TiO5 become weaker as effective temperature decreases, showing a reversal relation from M7. One can imagine that the same cool spot would lead to different amount of extra absorptions for different TiO bands because of their different temperature-sensitivities. To check this effect, we computed the resulting TiO bands due to large cool spots with $f_{s}=50\%$ for several example of M dwarfs with $3300\leq T_{q}\leq3900$ K and $T_{s}=0.85T_{q}$, using PHOENIX model spectra (solar metallicity, $\log g=5.0$), shown as solid squares in the Fig.~\ref{fig:tio2_tio5}, and values for corresponding quiescent stars with $T_{eff}=T_{q}$ are shown as open squares. We see that the displacements of these TiO bands of spotted stars compare to corresponding quiescent stars show similar trends that of active M stars in these diagrams. In addition, to check potential gravity effect on these indices for M-type stars, we show the mean relations for M giants that are derived based on a sample of $\sim$2100 M giants (selected with $\zeta>1.6$ and $EW_{H_{\alpha}}<0$ from M-type stars sample those lie in M giants branch, see Fig.~\ref{fig:zeta_m}). We can see that the M giants agree well with inactive dwarfs of earlier M-type, but for later M-type stars M giants tend to follow the sequence of active M stars, which gives a clue of probable gravity effect on TiO bands in these very cool active stars. However, the underlying physical mechanisms for above issues are not well understood, thus need further study. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teffph_ewha_dewha_m22.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teffph_tio2n_dtio2n_m22.eps} \caption{Measurements of $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ and TiO2n and their corresponding deviations ($\Delta EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ and $\Delta$TiO2n) to the mean values for entire sample stars are shown in left and right panel, respectively. Black solid lines show the mean relations for inactive counterparts. In the upper left panel, upper $3.5\sigma$ and lower $4\sigma$ to mean $EW_{H_{\alpha}}$ are shown in green dashed lines. Note $T_{eff}$ for Pleiades members are quiescent photosphere temperature. For members having LAMOST multi-observations, we displayed their average values rather than individual observational values.} \label{fig:ewha_tio2_active} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/syn_fit_m22_blue.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/syn_fit_m22_red.eps} \caption{Ratio spectra in blue region (left panel) and red region (right panel) of 11 Pleiades cool members with spectral type from early-K (blue) to early-M (black) is shown. Object names are marked for reference. Note the residual emission lines of atomic species and absorption of molecular species (see the text for details).} \label{fig:ratio_pleiades} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/tio5n_tio2n_all_ocs.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/tio4n_tio2n_all_ocs.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/tio5n_tio3n_all_ocs.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/tio5n_tio4n_all_ocs.eps} \caption{Relations between various TiO band indices are shown. Black solid and dot-dashed lines in each panel indicates the mean relations for inactive M dwarfs and giants, respectively. ``Theoretical'' relations from PHOENIX models with $\log g=4.5$ and $\log g=5.0$ are shown in green dashed and blue dotted lines, respectively. Filled squares represent spotted stars with $f_{s}=50\%$ and $T_{s}=0.85T_{q}$, and open squares represent corresponding quiescent stars with $T_{eff}=T_{q}$. Arrow indicates the displacement of TiO bands from quiescent star with $T_{eff}=3600$ K to spotted star with $T_{q}=3600$ K. Note the dotted lines connecting filled and open squares are shifted up by adding the same constants for better display.} \label{fig:tio2_tio5} \end{figure} \subsection{Spot configuration} Based on the idea that the extra TiO2 (\&TiO5) band absorption in an active dwarf indicates the presence of cool spots, we derived spot filling factors for 304 probable members of Pleiades by modelling their TiO2 (\&TiO5) band strengths, and shown in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:teffph_sfs} (only the results from TiO2n are displayed, see Appendix~\ref{sec:best_tio} for results from TiO5n), and listed in Table~\ref{tab:objects_results}. The results show overall picture that the upper envelope of $f_{s}$ increases slightly as stars become cooler. G-type stars have spot filling factors of $f_{s}<30\%$ whereas a large fraction of later type stars have values of $f_{s}>30\%$ in the range of 30\%-50\%. Many studies indicate that the radii of young low-mass active stars tended to be larger than predicted values \citep[e.g.][]{stau2007,jack2009}, and modelling results show that cool spot model can solely cause the detected radius inflation, however, this spot model need a very large spot coverage \citep{jack2014}. Our results found large spot coverages for few member stars that may provide indirect support to the spot model for explaining the radius inflation. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teffph_sfs1_m22_all.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/teffph_sfs1_m22_nprt.eps} \caption{Distribution of derived spot filling factors of Pleiades candidate members are in left panel. Error bars of spot filling factors are marked for five typical members with spectral type from late-G to medium M (see Table~\ref{tab:results_mc}). Spot filling factors for Pleiades members without detected periods (showing absence or very small spot rotational modulation) are in right panel.} \label{fig:teffph_sfs} \end{figure} Fig.~\ref{fig:teffph_sfs} shows that spot filling factors of Pleiades members with similar colors spread a wide range, in particular for K- and M-type stars, indicating possible affect from other parameters to stellar spot coverage. More interestingly, we found a plateau of spot coverage around $f_{s}\sim 40\%$ over the $T_{eff}$ interval from $\sim$3800 K to $\sim$5000 K, showing a saturation-like phase, a phenomenon detected on fast rotating stars like chromospheric activities of the NGC 2516 members \citep{jack2010} and the coronal activities of fast rotating late-type stars \citep[e.g.][]{wrig2011}. To further demonstrate this feature, in Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_rossby}, we showed the derived spot filling factors versus Rossby numbers $R_{o}$ ($R_{o}=P/\tau$, where $P$, $\tau$ denote the stellar rotation period and convective overturn time, respectively) for stars whose periods are available. To calculate Rossby numbers, rotation periods were adopted from the catalogue of \citet{hart2010}, and convective overturn times were estimated from stellar masses (masses were converted from quiescent photosphere temperature using PARSEC models) using the correlation between convective overturn time and mass by \citet{wrig2011}. Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_rossby} shows the existence of a trend that rapidly rotating K-type stars have larger spot coverage compare to slowly rotating counterparts. However, the trend is non-monotonous. For slowly rotating stars (Approx. $R_{o}>0.1$), spot coverage increases with decreasing $R_{o}$, while for the rapidly rotating stars ($R_{o}$ $<$ $\sim0.1$) the $f_{s}$ do not increase any more with decrement in $R_{o}$ showing a saturated phase, but it seems that members with different spectral types have different saturation levels. Most of the M-type stars in our sample have $R_{o}<0.1$ and their spot coverage reached saturated phase, despite there exist large scatter (partly due to large uncertainties of spot coverage determination for these stars). Furthermore, we introduced a new parameter, namely, $f'_{s} = f_{s}\times(1.0- (\frac{T_{s}}{T_{q}})^4)$, representing the ratio of ``lost" flux due to appearance of cool spotted region to expected flux of a quiescent photosphere (may be an indicator of photometric activity level). We plotted $f'_{s}$ with $R_{o}$ in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_rossby}, and noticed very similar features like $f_{s}$ versus $R_{o}$. In fact, we found that there also exists saturation of chromospheric activity levels for these members of Pleiades; a detail discussion about this aspect will appear in subsequent paper (Fang et al., in preparation). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/rossby_spcov1_sol_vlm_m22.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/rossby_dspflux_sol_vlm_m22.eps} \caption{Left: $f_{s}$ vs. $R_{o}$ for Pleiades candidate members with $T_{eff}>3800$ K (top panel) and $T_{eff}\leq3800$ K (bottom panel). Dotted line is drawn to indicate the general trend for slow rotating members and show saturated spot coverage level for fast rotators. Color gradient represent different effective temperatures. Right: same as left panels, but for $f'_{s}$ vs. $R_{o}$.} \label{fig:sfs_rossby} \end{figure} To characterize the distribution pattern of spots, we first focused on the correlation between derived spot coverage and amplitude of light variation due to spot rotational modulation. In Fig.~\ref{fig:sfs_amp}, we showed the Sloan r-band amplitude variation (the peak-to-peak amplitudes of the best-fitting sinusoid to the light curves, hereafter $A_{r}$) of Pleiades members against derived $f_{s}$ and $f'_{s}$ , where $A_{r}$ were derived by \citet{hart2010} based on data from the Hungarian-made Automated Telescope Network (HATNet) survey for transiting exoplanets. As shown in the upper left panel, there exists an overall trend of increasing $A_{r}$ with the increment of $f_{s}$, an expected relationship between spot coverage and corresponding light variation due to rotational modulation, assuming the spots are located asymmetrically on the surface. However, the scatter is very large, e.g., the stars having similar $A_{r}$ span wide regions in the diagram (the faster rotators tend to have larger $f_{s}$), especially for stars with $A_{r} < 0.10$ mag. Of course, these large scatter may be partly due to uncertainties in the measurements of spot filling factors, but we believe that these scatters mainly comes from the different spot distribution patterns on their photosphere. To illustrate, we assume the derived total spot coverage consist of two parts, namely, the asymmetric part $f_{s}(asym)$ resulting in light variation and the symmetric part $f_{s}(sym)$ having no contribution to light variation (e.g., polar-like spots and numerous, axi-symmetrically distributed spots). In this case, comparing with slow rotators showing similar $A_{r}$ the faster rotators have similar $f_{s}(asym)$ (thus similar $A_{r}$), but larger $f_{s}(sym)$, indicates spots become more symmetrical. If such a case is real, then indicates these two parts of spot coverage may have different dependence on rotation, e.g., the $f_{s}(sym)$ may get more benefits from the increase of stellar rotation rate until saturates. As shown by lower left panel, no evident trend is found in M-type stars, although there exists a weak gradual increase in $A_{r}$ with $f_{s}$. However, considering large uncertainties in the spot coverages for these very cool stars, it is very hard to say these features in M members are real or not. Furthermore, we checked the derived spot filling factors for the members without detected periods in the HATNet survey, which are displayed in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:teffph_sfs}. Among these stars most of them are M-type stars which have large spot coverages. Since very few G- and K-type members in our sample are without detected periods, it is very hard to conclude about this issue with earlier type stars. However, the results show that some M-type stars with high spot coverage showing no or very low light variations which indicates their photosphere may be covered by many small spotted regions, providing partly support for the assumption that large spot coverage might be made up of many small and randomly located spots on the stellar photosphere \citep{jack2012,jack2014}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=140mm,height=96mm]{figures/spcov1_ff_ramp_sol_vlm_m22_ros.eps} \caption{ $A_{r}$ against $f_{s}$ (left panels), and $f'_{s}$ (right panels) for Pleiades candidate members with $T_{eff}>3800$ K (upper panels) and with $T_{eff}\leq3800$ K (lower panels). Note the size of each symbol is scaled with $R{o}$ value, and color gradient denotes its effective temperature.} \label{fig:sfs_amp} \end{figure} \section{Conclusion} We have measured the strength of TiO bands in a large sample of LAMOST spectra of inactive dwarfs with solar metallicity over a wide temperature range from 3000 K to 6500 K, and obtained the standard values. We found extra TiO absorption features appear on the spectra of active stars, even hotter stars like G- and early K-type stars, unambiguously indicating the presence of cool starspots on their photospheres. In addition, active cool stars like late K- and M-type stars have stronger (deeper) TiO2, but weaker (shallower) TiO4 than inactive stars at a given TiO5 value. We believe that the anomalies in these TiO indices mainly result from the presence of cool spots, but for very young M-type stars the gravity effect may also be accounted. We have estimated the spot fractional coverages for 304 Pleiades candidate members by modelling their TiO2n (\&TiO5n) band strengths using standard values obtained from reference stars. The results show that the spot coverage of G-type members are generally less than 30\%, while a large fraction of K- and M-type members appear to be covered by very large cool spots with filling factors over the range of $30\%-50\%$. We have obtained the correlations between spot coverage and rotation, and the amplitude of light variation. We found faster rotating G- and K-type stars being covered by larger spots and slowly rotating G- and K-type members show good dependency of spot coverage on stellar rotation. More interestingly, we detected a saturation-like feature of spot coverage among fast rotators ($R_{o} < \sim0.1$) with a saturation level of $\sim40-50\%$. In G- and K-type members we noticed that the fraction of symmetrically distributed spots to the total spots among faster rotators is larger, suggests the symmetric part of spot coverage benefits more from the increment of stellar rotation rate. In addition, we found large spot coverages were detected in many M type members showing no or little light variation, all of them give strong constraints for stellar dynamo mechanism in these very active members. In subsequent publications, we present results of our extended analysis from LAMOST spectra of members of various open clusters in comparison with Pleiades, and active stars in the Kepler field. Also, present detail study towards the characteristics of magnetic activities on stellar photosphere, chromosphere and coronal region, and the correlations between these activity levels and stellar parameters: activity, rotation, the amplitude of light variation, and flux-flux relation (e.g., chromospheric-coronal flux-flux relation). \section*{Acknowledgements} We are thankful to the referee, John Stauffer, for his observant comments and constructive suggestions that helped to improve our manuscript. This study is supported by the National Key Basic Research Program of China (973 program, Nos. 2014CB845701 and 2014CB845703), and the National Natural Science Fundation of China (Grant No. U1431106). Y.B.K is thankful to the support from Chinese Academy of Sciences Visiting Fellowship for Researchers from Developing Countries, Grant No. 2013FFJB0008. This work has made use of LAMOST data. The Guo Shou Jing Telescope (the Large sky Area Multi-Object fiber Spectroscopic Telescope, LAMOST) is a National Major Scientific Project built by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Funding for the project has been provided by the National Development and Reform Commission. LAMOST is operated and managed by National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences.
\section{Introduction} \label{introduction} Trade involves asset exchange between partners who agree to a bartering network between themselves. Within this network, there are pockets of individuals or families whose rate of flow of income derived from exchanging their own human skills in the market place is not adequate to meet their basic necessities. Such people are referred to as poor and their state of living or consumption is called poverty. In order to understand the mechanics of income and consumption of such individuals, and the associated measure of poverty we embed them within a broader community of individuals endowed both with human skills as well as accumulated wealth and place them in an interacting market environment and a non-market state. \par Starting with the famous work of Pareto \cite{Pareto_1895}, numerous (mostly time independent) studies \cite{Pareto_1895,Mandelbrot_1960,Montroll_1983,Bouchaud_book,Bouchaud_2008,Mantegna_1995,Podobnik_2012,Mohanty_2006} have been made on the high income side, all generally converging to the same identical outcome, that of a power law tail for the large income sectors. Similar power law behaviors have been noted in other noisy models involving complex networks \cite{Carro_2016, Vespignani_2013}. The low income sectors, more specifically the \enquote{destitution margin}, has remained largely under studied. In this article, we will extend the understanding obtained from our previous stochastic agent-based model for generating a time varying profile of income distribution \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, and Engel curve based analysis of poverty \cite{Kakwani_1980, Sitaramam_1996, Kumar_1996}. In our first work \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, the time dependence of consumption was exogenously given (and hence could not be predicted). In this article, we generate time dependence of both income and consumption endogenously using the same agent-based trading model. In \cite{Sitaramam_1996} and \cite{Kumar_1996}, the underlying market mechanism for exchange of goods and services (commodities and assets) remained unexplained. In this paper, we apply the same agent-based commodity exchange model as the basis for generating the Engel curve. The most significant outcome of this marriage in concepts propounded in the older papers with the new one is that the characteristic features of poverty are endogenously demarcated by the nature of trade in an agent-based model. In particular, we find agents do not engage in trading of assets or even of luxuries as long as their basic necessities are not fulfilled, a feature emerging from the work by Engel, later studied by Kumar, Gore and Sitaramam \cite{Kumar_1996} and Chai and Moneta \cite{Engel_1895} and \cite{Chai_2010}. The poverty threshold thus emerges endogenously from the model as that level of income at which income is less than consumption deprivation of essential commodities. We will use, as our defining constituent of asset exchange, food grain consumption statistics data availed from World Bank \cite{NSS}. \par As always, the paucity of basic resources leading to poverty can be attributed to inhomogeneity in the spread of such resources that can be largely remedied through decentralization of assets. The history of economics is replete with examples of attempts at appropriating the best possible scheme for effecting this decentralization mechanism. The issue is contentious and attempts have generally been fractious \cite{Kumar_2009} with political opinions governing the subset of assumptions based on which most of the theoretical models have been attempted. In this work, our premise will be dispassionate economic argument that is free of socio-political conduits and limit our analysis to data based facts, that will define the model largesse. This will thus be a bottom-up approach where a model will be constructed around known facts and then analyzed for quantitative agreement with real data. \par Unfortunately poverty studies in economics made a fictitious classification of all people into two categories called \enquote{poor} and \enquote{non-poor} by defining a cut-off point of poverty level income (the so called \enquote{focus axiom} by Sen \cite{Sen_1976}). Several controversial issues arise on how that poverty level income is determined and if one can really say that someone just above that line is so different from the one just below that level to be excluded from poverty studies, etc. Defining who the poor are and then to define poverty is like putting the cart before the horse. One must define what poverty is and then identify those who have high degrees of poverty and label them as poor. Poverty then can be defined as deprivation in consumption of essential commodities, such as a staple food, say cereals. This is how Engel studied poverty. Some of our earlier works highlight these aspects in more details \cite{Kumar_2009, Kumar_1996, Sitaramam_1996}. The main thrust of Engel curve-based measure of poverty was to reject the \enquote{focus axiom} of Sen \cite{Sen_1976} and decline the notion of the existence of a fine distinction between the poor and non-poor. Although this argument was not well received by the mainstream economists when the seeds of the idea were initially advanced in \cite{Sitaramam_1996}, the arbitrary nature of the poverty line is now being addressed with renewed interest across the academic community. \par The starting point of our approach in this paper is to assume that there are two distinct markets, one for assets that are accumulated and saved or dissolved over time. The other market is the commodity market where goods and services needed for current consumption are traded. We assume that all people are permitted to participate in trade exchange over both markets, while a majority of the poor have a limited participation in the asset market transaction, they only trade their human skills or human capital for wage income, which is used in the other commodity markets for exchange. We do not introduce the notion of the poor and poverty line on our own, exogenously. Instead we let the data tell us what kind of asset and commodity exchanges people are involved in, observe the equilibrium behavior in the commodity and asset markets to determine income distribution and the implied consumption distribution, consumption deprivation and poverty. \subsection{The Engel Profiles: Definition of Consumption-Deprivation} \label{engel_plots \par As showed in two of our previous works \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010,Chattopadhyay_2007}, all three forms of conventional poverty measures, \enquote{headcount index},\enquote{poverty gap index} and \enquote{square poverty gap index} suffer from an inherent arbitrariness in defining an appropriate "{poverty line}'' across which each such index may be measured. These are classed as statistical measures \cite{Kakwani_1980}. In those studies poverty measure was defined with an exogenously and arbitrarily defined poverty line to identify who the poor are and the data were used only to estimate poverty so defined. In this study, and some of our earlier studies \cite{Sitaramam_1996,Kumar_1996,Kumar_2009} based on Engel curves, we used data to reveal the pattern of consumption deprivation on essential commodities that gave us an observed description of existing poverty. Thus our approach had an inherent congruence between theory and empirical verification. To define a more robust poverty measure, as in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, we use statistics for consumption deprivation (CD) \cite{Kumar_1996,Sitaramam_1996}. CD is derived from consumption expressed as a function of income. As shown in Figure \ref{fig_consumption}, consumption shows an initial increase with income followed by saturation, reflecting the fact that one can not eat in proportion to an increase in earning \cite{Cirera_2010}. CD is a shortfall in consumption from this saturation level. The complementary picture is shown in Figure 2, that was previously derived and discussed in detail in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}; it shows CPI-normalized deflated statistics of the income variation of the Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDF) against CPI-normalized income $y$. The results showed a highly interesting data collapse over all years that suggested inherent scaling in the CDF statistics. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9cm]{consump.pdf} \caption{A plot of the consumption function $C(y)$ against the expenditure $y$ on food grains. The data (dots) have been fitted against the consumption function $C(y)=\dfrac{Vy}{K+y}$ using a least squares mechanism. \label{fig_consumption}} \end{figure} \end{center} Correlating the NSS income data $y$ with that of the expenditure on basic cereals $C(y)$, we find a good fit to a functional relationship \cite {Chattopadhyay_2007}: \begin{equation} C(y,t)= \frac{V(t)y}{K(t)+y} \label{C_equation} \end{equation} where the parameters $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ are time dependent \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007, Kumar_2009}, as shown in figures \ref{fig_Vplot} and \ref{fig_Kplot}. $V(t)$ is a measure of the overall amount spent per family on cereal consumption when income is very large. This is the value of $C(y)$ in the plateau region of Fig. \ref{fig_consumption} for $y \to \infty$. $K(t)$, on the other hand, can be taken as the income necessary to support a consumption expense that is half of the maximum overall spend per family ($V(t)$). Incidentally, $K$ is also that level of income where consumption deprivation function and the affluence function (the actual consumption) will be equal. Overall, the {\it consumption deprivation} relates to the actual shortfall in the income necessary to achieve the maximum possible lifestyle based on cereal consumption alone and is defined as \[CD(y(t))=V(t)-C(y(t)) =\frac{V(t) K(t)}{K(t)+y(t)}.\] \par In our previous work \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, the parameters $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ were fixed from data that were available on a year-by-year basis from the World Bank repository \cite{NSS}. For the same reason, though, {\it the analysis there was limited to the plausible range of data without any predictive power for future times for which data is not available}. The only way to ingrain a generic time dependence in the consumption function that can probabilistically predict values of $C(y)$ for future times is to have a time evolving model for $C(y(t))$ itself, which is the main theme of this paper, although the nature of such time dynamics may be non-unique in its character. \section{The Inequality Model} As a token departure from our previous theoretical analysis \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, this article treats trade in commodities, other than the basic essential commodity, and of assets other than ones own personal work skills, occurs only above a certain minimum threshold level. As detailed in our earlier works \cite{Kumar_1996, Sitaramam_1996, Chattopadhyay_2007}, our choice for this minimum of income threshold is the consumption deprivation function $CD(y_i,t)$ which is the amount of income lacking in an income class $i$ that is needed to sustain trade above the poverty (or inequality) level, that, then is a function of the income $y_i(t)$ at time $t$. While the increase in the spending power of the entire population is a motivating factor and a goal for growth in income, a transfer of wealth (e.g. investment by agent $i$ through trade) will result in decreased spending power for this agent that will oppose the positive growth rate defined by ${\overline Y}_i(t)$. But such a transfer of wealth can now only happen when the income $y_i(t)$ is greater than the consumption deprivation $CD(y_i;t)$. What this implies is that a household will not have any savings in assets as long as the income is less than the consumption deprivation. \subsection{Stochastic income-expenditure model above threshold} The resultant stochastic (Langevin) model that we then get from this construction is as follows \begin{subequations} \begin{eqnarray} && \frac{dy_i}{dt} = \beta \:{\overline Y_i}(t) - \alpha \:(y_i -CD_i) + \eta_i(t)y_i, \label{Langevin} \\ && <\eta_i(t) \eta_j(t')> = D_0 \delta(t-t') \delta_{ij}, \label{Noise} \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} where $\beta {\overline Y}_i(t)$ is the maximum level of income (proportional to the mean growth rate ${\overline Y_i}(t)$ of income) at time $t$ for the ${i}^{\mathrm{th}}$ class of individuals would like to aim at but achieve only a fraction of it in each period. This is a sum of desired consumption expenditure and desired savings. This is thus partly an adaptive behavior, the first term being a motivational force that creates incentives to increase the level of income, and the second term, on the other hand, defines how increase in income is offset by a decrease in income available for consumption in the current period (due to savings). It assumes that a proportion $\alpha$ of income is saved and is not available for spending in the current period. $\eta_i(t)$ is a stochastic factor generated by the uncertain market environment; greater the value of income and trade, the larger is the stochastic disturbance to modulate the income. The contribution coming from this market uncertainty depends on the choice of distribution \cite{Metzler_2004}. Since a market consists of both assets and commodities (goods and services consumed), we can decompose income into expenditure on commodities and savings. \par In this article, we are primarily considering two separate markets, asset markets and commodity markets. When we deal with the commodity markets, the monetary asset allocated for consumption expenditure is taken as given, taken from the asset market solution. Our earlier papers \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010} and \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007} dealt with the asset market equilibrium and determined the equilibrium income distribution. In this paper, we take that solution as given and examine the commodity exchange market the same way as we examined the asset market equilibrium. The basic idea of trading of commodities for consumption between agents remains more or less same as in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}: an agent $i$ can spend an amount $y_i$ while being subjected to stochastic effects of trading $\eta_i(t)$ at time $t$. The rate of increase of the agent's ability to spend more money on a commodity will be principally determined by two factors, the (time dependent) maximum consumption expenditure on essential commodities by the entire reference population to which the household belongs, $V(t)$, and total income available for consumption expenditure as derived from the asset market distribution. We are thus assuming a recursive behavior, making a decision on work, income and savings first and then using the income available for consumption to make consumption expenditure decisions. \par What we do now is to integrate the expenditure dynamics, including consumption deprivation, with the income distribution dynamics that is based on an Ito calculus scheme \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}. \subsection{Fokker-Planck Modeling: Results and Discussions} \label{fokker_planck} The above form of the stochastic income-expenditure growth rate above the threshold line $CD_i(y,t)$ leads to the following Fokker-Planck equation \cite{Hanggi_2009} which depicts the time rate of change of the income distribution function {\small \begin{eqnarray} \frac{\partial {\hat f}}{\partial t}(y,t) &=& \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \bigg\{ \bigg[(\alpha+2)y - C(t) - CD(y,t) \bigg] \:{\hat f} + \nonumber \\ &+& y^2\:\frac{\partial {\hat f}}{\partial y}\bigg\} \label{Fokker-Planck} \end{eqnarray} } The coupled dynamics described above, involving the probability density function of income $f(y,t)$ and the consumption deprivation function $\text{CD}(y,t)$, represents the fact that effective trade only ensues when the effective mean income overshoots the actual mean $C(t)$ by a factor of $\text{CD}(y,t)$. In the steady state ${\overline C}(t)=C_0$ and $CD(y) = \frac{V_0 K_0}{K_0+y}$ ($t \to \infty$ limit), which gives us the steady state income distribution: \begin{equation} {\hat f(y)}_{t\rightarrow \infty} \propto \frac{e^{-\frac{(C_0+V_0)}{y}}}{y^{\alpha+2}}\:{\left(1+\frac{K_0}{y}\right)}^{V_0/K_0}, \label{Levi} \end{equation} Here $V_0$ and $K_0$ are the values of $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ for the corresponding year concerned. The proportionality constant can be evaluated from the condition $\displaystyle \int_{y_0}^\infty\:{\hat f(y)}_{t\rightarrow \infty}\:dy =1$. \par The parameter $\alpha$ varies from economy to economy and can be evaluated from data. For our study, we use the Indian data recorded in the Indian National Sample Survey (NSS) \cite{NSS} spanning 43 years (1959-2002) across 25 surveys and sampling about 7 million income data. Only food consumption statistics has been used, that being the modicum of basic life disbursement for the lowest income sectors (destitute). The monthly income/expense data are made available across various income sectors, popularly known as \enquote{expenditure classes}, using which the cumulative distribution function (CDF) was plotted. The CDF led to the probability density function (PDF). For the purpose of this analysis, all data have been {\it deflated} using the consumer price index (CPI) data (also available from www.worldbank.org), the conversion formula being: \begin{equation} \text{Deflated\:\:expenditure}\:=\:\frac{\text{Raw\:\:expenditure\:\:data}}{\text{CPI}}. \label{deflated} \end{equation} The inset shows that the IPDF emerging from our model is also in excellent agreement with the functional form provided in equation (\ref{Levi}). \begin{figure}[htbp!] \centering \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig1.pdf} \caption[CDF]{Plots of the cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) against deflated income for selected years, with inflation independently sourced from the consumer price index (CPI) and renormalized to the 1974 mean income in rupees (64.84 INR). The green line is our theoretical curve, taking $y_i$ as income above a non-zero level below which agents would die of starvation (set at 0.15 in renormalized units). Inset shows the IPDF which is the differential of the CDF, evaluated from the data by interpolation. The points are the real data from NSS, the line is our analytic function for the steady state distribution that fits with the power-law predicted in equation \ref{Levi} with $\alpha=1.6$. \label{fig_cdf}} \end{figure} Eigenvalue analysis shows that this solution is stable against perturbations. As shown in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, equation \ref{Fokker-Planck} can be analytically solved to obtain the full time-dependent solution as a sum of confluent hypergeometric functions $F(a,b,z)$ with time-dependent coefficients: \begin{equation} {\hat f}(y,t) = \sum_{n=0}^{n=\infty}\:\exp(-\omega_n t)\:g_n(y) \end{equation} where $\omega_n=2\pi n$ and \begin{eqnarray} g_n(y) &=& B_1\:{\left ( \frac{c(t)}{y} \right )}^ {\gamma^{(1)}_{-}}\: F(\gamma^{(1)}_{-},\gamma^{(2)}_{-},-\frac{C(t)}{y}) \nonumber \\ &+& B_2\:{\left ( \frac{C(t)}{y} \right )}^ {\gamma^{(1)}_{+}}\: F(\gamma^{(1)}_{+},\gamma^{(2)}_{+},-\frac{c(t)}{y}) \\ \gamma^{(1)}_{\pm}&=&\frac{3+\alpha \pm \sqrt{{(1+\alpha)}^2+4\omega_n}}{2} \\ \gamma^{(2)}_{\pm}&=&1 \pm \sqrt{{(1+\alpha)}^2+4\omega_n} \label{eigenvalue} \end{eqnarray} and $B_1$ and $B_2$ are constants dependent on initial conditions. For the Indian data set used, the adjustable (changing with the economy) parameter $\alpha=1.6$ that confirms fractional Brownian motion for the stochastic model \cite{Metzler_1999}. \section{The Consumption-Deprivation Dynamics} \label{cd_dynamics} In the following, we demonstrate a phenomenological derivation of the \enquote{consumption deprivation} (CD) kinetics of agent $i$ who has income $y$ line at time $t$. This income is still deficient by $CD(y,t)$ in restoring the \enquote{consumption} function back to the saturation level $V(t)$. The question then would be the dynamical \enquote{instability} that may be created due to influx (or outflux) of wealth fraction $\Delta y$ to (or from) agent $i$. Surely, such a change will initiate a competition of two opposing forces of economics: one that will try to \enquote{neutralize} the effects of this spike in deprivation through isotropic homogenization of assets across all wealth states characterized by $y$ and the other that will strive to work against this dialectics by maximizing a \enquote{lateral growth} leading to {\it wealth piling} in nearest income states $y \pm \Delta y$. The first effect can be easily represented by a Laplacian diffusion term (not in money, but in CD) $\nu(t) \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2} CD(y,t)$ ($\nu(t)$: time dependent diffusion constant) while the latter term depends both on the {\it transient poverty} $\text{CD}(y,t)$ itself, together with that of the gradient of the poverty increase $\frac{\partial}{\partial y} \text{CD}(y,t)$ across neighboring wealth sectors $[y-\Delta y,y+\Delta y]$; in other words, on the product $\text{CD}(y,t) \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \text{CD}(y,t)$. This second (reflection) symmetry violating term implies that the poorest people ($y\rightarrow 0$) achieve the fastest poverty reduction, although, such a scheme does not allow for conservation of income as is reasonable. \par Combining both terms respectively representing economic neutralisation around the saturation level $V(t)$ (diffusion dynamics) that is perturbed by a directed economic gradient between neighbouring agents (Burgers' nonlinearity \cite{Burgers_1974}), we arrive at our time dynamical model for consumption deprivation: {\small \begin{eqnarray} && \frac{\partial}{\partial t} CD(y,t) + CD(y,t) \frac{\partial}{\partial y} CD(y,t) = \nu(t) \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2} CD(y,t), \nonumber \\ && \frac{\partial}{\partial t} CD(y,t) = V(t)K(t) \frac{2\nu(t)+ V(t)K(t)}{(K(t)+y)^3} \label{Burgers_new} \end{eqnarray} } The increase (or decrease) in poverty is then simply related to whether $\Phi(t)=2\nu(t) + V(t)K(t)>0$ (or $\Phi(t)<0$ for poverty decrease). \par In order to stipulate a value, or at least a regime, for $\nu(t)$, we need to estimate the stationary state statistics of our dynamical model with that from our previous data based studies \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007,Chattopadhyay_2010}. As simple algebra will suggest, a stationary state solution ($\frac{\partial}{\partial t} CD(y,t)=0$) of our model gives $CD(y,t=t_0) = \frac{-2\nu_0}{K_0 + y}$, where $K_0$ is the value of the parameter $K(t)$ at $t=t_0$. A comparison of this steady-state solution with that from \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007} will further ensure that $\nu_0 = -\frac{V_0 K_0}{2}$, thereby non-equivocally establishing the steady state form of $\nu(t)$. For the time dynamical evolution of the CD function, we will assume a solution that is not too far from the linearly stabilized steady state defined by $\nu_0$, {\it i. e.} $\nu(t)=-\frac{V_0 K_0}{2} + \delta \nu(t)$, ensuring time evolution of the CD-function by maintaining $\Phi(t) \neq 0$, where $\delta \nu(t)$ quantifies the non-equilibrium increment in $\nu(t)$ as a function of time. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9.0cm]{Vplot.pdf} \caption{$V(t)$ versus $t$; $V(t)=-890.5 + 963.69e\exp(-0.0025t)$ for $V(t)>0$. The dots represent real data points while the solid line is the least square fitted trendline through these points between $1960<t<1992$.} \label{fig_Vplot} \end{figure} \end{center} This can be done without any loss of generality since our actual data analysis from \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010} has already ensured that PDF statistics from each yearly data matches with the corresponding steady state solution of the original Fokker-Planck model given in equation (\ref{Fokker-Planck}). The choice of such a hydrodynamic model also ensures the implicit presence of long ranged \enquote{hydrodynamic interactions}' that are believed to be so vital in understanding financial peaks and troughs from agent based modelling studies \cite{Bouchaud_book}. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9.0cm]{Kplot.pdf} \caption{$K(t)$ versus $t$; $K(t)=-579.66+674.66\exp(-0.0048t)$ for $K(t)>0$. The dots represent real data points while the solid line is the least square fitted trendline through these points between $1960<t<1992$.} \label{fig_Kplot} \end{figure} \end{center} In both figures \ref{fig_Vplot} and \ref{fig_Kplot}, the x-axes use \enquote{round numbers} depicting timelines, rather than year numbers; this is to allay the aperiodic nature of data collection over the years. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9.0cm]{Cplot.pdf} \caption{CPI normalized mean income plotted against time. There is a monotonically increasing trend post 1973 (indicated by a marker in the figure), the year all poverty data got standardized, a behavior that is compatible with real expectations. The corresponding least square regression fit is estimated as $C(t)=1.16t-2218.7$ between $1973<t<1992$.} \label{fig_Cplot} \end{figure} \end{center} Using Cole-Hopf transformation \cite{Burgers_1974}, the closed form time dependent solution of the consumption deprivation function for constant parameter values $V_0$ and $K_0$ from equation (\ref{Burgers_new}) can be written as \begin{eqnarray} CD(y,t) &=& -2\nu_0 \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \log \bigg[{(4\pi \nu_0 t)}^{-1/2} \int_{y_0}^{\infty} dy_1 \:e^{-\frac{{(y-y_1)}^2}{4\nu_0 t}} \nonumber \\ &\times& e^{-\frac{1}{2\nu_0} \displaystyle \int_{0}^{y_1} dy_2 \:CD(y_2,0)}\bigg], \label{Cole-Hopf} \end{eqnarray} where $CD(y,0)$ is the initial value of the function $CD(y,t)$. This solution assumes a fixed value of the parameters $V$ and $K$ for any year as its initial condition and then uses that to arrive at CD-values for future times as given in equation (\ref{Cole-Hopf}). At the level of linear stability analysis, this means that one does not even need to have {\it a priori }knowledge of the nature of time dependence of the variables $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ which makes the description properly probabilistic. \section{Results and Discussions} \label{results_and_discussions} Both parameters $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ are known to show strong time variations (as shown in figures 3 and 4); this is a very suggestive trend and needs to be incorporated in all analyses. Figure 5 shows the variation of (CPI normalized) mean income over advancing years. The fast rising mean income in the post 1973 era, as evident from these Indian data, are commensurate with the improving economic situation of the country and is a complementary description to decreasing poverty trends, as could be seen from Figures 3 and 4 respectively. Figure 6 reminds one of the Engel prediction \cite{Engel_1895} that as $y$ increases, the $C(y)/y$ fraction linearly converges to a very low value (data from 1989, as in Figure 1). In the following, we solve the dynamical system of equations (\ref{Fokker-Planck}), (\ref{Burgers_new}) and (\ref{poverty_index}) numerically for the initial value $CD(y_0) = \frac{V_0 K_0}{K_0 + y_0} \approx \frac{73.19 \times 95}{95 + 30} = 55.62$ using nonlinear regression fits from real data ($V(t) = -890.5+963.69 \exp(-0.0025t)$ and $K(t)=-579.66+674.66\exp(-0.0048t)$; $V(t),\:K(t)\:>0$) as shown in figures 3 and 4 to obtain the time series estimate of the poverty (Figure 7). In the limit of destitution ($y\to0$), one can easily see that $C(y)/y(t)\to\dfrac{V(t)}{K(t)}$, that is the budget share of essential commodities. The quantity $V_0/K_0$ (= 0.77) is the budget share of the poor. The proposed formulation of the CD-dynamics thus has far reaching consequences, in that it reconfirms the Engel prediction in the steady state limit \bigg($\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t}$CD = 0\bigg), the fact that $C_{\text{steady state}}(y) =\dfrac{V_0 \:y}{K_0 + y}$, where $V_0$ (=73.19) and $K_0$ (=95) are the fixed point values of $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ respectively. The \enquote{theoretical turnover time} defining the validity of the nonlinear regression fits of $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ are accurate up to about 31.5 rounds, that in year numbers is roughly equal to 2005, as shown in Figure 7. The model is not restricted to these numbers, though, since a running average can be continuously done to stretch the range of validity to whatever timeline is required. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9cm]{ratio.pdf} \caption{A plot of the ratio of the consumption function to the income $C(y)/y$ that is seen to follow a linear decaying trend with $y$ (data as in Figure \ref{fig_consumption}). \label{fig_ratio}} \end{figure} \end{center} \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9.0cm]{burgersy.pdf} \caption{Plots comparing cereal expenditure versus income (all in Indian rupees) data for the year 2004-5 \cite{suryanarayana} (solid circles) with the Engel form fit (solid straight line) and the numerical solution (dots) of equation (\ref{Burgers_new}). \label{fig_burgersy}} \end{figure} \end{center} Figure \ref{fig_Cplot} shows the variation of (CPI normalized) mean income over advancing years. The fast rising mean income in the post 1973 era, as evident from these Indian data, are commensurate with the improving economic situation of the country and is a complementary description to decreasing poverty trends, as could be seen from Figures \ref{fig_Vplot} and \ref{fig_Kplot} respectively. The dotted points in Figure \ref{fig_ratio} are the actual data points that are compared against a regression fit straight line. This linear plot reminds one of the Engel prediction \cite{Engel_1895} which originally explained why food expense related expenditure can only follow a \enquote{monotonically decaying} profile with increasing income. The statistics in Figure \ref{fig_burgersy} complements this description. As a major confirmation of the hypothesis used to track the CD-dynamics, Figure \ref{fig_burgersy} shows a comparison of the actual model data \cite{suryanarayana} (dotted line) for the year 2004-5 with the Engel curve (solid line) hypothesis and thereafter, an income:expenditure analyzed from a solution of equation (\ref{Burgers_new}). The simulation here uses the deterministic limit of equation 2, in that this leads to an average income that can also be calculated from equation (3) using the relation $<y>=\displaystyle \int_{y_0}^{\infty}dy\:y {\hat f}(y,t)$. In this estimation, we have used the functional representation of $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ as shown in Figures 3 and 4. The $y$ shown in this figure is actually this ensemble averaged $<y>$ and the corresponding consumption function is $C(<y>)$; for brevity as also for the sake of our general line of reasoning, we have dropped the curly brackets \enquote{$<>$} in the plot. The quality of Engel's predictions and the strength of our complementary model can be justified both from the fit (solid line against real data circles) as well as from the solution (dotted line) of our proposed model represented in equation (\ref{Burgers_new}). As always, the strength of an assumption can only be proved from the efficacy of its quantitative measurable output, that, in our case, will be the \enquote{poverty index}. Following \cite{Atkinson_2011_1, Atkinson_2011_2, Kumar_1996, Chattopadhyay_2010}, the poverty index $P_{CD}(t)$ is defined as the statistical average of the consumption deprivation function across the entire range of income: \begin{equation} P_{CD}(t) = \int_{y_0}^{\infty} dy\:CD(y,t) \hat f(y,t) \label{poverty_index} \end{equation} where $CD(y,t)$ and $\hat f(y,t)$ will be respectively obtained from equations (\ref{Burgers_new}) and (\ref{Fokker-Planck}). The time varying mean income $C(t)$ present in equation (\ref{Burgers_new}) can be evaluated from the relation $C(t)=\displaystyle \int_{y_0}^{\infty}dy\:y f(y,t)$ which irons out the oscillatory instability that would otherwise crop up in the numerical simulation should the $C(t)=1.16*t-2218.7$ fit function be used instead. \par Remarkably, from our (deflated) NSS data over 23 years, it can be seen from Figs. \ref{fig_Vplot} and \ref{fig_Kplot} that both parameters admit of approximate linear regression fits with time decaying trends. In the post 1973 regime, when all poverty data were renormalized for the first time, the mean income profile too follows an upward linear trend as shown in Fig. \ref{fig_Cplot} that fits well with the decaying linear trends depicted in the $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ regression fits. The legends to these figures show the relevant extrapolation formulae ($V,K>0$, $\forall\:t$). Apart from clearly indicating a (linear) trend in the deflated time series statistics, the starting points (round 6) of both these plots define the initial condition $CD(y,0)$ that is needed to solve equation (\ref{Fokker-Planck}). The progressively diminishing values both for $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ are not so difficult to anticipate, since the It must be noted, though, that such fits are limited to positive definite values of $V$ and $K$ only. As a cross-check of the strength of our theory, we compared our new theoretical poverty index with data from all three indices popularly used in the literature: the head count (HI) index, the poverty gap (PG) index and the squared poverty gap (SPG) index. Additionally, we also compared this with a similar statistics obtained from our previous work (Figure 4 in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}). \begin{center} \begin{figure}[tbp] \includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=9.0cm]{PI14042016.pdf} \caption{Plots of the different poverty indices - head-count-index (HCI; dashed), Poverty Gap (PG; dotdashed) index, Squared Poverty Gap (SPG; dotted) index - against the previous \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010} work ("Without CD-dynamics": solid line) and that against the new CD-dynamics ("With CD-dynamics": diamonds) adjusted estimation. Post 1965, the mean profile of the CD-dynamics modified theoretical index is shown to be in a steady decline across the years. The new theoretical index has also the major advantage of being able to forecast future poverty line statistics based on linear regression fits as depicted in Figures \ref{fig_Vplot} and \ref{fig_Kplot}. The part beyond 1992 shows the prediction made from this theory that can be tested against real data. \label{fig_povI}} \end{figure} \end{center} \par The result (Fig \ref{fig_povI}) shows decent agreement between the new CD-dynamics modified index with all three indices compared to that in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007}, a plot that is represented in Fig \ref{fig_povI} as \enquote{CD-fit theory}. While the new time dynamics adjusted poverty index does not improve the quantitative result compared to the poverty index calculated earlier \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, its strength lies in its probabilistic prediction ability as is demonstrated in the values beyond 1992. An important stabilizing feature of this mechanism is that the evaluation of this new CD-dependent poverty index does not rely on any regression fitting of the time evolution of the mean income of the population. This arguably edges out the occasional hikes (as in 1967) and dips (as in 1988) but at a statistical level, this gives quite reliable estimates of the poverty index for future times. The strong upward trend shown in the mean income variation with time (Fig. \ref{fig_Cplot}) is ingrained in this analysis through the usage of the ensemble averaged definition $C(t)=\displaystyle \int_{y_0}^\infty\:y {\hat f}(y,t)\:dy$ and should be the definition used; this obfuscates the strong oscillations shown in the growth profile of $C(t)$. In our simulations, we considered $y_0=30$ as the CPI adjusted per capita daily income. In order to cross check the veracity of this modified poverty index, we used HCI data from \url{www.worldbank.org} for the years 2005 and 2010, together with relevant CPI values from the Reserve Bank of India (\url{www.rbi.org.in}) for these two years. The relative HCI indices for these two years (37.2\% in 2005 versus 29.8\% in 2010) scale identically as the new model index (2.16 units in 2005 against 1.73 units in 2010) to within 95\% accuracy. Such basic success in probabilistic prediction of the gross qualitative aspects of the poverty index evolution emphasises the need for advancing more accurate models based on more elaborate data analysis that will go beyond the present restrictions through more accurate prediction of the primary agent based Langevin model (\ref{Langevin}) and thereafter integrating the same with the presently espoused consumption deprivation dynamics. The dynamical equation (\ref{Langevin}) also gives some indication of the effect of redistributed income between expenditure classes on overall mean income. Typically we find that such redistribution reduces poverty during the period of application, but suppresses the mean income, such that if the redistribution is removed (or, in the long term, even if it remains) then the poverty may increase again, unless some external agent, such as improved technology, contributes in a still faster rate of increase of the mean income. \section{Conclusions} \label{conclusions} The result demonstrated in Figure 8 shows decent agreement between the new CD-dynamics modified index with the HCI, PG and SPG indices, together with the theoretical index (constrained to data only) previously estimated in \cite{Chattopadhyay_2007}, a plot that is represented in Figure 8 as \enquote{CD-fit theory}. While the new time dynamics adjusted poverty index does not improve the quantitative result compared to the poverty index calculated earlier \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010} and hence is a \enquote{null result} from that context, the uniqueness of this new study is in its ability to predict the future indices. The fact that parameters $V(t)$ and $K(t)$ are now regressively linked to the core dynamics of the poverty evolution, this new model allows for probabilistic future predictions. In order to cross check the veracity of this modified poverty index, we used HCI data from \url{www.worldbank.org} for the years 2005 and 2010, together with relevant CPI values from the Reserve Bank of India (\url{www.rbi.org.in}) for these two years. The relative HCI indices for these two years (37.2\% in 2005 versus 29.8\% in 2010) scale identically as the new model index (2.16 units in 2005 against 1.73 units in 2010) to within 95\% accuracy. At this point, it is worthwhile to remind that since we are rejecting the focus axiom of Sen ({\it i. e.} the poverty line) \cite{Sen_1976}, strictly speaking, there is no point in validating our results with HCI and PGI that depend on that axiom. But as both indices track consumption deprivation, one with a poverty line and the other without (in the traditional poverty economics these indices are referred to as exclusive and inclusive indices), we only check for the direction of trend and not the actual magnitude. Such basic success in probabilistic prediction of the gross qualitative aspects of the poverty index evolution emphasises the need for advancing more accurate models based on more elaborate data analysis that will go beyond the present restrictions through more accurate prediction of the primary agent based Langevin model (\ref{Langevin}) and thereafter integrating the same with the presently espoused consumption deprivation dynamics. The dynamical equation (\ref{Langevin}) also gives some indication of the effect of redistributed income between expenditure classes on overall mean income. Typically we find that such redistribution reduces poverty during the period of application, but suppresses the mean income, such that if the redistribution is removed (or, in the long term, even if it remains) then the poverty may increase again, unless some external agent, such as improved technology, contributes in a still faster rate of increase of the mean income. \par In summary, we have generalized the scopes of our earlier work on alternative and self-consistent poverty index calculations based on mathematical models \cite{Chattopadhyay_2010}, now to include probabilistic measurements of the Inequality Index above the minimum income threshold line. The data used in our analysis were confined to years 1959-1992 but using relatively recent data from years 1993 and 2004, two not-so-close years where the fiscal dynamics are expected to be relatively independent of each other, results obtained from our model compare favorably with the representative HCI indices (\url{www.worldbank.org}) as would be evident from the approximately parallel lines in Figure \ref{fig_povI}. Beyond 1992, though, our model predicts a much slower precipitation of the Poverty Index (PI) compared to the conventional head count index, eventually reaching an effective plateau at around year 2004-5; we take this as a clear signature of a fast stabilizing economy (India in this case) that seems to be justified from analysis of recent data for the year 2004-5 \cite{suryanarayana}. The combination of results from numerical solution of equation (\ref{Burgers_new}) as shown in Figure 7 and the Engel fit form $C(y)=\dfrac{V\:y}{K+y}$ for 2004-5 data \cite{suryanarayana} proves that the corresponding income needed to consume an amount $V/2$ (= 69.5) is matched by a corresponding saturation income of $y=K$ (= 236.94). In other words, our model is robust enough to forecast an effective \enquote{steady state} in the poverty dynamics of the Indian economy at around 2004-5 that shows up as a plateau in the PI time profile. This result is a major improvement over the HCI index based conventional studies which fail to detect this steady state. Such a confirmation demonstrates the strength of this new model based approach; this also emphasizes the need for such alternate poverty measures over the conventional HCI/PG/SPG based poverty evaluation. While in the absence of any dynamic models for the dominant parameters ($V$ and $K$), predictions can never be \enquote{full proof}, the present approach transcends all previous modeling results in the robustness of its prediction accuracy. Our model is based only on cereal consumption. The data capture from the real world data would be hopefully much better if the model is based on a multi-market trade equilibrium using consumption expenditure data on several commodities. Current works are in progress to enhance the scopes of the theoretical model even further by including non-essential foods and non-food grain statistics in a multivariate structure to arrive at an even more robust description of the poverty index. \section{Acknowledgments} \label{acknowledgments} AKC acknowledges partial research support from Royal Society grant number RSO11137. Discussions with G. J. Ackland and Ewa Grela are thankfully acknowledged. TKK acknowledges his debt to the coauthors of his earlier studies on Engel curve based poverty measure, Sitaramam and Gore.
\section{Introduction}\label{intro} We consider the following questions: {\it For a given effective Cartier divisor $D$ on a given projective variety $X$, find the conditions (for $D$ and $X$) such that every holomorphic mapping $f\colon\mathbb C\to X\backslash D$ must be degenerate (i.e. its image is contained some proper subvariety of $X$); If both $D$ and $X$ are defined over a number field $k$, then one also asks when every set of integral points of $X\backslash D$ must be degenerate.} In answering the above questions, the first author introduced (\cite{R4} and \cite{ru}) the notion of the \emph{Nevanlinna constant}, denoted by $\Nev(D)$, and proved that {\it if $\Nev(D)<1$, then every holomorphic mapping $f\colon\mathbb C\to X\backslash D$ must be degenerate, and every set of integral points of $X\backslash D$ must also be degenerate if both $D$ and $X$ are defined over a number field $k$}. Moreover, the quantitative versions of the above results, in the spirit of Nevanlinna--Roth--Cartan--Schmidt, are also obtained. We recall his result in detail here. For notations see Sections \ref{prelim} and \ref{sect_weil}. \begin{definition}[see \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}] \label{def_nevintro} Let $X$ be a normal projective variety, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. The \textbf{Nevanlinna constant} of $D$, denoted $\Nev(D)$, is given by \begin{equation} \Nev(D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;, \end{equation} where the infimum is taken over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N$ is a positive integer, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V\ge2$, and $\mu$ is a positive real number such that, for all $P\in \Supp D$, there exists a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ with \begin{equation} \label{d} \sum_{s\in \mathcal B} \ord_E (s) \ge \mu \ord_E (ND) \end{equation} for all irreducible components $E$ of $D$ passing through $P$. If $\dim H^0(X,\mathscr O(ND))\leq 1$ for all positive integers $N$, we define $\Nev(D)=+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\Nev(D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. \end{definition} \begin{tha} [see \cite{R4}] \label{masterc} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, $$ m_f(r, D) \le_{\operatorname{exc}} \left(\Nev(D)+\epsilon\right) T_{f, D}(r) $$ holds for any holomorphic mapping $f\colon \mathbb C\rightarrow X$ with Zariski-dense image. Here the notation $\le_{\operatorname{exc}}$ means that the inequality holds for all $r\in(0,\infty)$ outside of a set of finite Lebesgue measure. \end{tha} \begin{thb}[see \cite{ru}] \label{mastera} Let $k$ be a number field, and let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$ containing all of the archimedean places. Let $X$ be a projective variety over $k$, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, the inequality $$ m_S(x, D) \leq \left(\Nev(D)+\epsilon\right) h_D(x) $$ holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside a proper Zariski closed subset of $X$. \end{thb} As was shown in \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}, by computing $\Nev(D)$, the above results recover the results of Evertse--Ferretti \cite{ef_festschrift} and of \cite{ru_annals}, as well as derive new results for divisors which are not necessarily linear equivalent on $X$. More importantly, it led to a unified proof (for the known results) by simply computing $\Nev(D)$. In attempting to use the filtration constructed by Autissier in \cite{Aut2} to derive a more general result (see the General Theorem below), as well as in deriving a proof of an example of Faltings \cite{faltings} from the view of $\Nev(D)$, the authors realized that the notion of $\Nev(D)$ is not general enough to serve our purpose. More specifically, as we shall see, the (pointwise) maximum of two or more Weil functions occurs in the proofs, and this is not in general a Weil function. All of these facts motivate the following modified definition. Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ and let $\mathcal B$ be a finite set of global sections of $\mathscr L$. Then we let $(\mathcal B)$ denote the sum of the divisors $(s)$ for all $s\in\mathcal B$: \begin{equation}\label{def_parens_B} (\mathcal B) = \sum_{s\in\mathcal B} (s)\;. \end{equation} \begin{definition}\label{bidef1} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. Then $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;,$$ where the infimum passes over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V>1$, and $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, with the following property. There are finitely many bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu N\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). (Here we use the same convention as in Definition \ref{def_nevintro} when there are no triples $(N,V,\mu)$ that satisfy the condition.) If $L$ is a Cartier divisor or Cartier divisor class on $X$, then we define $\Nevbir(L,D)=\Nevbir(\mathscr O(L),D)$. We also define $\Nevbir(D)=\Nevbir(D,D)$. \end{definition} \begin{remark} Since $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is a birational invariant (Proposition \ref{prop_b_nev}(a)), and since blowing up turns a proper closed subscheme into an effective Cartier divisor, the restriction that $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor is unnecessary. Indeed, we can use the definitions of Silverman \cite{silverman} or Yamanoi \cite[Def.~2.2.1]{yamanoi} to define Weil functions for proper closed subschemes; one may then allow $D$ to be a proper closed subscheme (or a finite linear combination of proper closed subschemes with coefficients in $\mathbb N$, or even in $\mathbb R^+$). \end{remark} With the notation $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$, we modify Theorems A and B as follows: \begin{theorem}\label{b_thmd} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor and $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ with $\dim H^0(X, \mathscr L^N)\ge 1$ for some $N>0$. Let $f\colon\mathbb C\to X$ be a holomorphic mapping with Zariski-dense image. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_eq1} m_f(r, D) \le_{\operatorname{exc}} \left(\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)+\epsilon\right) T_{f, \mathscr L}(r). \end{equation} \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}\label{b_thmc} Let $k$ be a number field, and let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$ containing all archimedean places. Let $X$ be a projective variety over $k$, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ with $\dim H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)\ge 1$ for some $N>0$. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that the inequality \begin{equation} m_S(x, D) \le \left(\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)+\epsilon\right) h_{\mathscr L}(x) \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$. \end{theorem} \begin{corollary} Let $X$ be a projective variety over a number field $k$, and let $D$ be an ample Cartier divisor on $X$. If $\Nevbir(D)<1$ then there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that any set of $D$-integral points on $X$ has only finitely many points outside of $Z$. \end{corollary} We note that while the above definition of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is convenient for use in applications, it involves Weil functions in its definition. As we shall see later, one can actually get rid of the Weil functions in the definition of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ by taking a proper birational lifting. So we propose the second (equivalent) definition $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$. \begin{definition}\label{bidef2} Let $X$ be a complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. If $X$ is normal, then we define $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;,$$ where the infimum passes over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V>1$, and $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, with the following property. There are a variety $Y$ and a proper birational morphism $\phi\colon Y\to X$ such that the following condition holds. For all $Q\in Y$ there is a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation} \phi^{}(\mathcal B) \ge \mu N\phi^{}D \end{equation} in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. If there are no such triples $(N,V,\mu)$, then $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined to be $+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. \end{definition} Note that a \emph{birational morphism} from $X$ to $Y$ is a morphism $X\to Y$ that has an inverse as a rational map; in other words, it is a birational map $X\dashrightarrow Y$ that is regular everywhere on $X$. One of the goals of this paper is to prove that these two definitions (Definitions \ref{bidef1} and \ref{bidef2}) are equivalent. Another goal of this paper is to use Theorems \ref{b_thmc} and \ref{b_thmd}, together with the filtration constructed by Autissier in \cite{Aut2}, to prove the following two General Theorems (in the arithmetic and analytic cases). Throughout this section, we use $h^0(\mathscr L)$ to denote $\dim H^0(X, \mathscr L)$ for a line sheaf $\mathscr L$ on $X$, $h^0(D)$ to denote $\dim H^0(X, \mathscr O(D))$ for an effective divisor $D$ on $X$, and $H^0(X, \mathscr L(-D))$ to denote $H^0(X, \mathscr L\otimes \mathscr O(-D))$. \begin{definition}\label{def_aut_lambda} Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf and $D$ be a nonzero effective Cartier divisor on a complete variety $X$. We define \begin{equation} \gamma(\mathscr L, D) = \inf_N {Nh^0(\mathscr L^N)\over \sum_{m\ge 1}h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD))}, \end{equation} where $N$ passes over all positive integers such that $h^0(\mathscr L^N(-D))\ne0$. (Note that $\|\mathscr L^N\|$ does not have to be base point free). If $h^0(\mathscr L^N(-D))=0$ for all $N$, then we set $ \gamma(\mathscr L, D)=+\infty$. \end{definition} \begin{thm} [Arithmetic Part] \label{Ga} Let $X$ be a projective variety over a number field $k$, and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors intersecting properly on $X$. Let $D=D_1+\dots+D_q$. Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ with $h^0(\mathscr L^N)\ge 1$ for $N$ big enough. Let $S\subset M_k$ be a finite set of places. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, $$ m_S(x, D) \leq \left(\max_{1\leq j \leq q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+\epsilon\right) h_{\mathscr L}(x),$$ holds for all $k$-rational points outside a proper Zariski closed subset of $X$. \end{thm} \begin{thm}[Analytic Part] \label{Gb} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors intersecting properly on $X$. Let $D=D_1+\dots+D_q$. Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ with $h^0(\mathscr L^N)\ge 1$ for $N$ big enough. Let $f: \mathbb C \rightarrow X$ be an algebraically non-degenerate holomorphic map. Then, for every $\epsilon > 0$, $$m_f(r, D) \le_{\operatorname{exc}} \left(\max_{1\leq j \leq q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+\epsilon\right)T_{f, \mathscr L}(r). $$ \end{thm} Write $\gamma(D_j): =\gamma(\mathscr O(D), D_j)$ with $D:=D_1+\cdots+D_q$. To compute $\gamma(D_j)$, we consider $D_1, \dots, D_q$ which are effective Cartier divisors on $X$ in general position, such that each $D_j$ is linearly equivalent to a fixed ample divisor $A$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem, with $n=\dim X$, $$h^0(ND) = h^0(qNA)={(qN)^n A^n\over n!} + o(N^n)$$ and $$h^0(ND-mD_j) = h^0((qN-m)A)={(qN-m)^n A^n\over n!} + o(N^n).$$ Thus $$\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(ND-mD_j) ={A^n\over n!}\sum_{l= 0}^{qN-1} l^n+o(N^{n+1}) ={A^n(qN-1)^{n+1}\over (n+1)!} + o(N^{n+1}).$$ Hence $$\gamma(D_j)=\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty} {N{(qN)^n A^n\over n!}+ o(N^{n+1})\over {A^n(qN-1)^{n+1}\over (n+1)!} +o(N^{n+1})}={n+1\over q}.$$ Therefore, the General Theorems imply the following results of Evertse--Ferretti in the case when $X$ is Cohen--Macaulay (for example $X$ is smooth) as well as the result of Ru. \begin{thc} [Evertse--Ferretti \cite{ef_festschrift}] Let $X$ be a projective variety over a number field $k$, and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective divisors on $X$ in general position. Let $S\subset M_k$ be a finite set of places. Assume that there exist an ample divisor $A$ on $X$ and positive integers $d_i$ such that $D_i$ is linearly equivalent to $d_i A$ for $i=1, \dots, q$. Then, for every $\epsilon >0$, $$\sum_{i=1}^q {1\over d_i} m_S(x, D_i) \leq (\dim X+1+\epsilon) h_A(x)$$ holds for all $k$-rational points outside a proper Zariski closed subset of $X$. \end{thc} \begin{thd}[\cite{ru_annals}] Let $X$ be a smooth complex projective variety and $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective divisors on $X$, located in general position. Suppose that there exists an ample divisor $A$ on $X$ and positive integers $d_i$ such that $D_i$ is linearly equivalent to $d_i A$ on $X$ for $i=1, \dots, q$. Let $f: \mathbb C \rightarrow X$ be an algebraically non-degenerate holomorphic map. Then, for every $\epsilon > 0$, $$ \sum_{i=1}^q {1\over d_i} m_f(r, D_i) \le_{\operatorname{exc}} (\dim X+1+\epsilon)T_{f,A}(r).$$ \end{thd} More computations of $\gamma(D_i)$ and consequences of the General Theorems will be given later. It is important to note that our General Theorem can be proved without using the notion of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$ (and thus not using Theorem \ref{b_thmc} and Theorem \ref{b_thmd}) by, instead, applying the Schmidt's subspace theorem and H. Cartan's theorem directly (see the proof below). More importantly our proof greatly simplifies the original proof of Evertse--Ferretti and of Ru, where the Chow and Hilbert weights are involved. Our paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{prelim}, we introduce notations and preliminaries. In Section \ref{sect_weil}, we review the definition and properties of Weil functions. In Section \ref{sect_aut}, we give a proof of our General Theorem as well as discuss its application in the case when $D=D_1+\cdots +D_q$ has equi-degree. Sections \ref{sect_nevbir} and \ref{models} are devoted to proving that the two definitions of $\Nevbir(D)$ given in this section are equivalent. Section \ref{proofs} gives a proof of the main theorems involving $\Nevbir(D)$. Finally, in Sections \ref{falt_geom} and \ref{falt_finis}, we revisit the example of Faltings \cite{faltings}, since its proof gave the original motivation for our modified Nevanlinna constant. We will primarily discuss the number field cases of our results here. The corresponding results in Nevanlinna theory can be proved by similar methods, as can the diophantine results over function fields of characteristic zero. \section{Notation and Preliminaries}\label{prelim} In this paper, $\mathbb N=\{0,1,2,\dots\}$ and $\mathbb R^+$ is the interval $\sq(0,\infty)$. \subsection{Notation and conventions in number theory} For a number field $k$, recall that $M_k$ denotes the set of places of $k$, and that $k_\upsilon$ denotes the completion of $k$ at a place $\upsilon\in M_k$. Norms $\\|\cdot\\|_\upsilon$ on $k$ are normalized so that $$\\|x\\|_\upsilon = \|\sigma(x)\|^{[k_\upsilon:\mathbb R]} \qquad\text{or}\qquad \\|p\\|_\upsilon = p^{-[k_\upsilon:\mathbb Q_p]}$$ if $\upsilon\in M_k$ is an archimedean place corresponding to an embedding $\sigma\colon k\hookrightarrow\mathbb C$ or a non-archimedean place lying over a rational prime $p$, respectively. Heights are logarithmic and relative to the number field used as a base field, which is always denoted by $k$. For example, if $P$ is a point on $\mathbb P^n_k$ with homogeneous coordiantes $[x_0:\dots:x_n]$ in $k$, then $$h(P) = h_{\mathscr O(1)}(P) = \sum_{\upsilon\in M_k} \log\max\{\\|x_0\\|_\upsilon,\dots,\\|x_n\\|_\upsilon\} \;.$$ We use the standard notations of Nevanlinna theory and Diophantine approximation (see, for example, \cite{vojta_cm}, \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}). \subsection{Notation in algebraic geometry} A \emph{variety} over a field $k$ is an integral scheme, separated and of finite type over $\Spec k$. A morphism of varieties is a morphism of schemes over $k$. A \emph{line sheaf} is a locally free sheaf of rank $1$ (an invertible sheaf). If $\mathscr L$ is a line sheaf on a variety $X$, then $\mathscr L^n$ denotes the $n^{\text{th}}$ tensor power $\mathscr L^{\otimes n}$, and if $D$ is a Cartier divisor on $X$, then $\mathscr L(D)$ denotes $\mathscr L\otimes\mathscr O(D)$. \begin{definition}\label{def_int_properly} Let $D_1,\dots,D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors on a variety $X$ of dimension $n$. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] We say that $D_1,\dots,D_q$ lie in \textbf{general position} if for any $I\subseteq \{1,\dots,q\}$, we have $\dim (\bigcap_{i\in I} \Supp D_i)=n-\#I$ if $\#I\le n$, and $\bigcap_{i\in I} \Supp D_i=\emptyset$ if $\#I>n$. \item[(b).] We say that $D_1,\dots,D_q$ \textbf{intersect properly} if for any subset $I\subseteq \{1, \dots, q\}$ and any $x\in \bigcap_{i\in I} \Supp D_i$, the sequence $(\phi_i)_{i\in I}$ is a regular sequence in the local ring ${\mathscr O}_{X,x}$, where $\phi_i$ are the local defining functions of $D_i$, $1 \leq i \leq q$. \end{enumerate} \end{definition} \begin{remark}\label{properint} By Matsumura \cite[Thm.~17.4]{mat}, if $D_1,\dots,D_q$ intersect properly, then they lie in general position. The converse holds if $X$ is Cohen--Macaulay (this is true if $X$ is nonsingular). \end{remark} \subsection{Theorems of Schmidt and Cartan} Schmidt's Subspace Theorem and the corresponding theorem of Cartan play a central role in this paper. This subsection recalls the specific variants of these theorems to be used in this paper. We start with some notation, starting with the number field case. Let $k$ be a number field, and let $H$ be a hyperplane in $\mathbb P^n_k$. Let $a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n$ be a linear form with $a_0,\dots,a_n\in k$ whose vanishing determines the hyperplane $H$. Then, for all $v\in M_k$ and all rational points $P\in\mathbb P^n_k(k)$ with homogeneous coordinates $[x_0:\dots:x_n]$, we let $$\lambda_{H,v}(P) = -\log\frac{\\|a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n\\|_\upsilon} {\max\{\\|a_0\\|_\upsilon,\dots,\\|a_n\\|_\upsilon\} \cdot\max\{\\|x_0\\|_\upsilon,\dots,\\|x_n\\|_\upsilon\}}\;.$$ This quantity is independent of the choice of homogeneous coordinates for $P$, and also does not depend on the linear form $a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n$ chosen above. Then Schmidt's Subspace theorem is as follows (see \cite[Thm.~2.8]{ru}, for example). \begin{theorem}\label{schmidt} Let $k$ be a number field, let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$ containing all archimedean places, let $n$ be a positive integer, let $H_1,\dots,H_q$ be hyperplanes in $\mathbb P^n_k$, let $\epsilon>0$, and let $c\in\mathbb R$. Then there is a finite union $Z$ of proper linear subspace of $\mathbb P^n_k$, depending only on $k$, $S$, $n$, $H_1,\dots,H_q$, $\epsilon$, and $c$, such that the inequality $$\sum_{\upsilon\in S}\max_J\sum_{j\in J}\lambda_{H_j,\upsilon}(x) \le (n+1+\epsilon)h(x) + c$$ holds for all $x\in(\mathbb P^n_k\setminus Z)(k)$. Here the set $J$ ranges over all subsets of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ such that the hyperplanes $(H_j)_{j\in J}$ lie in general position. \end{theorem} The corresponding theorem for approximation to hyperplanes by holomorphic curves is due to Cartan \cite{cartan}. Again, we first need a definition. Let $H$ be a hyperplane in $\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$, and let $a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n$ be a linear form whose vanishing determines $H$. Then, for all $P\in\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$, choose homogeneous coordinates $[x_0:\dots:x_n]$ for $P$, and let $$\lambda_H(P) = -\frac12\log\frac{\|a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n\|^2} {(\|a_0\|^2+\dots+\|a_n\|^2)(\|x_0\|^2+\dots+\|x_n\|^2)}\;.$$ Again, this does not depend on the choice of the form $a_0x_0+\dots+a_nx_n$ or on the choice of homogeneous coordinates $[x_0:\dots:x_n]$. Then the theorem of Cartan to be used here is as follows (see \cite{R4}, for example). \begin{theorem}\label{cartan} Let $n$ be a positive integer, let $H_1,\dots,H_q$ be hyperplanes in $\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$, and let $f\colon\mathbb C\to \mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$ be a holomorphic curve whose image is not contained in a hyperplane. Then, for any $\epsilon>0$, $$\int_0^{2\pi} \max_J \sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{H_j}(f(re^{i\theta}))\,\frac{d\theta}{2\pi} \le_{\operatorname{exc}} (n+1+\epsilon)T_f(r),$$ where $J$ varies over the same collection of sets as in Theorem \ref{schmidt}, and where the notation $\le_{\operatorname{exc}}$ means that the inequality holds for all $r\in(0,\infty)$ outside of a set of finite Lebesgue measure. \end{theorem} \begin{remark}\label{remk_schmidt_cartan} In the above two theorems, there is a finite union $Z_1$ of proper linear subspaces of $\mathbb P^n_k$ or $\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$ (in Theorems \ref{schmidt} and \ref{cartan}, respectively), depending only on the hyperplanes $H_1,\dots,H_q$, with the following properties. In Theorem \ref{schmidt}, the subset $Z$ may be taken to be the union of $Z_1$ and a finite union of points, and in Theorem \ref{cartan}, the condition on the holomorphic curve $f$ may be relaxed to allow any nonconstant holomorphic map $f\colon\mathbb C\to\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$ whose image is not contained in $Z_1$. See \cite{vojta_aj} and \cite{vojta_smt_ajm_1997}, respectively. \end{remark} \begin{remark} Since the functions $\lambda_{H,\upsilon}$ are bounded from below, we may assume in Theorems \ref{schmidt} and \ref{cartan} that $\bigcap H_i=\emptyset$ (include more hyperplanes). Then, in each of these theorems, we may also require that all of the sets $J$ have $n+1$ elements. \end{remark} When working with the methods of Corvaja, Zannier, Evertse, Ferretti, Autissier, and the first author, it is useful to phrase Theorems \ref{schmidt} and \ref{cartan} in terms of divisors in a linear system. This leads to Theorems \ref{schmidt_base} and \ref{cartan_base}, below. (In this paper, they are used to prove the General Theorems of Section \ref{sect_aut}, and to prove Proposition \ref{b_thmc_prop21}.) Theorems \ref{schmidt_base} and \ref{cartan_base} use the notion of Weil functions (the functions $\lambda_H$ above are examples of Weil functions). The reader not already familiar with these functions is encouraged to refer to Section \ref{sect_weil} or to the references contained therein for more information. \begin{theorem}\label{schmidt_base} Let $k$ be a number field, let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$ containing all archimedean places, let $X$ be a complete variety over $k$, let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$, let $V$ be a nonzero linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr O(D))$, let $s_1,\dots,s_q$ be nonzero elements of $V$, let $\epsilon>0$, and let $c\in\mathbb R$. For each $i=1,\dots,q$, let $D_j$ be the Cartier divisor $(s_j)$, and let $\lambda_{D_j}$ be a Weil function for $D_j$. Then there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$, depending only on $k$, $S$, $X$, $L$, $V$, $s_1,\dots,s_q$, $\epsilon$, $c$, and the choices of Weil and height functions, such that the inequality \begin{equation}\label{ineq_schmidt_base} \sum_{\upsilon\in S}\max_J\sum_{j\in J}\lambda_{D_j,\upsilon}(x) \le (\dim V+\epsilon)h_D(x) + c \end{equation} holds for all $x\in(X\setminus Z)(k)$. Here the set $J$ ranges over all subsets of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ such that the sections $(s_j)_{j\in J}$ are linearly independent. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $d=\dim V$. We may assume that $d>1$ (otherwise, all $D_j$ are the same divisor, and the sets $J$ have at most one element each, so (\ref{ineq_schmidt_base}) follows immediately from (the number theory version of) the First Main Theorem). Let $\Phi\colon X\dashrightarrow\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$ be the rational map associated to the linear system $V$. Let $X'$ be the closure of the graph of $\Phi$, and let $p\colon X'\to X$ and $\phi\colon X'\to\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$ be the projection morphisms. Note that, even though $\Phi$ extends to the morphism $\phi\colon X'\to\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$, the linear system of $H^0(X',p^{}\mathscr O(D))$ corresponding to $V$ may still have base points. What is true, however, is that there is an effective Cartier divisor $B$ on $X'$ such that, for each nonzero $s\in V$, there is a hyperplane $H$ in $\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$ such that $p^{}(s)-B=\phi^{}H$. (More precisely, $\phi^{}\mathscr O(1)\cong\mathscr O(p^{}D-B)$. The map $$\alpha\colon H^0(X',\mathscr O(p^{}D-B)) \to H^0(X,\mathscr O(p^{}D))$$ defined by tensoring with the canonical global section $1_B$ of $\mathscr O(B)$ is injective, and its image contains $p^{}(V)$. The preimage $\alpha^{-1}(p^{}(V))$ corresponds to a base-point-free linear system for the divisor $p^{}D-B$.) For each $j=1,\dots,q$ let $H_j$ be the hyperplane in $\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$ for which $p^{}(s_j)-B=\phi^{}H_j$. Choose a Weil function $\lambda_B$ for $B$. Then, for all $\upsilon\in S$ and all $j=1,\dots,q$, we have $$p^{}\lambda_{D_j,\upsilon} = \phi^{}\lambda_{H_j,\upsilon} + \lambda_{B,\upsilon} + O(1)\;.$$ Therefore it will suffice to prove that for any $c'\in\mathbb R$ the inequality \begin{equation}\label{eq_schmidt_base_1} \sum_{\upsilon\in S}\max_J\sum_{j\in J} (\lambda_{H_j,\upsilon}(\phi(x))+\lambda_{B,\upsilon}(x)) \le (\dim V+\epsilon)h_D(p(x)) + c' \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X'(k)$ outside of some proper Zariski-closed subset $Z'$ of $X'$. Indeed, for suitable $c'$ this will imply (\ref{ineq_schmidt_base}) outside of $Z:=p(Z'\cup\Supp B)$. The set $Z$ is Zariski-closed in $X$ because $p\colon X'\to X$ is a proper morphism, and $Z\ne X$ because $p$ is birational. For any subset $J$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$, the sections $s_j$, $j\in J$ are linearly independent elements of $V$ if and only if the hyperplanes $H_j$, $j\in J$ lie in general position in $\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$. Therefore we may apply Theorem \ref{schmidt}, to obtain that for any $c''$ the inequality \begin{equation}\label{eq_schmidt_base_2} \sum_{\upsilon\in S}\max_J\sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{H_j,\upsilon}(\phi(x))(x) \le (\dim V+\epsilon)h(\phi(x)) + c'' \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X'(k)$ for which $\phi(x)$ does not lie in a finite union $Z''$ of proper linear subspaces of $\mathbb P^{d-1}_k$. Here $Z''$ depends on $k$, $S$, $d$, $H_1,\dots,H_q$, $\epsilon$, and $c''$, but not on $x$. Since each set $J$ as above has at most $\dim V$ elements and $B$ is effective, we have $$(\#J)\lambda_{B,\upsilon}(x) \le (\dim V)\lambda_{B,\upsilon}(x) + O(1)$$ for all $x\in X'(k)$. Therefore, (\ref{eq_schmidt_base_2}) implies (\ref{eq_schmidt_base_1}) for all $x\in X'(k)$ outside of $Z':=\phi^{-1}(Z'')$. Since the coordinates of $\phi$ are associated to linearly independent elements of $p^{}(V)$, the (closed) set $Z'$ is not all of $X'$. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{cartan_base} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety, let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$, let $V$ be a nonzero linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr O(D))$, and let $s_1,\dots,s_q$ be nonzero elements of $V$. For each $i=1,\dots,q$, let $D_j$ be the Cartier divisor $(s_j)$, and let $\lambda_{D_j}$ be a Weil function for $D_j$. Let $f\colon\mathbb C\to X$ be a holomorphic map with Zariski-dense image. Then, for any $\epsilon>0$, $$ \int_0^{2\pi} \max_J\sum_{j\in J}\lambda_{D_j}(f(re^{i\theta})) \le_{\operatorname{exc}} (\dim V)T_{f,D}(r) + O(\log^{+} T_{f,D}(r)) + o(\log r)\;. $$ Here the set $J$ ranges over all subsets of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ such that the sections $(s_j)_{j\in J}$ are linearly independent. \end{theorem} The proof of this theorem is very similar to the proof of Theorem \ref{schmidt_base}, and is omitted. \begin{remark} In Theorems \ref{schmidt_base} and \ref{cartan_base}, if the rational map $X\dashrightarrow\mathbb P^{d-1}$ is generically finite, then there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z_1$ of $X$, depending only on $D$, $V$, and $s_1,\dots,s_q$, with the following properties. In Theorem \ref{schmidt_base}, the subset $Z$ may be taken to be the union of $Z_1$ and a finite union of points, and in Theorem \ref{cartan_base}, the condition on the holomorphic curve $f$ may be relaxed to allow any nonconstant holomorphic map $f\colon\mathbb C\to\mathbb P^n_{\mathbb C}$ whose image is not contained in $Z_1$. Indeed, in the notation of the proof of Theorem \ref{schmidt_base}, we may take $Z_1=p(\phi^{-1}(Z_1')\cup Z_2\cup\Supp B)$, where $Z_1'\subseteq\mathbb P^{d-1}$ is the closed subset of Remark \ref{remk_schmidt_cartan} and $Z_2$ is the subset of $X'$ where $\phi$ is not finite. \end{remark} \begin{remark} In Theorems \ref{schmidt_base} and \ref{cartan_base}, we may assume (by shrinking $V$ or using more sections) that $s_1,\dots,s_q$ span $V$. Under this assumption, we may instead take the maximum over all sets $J$ such that $(s_j)_{j\in J}$ is a basis of $V$. \end{remark} \section{Weil Functions}\label{sect_weil} Let $X$ be a variety over $\mathbb C$, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $s=1_D$ be a canonical section of $\mathscr O(D)$ (i.e., a global section for which $(s)=D$). Choose a smooth metric $\|\cdot\|$ on $\mathscr O(D)$. In Nevanlinna theory, one often encounters the function \begin{equation}\label{eq_weil_intro} \lambda_D(x) := -\log\|s(x)\|\;; \end{equation} this is a real-valued function on $X(\mathbb C)\setminus\Supp D$. It is linear in $D$ (over a suitable domain), so by linearity and continuity it can be extended to a definition of $\lambda_D$ for a general Cartier divisor $D$ on $X$. Weil functions are counterparts to such functions in number theory. In number theory, however, the situation is more complicated because a number field has infinitely many inequivalent absolute values, and because $\overline k_v$ is not locally compact unless $v$ is archimedean. One often needs to sum over all absolute values of $k$, so an inequality that is true up to $O(1)$ in Nevanlinna theory needs to be true up to a constant that vanishes for almost all (all but finitely many) $v$ in number theory. Giving a full definition of Weil functions is beyond the scope of this paper; see Lang \cite[Ch.~10]{lang} for a full treatment of Weil functions, or the second author \cite[Sect.~8]{vojta_cm} for a brief treatment with a few more details than are given here. \medskip \emph{Throughout this section, $k$ is a number field, and varieties and morphisms are implicitly taken to be over $k$.} \medskip \begin{definition} Let $X$ be a variety. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] The set $X(M_k)$ is defined as $$X(M_k) = \coprod_{v\in M_k} X(\overline k_v)\;.$$ Here $k_v$ is the completion of $k$ at a place $v$, and $\overline k_v$ is an algebraic closure of $k_v$. By abuse of notation, if $Z$ is a subset of $X$, then we write $X(M_k)\setminus Z$ to mean $(X\setminus Z)(M_k)$. The topology on $X(\overline k_v)$ is the topology determined by the (unique) extension of $v$ to $\overline k_v$. A subset of $X(M_k)$ is open if and only if its intersection with $X(\overline k_v)$ is open for all $v\in M_k$. \item[(b).] An \textbf{$M_k$-constant} is a collection $c=(c_v)_{v\in M_k}$ of real numbers such that $c_v=0$ for almost all $v$. \item[(c).] Let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$. A \textbf{Weil function} for $D$ is a function $\lambda_D\colon X(M_k)\setminus\Supp D\to\mathbb R$ that satisfies the following condition. For each Zariski-open subset $U$ of $X$ and each function $f\in K(X)^{}$ such that the divisors $D$ and $(f)$ coincide on $U$, there is a continuous locally $M_k$-bounded function $\alpha\colon U(M_k)\to\mathbb R$ such that \begin{equation}\label{weil_def_eq} \lambda_D(x) = -\log\\|f(x)\\|_v + \alpha(x) \end{equation} for all $v\in M_k$ and all $x\in U(\overline k_v)\setminus\Supp D$. \item[(d).] Let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $v$ be a place of $k$. A \textbf{local Weil function} for $D$ at $v$ is a function $\lambda_{D,v}\colon X(\overline k_v)\setminus\Supp D\to\mathbb R$ that satisfies the following condition. For each Zariski-open subset $U$ of $X$ and each function $f\in K(X)^{}$ such that the divisors $D$ and $(f)$ coincide on $U$, there is a locally bounded continuous function $\alpha\colon U(\overline k_v)\to\mathbb R$ such that $$ \lambda_{D,v}(x) = -\log \\|f(x)\\|_v + \alpha(x) $$ for all $x\in U(\overline k_v)\setminus\Supp D$. (Local Weil functions are also called \emph{local heights.}) \end{enumerate} \end{definition} For the definition of locally $M_k$-bounded function, see Lang \cite[Ch.~10, Sect.~1]{lang}. The details of this definition are not really necessary for this paper, though. For this paper, it is enough to know that if $\alpha\colon U(M_k)\to\mathbb R$ is a locally $M_k$-bounded function, then its restriction to $U(\overline k_v)$ for any $v$ is locally bounded and continuous. Conversely, any locally bounded continuous function $U(\overline k_v)\to\mathbb R$ extends to a locally $M_k$-bounded function on $U(M_k)$. Because of this, if $D$ is a Cartier divisor on a variety $X$, if $\lambda_D$ is a Weil function for $D$, and if $v$ is a place of $k$, then $\lambda_{D,v}:=\lambda_D\big\|_{X(\overline k_v)\setminus\Supp D}$ is a local Weil function for $D$ at $v$. Conversely, given any finite collection $S$ of places of $k$ and local Weil functions for $D$ at all $v\in S$, there is a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$ such that $\lambda_{D,v}$ coincides with the given local Weil functions at all $v\in S$. In this paper, we will only use local Weil functions at finitely many places, so (global) Weil functions are not strictly speaking necessary here. They are only used because using local Weil functions would lead to the question of whether the condition depends on the choice of place of $k$. (Perhaps we could have defined a \emph{semilocal Weil function} to be a collection of local Weil functions at finitely many places $v$. One could replace global Weil functions throughout this paper with such semilocal Weil functions without any loss of rigor.) Given a complete variety $X$ and a Cartier divisor $D$ on $X$, there exists a Weil function for $D$. For a proof when $X$ is projective, see \cite[Ch.~10, Thm.~3.5]{lang}. The proof in the general case is sketched in \cite[Thm.~8.7]{vojta_cm}. Existence of local Weil functions is much easier. For local Weil functions at an archimedean place $v$, we have $\overline k_v=\mathbb C$, so the method of (\ref{eq_weil_intro}) works. If $v$ is non-archimedean, then one can make similar constructions using the notion of $v$-adically metrized line sheaf due to S. Zhang \cite[Appendix]{zhang_jams}. Or, see the sketched proof in \cite[Thm.~8.7]{vojta_cm}. By \cite[Ch.~10, Lemma~1.4]{lang}, if $U$ is a nonempty open subset of $X$, then $U(M_k)$ is dense in $X(M_k)$ and $U(\overline k_v)$ is dense in $X(\overline k_v)$ for all $v$. (Lang works with $\overline k$ instead of $\overline k_v$, but the proofs are the same.) Therefore, if $D$ is a Cartier divisor on a variety $X$, and if $U$ is any nonempty subset of $X$ disjoint from $\Supp D$, any function $\lambda\colon U(M_k)\to\mathbb R$ that satisfies (\ref{weil_def_eq}) extends uniquely to a Weil function for $D$. This fact will be used frequently without specific mention. If $D$ is an effective divisor, then a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$ may be extended to a function $\lambda_D\colon X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$. \begin{proposition}\label{weil_props} Weil functions have the following properties. Let $X$ be a variety. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] \textbf{Additivity.} If $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are Weil functions for Cartier divisors $D_1$ and $D_2$ on $X$, respectively, then $\lambda_1+\lambda_2$ extends uniquely to a Weil function for $D_1+D_2$. \item[(b).] \textbf{Functoriality.} If $\lambda$ is a Weil function for a Cartier divisor $D$ on $X$, and if $f\colon Y\to X$ is a morphism of $k$-varieties such that $f(Y)\nsubseteq\Supp D$, then $x\mapsto\lambda(f(x))$ is a Weil function for the Cartier divisor $f^{}D$ on $Y$. \item[(c).] \textbf{Normalization.} If $X=\mathbb P^n_k$, and if $D$ is the hyperplane at infinity, then the function $$ \lambda_{D,v}([x_0:\dots:x_n]) := -\log\frac{\\|x_0\\|_v}{\max\{\\|x_0\\|_v,\dots,\\|x_n\\|_v\}} $$ is a Weil function for $D$. For the definition of $\\|\cdot\\|_v$, see \cite[Sect.~1]{vojta_cm} \end{enumerate} Local Weil functions (at a given place $v$) also have these properties. \end{proposition} For proofs of these properties, see Lang \cite[Ch.~10]{lang}. Next we show which Weil functions correspond to effective Cartier divisors (in more generality than will be needed here), and use that result to derive a uniqueness result (Corollary \ref{weil_uniq}). \begin{remark}\label{remk_eff} On a normal variety, the Cartier divisors are exactly the locally principal Weil divisors \cite[II~6.11.2]{Hartshorne}, and a Cartier divisor is effective as a Cartier divisor if and only if it is effective as a Weil divisor \cite[II~6.3A]{Hartshorne}. \end{remark} \begin{proposition}\label{weil_eff} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\lambda_D$ be a Weil function for $D$. Then the following conditions are equivalent. \begin{enumerate} \item $D$ is effective. \item $\lambda_D$ is bounded from below by an $M_k$-constant. \item for all $v\in M_k$, $\lambda_{D,v}$ is bounded from below. \item there exists a $v\in M_k$ such that $\lambda_{D,v}$ is bounded from below. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} For the implication (i)$\implies$(ii), see \cite[Ch.~10, Prop.~3.1]{lang}. The implications (ii)$\implies$(iii)$\implies$(iv) are trivial. To show that (iv)$\implies$(i), assume that $D$ is not effective. By Remark \ref{remk_eff}, $D$ (as a Weil divisor) has at least one component with negative multiplicity. Fix a closed point $x\in X$ that lies on that prime divisor, but not on any other irreducible component of $\Supp D$, and let $U$ be a Zariski-open neighborhood of $x$. Take a sequence $(x_n)$ of points in $U(\overline k_v)\setminus\Supp D$ that converges to $x$ in the $v$-topology. Then the sequence $\lambda_{D,v}(x_n)$ goes to $-\infty$; thus $\lambda_{D,v}$ is not bounded from below. \end{proof} \begin{corollary}\label{weil_uniq} Let $X$ be a complete variety (not necessarily normal), let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be Weil functions for $D$. Then there are $M_k$-constants $c$ and $c'$ such that $$-c \le \lambda_1-\lambda_2 \le c'\;.$$ \end{corollary} \begin{proof} By Proposition \ref{weil_props}a we may assume that $D=0$ and $\lambda_2=0$. The corollary is then immediate from Proposition \ref{weil_eff} and Proposition \ref{weil_props}b (pull back to the normalization). \end{proof} The following proposition is useful for constructing Weil functions via the ``min-max'' method. It will also be used later in this paper. \begin{proposition}\label{weil_min} Let $X$ be a variety; let $D_1,\dots,D_n$ and $D$ be Cartier divisors on $X$; and let $\lambda_{D_1},\dots,\lambda_{D_n}$ be Weil functions for $D_1,\dots,D_n$, respectively. Assume that $D_i-D$ is effective for all $i$, and that $$\bigcap_{i=1}^n \Supp(D_i-D) = \emptyset\;.$$ Then the function $$\lambda_D := \min\{\lambda_{D_i}:i=1,\dots,n\}$$ is a Weil function for the divisor $D$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} See Lang \cite[Ch.~10, Prop.~3.2]{lang}. \end{proof} A slightly more general statement will be used to rephrase Definition \ref{bidef2}. \begin{lemma}\label{weil_max_fancy} Let $X$ be a projective variety, and let $U_1,\dots,U_n$ be Zariski-open subsets of $X$ that cover $X$. Let $D_1,\dots,D_n$ be Cartier divisors on $X$ such that $D_i\big\|_{U_i}$ is effective for all $i$, and let $\lambda_{D_i}$ be Weil functions for $D_i$ for all $i$. Then there is an $M_k$-constant $\gamma=(\gamma_v)$ such that, for all $v$ and all $x\in X(\overline k_v)$ there is an $i$ such that $x\in U_i$ and $\lambda_{D_i,v}(x)\ge \gamma_v$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By taking a finite refinement of $\{U_i\}$, we may assume that each $U_i$ is affine, and that $D_i\big\|_{U_i}=(f_i)$ for some nonzero $f_i\in\mathscr O(U_i)$ for all $i$. Then $\lambda_{D_i}$ is locally $M_k$-bounded from below on $U_i(M_k)$ for all $i$. Indeed, by \cite[Ch.~10, Prop.~1.3]{lang}, the function $-\log\\|f_i\\|$ is locally $M_k$-bounded from below on $U_i(M_k)$; therefore so is $\lambda_{D_i}$ since by definition of Weil function and N\'eron function the difference between the two functions is locally $M_k$-bounded. By \cite[Ch.~10, Prop.~1.2]{lang}, there are affine $M_k$-bounded sets $E_1,\dots,E_n$ such that $\bigcup E_i=X(M_k)$ and such that $E_i\subseteq U_i(M_k)$ for all $i$. By definition of locally $M_k$-bounded function (see \cite[Ch.~10, Sect.~1]{lang}), for each $i$ there is an $M_k$-constant $\gamma_i$ such that $\lambda_{D_i}\ge\gamma_i$ on $E_i$. This concludes the proof, with $\gamma=\min\{\gamma_1,\dots,\gamma_n\}$. \end{proof} \begin{remark} It is possible to prove Proposition \ref{weil_min} using Lemma \ref{weil_max_fancy} rather easily. \end{remark} \section{The General Theorem}\label{sect_aut} In this section, we prove the General Theorem (in both the arithmetic and analytic cases) by using the filtration constructed by Autissier in \cite{Aut2}. Before presenting the proof, we first discuss some consequences of the General Theorem, in addition to Theorems C and D discussed in the introduction. \subsection{The equi-degree case} Using the General Theorem, we can derive a more precise (if not sharp) theorem of Schmidt's subspace theorem type (in the arithmetic case) and Nevanlinna's Second Main Theorem type (in the complex case) for the divisors which are (only) assumed to have equi-degree. \begin{definition} Suppose that X is a complete variety of dimension $n$. Let $D_1,\dots,D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors on $X$, and let $D=D_1+D_2+\cdots+D_q$. We say that \textbf{$D$ has equi-degree with respect to $D_1, D_2, \dots, D_q$} if $D_i\idot D^{n-1}=\frac{1}{q}D^{n}$ for all $i=1,\dots,q$. \end{definition} The important result associated to the concept of equi-degree is as follows. \begin{lemma}[Levin {\cite[Lemma~9.7]{levin_annals}}]\label{lem_lev09_9_7} Let X be a complete variety of dimension $n$. If $D_j, 1 \leq j \leq q$, are big and nef Cartier divisors, then there exist positive real numbers $r_j$ such that $D=\sum_{j=1}^q r_j D_j$ has equi-degree. \end{lemma} (In \cite{levin_annals}, Levin assumed that $X$ is projective, but his proof works more generally for complete varieties without change.) Since divisors $r_jD_j$ and $D_j$ have the same support, the above lemma tells us that we can always make the given big and nef divisors have equi-degree without changing their supports. This means that the condition of equi-degree, rather than the previous assumptions of linear or numerical equivalence for the divisors $D_1,\cdots,D_q$, is indeed a correct (or reasonable) assumption in the study of (quasi) hyperbolicity as well as the study of the degeneracy of integral points on the complement $X\backslash D$. To compute $\gamma(D_j)$ for $j=1, \dots, q$, we use the following lemma of Autissier. \begin{lemma}[{\cite[Lemma 4.2]{aut}}] \label{lem_aut1_4_2} Suppose $E$ is a big and base-point free Cartier divisor on a projective variety $X$, and $F$ is a nef Cartier divisor on $X$ such that $F-E$ is also nef. Let $\beta>0$ be a positive real number. Then, for any positive integers $N$ and $m$ with $1 \leq m\leq \beta N$, we have \begin{eqnarray} h^0(NF-mE)&\ge& {F^n\over n!}N^n - {F^{n-1}\idot E\over (n-1)!}N^{n-1}m \\ &~&+ {(n-1)F^{n-2}\idot E^2\over n!} N^{n-2}\min\{m^2, N^2\} +O(N^{n-1}) \end{eqnarray} where the implicit constant depends on $\beta$. \end{lemma} We now compute $\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(ND-mD_i)$ for each $1 \leq i\leq q$. Let $n=\dim X$, and assume that $n\ge2$. Let $\beta={D^n\over n D^{n-1}\idot D_i}$ and $A=(n-1)D^{n-2}\idot D_i^2$. Then, by Lemma \ref{lem_aut1_4_2}, \begin{equation} \begin{split} &\sum_{m=1}^{\infty} h^0(ND-mD_i) \label{aut1} \\ &\quad \ge \sum_{m=1}^{[\beta N]} \left( {D^n\over n!}N^n - {D^{n-1}\idot D_i\over (n-1)!}N^{n-1}m + {A\over n!}N^{n-2}\min\{m^2, N^2\}\right)+O(N^n) \\ &\quad\ge \left( {D^n\over n!} \beta - {D^{n-1}\idot D_i\over (n-1)!}{\beta^2\over 2} + {A\over n!}g(\beta)\right)N^{n+1}+O(N^n) \\ &\quad= \left({\beta\over 2}+{A\over D^n}g(\beta)\right) D^n {N^{n+1}\over n!} +O(N^n) \\ &\quad= \left({\beta\over 2}+\alpha \right) N h^0(ND) +O(N^n) \end{split} \end{equation} where $\alpha:= {A\over D^n}g(\beta)$ and $g: \mathbb R^+\rightarrow \mathbb R^+$ is the function given by $g(x)={x^3\over 3}$ if $x\leq 1$ and $g(x)=x-{2\over 3}$ for $x\ge 1$. Now from the assumption of equi-degree, $D_i\idot D^{n-1}={1\over q} D^n$, so $\beta ={q\over n}$. Hence $$\gamma(D_i)= \inf_N {Nh^0(ND)\over \sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(ND-mD_i)}\leq {1\over {\beta\over 2}+\alpha }< {2n\over q}.$$ The General Theorem in Section \ref{intro} thus gives \begin{theorem} [Arithmetic Part]\label{thm_equideg_ar} Let $k$ be a number field and let $S\subseteq M_k$ be a finite set containing all archimedean places. Let $X$ be a projective variety of dimension $\ge 2$ over $k$, and let $D_1,\dots,D_q$ be ample Cartier divisors on $X$ that intersect properly. Assume that $D:=\sum_{j=1}^q D_j$ has equi-degree respect to $D_1,\dots,D_q$. Then, for $\epsilon_0>0$ small enough (which only depends on the given divisors), the inequality $$m_S(x, D) < \left({2\dim X\over q}-\epsilon_0\right) h_D(x)$$ holds for all $k$-rational points $x\in X(k)$ outside of a proper Zariski-closed subset of $X$. \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}[Analytic Part]\label{thm_equideg_an} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety of dimension $\ge 2$, and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be ample Cartier divisors on $X$ that intersect properly. Assume that $D:=\sum_{j=1}^q D_j$ has equi-degree with respect to $D_1, \dots, D_q$. Let $f\colon \mathbb C\rightarrow X$ be a holomorphic map with Zariski-dense image. Then, for $\epsilon_0>0$ small enough, $$m_f(r, D) <_{\operatorname{exc}} \left({2\dim X\over q}-\epsilon_0\right)T_{f,D}(r).$$ \end{theorem} In general, we can prove \begin{theorem}[Arithmetic Part]\label{thm_ban_ar} Let $k$ be a number field and let $S\subseteq M_k$ be a finite set containing all archimedean places. Let $X$ be a projective variety of dimension $\ge 2$ over $k$, and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective, big, and nef Cartier divisors on $X$ that intersect properly. Let $r_i>0$ be real numbers such that $D:=\sum_{i=1}^q r_i D_i$ has equi-degree (such numbers exist due to Lemma \ref{lem_lev09_9_7}). Then, for $\epsilon_0>0$ small enough, the inequality $$ \sum_{j=1}^q r_j m_S(x, D_j) < \left({2\dim X\over q}-\epsilon_0\right) \left(\sum_{j=1}^q r_jh_{D_j}(x)\right)$$ holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside a proper Zariski-closed subset of $X$. \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}[Analytic Part]\label{thm_ban_an} Let $X$ be a complex projective variety of dimension $\ge 2$, and let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective, big, and nef Cartier divisors on $X$ that intersect properly. Let $r_i>0$ be real numbers such that $D:=\sum_{i=1}^q r_i D_i$ has equi-degree (such numbers exist due to Lemma \ref{lem_lev09_9_7}). Let $f\colon \mathbb C\rightarrow X$ be a holomorphic map with Zariski-dense image. Then, for $\epsilon_0>0$ small enough, $$ \sum_{j=1}^q r_j m_f(r, D_j) <_{\operatorname{exc}} \left({2\dim X\over q}-\epsilon_0\right) \left(\sum_{j=1}^q r_jT_{f, D_j}(r)\right).$$ \end{theorem} The proofs of Theorems \ref{thm_ban_ar} and \ref{thm_ban_an} are similar to the proofs of Theorems \ref{thm_equideg_ar} and Theorem \ref{thm_equideg_an} above, except in this case, the divisor $D=\sum_{i=1}^q r_i D_i$ is an $\mathbb R$-divisor, so we need to approximate this divisor by a $\mathbb Q$-divisor $\widehat{D}:=\sum_{i=1}^q a_i D_i$, similar to the argument carried out in \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}. We omit the proofs here. We note that Theorems \ref{thm_ban_ar} and \ref{thm_ban_an} greatly improve the earlier results in \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}. \subsection{The proof of the General Theorem} The proof of the General Theorems stated in Section \ref{intro} uses the the filtration constructed by Pascal Autissier (see \cite{Aut2}). We first review his results. Let $D_1, \dots, D_r$ be effective Cartier divisors on a projective variety $X$. Assume that they intersect properly on $X$, and that $\bigcap_{i=1}^r D_i$ is non-empty. Let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf over $X$ with $l:=h^0(\mathscr L)\ge 1$. \begin{definition} A subset $N\subset \mathbb N^r$ is said to be \textbf{saturated} if ${\bf a}+{\bf b}\in N$ for any ${\bf a}\in \mathbb N^r$ and ${\bf b}\in N$. \end{definition} \begin{lemma}[{\cite[Lemma 3.2]{Aut2}}]\label{lemm_aut2_3_2} Let $A$ be a local ring and $(\phi_1, \dots, \phi_r)$ be a regular sequence of $A$. Let $M$ and $N$ be two saturated subsets of $\mathbb N^r$.Then $${\mathcal I}(M)\cap {\mathcal I}(N)={\mathcal I}(M\cap N),$$ where, for $N\subset \mathbb N^r$, ${\mathcal I}(N)$ is the ideal of $A$ generated by $\{\phi_1^{b_1}\cdots \phi_q^{b_r}~\|~{\bf b}\in N\}$. \end{lemma} \begin{remark}\label{remk_aut2_3_2} We use Lemma \ref{lemm_aut2_3_2} in the following particular situation: Let $$\bigtriangleup = \{{\bf t}=(t_1, \dots, t_r)\in (\mathbb R^+)^r ~\|~ t_1+\cdots +t_r=1\}.$$ For each ${\bf t}\in \bigtriangleup$ and $x\in \mathbb R^+$, let $$N({\bf t}, x)=\{{\bf b}\in \mathbb N^r~\|~t_1b_1+\cdots +t_rb_r\ge x\}.$$ Notice that $N({\bf t}, x)\cap N({\bf u}, y)\subset N(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u}, \lambda x+ (1-\lambda)y)$ for all $\lambda\in[0,1]$. So, from Lemma \ref{lemm_aut2_3_2}, we have \begin{equation} {\mathcal I}(N({\bf t}, x))\cap {\mathcal I}(N({\bf u}, y))\subset {\mathcal I}(N(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u}, \lambda x+ (1-\lambda)y)) \end{equation} for any ${\bf t}, {\bf u}\in \bigtriangleup$; $x, y\in \mathbb R^+$; and $\lambda\in[0,1]$. \end{remark} \begin{definition} Let $W$ be a vector space of finite dimension. A \textbf{filtration} of $W$ is a family of subspaces ${\mathcal F}=({\mathcal F}_x)_{x\in \mathbb R^+}$ of subspaces of $W$ such that $\mathcal F_x\supseteq\mathcal F_y$ whenever $x\le y$, and such that ${\mathcal F}_x=\{0\}$ for $x$ big enough. A basis ${\mathcal B}$ of $W$ is said to be \textbf{adapted to $\mathcal F$} if ${\mathcal B}\cap {\mathcal F}_x$ is a basis of ${\mathcal F}_x$ for every real number $x\ge 0$. \end{definition} \begin{lemma}[Levin \cite{levin_annals}, Autissier \cite{Aut2}]\label{lemm_filt} Let ${\mathcal F}$ and ${\mathcal G}$ be two filtrations of $W$. Then there exists a basis of $W$ which is adapted to both ${\mathcal F}$ and ${\mathcal G}$. \end{lemma} For any fixed ${\bf t}\in \bigtriangleup$, we construct a filtration of $H^0(X, \mathscr L)$ as follows: for $x\in \mathbb R^+$, one defines the ideal ${\mathcal I}({\bf t}, x)$ of ${\mathscr O}_X$ by \begin{equation}\label{def_I} {\mathcal I}({\bf t}, x) = \sum_{{\bf b}\in N({\bf t}, x)} {\mathscr O}_X(-\sum_{i=1}^r b_iD_i)\;, \end{equation} and let \begin{equation}\label{def_filtr_h_0} {\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x = H^0(X, {\mathcal I}({\bf t}, x)\otimes \mathscr L)\;. \end{equation} Then $({\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x)_{x\in \mathbb R^+}$ is a filtration of $H^0(X, \mathscr L)$. For $s\in H^0(X, \mathscr L) -\{0\}$, let $\mu_{\bf t}(s)=\sup\{y\in \mathbb R^+~\|~s\in {\mathcal F}({\bf t})_y\}.$ Also let \begin{equation}\label{def_F} F({\bf t}) = {1\over h^0(\mathscr L)}\int_0^{+\infty}(\dim{\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x)\,dx\;. \end{equation} \begin{remark}\label{remk_levin_aut} Let ${\mathcal B}=\{s_1, \dots, s_l\}$ be a basis of $H^0(X, \mathscr L)$ with $l=h^0(\mathscr L)$. Then we have $$F({\bf t})\ge {1\over l}\int_0^{\infty} \#({\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x\cap {\mathcal B})dx={1\over l}\sum_{k=1}^l \mu_{{\bf t}}(s_k),$$ where equality holds if ${\mathcal B}$ is adapted to the filtration $({\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x)_{x\in \mathbb R^+}.$ \end{remark} The key result we will use about this filtration is the following Proposition. \begin{proposition}[{\cite[Th\'eor\`eme 3.6]{Aut2}}]\label{aut2_thm_3_6} With the notations and assumptions above, let $F: \bigtriangleup \rightarrow \mathbb R^+$ be the map defined in (\ref{def_F}). Then $F$ is concave. In particular, for ${\bf t}\in \bigtriangleup$, \begin{equation}\label{aut_ineq} F({\bf t}) \ge \min_i \left({1\over h^0(\mathscr L)}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L(-mD_i))\right)\;. \end{equation} \end{proposition} We include a proof here for the sake of completeness. \begin{proof} For any ${\bf t}, {\bf u}\in \bigtriangleup$ and $\lambda \in [0, 1]$, we need to prove that \begin{equation}F(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u})\ge \lambda F({\bf t})+(1-\lambda)F({\bf u}).\end{equation} By Lemma \ref{lemm_filt}, there exists a basis ${\mathcal B}=\{s_1, \dots, s_l\}$ of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$ with $l=h^0(\mathscr L)$, which is adapted both to $({\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x)_{x\in \mathbb R^+}$ and to $({\mathcal F}({\bf u})_y)_{y\in \mathbb R^+}$. For $x, y\in \mathbb R^+$, by Lemma \ref{lemm_aut2_3_2} (or Remark \ref{remk_aut2_3_2}), since $D_1, \dots, D_r$ intersect properly on $X$ $${\mathcal F}({\bf t})_x\cap {\mathcal F}({\bf u})_y \subset {\mathcal F}(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u})_{\lambda x+ (1-\lambda)y}.$$ For $s\in H^0(X, \mathscr L)-\{0\}$, we have, from the definition of $\mu_{{\bf t}}(s)$ and $\mu_{{\bf u}}(s)$, $s\in {\mathcal F}(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u})_{\lambda x+ (1-\lambda)y}$ for $x<\mu_{{\bf t}}(s)$ and $y<\mu_{{\bf u}}(s)$, and thus $$\mu_{\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u}}(s)\ge \lambda \mu_{{\bf t}}(s) +(1-\lambda)\mu_{{\bf u}}(s).$$ Taking $s=s_j$ and summing it over $j=1, \dots, l$, we get, by Remark \ref{remk_levin_aut}, $$F(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u})\ge \lambda {1\over l}\sum_{j=1}^l \mu_{{\bf t}}(s_j) +(1-\lambda){1\over l}\sum_{j=1}^l \mu_{{\bf u}}(s_j).$$ On the other hand, since ${\mathcal B}=\{s_1, \dots, s_l\}$ is a basis adapted to both ${\mathcal F}({\bf t})$ and ${\mathcal F}({\bf u})$, from Remark \ref{remk_levin_aut}, $F({\bf t})={1\over l}\sum_{j=1}^l \mu_{{\bf t}}(s_j)$ and $F({\bf u})={1\over l}\sum_{j=1}^l \mu_{{\bf u}}(s_j)$. Thus $$F(\lambda {\bf t}+(1-\lambda){\bf u})\ge \lambda F({\bf t})+(1-\lambda)F({\bf u}),$$ which proves that $F$ is a convex function. To prove (\ref{aut_ineq}), let ${\bf e}_1=(1, 0, \dots, 0)$, $\cdots$, ${\bf e}_r=(0, 0, \dots, 1)$ be the natural basis of $\mathbb R^r$, and write, for ${\bf t} \in \bigtriangleup$, ${\bf t}=t_1{\bf e_1}+\cdots+t_r{\bf e}_r$. Then, notice that $t_1+\cdots +t_r=1$, from the convexity of $F$, we get $$F({\bf t}) = F(t_1{\bf e_1}+\cdots+t_r{\bf e}_r) \ge (t_1+\cdots +t_r) \min_i F({\bf e}_i) = \min_i F({\bf e}_i)$$ and, obviously, $F({\bf e}_i)={1\over h^0(\mathscr L)}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L(-mD_i))$ for $i=1, \dots, r$. \end{proof} We are now ready to prove the General Theorems. We first consider the arithmetic case. Let $D_1, \dots, D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors intersecting properly on $X$, and let $D=D_1+\cdots+D_q$. Choose Weil functions $\lambda_{D_1},\dots,\lambda_{D_q}$ for the Cartier divisors $D_1,\dots,D_q$, respectively. Since these divisors are effective, we may assume that $\lambda_{D_i,\upsilon}(y)\ge0$ for all $i=1,\dots,q$; all $\upsilon\in S$; and all $y\in X(\overline k_\upsilon)\setminus\Supp D_i$ (this can be done by Proposition \ref{weil_eff}). Let $\epsilon>0$, and pick a positive integer $N$ such that \begin{equation}\label{choice_of_N} \max_{1\le j\le q} \frac{Nh^0(\mathscr L^N)}{\sum_{m\ge1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_j))} < \max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+{\epsilon\over 4}\;. \end{equation} \begin{lemma}[similar to {\cite[Lemma~20.7]{vojta_cm}}] \label{vojta_cm_20_7} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a number field $k$; let $D_1,\dots,D_q$ be effective Cartier divisors on $X$; let $D=D_1+\dots+D_q$; and let $\lambda_{D_1},\dots,\lambda_{D_q}$ be Weil functions for $D_1,\dots,D_q$, respectively. Let $$\Sigma = \left\{\sigma\subseteq \{1,\dots,q\} \bigm\| \bigcap_{j\in \sigma} \Supp D_j\ne\emptyset\right\}\;.$$ For each $\sigma \in \Sigma$, write \begin{equation}D=D_{\sigma, 1} + D_{\sigma, 2}\;, \end{equation} where $$D_{\sigma, 1} = \sum_{j\in \sigma} D_j \qquad\text{and}\qquad D_{\sigma, 2} = \sum_{j\notin \sigma} D_j \;.$$ Let $\lambda_{D_{\sigma,2}}=\sum_{j\notin\sigma}\lambda_{D_j}$ for all $\sigma\in\Sigma$. Then there exists an $M_k$-constant $(C_{\upsilon})_{\upsilon \in M_k}$, depending only on $X$; $D_1,\dots,D_q$; and the chosen Weil functions, such that $$\min_{\sigma\in \Sigma}\lambda_{D_{\sigma, 2}, \upsilon}(x)\leq C_{\upsilon}$$ for all $x\in X(\overline k_{\upsilon})$ and all $\upsilon \in M_k$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The definition of the set $\Sigma$ implies that $$\bigcap_{\sigma\in \Sigma} \Supp D_{\sigma, 2}=\emptyset,$$ because for all $x\in X$ the set $\sigma = \{j\in\{1,\dots,q\} \mid x\in \Supp D_j\}$ is an element in $\Sigma$, and then $x\not\in \Supp D_{\sigma, 2}$. The lemma then follows from Proposition \ref{weil_min} and Corollary \ref{weil_uniq}, since $\Sigma$ is a finite set. \end{proof} Let $c\ge 1$ be an integer such that $h^0(\mathscr L^N(-cD_j))=0$ for $j=1, \dots, q$ and fix an integer $b$ with $b\ge {cn\over N\epsilon_0}$, where $\epsilon_0>0$ is chosen such that $$\epsilon_0 <{\epsilon\over ( \max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+1+\epsilon)( 4\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+1+\epsilon)}.$$ For $\sigma\in \Sigma$, let $$\bigtriangleup_{\sigma}=\left\{{\bf a}=(a_i)\in {\mathbb N}^{\#\sigma}~\|~\sum_{i\in \sigma} a_i=b\right\}.$$ For ${\bf a}\in \bigtriangleup_{\sigma}$ (hence ${1\over b}{\bf a}\in \bigtriangleup$), as above, one defines (see (\ref{def_I}), (\ref{def_filtr_h_0}), and (\ref{def_F})) the ideal ${\mathcal I}(x)$ of ${\mathscr O}_X$ by $${\mathcal I}(x) = \sum_{{\bf b}} {\mathscr O}_X\left(-\sum_{i\in \sigma} b_iD_{i}\right)$$ where the sum is taken for all ${\bf b}\in {\mathbb N}^{\#\sigma}$ with $\sum_{i\in \sigma} a_ib_i\ge bx$. Let $${\mathcal F}(\sigma; {\bf a})_x = H^0(X, \mathscr L^N\otimes {\mathcal I}(x))\;,$$ which we regard as a subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$, and let $$F(\sigma; {\bf a}) = {1\over h^0(\mathscr L^N)}\int_0^{+\infty}(\dim{\mathcal F}(\sigma;{\bf a})_x)\,dx\;.$$ Applying Proposition \ref{aut2_thm_3_6} with the line sheaf being taken as $\mathscr L^N$, we have $$F(\sigma; {\bf a})\ge \min_{1\leq i \leq q}\left({1\over h^0(\mathscr L^N)}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))\right).$$ Let $\mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}$ be a basis of $H^0(X, \mathscr L^N)$ adapted to the above filtration $\{{\mathcal F}(\sigma; {\bf a})_x\}_{x\in\mathbb R^+}$. By Remark \ref{remk_levin_aut}, $F(\sigma, {\bf a}) = {1\over h^0(\mathscr L^N)}\sum_{s\in \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}} \mu(s)$, where $\mu(s)$ is the largest rational number for which $s\in {\mathcal F}(\sigma; {\bf a})_{\mu}$. Hence \begin{equation}\label{sum_mu_geq} \sum_{s\in \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}} \mu(s) \ge \min_{1\leq i\leq q} \sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))\;. \end{equation} It is important to note that the set $\bigcup_{\sigma; {\bf a}} \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}$ is a finite set. Let $$\lambda_D = \sum_{j=1}^q \lambda_{D_j} \qquad\text{and}\qquad \lambda_{D_{\sigma,1}} = \sum_{j\in\sigma} \lambda_{D_j} \quad\text{for all $\sigma\in\Sigma$}$$ (note that $\lambda_{D_{\sigma,2}}$ was defined already in Lemma \ref{vojta_cm_20_7}). Given $\sigma\in\Sigma$ and $\mathbf a\in\bigtriangleup_\sigma$, any nonzero section $s\in H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ can be written locally as $$s = \sum_{\mathbf b} f_{\mathbf b}\prod_{i\in\sigma} 1_{D_i}^{b_i}\;,$$ where $f_{\mathbf b}$ is a local section of $\mathscr L^N(-\sum_{i\in\sigma} b_iD_i)$, $1_{D_i}$ is the canonical section of $\mathscr O(D_i)$ for each $i$, and the sum is taken for all $\mathbf b\in\mathbb N^{\#\sigma}$ with $\sum_{i\in\sigma} a_ib_i\ge b\mu(s)$. Moreover, $f_{\mathbf b}=0$ for all but finitely many $\mathbf b$. By a compactness argument, there exist a finite covering $\{U_j\}_{j\in J_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}}$ of $X$ by Zariski-open sets and a finite set $K=K_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}\subseteq\mathbb N^{\#\sigma}$ such that \begin{equation}\label{s_local_sum} s = \sum_{\mathbf b\in K} f_{s,j;\mathbf b} \prod_{i\in\sigma} 1_{D_i}^{b_i} \end{equation} on $U_j$ for all $j\in J_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}$, where $f_{s,j;\mathbf b}\in\Gamma(U_j,\mathscr L^N(-\sum_{i\in\sigma} b_iD_i))$ and all $\mathbf b\in K$ satisfy $\sum_{i\in\sigma} a_ib_i\ge b\mu(s)$. \begin{lemma}\label{lemm_bound_weil_s} For each $\upsilon\in S$ there is a constant $c_v$ (which depends also on $\epsilon$ and the choices of Weil functions $\lambda_s$) with the following property. Pick $\sigma\in\Sigma$, $\mathbf a\in\bigtriangleup_{\sigma}$, and $s\in\mathcal B_{\sigma;\mathbf a}$, and choose a Weil function $\lambda_s$ for the divisor $(s)$. Then, for each $\upsilon\in S$, \begin{equation}\label{lambdainq} \lambda_{s,\upsilon}(P) \ge \min_{\mathbf b} \sum_{i\in\sigma} b_i\lambda_{D_i, \upsilon}(P)+c_\upsilon \end{equation} for all $P\in X(k)$, where the minimum is taken over all $\mathbf b\in K$ as in (\ref{s_local_sum}). \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For all $\sigma\in\Sigma$, all $\mathbf a\in\bigtriangleup_\sigma$, all $s\in\mathcal B_{\sigma;\mathbf a}$, all $j\in J_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}$, and all $\upsilon\in S$ there are constants $c_{\upsilon; j, \sigma,\mathbf a}$ such that, for all $P$ in a $\upsilon$-bounded subset of $U_j(k_\upsilon)$, \begin{equation}\label{lambdainq_pre} \lambda_{s,\upsilon}(P) \ge \min_{\mathbf b} \sum_{i\in \sigma} b_i\lambda_{D_i, \upsilon}(P)+c_{\upsilon;j,\sigma,\mathbf a}\;. \end{equation} These bounded subsets can be chosen to cover all of $X(k_\upsilon)$. This gives (\ref{lambdainq}), since the sets $\Sigma$, $\bigtriangleup_\sigma$, $\mathcal B_{\sigma;\mathbf a}$, and $J_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}$ are finite. Note also that (\ref{lambdainq_pre}) for all $P\in X(\overline k)$ follows from Proposition \ref{prop_aut_weil_ineq}. \end{proof} We may further assume that the sets $K=K_{\sigma,\mathbf a,s}$ in Lemma \ref{lemm_bound_weil_s} contain no $\mathbf b$ for which $f_{s,j;\mathbf b}=0$ for all $s$ and $j$. In particular, since $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N(-cD_j))=0$ for all $j$, we may assume that all $\mathbf b\in K$ satisfy $b_j<c$ for all $j$. Also, from the assumption that $D_1, \dots, D_q$ intersect properly (and hence lie in general position), we have $\#\sigma_{P, \upsilon}\leq n$. Therefore, by the choice of the integer $b$, we may assume that all $\mathbf b\in K$ in (\ref{lambdainq}) satisfy \begin{equation}\label{mathbf_b_ineq} \sum_{i\in\sigma} b_i \le nc \le bN\epsilon_0\;. \end{equation} Now for $P\in X(k)$ and $\upsilon\in S$ pick $\sigma_{P,\upsilon}\in\Sigma$ in Lemma \ref{vojta_cm_20_7} such that \begin{equation} \lambda_{D_{\sigma_{P, \upsilon},2}, \upsilon}(P)\leq C_{\upsilon}\label{b} \end{equation} where $C_{\upsilon}$ is the $M_k$-constant appearing in Lemma \ref{vojta_cm_20_7}, which depends only on $X$; $D_1, \dots, D_q$; and the chosen Weil functions. For $i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}$ we let \begin{equation}\label{def_t_Pvi} t_{P, \upsilon; i}={\lambda_{D_{i}, \upsilon}(P)\over \sum_{j\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_{j}, \upsilon}(P)}. \end{equation} Note that $\sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} t_{P, \upsilon; i}=1$. Choose ${\bf a}_{P, \upsilon} =(a_{P, \upsilon; i}) \in \bigtriangleup_{\sigma_{P, \upsilon}}$ such that \begin{equation}\label{condition_aPv} \|b t_{P, \upsilon; i} -a_{P, \upsilon; i}\|\leq 1 \qquad\text{for all $i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}$.} \end{equation} Using (\ref{lambdainq}) with $\sigma=\sigma_{P, \upsilon}$ and ${\bf a}= {\bf a}_{P, \upsilon}$, (\ref{def_t_Pvi}), (\ref{condition_aPv}), and (\ref{mathbf_b_ineq}), we get, for any $s\in \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}$, \begin{equation}\label{lambda_s_chain} \begin{split} \lambda_{s, \upsilon}(P) &\ge \min_{\mathbf b\in K} \sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} b_i\lambda_{D_i, \upsilon}(P)+O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ &= \left( \sum_{j\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_j, \upsilon}(P) \right) \min_{\mathbf b\in K} \sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} b_it_{P, \upsilon; i} +O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ &\ge \left( \sum_{j\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_j, \upsilon}(P) \right) \min_{\mathbf b\in K} \sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} b_i {a_{P, \upsilon; i}-1\over b} +O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ & \ge (\mu(s) - N\epsilon_0) \left( \sum_{j\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_j, \upsilon}(P) \right) +O_{\upsilon}(1), \end{split} \end{equation} where the set $K$ is as in (\ref{s_local_sum}). Therefore, by (\ref{lambda_s_chain}), (\ref{sum_mu_geq}), the definition of $\lambda_{D_{\sigma,1}}$, and (\ref{b}), we have \begin{equation}\label{weil_chain_ineq} \begin{split} \sum_{s\in \mathcal B_{P,\sigma}}\lambda_{s, \upsilon} (P) &\ge \left(\sum_{s\in \mathcal B_{P,\sigma}} (\mu(s) - N\epsilon_0)\right) \left( \sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_i, \upsilon}(P) \right) +O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ &\ge \left( \min_{1\leq i\leq q} \sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i)) -Nl\epsilon_0 \right) \left( \sum_{i\in \sigma_{P, \upsilon}} \lambda_{D_i, \upsilon}(P) \right) +O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ &= \left( \min_{1\leq i\leq q} \sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))-Nl\epsilon_0 \right) \lambda_{D_{\sigma_{P, \upsilon}, 1},\upsilon}(P)+O_{\upsilon}(1) \\ &= \left( \min_{1\leq i \leq q}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))-Nl\epsilon_0 \right) \lambda_{D, \upsilon}(P) +O_{\upsilon}(1)\;, \end{split} \end{equation} where $l=h^0(\mathscr L^N)$. For any basis ${\mathcal B}$ of $H^0(X, {\mathscr L}^N)$, we recall the notation $(\mathcal B)$ from (\ref{def_parens_B}): $$(\mathcal B) = \sum_{s\in\mathcal B} (s).$$ For such $\mathcal B$, choose a Weil function $\lambda_{\mathcal B}$ for the divisor $(\mathcal B)$; then (\ref{weil_chain_ineq}) gives \begin{equation}\label{weilbase} \max_{\sigma; {\bf a}} \lambda_{ \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}}} \ge \left( \min_{1\leq i \leq q}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))-Nl\epsilon_0 \right) \lambda_{D, \upsilon} + O_v(1)\;. \end{equation} Thus from the definition of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$ (see Definition \ref{bidef1}) and by (\ref{choice_of_N}), we get $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D) \leq \max_{1\leq j\leq q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)$$ and thus the General Theorem follows from Theorem \ref{b_thmd}. This finishes the proof. Note that we can continue the proof without using the notion of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D_j)$ and Theorem \ref{b_thmd}. Indeed write $$\bigcup_{\sigma; {\bf a}} \mathcal B_{\sigma; {\bf a}} = \mathcal B_1\cup\cdots \cup \mathcal B_{T_1}=\{s_1, \dots, s_{T_2}\}.$$ For each $i=1,\dots, T_1$, let $J_i\subseteq\{1,\dots,T_2\}$ be the subset such that $\mathcal B_i = \{s_j:j\in J_i\}$. Then, by (\ref{weilbase}), for each $v\in S$, \begin{equation}\label{weilbase2} \begin{split} \left( \min_{1\leq i \leq q}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))-Nl\epsilon_0 \right) \lambda_{D, \upsilon} &\le \max_{1\le i\le T_1} \lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v} + O_{\upsilon}(1)\\ &= \max_{1\le i\le T_1} \sum_{j\in J_i} \lambda_{s_j,v} + O_{\upsilon}(1). \end{split} \end{equation} By Theorem \ref{schmidt_base} with $\epsilon$ in Theorem \ref{schmidt_base} taken as ${\epsilon\over 4\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+1+\epsilon}$, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that the inequality \begin{equation}\label{schmidt_ineq} \sum_{v\in S} \max_J \sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{s_j,v}(x) \le \left(l +{\epsilon\over 4\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+1+\epsilon}\right)h_{ND}(x) \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$; here $l=h^0(\mathscr L^N)$ and the maximum is taken over all subsets $J$ of $\{1,\dots,T_2\}$ for which the sections $s_j$, $j\in J$, are linearly independent. Combining (\ref{weilbase2}) and (\ref{schmidt_ineq}) gives $$\sum_{\upsilon\in S} \lambda_{D, \upsilon}(x) \leq {l+{\epsilon\over 4\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+1+\epsilon}\over \min_{1\leq i \leq q}\sum_{m\ge 1} h^0(\mathscr L^N(-mD_i))-Nl\epsilon_0} h_{\mathscr L^N}(x)$$ for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$. Here we used the fact that all of the $J_i$ occur among the $J$ in (\ref{schmidt_ineq}). Using (\ref{choice_of_N}), the fact that $l=h^0(\mathscr L^N)$ and $h_{\mathscr L^N}(x)=Nh_{\mathscr L}(x)$, we have, for $x\in X(k)$ outside of a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$, \begin{equation} \begin{split} \sum_{\upsilon\in S} \lambda_{D, \upsilon}(x) &\leq {( \max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j) +{\epsilon\over 4}) (1+{\epsilon\over 4\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j)+\epsilon})\over 1-( \max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j) +{\epsilon\over 4})\epsilon_0} h_{D}(x)\\ &\leq (\max_{1\le j\le q} \gamma(\mathscr L, D_j) +\epsilon)h_D(x), \end{split} \end{equation} from our choice of $\epsilon_0$. This proves the General Theorem for the arithmetic case. The proof in the analytic case is similar, by replacing Theorem \ref{schmidt_base} (Schmidt's Subspace Theorem) with Theorem \ref{cartan_base} (H. Cartan's theorem). \begin{remark} With notation as in Definition \ref{def_aut_lambda}, let \begin{equation} \gamma'(\mathscr L, D) = \inf_{N,V} \frac{N\dim V} {\sum_{m\ge 1} \dim(V\cap H^0(X,\mathscr L^N(-mD)))}\;, \end{equation} where the infimum is over all positive integers $N$ and all linear subspaces $V$ of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$, and the fraction is taken to be $+\infty$ if the denominator is zero. Here we identify $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N(-mD))$ with a subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ via the injection gotten by tensoring with $1_D^m$. Then the General Theorems remain true when $\gamma$ is replaced by $\gamma'$. The same proof works with minimal changes, but we have not included it here because we know of no applications so far. \end{remark} \section{The Birational Nevanlinna Constant}\label{sect_nevbir} The goal of this section and the next two sections is to prove that the two definitions (Definitions \ref{bidef1} and \ref{bidef2}) of the birational Nevanlinna constant $\Nevbir(D)$ given in Section \ref{intro} are equivalent. We first recall the definition of the Nevalinna constant $\Nev(D)$ introduced by the first author (Definition \ref{def_nevintro}), as well as the important results regarding $\Nev(D)$. \begin{definition}[see \cite{R4} and \cite{ru}] \label{def_nev} Let $X$ be a normal projective variety, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. The \textbf{Nevanlinna constant} of $D$, denoted $\Nev(D)$, is given by \begin{equation}\label{Nconstant} \Nev(D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} {\dim V\over \mu}\;, \end{equation} where the infimum is taken over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N$ is a positive integer, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V\ge2$, and $\mu$ is a positive real number such that, for all $P\in \Supp D$, there exists a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ with \begin{equation} \label{large} \sum_{s\in \mathcal B} \ord_E (s) \ge \mu \ord_E (ND) \end{equation} for all irreducible components $E$ of $D$ passing through $P$. If $\dim H^0(X,\mathscr O(ND))\leq 1$ for all positive integers $N$, we define $\Nev(D)=+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\Nev(D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. \end{definition} Next, we rephrase the definition of $\Nev(D)$. Recall from (\ref{def_parens_B}) that if $\mathcal B$ is a finite set of global sections of a line sheaf $\mathscr L$ on a variety $X$, then $(\mathcal B)$ denotes the divisor $$(\mathcal B) = \sum_{s\in\mathcal B} (s)\;.$$ First of all, notice that the divisor $D$ plays two separate roles in Definition \ref{def_nev}: the role in (\ref{large}), and the space $H^0(X,\mathscr O(ND))$. At times it will be convenient to separate those two roles, so we introduce a line sheaf $\mathscr L$ and replace $H^0(X,\mathscr O(ND))$ with $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$. Next, we can impose (\ref{large}) on all divisor components passing through $P$ (not just those occurring in $D$). Also, since we are taking the infimum in Definition \ref{def_nev}, we can require $\mu$ to be rational. With these two changes, the condition on the triple is equivalent to requiring that the $\mathbb Q$-divisor $(\mathcal B)-\mu ND$ be effective near $P$. This leads to the following definition. \begin{definition}\label{def_nev2} Let $X$ be a complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. If $X$ is normal, then we define $$\Nev(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;.$$ Here the inf is taken over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V>1$, and $\mu>0$ is a rational number, that satisfy the following property. For all $P\in X$ there is a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq2} (\mathcal B) \ge \mu ND \end{equation} in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $P$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. If there are no such triples $(N,V,\mu)$, then $\Nev(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined to be $+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\Nev(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. \end{definition} Note that $\Nev(\mathscr O(D),D)$ (as defined above) coincides with $\Nev(D)$ as in Definition \ref{def_nev}. To prove the equivalence, we start by recalling the second definition of $\Nevbir(D)$ (Definition \ref{bidef2}) given in Section \ref{intro}: \begin{definition}[see Definition \ref{bidef2}] \label{def_nevprime} Let $X$ be a complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. If $X$ is normal, then we define $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;,$$ where the infimum passes over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V>1$, and $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, with the following property. There are a variety $Y$ and a proper birational morphism $\phi\colon Y\to X$ such that the following condition holds. For all $Q\in Y$ there is a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq3} \phi^{}(\mathcal B) \ge \mu N\phi^{}D \end{equation} in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. If there are no such triples $(N,V,\mu)$, then $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined to be $+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. If $L$ is a Cartier divisor or Cartier divisor class on $X$, then we define $\Nevbir(L,D)=\Nevbir(\mathscr O(L),D)$. We also define $\Nevbir(D)=\Nevbir(D,D)$. \end{definition} (Note that a \emph{birational morphism} from $X$ to $Y$ is a morphism $X\to Y$ that has an inverse as a rational map; in other words, it is a rational map $X\dashrightarrow Y$ that is defined everywhere on $X$.) \begin{remark}\label{remk_D_linear} It is easy to see from the definitions that if $n$ is a positive integer then $$\Nev(\mathscr L,nD) = n\Nev(\mathscr L,D) \qquad\text{and}\qquad \Nevbir(\mathscr L,nD) = n\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)\;.$$ \end{remark} We have the following easy comparison. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma_comp_nevs} Let $X$, $D$, and $\mathscr L$ be as in Definitions \ref{def_nev2} and \ref{def_nevprime}. Then $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) \le \Nev(\mathscr L,D)\;.$$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} We may assume that $X$ is normal, because in both Definition \ref{def_nev2} and Definition \ref{def_nevprime} the general case is handled by pulling back to the normalization. If a triple $(N,V,\mu)$ satisfies the condition of Definition \ref{def_nev2}, then it also satisfies the condition of Definition \ref{def_nevprime}, because in the latter condition we can take $Y=X$ and let $\phi$ be the identity map. Thus, the infimum in Definition \ref{def_nevprime} is being taken over a larger set. \end{proof} The only difference between the definitions is that in $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$, the basis $\mathcal B$ is allowed to be taken locally on a blowing-up of $X$, rather than on $X$ itself. We now show that $\Nevbir$ can be viewed as a \emph{birationalization} of $\Nev$. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_b_nev} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a number field $k$, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$ is a birational invariant, in the sense that if $\phi\colon Y\to X$ is a model of $X$, then $$\Nevbir(\phi^{}\mathscr L,\phi^{}D) = \Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)\;.$$ \item[(b).] For all $\epsilon>0$ there is a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ such that $$\Nev(\phi^{}\mathscr L,\phi^{}D) < \Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) + \epsilon\;.$$ \item[(c).] In particular, $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{\phi\colon Y\to X} \Nev(\phi^{}\mathscr L,\phi^{}D)\;,$$ where the infimum is over all models of $X$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} (a). This is clear from Definition \ref{def_nevprime}, since the condition on $(N,V,\mu)$ remains true if $Y$ is replaced by another variety $Y'$ that dominates $Y$ (i.e., there is a proper birational morphism $Y'\to X$ that factors through $Y$). (b). Let $(N,V,\mu)$ be a triple satisfying the condition of Definition \ref{def_nevprime}, for which $$\frac{\dim V}{\mu} < \Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) + \epsilon\;,$$ and let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be as in Definition \ref{def_nevprime}. Then the triple $(N,\phi^{}V,\mu)$ satisfies the condition of Definition \ref{def_nev2} for $\Nev(\phi^{}\mathscr L,\phi^{}D)$. This proves (b). (c). This part is immediate from part (b) and from Lemma \ref{lemma_comp_nevs}. \end{proof} To conclude this section, we prove the following Proposition which would lead to the equivalence of the two definitions of $\Nevbir(D)$. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_nevprime_weil} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety over a number field, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, let $V$ be a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$ with $\dim V>1$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. Consider the following conditions. \begin{enumerate} \item There are a variety $Y$ and a proper birational morphism $\phi\colon Y\to X$ such that for all $Q\in Y$ there is a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that $$ \phi^{}(\mathcal B) \ge \mu \phi^{}D $$ in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. \item There are finitely many bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). \end{enumerate} If (i) is true, then so is (ii). \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Assume that (i) holds. By quasi-compactness, we may assume that only finitely many open subsets $U$ occur in (i). Let $U_1,\dots,U_\ell$ be a collection of such subsets. Since the condition on $\mathcal B$ only depends on $U$, we may fix a basis $\mathcal B_i$ for each open subset $U_i$. Also, for each $i$ let $\lambda_{\mathcal B_i}$ be a Weil function for the divisor $(\mathcal B_i)$, and let $\lambda_D$ be a Weil function for $D$. Fix a positive integer $n$ such that $n\mu\in\mathbb Z$, and such that the divisor $n\phi^{}(\mathcal B_i)-n\mu\phi^{}D$ is effective on $U_i$ for all $i$. The above Weil functions can be pulled back to give Weil functions for $\phi^{}(\mathcal B_i)$ and $\phi^{}D$, respectively, on $Y$. By Lemma \ref{weil_max_fancy} applied to the divisors $D_i:=n\phi^{}(\mathcal B_i)-n\mu\phi^{}D$ for all $i$ and to the open sets $U_1,\dots,U_\ell$, there is an $M_k$-constant $\gamma$ such that $$\max_{i=1,\dots,\ell} \bigl(n\phi^{}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i}-n\mu\phi^{}\lambda_D\bigr) \ge\gamma\;.$$ Therefore (ii) holds, with $c=-\gamma/n$. \end{proof} The converse will be proved in the next section (Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs}). \section{Models of Varieties, b-divisors, and b-Weil Functions}\label{models} In light of the birational nature of $\Nevbir$, it is useful to consider birationalizations of the definitions of Cartier divisor and Weil function. (Birational variants of Cartier divisors have already been developed as part of the minimal model program.) These allow one to finish the proof of Proposition \ref{prop_nevprime_weil}, and therefore to show that $\Nevbir$ can be defined using Weil functions. (This was the original definition of $\Nevbir$.) In this section, we define the notion of b-Cartier b-divisor, and show that the group of these objects (on a fixed variety $X$ over some field), when partially ordered by the condition that $\mathbf D_1\ge\mathbf D_2$ if $\mathbf D_1-\mathbf D_2$ is effective, forms a lattice (i.e., a partially ordered set in which every nonempty finite set has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound). We then define the related concept of b-Weil function on $X$, and show that a corresponding group (obtained by modding out by the subgroup of $M_k$-bounded functions) is also a lattice, and is naturally isomorphic to the partially ordered group of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$. Once these b-divisors and b-Weil functions have been defined and their elementary properties discussed, the main result of this section (Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs}) is stated and proved. This result gives alternative descriptions of the main condition of Definition \ref{def_nevprime} using b-Cartier b-divisors and using b-Weil functions. We begin by recalling some definitions from the minimal model program (the Mori program). The notion of b-divisor is originally due to Shokurov; see \cite[Def.~1.7.4 and \S\,2.3]{corti} for details. The prefix `b' stands for \emph{birational}. \begin{definition}\label{def_b_divisor} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a field $k$. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] A \textbf{model} of $X$ is a proper birational morphism $Y\to X$ over $k$, where $Y$ is a variety over $k$. We often use $Y$ to denote the model. \item[(b).] The category of models of $X$ is the category whose objects are models of $X$ and whose morphisms are morphisms over $X$. We say that a model $Y_1$ of $X$ \textbf{dominates} a model $Y_2$ of $X$ if there is a morphism $Y_1\to Y_2$ (necessarily unique) in this category. \item[(c).] A \textbf{b-Cartier b-divisor} on $X$ is an equivalence class of pairs $(Y,D)$, where $Y$ is a model of $X$ and $D$ is a Cartier divisor on $Y$; here equivalence classes are those for the equivalence relation generated by the relation $(Y_1,D_1)\sim (Y_2,D_2)$ if $Y_1$ dominates $Y_2$ via $\phi\colon Y_1\to Y_2$, and $D_1=\phi^{}D_2$. \item[(d).] A b-Cartier b-divisor $\mathbf D$ on $X$ is \textbf{effective} if it is represented by a pair $(Y,D)$ such that $D$ is effective. \end{enumerate} \end{definition} \begin{remark} Definition~\ref{def_b_divisor}(c) is different from the definition given in \cite{corti}, but it is equivalent. In \emph{op.~cit.,} $X$ is required to be normal, and one works in the category of normal models of $X$. A b-divisor on $X$ is an element $$\mathbf D=(\mathbf D_Y)_{Y} \in \varprojlim_Y \Div(Y)\;,$$ where $\Div(Y)$ is the group of Weil divisors on a normal model $Y$ of $X$, and the projective limit is relative to push-forwards $\phi_{}\colon\Div Y_1\to\Div Y_2$ via morphisms $\phi\colon Y_1\to Y_2$, if $Y_1$ dominates $Y_2$ via $\phi$. A b-divisor $\mathbf D$ on $X$ is b-Cartier if there is a normal model $Y$ of $X$ and a Cartier divisor $D$ on $Y$ such that $\mathbf D_{Y_1}=\phi^{}D$ for all normal models $Y_1$ of $Y$ with $X$-morphisms $\phi\colon Y_1\to Y$. To see that this definition is equivalent to Definition~\ref{def_b_divisor}c, we first note that restricting models in Definition~\ref{def_b_divisor} to normal models does not change the definition. Then, since the normalization of $X$ is a final object in the category of normal models of $X$, we may assume that $X$ is normal. It is then straightforward to see that this definition agrees with the definition in \emph{op.~cit.} \end{remark} \begin{lemma}\label{lemm_eff_b_cartier} Let $X$ be a variety, let $\mathbf D$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor on $X$, and let $(Y,D)$ be a pair that represents $\mathbf D$. Assume that $Y$ is normal. Then $\mathbf D$ is effective if and only if $D$ is effective. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The reverse implication is immediate from the definitions. To prove the forward implication, assume that $\mathbf D$ is effective. By definition, there is a pair $(Y',D')$ representing $\mathbf D$ such that $D'$ is effective. By pulling back to a possibly larger model, we may assume that $Y'$ dominates $Y$, say by $f\colon Y'\to Y$, and that $Y'$ is normal. Then $D=f_{}D'$ (here $f_{}$ refers to Weil divisors; note that $f_{}f^{}D=D$). In particular, by Remark \ref{remk_eff}, $D$ is effective. \end{proof} The following definition generalizes the definition of Weil function to b-Cartier b-divisors. This definition comes from \cite[\S\,7]{vojta_ssav1}. In \emph{loc.~cit.} they were called \emph{generalized Weil functions}, but it is now apparent that it is more natural to call them \emph{b-Weil functions}. \begin{definition}\label{def_b_weil_fcn} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a number field $k$. Then a \textbf{b-Weil function} on $X$ is an equivalence class of pairs $(U,\lambda)$, where $U$ is a nonempty Zariski-open subset of $X$ and $\lambda\colon U(M_k)\to\mathbb R$ is a function such that there exist a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ and a Cartier divisor $D$ on $Y$ such that $\lambda\circ\phi$ extends to a Weil function for $D$. Pairs $(U,\lambda)$ and $(U',\lambda')$ are \textbf{equivalent} if $\lambda=\lambda'$ on $(U\cap U')(M_k)$. Local b-Weil functions on $X$ are defined similarly. \end{definition} It is clear that every Weil function on a variety $X$ over $k$ is also a b-Weil function on $X$, and that b-Weil functions on $X$ form an abelian group under addition. Also, if $\phi\colon X\dashrightarrow Y$ is a dominant rational map and if $\lambda$ is a b-Weil function on $Y$, then $\phi^{}\lambda$ (defined in the obvious way) is a b-Weil function on $X$. The same facts are true for local b-Weil functions at a given place $v$. \begin{definition}\label{def_div_of_b_Weil} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a number field $k$, let $\lambda$ be a b-Weil function on $X$, and let $\mathbf D$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor on $X$. We say that $\lambda$ is a \textbf{b-Weil function for $\mathbf D$} if $\mathbf D$ is represented by a pair $(Y,D)$ as in Definition \ref{def_b_divisor}, such that if $\phi\colon Y\to X$ is the structural morphism of $Y$, then $\lambda\circ\phi$ extends to a Weil function for $D$ on $Y$. \end{definition} \begin{proposition}\label{prop_b_div_vs_b_Weil} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a number field $k$. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] For $i=1,2$ let $\mathbf D_i$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor on $X$ and let $\lambda_i$ be a b-Weil function for $\mathbf D_i$. Then $-\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_1+\lambda_2$ are b-Weil functions for $-\mathbf D_1$ and $\mathbf D_1+\mathbf D_2$, respectively. \item[(b).] Let $\mathbf D$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor and let $\lambda$ be a b-Weil function on $X$ for $\mathbf D$. Then $\lambda$ is $M_k$-bounded from below if and only if $\mathbf D$ is effective, and $\lambda$ is $M_k$-bounded if and only if $\mathbf D=0$. \item[(c).] Let $\lambda$ be a b-Weil function on $X$. Then there is a unique b-Cartier b-divisor $\mathbf D$ such that $\lambda$ is a b-Weil function for $\mathbf D$. \item[(d).] Let $\mathbf D$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor on $X$. Then there is a b-Weil function $\lambda$ for $\mathbf D$. \item[(e).] The map $\lambda\mapsto\mathbf D$ in part (c) gives a group isomorphism from the group of b-Weil functions on $X$, modulo addition of $M_k$-bounded functions, to the group of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$. \end{enumerate} Analogous statements hold for local b-Weil functions at a fixed place $v$ of $k$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} (a). For each $i$ let $\phi_i\colon Y_i\to X$ be a model of $X$ and let $D_i$ be a Cartier divisor on $Y_i$ such that $\phi_i\circ\lambda_i$ extends to a Weil function on $Y_i$ for $D_i$, and such that $(Y_i,D_i)$ represents $\mathbf D_i$. Then the first assertion is immediate, since $-\phi_1\circ\lambda_1$ extends to a Weil function for $-D_1$ on $Y_1$. For the second assertion, we may replace $Y_1$ and $Y_2$ with a model $Y$ for $X$ that dominates both of them, and pull back $D_1$ and $D_2$ to $Y$. Then the assertion follows from additivity of Weil functions on $Y$. (b). Let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a model of $X$ and let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $Y$ such that $\phi\circ\lambda$ extends to a Weil function for $D$ on $Y$, and such that $(Y,D)$ represents $\mathbf D$. By replacing $Y$ with its normalization, we may assume that $Y$ is normal. Then $\lambda$ is $M_k$-bounded from below if and only if $D$ is effective, by Proposition \ref{weil_eff}. If $D$ is effective, then so is $\mathbf D$. Conversely, if $\mathbf D$ is effective, then it is represented by a pair $(Y',D')$ with $D'$ effective. Let $Y''$ be a normal model of $X$ that dominates both $Y$ and $Y'$, and let $\psi\colon Y''\to Y$ and $\psi'\colon Y''\to Y'$ be the implied morphisms. Then $D=\psi_{}(\psi')^{}D'$ is effective, so $\lambda$ is $M_k$-bounded from below. The second assertion follows formally by applying the first assertion also to $-\lambda$ and $-\mathbf D$. (c). Let $\lambda$ be a b-Weil function on $X$. By Definition~\ref{def_b_weil_fcn} there exist a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ for $X$ and a Cartier divisor $D$ on $Y$ such that $\lambda\circ\phi$ extends to a Weil function for $D$ on $Y$. Then $\lambda$ is a b-Weil function for the b-Cartier b-divisor $\mathbf D$ represented by the pair $(Y,D)$. To show uniqueness, suppose that $\lambda$ is a b-Weil function for b-Cartier b-divisors $\mathbf D_1$ and $\mathbf D_2$. Then $\lambda-\lambda=0$ is a b-Weil function for $\mathbf D_1-\mathbf D_2$. This divisor must be zero, by part (b) applied to $\pm(\mathbf D_1-\mathbf D_2)$. (d). Let $\mathbf D$ be a b-Cartier b-divisor, and let $(Y,D)$ be a pair representing it. By Chow's lemma, we may assume that $Y$ is projective. By Lang \cite[Ch.~10, Thm.~3.5]{lang}, there is a Weil function for $D$ on $Y$. This defines a b-Weil function for $\mathbf D$. (e). Part (c) determines a well-defined function from the group of b-Weil functions on $X$ to the group of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$. Part (a) implies that it is a group homomorphism, part (b) implies that its kernel is the subgroup of $M_k$-bounded b-Weil functions, and part (d) implies that it is surjective. The proofs of corresponding statements for local b-Weil functions are left to the reader. \end{proof} The main reason for defining b-Weil functions in \cite{vojta_ssav1} was the fact that the (pointwise) maximum of two Weil functions may not be a Weil function, but the maximum of two b-Weil functions is another b-Weil function. The main result of this section shows that the group of b-Cartier b-divisors on a variety also has a least upper bound, relative to the cone of effective b-Cartier b-divisors, and that this lub corresponds to the maximum of b-Weil functions. We start with a lemma on the underlying geometry of a least upper bound of b-Cartier b-divisors. It will not be used until later (Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs}), but it is stated here because it provides valuable intuition. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma_lub_intuit} Let $X$ be a variety over a field, and let $\mathbf D$ and $\mathbf D_1,\dots,\mathbf D_n$ be b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$. Let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a normal model of $X$ such that $\mathbf D$ and $\mathbf D_1,\dots,\mathbf D_\ell$ are represented by Cartier divisors $D$ and $D_1,\dots,D_\ell$ on $Y$, respectively. Then $\mathbf D$ is a least upper bound of $\mathbf D_1,\dots,\mathbf D_\ell$ if and only if $D-D_i$ is effective for all $i$ and $$\bigcap_{i=1}^\ell \Supp(D-D_i) = \emptyset\;.$$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By Lemma \ref{lemm_eff_b_cartier}, $\mathbf D$ is an upper bound of $\mathbf D_1,\dots,\mathbf D_\ell$ if and only if $D-D_i$ is effective for all $i$. Let $Z=\bigcap\Supp(D-D_i)$ and suppose that $Z\ne\emptyset$. Let $f\colon Y'\to Y$ be the blowing-up of $Y$ along $Z$, and let $E$ be the exceptional divisor. Then $E$ is a nonzero effective Cartier divisor, and $f^{}(D-D_i)-E$ is effective for all $i$. This shows that $(Y',f^{}D-E)$ represents another upper bound of $\mathbf D_1,\dots,\mathbf D_\ell$, and therefore $\mathbf D$ is not a \emph{least} upper bound. Thus $Z=\emptyset$. \end{proof} This next lemma shows that the above situation is not uncommon. It is taken from the proof of \cite[Prop.~7.3]{vojta_ssav1}. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma_max_divisors} Let $D$ be a Cartier divisor on a variety $Y$ over a field $k$. Then there are a proper model $\phi\colon Z\to Y$ and effective Cartier divisors $D'$ and $D''$ on $Z$ such that $\phi^{}D=D'-D''$, and such that the supports of $D'$ and $D''$ are disjoint. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $U$ is an open subset of $Y$ on which $D$ is equal to a principal divisor $(f)$, then define $Z_U$ to be the closure of the graph of the rational function $U\dashrightarrow\mathbb P^1$ given by $f$, and let $D'$ and $D''$ be the pull-backs of the divisors $[0]$ and $[\infty]$ on $\mathbb P^1$, respectively. This construction is compatible with restricting to an open subset $U$, and multiplying $f$ by an element of $\mathscr O_U^{}$ induces an automorphism of $Z_U$ that fixes $D'$ and $D''$. Therefore the schemes $Z_U$ and divisors $D'$ and $D''$ on $Z_U$ glue together to give a scheme $Z$, proper over $Y$, and Cartier divisors $D'$ and $D''$ on $Z$, that satisfy the conditions of the lemma. \end{proof} For the next step, we recall that a \textbf{lattice} is a partially ordered set in which every pair of elements $a,b$ has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound. These are called the \textbf{join} and \textbf{meet}, respectively, and are denoted $a\vee b$ and $a\wedge b$, respectively. The following definition comes from Steinberg \cite[Ch.~2]{steinberg}. \begin{definition}\label{lattice_group} A \textbf{lattice-ordered group} is a group $G$, together with a partial ordering on $G$ that respects the group operation (i.e., $x\le y\iff xz\le yz\iff zx\le zy$ for all $x,y,z\in G$), such that the partial ordering forms a lattice. \end{definition} In this paper, all lattice-ordered groups are abelian, and are written additively. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_b_div_lattice} Let $X$ be a complete variety over a field $k$. \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] Let the set of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$ be partially ordered by the relation $\mathbf D_1\leq\mathbf D_2$ if $D_2-D_1$ is effective. Then the group of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$ is a lattice-ordered group. \item[(b).] Assume that $k$ is a number field. Let $G$ be the group of b-Weil functions on $X$, modulo the set of $M_k$-bounded functions. Let $G$ be partially ordered by the condition that $\lambda_1\leq\lambda_2$ if $\lambda_2-\lambda_1$ is $M_k$-bounded from below. Then $G$ is isomorphic to the partially ordered group of b-Cartier b-divisors on $X$ under the isomorphism of Proposition~\ref{prop_b_div_vs_b_Weil}. In particular, it is a lattice-ordered group. \item[(c).] Assume that $k$ is a number field, and let $G$ be the group of part (b). Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be b-Weil functions for b-Cartier b-divisors $\mathbf D_1$ and $\mathbf D_2$, respectively, on $X$. Then the function $\max\{\lambda_1,\lambda_2\}$ is a b-Weil function for the b-Cartier b-divisor $\mathbf D_1\vee\mathbf D_2$, and its image in $G$ is the join of the images of $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ in $G$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} (a). That the group is a partially ordered group is clear from the definition of the ordering. To check that it is a lattice, by the group property it suffices to check that for any b-Cartier b-Weil divisor $\mathbf D$ on $X$, the pair $\mathbf D,\mathbf 0$ has a least upper bound. To do this, let $(Y,D)$ be a representative for $\mathbf D$. By replacing $Y$ with the model constructed in Lemma~\ref{lemma_max_divisors}, we may assume that $D=D'-D''$, where $D'$ and $D''$ are effective Cartier divisors with disjoint supports. We may also assume that $Y$ is normal. Then $(Y,D')$ represents a least upper bound for the pair $\mathbf D,\mathbf 0$. Indeed, this is true by Lemma \ref{lemma_lub_intuit}, because the divisors $D'-D=D''$ and $D'-0$ are effective divisors with disjoint supports. (b). Part (b) of Proposition \ref{prop_b_div_vs_b_Weil} implies that the group isomorphism preserves the ordering, so $G$ is a lattice-ordered group. (c). Again, we may assume that $\lambda_2=0$. Then $\mathbf D_2=\mathbf 0$. As in the proof of (a), we may let $(Y,D)$ be a representative for $\mathbf D_1$, and may assume that $Y$ is normal and that $D=D'-D''$, where $D'$ and $D''$ are effective with disjoint supports. Then $(Y,D')$ represents $\mathbf D_1\vee\mathbf 0$. Let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be the structural morphism of $Y$. Then $\phi^{}\lambda_1$ is a Weil function for $D$. By Proposition \ref{weil_min}, $\max\{\phi^{}\lambda_1,0\}$ is a Weil function for $D'$, and therefore $\max\{\lambda_1,0\}$ is a b-Weil function for the b-Cartier b-divisor represented by the pair $(Y,D')$. Thus, it is a b-Weil function for $\mathbf D_1\vee\mathbf 0$. This proves the first assertion. The other assertion then follows from (b). \end{proof} We now can give some equivalent formulations of Definition \ref{def_nevprime} using b-divisors and b-Weil functions. We start with a definition that focuses on the part of the definition of $\Nevbir$ that varies. \begin{definition}\label{def_mu_b_growth} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, let $V$ be a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$ with $\dim V>1$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. We say that $D$ has \textbf{$\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L$} if there is a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ such that for all $Q\in Y$ there is a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_b_growth} \phi^{}(\mathcal B) \ge \mu \phi^{}D \end{equation} in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. Also, we say that $D$ has \textbf{$\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$} if it satisfies the above condition with $\mathscr L=\mathscr O(D)$. \end{definition} Then Definition \ref{def_nevprime} basically says that $\Nevbir(D)$ is the infimum of $(\dim V)/\mu$ over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $ND$ has $\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L^D$. (The corresponding condition for Definition \ref{def_nev2} is called $\mu$-growth; see \cite{ru}. The proof of Lemma \ref{lemma_comp_nevs} then amounts to saying that if $D$ has $\mu$-growth with respect to $V$, then it also has $\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$.) The following proposition completes Proposition \ref{prop_nevprime_weil} (and adds more equivalent conditions). \begin{proposition}\label{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, let $V$ be a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$ with $\dim V>1$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. Then the following are equivalent. \begin{enumerate} \item $D$ has $\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L$. \item Let $n$ be a positive integer such that $n\mu\in\mathbb Z$. Then there are bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_b_growth_ii} n\bigvee_{i=1}^\ell (\mathcal B_i) \ge n\mu D \end{equation} relative to the cone of effective b-Cartier b-divisors. \item There are bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). \item For each place $v\in M_k$ there are finitely many bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; local Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1,v},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell,v}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively, at $v$; a local Weil function $\lambda_{D,v}$ for $D$ at $v$; and a constant $c$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_b_growth_iv} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v} \ge \mu\lambda_{D,v} - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(\overline k_v)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). \item The condition of (iv) holds for at least one place $v$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Conditions (ii) and (iii) are equivalent by Proposition \ref{prop_b_div_lattice}. Conditions (iii)--(v) are equivalent by Proposition \ref{weil_eff}. The implication (i)$\implies$(iii) is Proposition \ref{prop_nevprime_weil}. Finally, (ii)$\implies$(i) follows from Lemma \ref{lemm_ii_impl_i} (below), with $D_i=(\mathcal B_i)$ for all $i$. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{lemm_ii_impl_i} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $\mu>0$ be a rational number, and let $n$ be a positive integer such that $n\mu\in\mathbb Z$. Let $D$ and $D_1,\dots,D_\ell$ be Cartier divisors on $X$. Assume that \begin{equation}\label{lemm_eq_ii} n\bigvee_{i=1}^\ell D_i \ge n\mu D \end{equation} relative to the cone of effective b-Cartier b-divisors. Then there is a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ such that for all $Q\in Y$ there is an index $i$ such that $\phi^{}D_i\ge\mu\phi^{}D$ in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Assume that (\ref{lemm_eq_ii}) is true. Let $\mathbf E=\bigvee D_i$, and let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a normal model of $X$ such that $\mathbf E$ is represented by a Cartier divisor $E$ on $Y$. By Lemma \ref{lemma_lub_intuit}, $E-\phi^{}D_i$ is effective for all $i$, and $\bigcap\Supp(E-\phi^{}D_i)=\emptyset$. Therefore, for any given $Q\in Y$ there is an index $i$ such that $Q\notin\Supp(E-\phi^{}D_i)$. Fix such an $i$, and let $U_i=Y\setminus\Supp(E-\phi^{}D_i)$. Then $Q\in U_i$. Moreover, by (\ref{lemm_eq_ii}), $$n\phi^{}D_i\big\|_{U_i} = nE\big\|_{U_i} \ge n\mu\phi^{}D\big\|_{U_i}$$ relative to the cone of effective divisors on $U_i$. Therefore $\phi^{}D_i\ge\mu\phi^{}D$ on $U_i$ relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U_i$, as was to be shown. \end{proof} \begin{remark} In light of Proposition \ref{prop_b_nev}, one may regard (\ref{eq3}) or (\ref{eq_mu_b_growth_ii}) as being conditions that are \emph{local on the Zariski--Riemann space}, as opposed to (\ref{eq2}), which is local in the Zariski topology. (The Zariski--Riemann space of a complete variety $X$ is the inverse limit of all models of $X$ \cite[Ch.~VI, \S\,17]{zar_sam_II}.) \end{remark} Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs} leads to the following Corollary which is the Definition \ref{bidef1} of $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D)$: \begin{corollary}\label{cor_nevprime_weil} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. Then $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,V,\mu} \frac{\dim V}{\mu}\;,$$ where the infimum passes over all triples $(N,V,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $V$ is a linear subspace of $H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ with $\dim V>1$, and $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, with the following property. There are finitely many bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu N\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). (Here we use the same convention as in Definition \ref{def_nevprime} when there are no triples $(N,V,\mu)$ that satisfy the condition.) \end{corollary} Similar corollaries are true for conditions (ii), (iv), and (v) of Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs}. The following proposition can be used in the proof of the General Theorem in Section \ref{sect_aut}. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_aut_weil_ineq} Let $X$ be a variety over a number field or over $\mathbf C$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, and let $E_1,\dots,E_m$ be effective Cartier divisors on $X$. Let $s$ be a nonzero global section of $\mathscr L$ lying in the (coherent) subsheaf of $\mathscr L$ generated by $\mathscr L(-E_j)$ ($j=1,\dots,m$). Let $\lambda_s$ be a Weil function for the divisor $(s)$, and for each $j$ let $\lambda_{E_j}$ be a Weil function for $E_j$. Then there is an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation}\label{aut_weil_ineq} \lambda_s \ge \min_j \lambda_{E_j} + c\;. \end{equation} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} By Proposition \ref{prop_b_div_lattice}, (\ref{aut_weil_ineq}) is equivalent to the assertion that the divisor $$(s) - \bigwedge_{j=1}^m E_j$$ is effective. Let $\mathbf E=\bigwedge E_j$, and let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a model of $X$ on which $\mathbf E$ is represented by a Cartier divisor $E$. Since $\phi^{}E_j-E$ is effective for all $j$, the sheaf $\phi^{}\mathscr L(-E)$ contains the sheaves $\phi^{}(\mathscr L(-E_j))$ for all $j$, and therefore $\phi^{}s$ is a global section of $\phi^{}\mathscr L(-E)$. This implies that the divisor $\phi^{}(s)-E$ is effective, as was to be shown. \end{proof} \section{The Proof of Theorems \ref{b_thmd} and \ref{b_thmc} for \texorpdfstring{$\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$}{Nevbir(L,D)}}\label{proofs} In this section, we prove Theorems \ref{b_thmd} and \ref{b_thmc}, which are the variations of Theorems A and B with $\Nev(D)$ replaced by $\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)$. We will only prove Theorem \ref{b_thmc} (the number field case), since the proof of Theorem \ref{b_thmd} is very similar. However, for this theorem we will give both a complete proof, based on Proposition 5.6 and Theorem B with $\Nev(\mathscr L, D)$ (note that Theorem B still holds, with the same proof, if $\Nev(D)$ is replaced by $\Nev(\mathscr L, D)$), and a sketch of how to prove the theorem directly, based on the proof of Theorem B in \cite{ru}. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{b_thmc}] Let $k$, $S$, $X$, and $D$ be as in the statement of the theorem, and let $\epsilon>0$ be given. By Proposition \ref{prop_b_nev}b, there is a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ such that \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_eq2} \Nev(\phi^\mathscr L, \phi^{}D) < \Nevbir(\mathscr L, D) + \epsilon\;. \end{equation} Let $Z_0\subseteq Y$ be the ramification locus of $\phi$. By Theorem B with $\Nev(\mathscr L, D)$, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z_1$ of $Y$ such that the inequality \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_eq3} m_S(y, \phi^{}D) \le \left(\Nev(\phi^\mathscr L, \phi^{}D)+\epsilon\right) h_{\phi^{}\mathscr L}(y) \end{equation} holds for all $y\in Y(k)$ outside of $Z_1$. By functoriality of proximity functions, (\ref{b_thmc_eq3}), (\ref{b_thmc_eq2}), and functoriality of heights, we then have \[ \begin{split} m_S(x,D) &= m_S(\phi^{-1}(x),\phi^{}D) + O(1) \\ &\le \left(\Nev(\phi^\mathscr L, \phi^{}D)+\epsilon\right) h_{\phi^{}\mathscr L}(\phi^{-1}(x)) + O(1) \\ &\le \left(\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)+2\epsilon\right) h_{\phi^{}\mathscr L}(\phi^{-1}(x)) + O(1) \\ &= \left(\Nevbir(\mathscr L, D)+2\epsilon\right) h_{\mathscr L}(x) + O(1) \end{split} \] for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z:=\phi(Z_0\cup Z_1)$. (Note that this set is closed since $\phi$ is proper, and that $\phi$ induces an isomorphism over $X\setminus Z$ since $\phi$ is unramified over that set.) \end{proof} We now indicate how Theorem \ref{b_thmc} can be proved using the methods of \cite[Sect.~2]{ru}. First, we note that it will suffice to prove the following proposition. This is a variant of \cite[Prop.~2.1]{ru}. \begin{proposition}\label{b_thmc_prop21} Let $k$ and $S$ be as in the statement of Theorem \ref{b_thmc}. Let $X$ be a normal complete variety over $k$. Let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor and $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$ with $h^0(\mathscr L^N)\ge 1$ for $N$ big enough. Let $(N,V,\mu)$ be a triple such that $ND$ has $\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L^N$. Then, for each $\epsilon>0$, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that the inequality $$m_S(x,D) \le \left(\frac{\dim V}{\mu} + \epsilon\right) h_{\mathscr L}(x)$$ holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$. \end{proposition} The fact that this proposition implies Theorem \ref{b_thmc} follows using almost exactly the same argument as appears in the end of Sect.~2 of \cite{ru} (involving pulling the proximity and height functions back to the normalization of $X$). It will not be repeated here. \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{b_thmc_prop21}] Assume that $ND$ has $\mu$-b-growth with respect to $V\subseteq H^0(X,\mathscr L^N)$ and $\mathscr L$. By Corollary \ref{cor_nevprime_weil}, there are bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V$; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_pr21_eq1} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu N\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). Write $$\bigcup_{i=1}^\ell \mathcal B_i = \{s_1,\dots,s_q\}\;.$$ and for each $j=1,\dots,q$ choose a Weil function $\lambda_{s_j}$ for the divisor $(s_j)$. For each $i=1,\dots,\ell$, let $J_i\subseteq\{1,\dots,q\}$ be the subset such that $\mathcal B_i = \{s_j:j\in J_i\}$. Then, by (\ref{b_thmc_pr21_eq1}), for each $v\in S$ there are constants $c_v$ and $c_v'$ such that \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_pr21_eq3} \begin{split} \mu N\lambda_{D,v} &\le \max_{1\le i\le\ell} \lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v} + c_v' \\ &\le \max_{1\le i\le\ell} \sum_{j\in J_i} \lambda_{s_j,v} + c_v\;. \end{split} \end{equation} By Schmidt's Subspace Theorem in the form of Theorem \ref{schmidt_base}, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that the inequality \begin{equation}\label{b_thmc_pr21_eq4} \sum_{v\in S} \max_J \sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{s_j,v}(x) \le (\dim V+\epsilon)h_{\mathscr L^N}(x) \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$; here the maximum is taken over all subsets $J$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ for which the sections $s_j$, $j\in J$, are linearly independent. Combining (\ref{b_thmc_pr21_eq3}) and (\ref{b_thmc_pr21_eq4}) gives \[ \begin{split} \mu Nm_S(D,x) &= \mu N\sum_{v\in S} \lambda_{D,v}(x) + O(1) \\ &\le \sum_{v\in S} \max_{1\le i\le\ell} \sum_{j\in J_i} \lambda_{s_j,v}(x) + O(1) \\ &\le \sum_{v\in S} \max_J \sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{s_j,v}(x) + O(1) \\ &\le (\dim V+\epsilon)h_{\mathscr L^N}(x) + O(1)\\ &=N(\dim V+\epsilon)h_{\mathscr L}(x) + O(1) \end{split} \] for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$. Here we used the fact that all of the $J_i$ occur among the $J$ in (\ref{b_thmc_pr21_eq4}). \end{proof} \section{An Example of Faltings: Geometry}\label{falt_geom} In his 1999 contribution to the \emph{Baker's Garden} volume, Faltings \cite{faltings} gave a class of examples of irreducible divisors $D$ on $\mathbb P^2$ for which $\mathbb P^2\setminus D$ has only finitely many integral points over any number ring, and over any localization of such a ring away from finitely many places. This paper is notable for two reasons. First, the divisor $D$ is irreducible. Prior to the paper, the only divisors $D$ on $\mathbb P^2$ for which such statements were know were divisors with at least four irreducible components. The second reason is that the paper gives examples of varieties for which finiteness of integral points is known, yet which cannot be embedded into semiabelian varieties. Prior to the paper, the only varieties for which such finiteness statements were known, and which could not be embedded into semiabelian varieties, were moduli spaces of abelian varieties. These examples were further explored by Zannier \cite{zannier} using methods of Zannier and Corvaja, although Zannier used a different family of examples. This family has substantial overlap with the examples of Faltings but does not contain all of his examples. After that, Levin \cite[\S\,13]{levin_annals} derived a generalization, using his method of \emph{large divisors,} that encompasses the examples of both Faltings and Zannier. Looking at Faltings' examples from the point of view of the Nevanlinna constant was what led to the formulation of $\Nevbir$. This came about because the left-hand sides of (\ref{eq_2.5.1}) and (\ref{eq_2.5.2}) involved maxima of Weil functions. We will split the main result of Faltings' paper into two theorems. The first of the two guarantees that examples with certain properties exist, and the second says that in each such example, the divisor $D$ on $\mathbb P^2$ has the property that $\mathbb P^2\setminus D$ has only finitely many integral points over any ring $\mathscr O_{k,S}$, where $\mathscr O_{k,S}$ is the localization $\mathscr O_{k,S}$ of the ring of integers of a sufficiently large number field $k$ away from a finite set of places $S$. We prove only the second theorem here, since that is the part that involves Nevanlinna constants. This section will cover the geometry of the examples, and the part of the proof of Theorem \ref{falt_dioph} that is specific to the geometry, and the next section will finish the proof of the theorem, using methods applicable in more general settings. \begin{theorem}[Faltings]\label{falt_constr} Let $k$ be a field of characteristic zero, and let $X$ be a smooth geometrically irreducible algebraic surface over $k$. Then, for all sufficiently positive line sheaves $\mathscr L$ on $X$, there exists a morphism $f\colon X\to\mathbb P^2$ that satisfies the following conditions. \begin{enumerate} \item $f^{}\mathscr O(1)\cong\mathscr L$. \item The ramification locus $Z$ of $f$ is smooth and irreducible, and the ramification index is $2$. \item The restriction of $f$ to $Z$ is birational onto its image $D\subseteq\mathbb P^2$. \item $D$ is nonsingular except for cusps and simple double points. \item Let $Y\to X\to\mathbb P^2$ denote the Galois closure of $X\to\mathbb P^2$ (i.e., the normalization of $X$ in the Galois closure of $K(X)$ over $K(\mathbb P^2)$). Also let $n=\deg f$. Then $Y$ is smooth and its Galois group over $\mathbb P^2$ is the full symmetric group $\mathscr S_n$. \item The ramification locus of $Y$ over $\mathbb P^2$ is the sum of distinct conjugate effective divisors $Z_{ij}$, $1\le i<j\le n$. They have smooth supports, and are disjoint with the following two exceptions. Points of $Y$ lying over double points of $D$ are fixed points of a subgroup $\mathscr S_2\times\mathscr S_2$ of $\mathscr S_n$, and they lie on $Z_{ij}\cap Z_{\ell m}$ with distinct indices $i,j,\ell,m$. Points of $Y$ lying over cusps of $D$ are fixed points of a subgroup $\mathscr S_3$ of $\mathscr S_n$, and lie on $Z_{ij}\cap Z_{i\ell}\cap Z_{j\ell}$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} For a proof of this theorem, and also an explicit description of the ``sufficiently positive'' condition on $\mathscr L$, see Faltings' paper \cite{faltings}. For convenience, write $Z_{ij}=Z_{ji}$ when $i,j\in\{1,\dots,n\}$ and $i>j$. Let $$A_i = \sum_{j\ne i} Z_{ij} \qquad\text{and}\qquad M = \sum A_i = \sum_{i\ne j} Z_{ij}\;.$$ Let $L$ be the divisor class of $\mathscr L$ on $X$, and let it also denote the pull-back of this divisor class to $Y$. In addition, let $d=\deg D$. We then have $$2\sum_{i<j}Z_{ij} = \sum A_i = M \sim dL\;.$$ The other part of Faltings' result is the following. \begin{theorem}\label{falt_dioph} Let $k$ be a number field and let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$. Let $Y$, $n$, $\{Z_{ij}\}_{i<j}$, $\{A_i\}_i$, and $M$ be as in Theorem \ref{falt_constr} and the discussion following it. Also let $\alpha$ be a rational number such that $M-\alpha A_i$ is an ample $\mathbb Q$-divisor for all $i$. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] if $\alpha>6$ then no set of $\mathscr O_{k,S}$-integral points on $Y\setminus\bigcup Z_{ij}$ is Zariski-dense, and \item[(b).] if $\alpha>8$ then every set of $\mathscr O_{k,S}$-integral points on $Y\setminus\bigcup Z_{ij}$ is finite. \end{enumerate} Since $Y\setminus\bigcup Z_{ij}$ is an \'etale cover of $\mathbb P^2\setminus D$, the above conclusions also hold for $\mathbb P^2\setminus D$ (see Serre \cite[\S\,4.2]{serre} or the second author \cite[\S\,5.1]{Vojta_LNM}). \end{theorem} The first part of the proof of this theorem is the following proposition, which contains all of the geometry specific to the situation of Theorem \ref{falt_constr}. \begin{proposition}\label{falt_main_prop} Let $k$ be a number field, and let $Y$, $n$, $\{Z_{ij}\}_{i<j}$, $\{A_i\}_i$, $M$, and $\alpha$ be as in Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}. Assume that $n\ge4$. Fix Weil functions $\lambda_{ij}$ for each $Z_{ij}$. Let $\beta$ be an integer such that $\beta\alpha\in\mathbb Z$ and such that $\beta M$ and all $\beta(M-\alpha A_i)$ are very ample. Fix an embedding $Y\hookrightarrow\mathbb P^N_k$ associated to a complete linear system of $\beta M$, and regard $Y$ as a subvariety of $\mathbb P^N_k$ via this embedding. Then \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] There are a finite list $H_1,\dots,H_q$ of hyperplanes in $\mathbb P^N_k$, with associated Weil functions $\lambda_{H_j}$ for all $j$, and constants $c_v$ for all $v\in M_k$, with the following property. Let $\mathscr J$ be the collection of all $3$-element subsets $J=\{j_0,j_1,j_2\}$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ for which $Y\cap H_{j_0}\cap H_{j_1}\cap H_{j_2}=\emptyset$. Then $\mathscr J\ne\emptyset$, and the inequality \begin{equation}\label{eq_2.5.1} \max_{J\in\mathscr J}\sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{H_j}(y) \ge \beta\alpha \sum_{i<j}\lambda_{ij}(y) - c_v \end{equation} holds for all $v\in M_k$ and all $y\in Y(\overline k_v)$ not lying on the support of any $Z_{ij}$ or on any of the $H_j$. \item[(b).] Let $C$ be an integral curve in $Y$, not contained in the support of any $Z_{ij}$. Then there are a finite list $H_1,\dots,H_q$ of hyperplanes, with associated Weil functions as before, and constants $c_v$ for all $v\in M_k$, with the following property. Let $\mathscr J$ be the collection of all $2$-element subsets $J=\{j_0,j_1\}$ of $\{1,\dots,q\}$ for which $C\cap H_{j_0}\cap H_{j_1}=\emptyset$. Then $\mathscr J\ne\emptyset$, and the inequality \begin{equation}\label{eq_2.5.2} \max_{J\in\mathscr J}\sum_{j\in J} \lambda_{H_j}(y) \ge \frac{\beta\alpha}{2} \sum_{i<j}\lambda_{ij}(y) - c_v \end{equation} holds for all $v\in M_k$ and for all but finitely many $y\in C(\overline k_v)$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} The proof of this proposition, in turn, relies mainly on two lemmas. These lemmas replace Faltings' computations of ideals associated to indices. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma_2.5.3} Let $i,j,\ell,m$ be distinct indices. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] there exist hyperplanes $H_0$, $H_1$, and $H_2$ in $\mathbb P^N_k$, such that $$Y\cap H_0\cap H_1\cap H_2=\emptyset$$ and \begin{equation}\label{eq_2.5.3.1} (H_0+H_1+H_2)\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha(Z_{ij}+Z_{\ell m}) \end{equation} is an effective Cartier divisor on $Y$; and \item[(b).] given any integral curve $C\subseteq Y$ not contained in any of the $Z_{ab}$, there are hyperplanes $H_0$ and $H_1$ in $\mathbb P^N_k$, such that $C\cap H_0\cap H_1=\emptyset$ and \begin{equation}\label{eq_2.5.3.2} (H_0+H_1)\big\|_C - Z_{ij}\big\|_C \end{equation} is an effective Cartier divisor on $C$. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\sigma_i$ and $\sigma_j$ be the canonical sections of $\mathscr O(A_i)$ and $\mathscr O(A_j)$, respectively. Then the linear system $$\sigma_i^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_i)) + \sigma_j^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_j))$$ has base locus $\Supp A_i\cap\Supp A_j$, since the first summand has base locus $\Supp A_i$ and the second has base locus $\Supp A_j$. This intersection consists of the union of $Z_{ij}$ and finitely many closed points. Choose an element of this linear system, sufficiently generic so that it does not vanish identically on any irreducible component of $Z_{\ell m}$, and let $H_0$ be the associated hyperplane in $\mathbb P^N_k$. Then $H_0\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha Z_{ij}$ is an effective divisor. Similarly let $\sigma_\ell$ and $\sigma_m$ be the canonical sections of $\mathscr O(A_\ell)$ and $\mathscr O(A_m)$, and let $H_1$ be the hyperplane associated to an element of $$\sigma_\ell^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_\ell)) + \sigma_m^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_m))\;,$$ chosen sufficiently generically such that $H_1$ does not contain any irreducible component of $H_0\cap Y$. Then $H_1\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha Z_{\ell m}$ is effective. By construction, $Y\cap H_0\cap H_1$ is a finite union of closed points, so we can let $H_2$ be a hyperplane that avoids those points to ensure that $Y\cap H_0\cap H_1\cap H_2=\emptyset$. By construction, $$\left(H_0\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha Z_{ij}\right) + \left(H_1\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha Z_{\ell m}\right) + H_2\big\|_Y$$ is effective, and this is the divisor (\ref{eq_2.5.3.1}). This proves (a). For part (b), let $\sigma_i$ be as above, and let $H_0$ be the hyperplane associated to an element of $\sigma_i^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_i))$, chosen generically so that $H_0$ does not contain $C$. Let $H_1$ be a hyperplane in $\mathbb P^N_k$, chosen so that $C\cap H_0\cap H_1=\emptyset$. Since $H_0\big\|_C - Z_{ij}\big\|_C$ is an effective divisor, so is (\ref{eq_2.5.3.2}). \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{lemma_2.5.4} Let $i,j,\ell$ be distinct indices. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a).] there exist hyperplanes $H_0$, $H_1$, and $H_2$ in $\mathbb P^N_k$, such that $$Y\cap H_0\cap H_1\cap H_2=\emptyset$$ and $$(H_0+H_1+H_2)\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha(Z_{ij} + Z_{i\ell} + Z_{j\ell})$$ is an effective Cartier divisor on $Y$; and \item[(b).] given any integral curve $C\subseteq Y$ not contained in any of the $Z_{ab}$, there are hyperplanes $H_0$ and $H_1$ in $\mathbb P^N_k$, such that $C\cap H_0\cap H_1=\emptyset$ and \begin{equation}\label{eq_2.5.4.1} (H_0+H_1)\big\|_C - \beta\alpha(Z_{ij} + Z_{i\ell})\big\|_C \end{equation} is an effective Cartier divisor on $C$. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\sigma_i$ and $\sigma_j$ be as in the preceding proof. Choose a section of the linear system $$\sigma_i^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_i)) + \sigma_j^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_j))\;,$$ and let $H_0$ be the associated hyperplane. Then $H_0\big\|_Y-\beta\alpha Z_{ij}$ is effective. We may assume that the choice of $H_0$ is sufficiently generic so that $H_0$ does not contain any irreducible component of $A_\ell$. Next let $\sigma_\ell$ be the canonical section of $\mathscr O(A_\ell)$, and let $H_1$ be the hyperplane associated to a section of $$\sigma_\ell^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_\ell))\;.$$ Then $H_1\big\|_Y - \beta\alpha(Z_{i\ell}+Z_{j\ell})$ is effective. We may assume that $H_1$ does not contain any irreducible component of $Y\cap H_0$. Again, $Y\cap H_0\cap H_1$ consists of finitely many points, and we choose $H_2$ to be any hyperplane not meeting any of these points. Part (a) then concludes as in the previous lemma. For part (b), let $H_0$ and $H_1$ be the hyperplanes associated to suitably chosen sections of $\sigma_i^{\beta\alpha}\cdot\Gamma(Y,\beta(M-\alpha A_i))$ and $\Gamma(Y,\beta M)$, respectively. As in the previous lemma, we then have $C\cap H_0\cap H_1=\emptyset$. Since $H_0\big\|_C-\beta\alpha(Z_{ij}+Z_{i\ell})\big\|_C$ is effective, so is (\ref{eq_2.5.4.1}). \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{falt_main_prop}] First consider part (a) of the proposition. Fix a place $v\in M_k$. Apply Lemmas \ref{lemma_2.5.3}a and \ref{lemma_2.5.4}a to all possible collections $i,j,\ell,m$ and $i,j,\ell$ of indices, respectively. This involves only finitely many applications, so only finitely many hyperplanes occur. Let $H_1,\dots,H_q$ be those hyperplanes. The conditions in Theorem \ref{falt_constr} on the intersections of the divisors $Z_{ij}$ imply that there is a constant $C_v$ such that, for each $y\in Y(k)$ not in $\bigcup\Supp Z_{ij}$, one of the following conditions holds. \begin{enumerate} \item $\lambda_{ij}(y)\le C_v$ for all $i$ and $j$; \item there are indices $i$ and $j$ such that $\lambda_{ij}(y)>C_v$ but $\lambda_{ab}(y)\le C_v$ in all other cases; \item there are distinct indices $i$, $j$, $\ell$, and $m$ such that $\lambda_{ij}(y)>C_v$ and $\lambda_{\ell m}(y)>C_v$ but $\lambda_{ab}(y)\le C_v$ in all other cases; or \item there are indices $i,j,\ell$ such that $\max\{\lambda_{ij}(y), \lambda_{i\ell}(y), \lambda_{j\ell}(y)\}>C_v$, but $\lambda_{ab}(y)\le C_v$ if $\{a,b\}\nsubseteq\{i,j,\ell\}$. \end{enumerate} For case (iii), (\ref{eq_2.5.1}) follows from Lemma \ref{lemma_2.5.3}a, since one can take $J$ corresponding to the hyperplanes occurring in the lemma, and the inequality will then follow from effectivity of (\ref{eq_2.5.3.1}). Case (ii) follows as a special case of this lemma, since $n\ge 4$. Case (iv) follows from Lemma \ref{lemma_2.5.4}a, by a similar argument. Finally, in case (i) there is nothing to prove. This proves (a). For part (b), let $H_1,\dots,H_q$ be a finite collection of hyperplanes occurring in all possible applications of Lemmas \ref{lemma_2.5.3}b and \ref{lemma_2.5.4}b with the given curve $C$. We have cases (i)--(iv) as before. Cases (ii) and (iii) follow from Lemma \ref{lemma_2.5.3}b, where we may assume without loss of generality that $\lambda_{ij}(y)\ge\lambda_{\ell m}(y)$ to obtain (\ref{eq_2.5.2}) from effectivity of (\ref{eq_2.5.3.2}). Similarly, case (iv) follows from Lemma \ref{lemma_2.5.4}b after a suitable permutation of the indices, and case (i) is again trivial. \end{proof} \begin{remark} It will not actually be needed in the sequel, but the collections $(c_v)$ of constants in each part of Proposition \ref{falt_main_prop} are actually $M_k$-constants. This follows directly from Proposition \ref{weil_eff}. \end{remark} \begin{remark} It is possible (and, in fact, slightly easier) to write Proposition \ref{falt_main_prop} in terms of b-Cartier b-divisors instead of Weil functions. For example, one can replace (\ref{eq_2.5.1}) with \begin{equation}\label{eq_2_5_1bis} \bigvee_{J\in\mathscr J} \sum_{j\in J} H_j \ge \beta\alpha\sum_{i<j} Z_{ij} \end{equation} relative to the cone of effective b-Cartier b-divisors. In the proof, one would let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a model for which the left-hand side of (\ref{eq_2_5_1bis}) pulls back to an ordinary divisor, and for each $P\in X$ one would consider four cases: \begin{enumerate} \item $P\notin Z_{ij}$ for all $i$, $j$; \item $P\in Z_{ij}$ for exactly one pair $i,j$; \item there are distinct indices $i,j,\ell,m$ such that $P\in Z_{ij}$ and $P\in Z_{\ell m}$, but $P\notin Z_{ab}$ for all other components; and \item there are indices $i,j,\ell$ such that $P$ lies on at least two of $Z_{ij}$, $Z_{i\ell}$, and $Z_{j\ell}$, but $P\notin Z_{ab}$ if $\{a,b\}\nsubseteq\{i,j,\ell\}$. \end{enumerate} In each case let $U$ be the complement of all $Z_{ab}$ that do not contain $P$. Then $U$ is an open neighborhood of $P$ in $X$, and there is a set $J$ of indices such that $\sum_{j\in J}H_j-\beta\alpha\sum_{a<b}Z_{ab}$ is effective on $U$. This set $J$ is obtained from Lemmas \ref{lemma_2.5.3} or \ref{lemma_2.5.4}, as appropriate. We choose to keep the phrasing in terms of Weil functions, however, since that is the phrasing that will be most convenient for the next step in the proof of Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}. \end{remark} \section{Conclusion of the Proof of Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}}\label{falt_finis} Although it is possible to conclude from Proposition \ref{falt_main_prop} that $\Nevbir\left(\sum Z_{ij}\right)<1$, this does not follow nearly as directly as one might first hope. One needs to use Mumford's theory of degree of contact, as in the work of Evertse and Ferretti \cite{ef_imrn}. This leads to a definition of \emph{Evertse--Ferretti Nevanlinna constant} $\NevEF(\mathscr L,D)$ (Definition \ref{def_nevef}). This section defines this new Nevanlinna constant, shows that it satisfies the expected diophantine property (Theorem \ref{ef_thmc}), and uses this theory to complete the proof of Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}. We start with a definition that corresponds to that of $\mu$-b-growth, and is suitable for applying the work of Evertse and Ferretti. \begin{definition}\label{def_mu_ef_growth} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. We say that $D$ has \textbf{$\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L$} if there is a model $\phi\colon Y\to X$ of $X$ such that for all $Q\in Y$ there are a base-point-free linear subspace $V\subseteq H^0(X,\mathscr L)$ with $\dim V=\dim X+1$ and a basis $\mathcal B$ of $V$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_ef_growth} \phi^{}(\mathcal B) \ge \mu \phi^{}D \end{equation} in a Zariski-open neighborhood $U$ of $Q$, relative to the cone of effective $\mathbb Q$-divisors on $U$. Also, we say that $D$ has \textbf{$\mu$-EF-growth} if it satisfies the above condition with $\mathscr L=\mathscr O(D)$. \end{definition} As with Proposition \ref{prop_mu_b_growth_equivs}, this definition can be expressed equivalently using b-Cartier b-divisors or b-Weil functions. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_mu_ef_growth_equivs} Let $X$ be a normal complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. Then the following are equivalent. \begin{enumerate} \item $D$ has $\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L$. \item Let $n$ be a positive integer such that $n\mu\in\mathbb Z$. Then there are base-point-free linear subspaces $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$ of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$, all of dimension $\dim X+1$, and corresponding bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$, respectively, such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_ef_growth_ii} n\bigvee_{i=1}^\ell (\mathcal B_i) \ge n\mu D \end{equation} relative to the cone of effective b-Cartier b-divisors. \item There are base-point-free linear subspaces $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$ of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$, all of dimension $\dim X+1$; bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$, respectively; Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a Weil function $\lambda_D$ for $D$; and an $M_k$-constant $c$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_ef_growth_iii} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i} \ge \mu\lambda_D - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(M_k)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). \item For each $v\in M_k$ there are base-point-free linear subspaces $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$ of $H^0(X,\mathscr L)$, all of dimension $\dim X+1$; bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$ of $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$, respectively; local Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1,v},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell,v}$ at $v$ for the divisors $(\mathcal B_1),\dots,(\mathcal B_\ell)$, respectively; a local Weil function $\lambda_{D,v}$ for $D$ at $v$; and a constant $c$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_mu_ef_growth_iv} \max_{1\le i\le\ell}\lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v} \ge \mu\lambda_{D,v} - c \end{equation} (as functions $X(\overline k_v)\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$). \item The condition of (iv) holds for at least one place $v$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Conditions (ii) and (iii) are equivalent by Proposition \ref{prop_b_div_lattice}, and (iii)--(v) are equivalent by Proposition \ref{weil_eff}. The implication (ii)$\implies$(i) follows from Lemma \ref{lemm_ii_impl_i}, with $D_i=(\mathcal B_i)$ for all $i$. To finish the proof, it will suffice to show that (i) implies (ii). Assume that condition (i) is true. Let $\phi\colon Y\to X$ be a model that satisfies the condition of Definition \ref{def_mu_ef_growth}. By quasi-compactness of $Y$, we may assume that only finitely many triples $(U,V,\mathcal B)$ occur. Let $(U_1,V_1,\mathcal B_1),\dots,(U_\ell,V_\ell,\mathcal B_\ell)$ be those triples. We may assume that $\bigvee(\mathcal B_i)$ is represented by a Cartier divisor $E$ on $Y$, and that $Y$ is normal. Let $n$ be a positive integer such that $n\mu\in\mathbb Z$, and let $n'$ be a positive integer such that $nn'\phi^{}(\mathcal B_i)-nn'\mu\phi^{}D$ is effective for all $i$. Then, for each $i$, $$nn'E\big\|_{U_i} \ge nn'\phi^{}(\mathcal B_i)\big\|_{U_i} \ge nn'\mu\phi^{*}D\big\|_{U_i}$$ relative to the cone of effective Cartier divisors on $U_i$, and this implies (\ref{eq_mu_ef_growth_ii}) since $Y$ is normal. \end{proof} \begin{definition}\label{def_nevef} Let $X$ be a complete variety, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. If $X$ is normal, then we define $$\NevEF(\mathscr L,D) = \inf_{N,\mu} \frac{\dim X+1}{\mu}\;,$$ where the infimum passes over all pairs $(N,\mu)$ such that $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$, $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, and $ND$ has $\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L^N$. If there are no such pairs $(N,\mu)$, then $\NevEF(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined to be $+\infty$. For a general complete variety $X$, $\NevEF(\mathscr L,D)$ is defined by pulling back to the normalization of $X$. If $L$ is a Cartier divisor or Cartier divisor class on $X$, then we define $\NevEF(L,D)=\NevEF(\mathscr O(L),D)$. We also define $\NevEF(D)=\NevEF(D,D)$. \end{definition} \begin{remark}\label{remk_EF_D_linear} As in Remark \ref{remk_D_linear}, if $n$ is a positive integer then $$\NevEF(\mathscr L,nD) = n\NevEF(\mathscr L,D)\;.$$ \end{remark} The two parts of Proposition \ref{falt_main_prop} say that $\beta\sum Z_{ij}=(\beta/2)M$ has $\alpha$-EF-growth and $(\alpha/2)$-EF-growth, respectively, with respect to $\mathscr O(\beta M)$, and therefore \[ \NevEF\left(\beta M,\frac\beta2M\right) \le \frac3\alpha \qquad\text{and}\qquad \NevEF\left(\beta M,\frac\beta2M\right) \le \frac4\alpha\;, \] respectively, on $Y$ and $C$, respectively. By Remark \ref{remk_EF_D_linear}, these become \begin{equation}\label{eq_falt_nevef} \NevEF(\beta M) \le \frac6\alpha \qquad\text{and}\qquad \NevEF(\beta M) \le \frac8\alpha\;, \end{equation} respectively. The main result of this section, Theorem \ref{ef_thmc}, is proved by first showing that $\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) \le \NevEF(\mathscr L,D)$ (Theorem \ref{thm_ineq_b_nev_ef_nev}). This, in turn, reduces to comparing the properties of $\mu$-b-growth and $\mu$-EF-growth. \begin{proposition}\label{prop_b_vs_ef_growth} Let $X$ be a normal variety over a number field $k$, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$, and let $\mu>0$ be a rational number. Assume that $D$ has $\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L$. Then for all $\epsilon>0$, there are a positive integer $m$, a rational number $\nu$, and a linear subspace $V\subseteq H^0(X,\mathscr L^m)$ such that $mD$ has $\nu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L^m$, and such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_b_vs_ef_nu_bound} \frac{\dim V}{\nu} \le \frac{\dim X + 1}{\mu} + \epsilon\;. \end{equation} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Assume that $D$ has $\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L$. Let $V_1,\dots,V_\ell$; $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_\ell$; $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_\ell}$; and $\lambda_D$ be as in condition (iii) of Proposition \ref{prop_mu_ef_growth_equivs}. Let $\{s_1,\dots,s_q\}$ be the elements of $\bigcup_i\mathcal B_i$. These sections determine a morphism $\Phi\colon X\to\mathbb P^{q-1}$. Let $Y$ be the image. Note that $\Phi$ need not be a closed immersion; in fact, it may happen that $\dim Y<\dim X$. Let $n=\dim Y$. From the theory of degree of contact (see \cite[Sects.~3--4]{ef_imrn} or \cite[Sect.~3]{ru} for the definitions), there is a constant $C>0$ such that the inequality \begin{equation}\label{eq_ef_vs_b_1} c_{j_0}+\dots+c_{j_n} \le \frac{n+1}{m}\frac{S_Y(m,\mathbf c)}{H_Y(m)}\left(1+\frac Cm\right) \end{equation} holds for all integers $m>0$, all $q$-tuples $\mathbf c\in\mathbb R_{\ge0}^q$, and all $(j_0,\dots,j_n)$ for which the divisors $(s_{j_0}),\dots,(s_{j_n})$ are base-point-free on $X$. Fix a place $v$ of $k$. For each $j=1,\dots,q$, choose a local Weil function $\lambda_{(s_j),v}$ for the divisor $(s_j)$ at $v$. Since each $(s_j)$ is effective, we may assume that each $\lambda_{(s_j)}$ is nonnegative. We will apply (\ref{eq_ef_vs_b_1}) with $\mathbf c=(\lambda_{(s_1),v}(x),\dots,\lambda_{(s_q),v}(x))$ for some $x\in X(\overline k_v)$. By (\ref{eq_mu_ef_growth_iv}), there is an index $i$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq_ef_vs_b_2} \lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v}(x) \ge \mu\lambda_{D,v}(x) + O(1)\;, \end{equation} where the implicit constant does not depend on $x$ (or $i$). Write $\mathcal B_i=\{s_{j_0},\dots,s_{j_n}\}$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eq_ef_vs_b_3} c_{j_0}+\dots+c_{j_n} = \lambda_{(s_{j_0}),v}(x)+\dots+\lambda_{(s_{j_n}),v}(x) = \lambda_{\mathcal B_i,v}(x) + O(1)\;, \end{equation} where the implicit constant does not depend on $x$. Since there are only finitely many possible values for $i$, the constant may also be taken independent of $i$. Combining (\ref{eq_ef_vs_b_1}), (\ref{eq_ef_vs_b_3}), and (\ref{eq_ef_vs_b_2}) gives \[ \begin{split} S_Y(m,\mathbf c) &\ge \frac{mH_Y(m)}{(n+1)(1+C/m)}\mu\lambda_{D,v}(x) + O(1) \\ &= \nu m\lambda_{D,v}(x) + O(1)\;, \end{split} \] where again the implicit constant does not depend on $x$, and $$\nu = \frac{\mu H_Y(m)}{(n+1)(1+C/m)}\;.$$ Let $V$ be the pull-back of $H^0(Y,\mathscr O(m))$. Then $\dim V=H_Y(m)$. Since $\dim X\ge n$, we have \[ \frac{\dim V}{\nu} = \frac{(n+1)(1+C/m)}{\mu} \le \frac{\dim X+1}{\mu}\left(1+\frac Cm\right)\;. \] Thus (\ref{eq_b_vs_ef_nu_bound}) holds for sufficiently large $m$. On the other hand, by the definition of $S_Y(m,\mathbf c)$ and our choice of $\mathbf c$, there are bases $\mathcal B_1,\dots,\mathcal B_r$ of $V$ and corresponding local Weil functions $\lambda_{\mathcal B_1,v},\dots,\lambda_{\mathcal B_r,v}$ such that \[ S_Y(m,\mathbf c) = \max_{1\le i\le r}\lambda_{(\mathcal B_i),v}(\Phi(x)) \] for all $x\in X(\overline k_v)$. Thus, after pulling the bases back to $V$ and the local Weil functions back to $X$, we see that $S_Y(m,\mathbf c)$ equals the left-hand side of (\ref{eq_mu_b_growth_iv}), and hence $mD$ has $\nu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L^m$. \end{proof} This proposition then leads quickly to the main results of the section. \begin{theorem}\label{thm_ineq_b_nev_ef_nev} Let $X$ be a variety over a number field $k$, let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$, and let $\mathscr L$ be a line sheaf on $X$. Then \begin{equation}\label{ineq_b_nev_ef_nev} \Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) \le \NevEF(\mathscr L,D)\;. \end{equation} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We may assume that $X$ is normal, since the definitions of $\Nevbir$ and $\NevEF$ both handle the general case by pulling back to the normalization. We may also assume that $\NevEF(\mathscr L,D)<\infty$ (otherwise there is nothing to prove). Let $\epsilon>0$. By definition of $\NevEF$, there is a pair $(N,\mu)$ with $N\in\mathbb Z_{>0}$ and $\mu\in\mathbb Q_{>0}$, such that $ND$ has $\mu$-EF-growth with respect to $\mathscr L^N$ and such that $$\frac{\dim X + 1}{\mu} < \NevEF(\mathscr L,D) + \epsilon\;.$$ By Proposition \ref{prop_b_vs_ef_growth}, there are a positive integer $m$, a rational number $\nu$, and a linear subspace $V\subseteq H^0(X,\mathscr L^{mN})$ such that $mND$ has $\nu$-b-growth with respect to $V$ and $\mathscr L^{mN}$, and such that $$\frac{\dim V}{\nu} \le \frac{\dim X + 1}{\mu} + \epsilon\;.$$ We then have $$\Nevbir(\mathscr L,D) \le \frac{\dim V}{\nu} < \NevEF(\mathscr L,D) + 2\epsilon\;,$$ and the proof concludes by letting $\epsilon$ go to zero. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{ef_thmc} Let $k$ be a number field, and let $S$ be a finite set of places of $k$ containing all archimedean places. Let $X$ be a projective variety over $k$, and let $D$ be an effective Cartier divisor on $X$. Then, for every $\epsilon>0$, there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that the inequality \begin{equation} m_S(x, D) \le \left(\NevEF(D)+\epsilon\right) h_D(x) \end{equation} holds for all $x\in X(k)$ outside of $Z$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} This is immediate from (\ref{ineq_b_nev_ef_nev}) and Theorem \ref{b_thmc}. \end{proof} \begin{corollary}\label{cor_nev_ef_int_pts} Let $X$ be a projective variety, and let $D$ be an ample Cartier divisor on $X$. If $\NevEF(D)<1$ then there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z$ of $X$ such that any set of $D$-integral points on $X$ has only finitely many points outside of $Z$. \end{corollary} Finally, we are able to prove Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{falt_dioph}] (a). By (\ref{eq_falt_nevef}) and the assumption $\alpha>6$, we have $$\NevEF(\beta M) \le \frac6\alpha < 1\;.$$ The result then follows by Corollary \ref{cor_nev_ef_int_pts}. (b). Let $Z$ be the Zariski closure of a set of $D$-integral points on $Y$. By part (a), $Z\ne Y$, so it will suffice to show that no irreducible component of $Z$ can be a curve. This holds because, on any curve $C$ in $Y$ not contained in $\Supp M$, $$\NevEF(\beta M) \le \frac8\alpha < 1\;,$$ and we conclude as before. \end{proof} \printbibliography \end{document}
\section{Acknowledgments} This project would not be possible without the help of my friends and colleagues at the Probabilistic Computing Project. I extend my sincerest gratitude to our principal investigator Vikash Mansinghka, the ideal professional and personal mentor in all respects. I am grateful to DARPA for funding this research and my appointment as a research assistant through the Probabilistic Programming for Advanced Machine Learning program. I thank my brother, Khaled, for his uplifting support, affection, and tolerance and engagement with my most atypical of thoughts. \section{Discussion and Future Work} \label{sec:discussion} This paper has shown that it is possible to use a computational formalism in probabilistic programming to apply, combine, and compare a broad class of probabilistic data analysis techniques. CGPMs extend the core provided by directed graphical models, which express elaborate probabilistic models in terms of smaller univariate pieces, by specifying a computational interface that allows these pieces to be multivariate, more black-box, and defined directly as software. A key feature of this framework is that it enables statistical modelers to compose discriminative, generative and hybrid models from different philosophies in machine learning and statistics using probabilistic programming. Moreover, the compositional abstraction is neutral to a CGPM's internal choices of (i) modeling assumptions, which may be i.e. hierarchical or flat, or Bayesian or non-Bayesian, and (ii) inference tactics, which may be i.e. optimization- or sampling-based. Several models from statistics admit natural implementations in terms of the current CGPM interface, such as non-linear mixed effect models \citep{davidian1995}, where each member represents a potentially repeated measurement with latent variables grouping the members into observation units; or Gaussian processes \citep{rasmussen2006}, where the input variables are time indexes from another CGPM, and the outputs are noisy observations of the (latent) function values \citep{tresp2001, rasmussen2002}. Computational representations of these models as CGPMs allows them to be composable as hybrid models, reusable as software, and queryable in interesting ways using the Bayesian Query Language. Both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} in Listing~\ref{lst:cgpm-interface} are executed against a single member of the population i.e. variables within a single row. Queries that target multiple members in the population are currently supported by an explicit sequence of \texttt{incorporate}, \texttt{infer}, and then \texttt{simulate} or \texttt{logpdf}. It is interesting to consider extending the CGPM interface to natively handle arbitrary multi-row cases -- this idea was originally presented in the GPM interface \cite[Section 3.1.1]{mansinghka2015} although concrete algorithms for implementing multi-row queries, or surface-level syntax in the Bayesian Query Language for invoking them, were left as open questions. Rather than support multi-row queries directly in the CGPM interface, it is instead possible to extend the BQL interpreter with a probabilistic query planner. Given given a cross-row query, the BQL interpreter automatically determines a candidate set of invocation sequences of the CGPM interface to answer it, and then selects among them based on time/accuracy requirements. A worthy direction for future work is extending the set of statistical data types (Section~\ref{subsec:implement-primitive}), and possibly CGPM interface, to support analysis tasks beyond traditional multivariate statistics. Some possible new data types and associated CGPMs are \begin{itemize} \item \texttt{GRAPH} data type, using a relational data CGPM based on the stochastic block model \citep{nowicki2001} or infinite relational model \citep{kemp2006}, \item \texttt{TEXT} data type, using a topic model CGPM such as latent Dirichlet allocation \citep{blei2003} or probabilistic latent semantic analysis \citep{hofmann1999}, \item \texttt{IMAGE} data type, using a CGPM based on neural networks. \end{itemize} Composing CGPMs with these data types leads to interesting tasks over their induced joint distributions. Consider an \texttt{IMAGE} variable with an associated \texttt{TEXT} annotation; a generative CGPM for the image and discriminative CGPM for the text (given the image) leads to image classification; a generative CGPM for the text and a discriminative CGPM for the image (given the text) allows simulating unstructured text followed by their associated images. It is also interesting to consider introducing additional structure to our current formalism of populations from Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-populations} to support richer notions of population modeling. For instance, populations may be hierarchical in that the variables of population A correspond to outputs produced by a CGPM for population B -- the simplest case being summary statistics such as means, medians, and inter-quartile ranges. Such hierarchical populations are common in census data, which contain raw measurements of variables for individual households, as well as row-wise and column-wise summaries based on geography, income level, ethnicity, educational background, and so on. Populations can also be extended to support ``merge'' operations in MML, which are analogous to the \texttt{JOIN} operations in SQL, where the CGPM on the joined population allows for transfer learning. Our presentation of the algorithm for \texttt{infer} in a composite network of CGPMs (Section~\ref{subsec:composition}) left open improvements to the baseline strategy of learning each CGPM node separately. One way to achieve joint learning, without violating the abstraction boundaries of the CGPM interface, is: after running \texttt{infer} individually for each CGPM, run a ``refine'' phase, where (i) missing measurements in the population are imputed using one forward pass of \texttt{simulate} throughout the network, then (ii) each CGPM updates its parameters based on the imputed measurements. This strategy can be repeated to generate several such imputed networks, which are then organized into an ensemble of CGPMs in a BayesDB metamodel (Section~\ref{subsubsec:bayesdb-mml-homogenous}) where each CGPM in the metamodel corresponds to a different set of imputations. The weighted-averaging of these CGPMs by BayesDB would thus correspond to integration over different imputations, as well as their induced parameters. Extending BQL, or developing new probabilistic programming languages, to assess the inference quality of CGPMs built in MML will be an important step toward broader application of these probabilistic programming tools for real-world analysis tasks. For instance, it is possible to develop a command in BQL such as \begin{center} \small\tt ESTIMATE KL DIVERGENCE BETWEEN <cgpm-1> AND <cgpm-2>\\ FOR VARIABLES <var-names-a> GIVEN <var-names-b>; \end{center} which takes two CGPMs (and an overlapping subset of their output variables) and returns an estimate of the KL divergence between their conditional predictive distributions, based on a Monte Carlo estimator using \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}. Such model-independent estimators of inference quality, backed by the CGPM interface, provide a proposal for unifying the testing and profiling infrastructure among a range of candidate solutions for a given data analysis task. This paper has shown that it is possible to unify and formalize a broad class of probabilistic data analysis techniques by integrating them into a probabilistic programming platform, which is itself integrated with a traditional database. We have focused on a class of probabilistic models that can be tightly integrated with flat database tables. Population schemas define the variables of interest along with their types, but unlike traditional database schemas, they can additionally include variables whose values are never directly observed. Concrete probabilistic models for populations are built via automated inference mechanisms, according to a baseline meta-modeling strategy which can also be customized. This idea is similar to concrete indexes for tables in traditional databases which are built by automated mechanisms, according to an indexing strategy which can be customized via its own schema. While we are encouraged by the early successes of this approach, there is a vast literature of richer ``data modeling'' formalisms from both databases and statistics. Integrating these ideas could yield further conceptual insight and practical benefits. We hope this paper encourages others to develop these connections, along with a new generation of intelligent tools for machine-assisted probabilistic data analysis. \section{Applications of Composable Generative Population Models} \label{sec:applications} The first part of this section outlines a case study applying compositional generative population models in BayesDB to a population of satellites maintained by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The dataset contains 1163 entries, and each satellites has 23 numerical and categorical features such as its material, functional, physical, orbital and economic characteristics. We construct a hybrid CGPM using an MML metamodel definition which combines (i) a classical physics model written as a probabilistic program in VentureScript, (ii) a random forest to classify a a nominal variable, (iii) an ordinary least squares regressor to predict a numerical variable, and (iv) principal component analysis on the real-valued features of the satellites. These CGPMs allow us to identify satellites that probably violate their orbital mechanics, accurately infer missing values of anticipated lifetime, and visualize the dataset by projecting the satellite features into two dimensions. The second part of this section explores the efficacy of hybrid compositional generative population models on a collection of common tasks in probabilistic data analysis by reporting lines of code and accuracy measurements against standard baseline solutions. Large savings in lines of code and improved accuracy are demonstrated in several important regimes. Most of the analysis of experimental results is contained in the figure gallery at the end of the section. \subsection{Analyzing satellites using a composite CGPM built from causal probabilistic programs, discriminative machine learning, and Bayesian non-parametrics} \label{subsec:experiment-satellites} The left panel in Figure~\ref{fig:mml-hybrid} illustrates a session in MML which declares the population schema for the satellites data, as well as the metamodel definition for building the hybrid CGPM network that models various relationships of interest between variables.% \footnote{This program is executed in iVenture, an experimental interactive probabilistic programming environment that supports running \texttt{\%bql}, \texttt{\%mml} and \texttt{\%venturescript} code cells, all of which operate on a common underlying BayesDB instance and Venture interpreter.} The \texttt{CREATE POPULATION} block shows the high-dimensional features of each satellite and their heterogeneous statistical types. For simplicity, several variables such as \texttt{perigee\_km}, \texttt{launch\_mass\_kg} and \texttt{anticipated\_lifetime} have been modeled as \texttt{NUMERICAL} rather than a more refined type such as \texttt{MAGNITUDE}. In the remainder of this section, we explain the CGPMs declared in the MML metamodel definition under the \texttt{CREATE METAMODEL} block, and refer to figures for results of BQL queries executed against them. The PCA CGPM on line 34 of the metamodel definition generates as output five real-valued variables, and exposes the first two principal component scores to BayesDB. This low-dimensional projection allows us to both visualize a clustering of the dataset in latent space, and discover oddities in the distribution of latent scores for satellites whose \texttt{class\_of\_orbit} is \texttt{elliptical}. It also identifies a single satellite, in cyan at grid point $(1, 1.2)$, as a candidate for further investigation. Figure~\ref{fig:pca-satellites} shows the result and further commentary on this experiment. Four variables in the population relate to the orbital characteristics of each satellite: \texttt{apogee\_km} $A$, \texttt{perigee\_km} $P$, \texttt{period\_minutes} $T$, and \texttt{eccentricity} $e$. These variables are constrained by the theoretical Keplerian relationships $e = \frac{A-P}{A+P}$ and $T=2\pi\sqrt{\frac{((A+P)/2)^3}{GM}}$, where $GM$ is a physical constant. In reality, satellites deviate from their theoretical orbits for a variety of reasons, such orbital and measurement noise, having engines, or even data-entry errors. The right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:mml-hybrid} shows a CGPM in pure VentureScript which accepts as input $\bm{y}_r=(A_r, P_r)$ (apogee and perigee), and generates as output $x_r = T_r$ (period). The prior is a Dirichlet process mixture model on the error, based on a stochastic variant of Kepler's Law, \begin{align} & G \sim DP(\alpha, \textsc{Normal-Inverse-Gamma}(m,V,a,b))\\ & (\mu_r,\sigma_r^2) \| G \sim G\\ & \epsilon_r \| \bm{y}_r \sim \textsc{Normal}(\cdot\|\mu_r,\sigma_r^2) && \textrm{where } \epsilon_r := T_r - \textsc{Kepler}(A_r,P_r). \end{align} While the internal details, external interface, and adapter which compiles the VentureScript source into a CGPM are beyond the scope of this paper, note that its MML declaration uses the \texttt{EXPOSE} command on line 45. This command makes the inferred cluster identity and noise latent variables (lines 17 and 22 of the VentureScript program) available to BQL. Figure~\ref{fig:kepler-overall} shows a posterior sample of the cluster assignments and error distribution, which identifies three distinct classes of anomalous satellites based on the magnitude of error. For instance, satellite \texttt{Orion6} in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:kepler-overall}, belongs to a cluster with ``extreme'' deviation. Further investigation reveals that \texttt{Orion6} has a period 23.94 minutes, a data-entry error for the true period of 24 hours (1440 minutes). Figure~\ref{fig:confusion} shows the improvement in prediction accuracy achieved by the hybrid CGPM over the purely generative CrossCat baseline, for a challenging multiclass classification task. As shown in lines 57-62 of the metamodel definition in Figure~\ref{fig:mml-hybrid}, the hybrid CGPM uses a random forest CGPM for the target variable \texttt{type\_of\_orbit} given five numerical and categorical predictors. Figures~\ref{fig:confusion-rf} and \ref{fig:confusion-cc} shows the confusion matrices on the test set for both the composite and baseline CGPMs. While both methods systematically confuse sun-synchronous with intermediate orbits, the use of a random forest classifier results in 11 less classification errors, or an improvement of 11 percentage points. Using a purely discriminative model for this task, i.e. a random forest without a generative model over the features (not shown), would require additional logic and heuristic imputation on feature vectors in the test set, which general contained missing entries. The final experiment in Figure~\ref{fig:cc-vs-kde} compares the posterior distribution of the vanilla CrossCat baseline and multivariate KDE for a two-dimensional density estimation task with nominal data types. The task is to jointly simulate the \texttt{country\_of\_operator} and \texttt{purpose} for a hypothetical satellite, given that its \texttt{type\_of\_orbit} is geosynchronous. The empirical conditional distribution from the dataset is shown in red. Both CrossCat and multivariate KDE capture the posterior modes, although the distribution form KDE has a fatter tail, as indicated by the high number of samples classified as ``Other''. The figure caption contains additional discussion. There dozens of additional BQL queries that can be posed about the satellites population and, based on the analysis task of interest, answered using both the existing CGPMs in the hybrid metamodel as well as more customized CGPMs. The empirical studies in this section has shown it is possible and practical to apply CGPMs in BayesDB to challenging data analysis tasks in a real-world dataset, and use BQL queries to compare their performance characteristics. \subsection{Comparing code length and accuracy on representative data analysis tasks} \label{subsec:loc-accuracy} One of the most sparsely observed variables in the satellites dataset is the \texttt{anticipated\_lifetime}, with roughly one in four missing entries. The analysis task in Figure~\ref{fig:loc-regression} is to infer the anticipated lifetime $x_$ of a new satellite, given the subset of its numerical and nominal features $\bm{y}_$ shown in the codeblock above the plot. To quantify performance, the predictions of the CGPM were evaluated on a held-out set of satellites with known lifetimes. Many satellites in both the training set and test set contained missing entries in their covariates, requiring the CGPM to additionally impute missing values in the predictors before forward simulating the regression. Unlike the purely generative and purely discriminative baselines (shown in the legend), the hybrid CGPM learns both a joint distribution over the predictors and a discriminative model for the response, leading to significantly improved predictive performance. The improvement in lines of code over the baseline methods in Figure~\ref{fig:loc-regression} is due to using combinations of (i) SQL for data processing, (ii) MML for model building, and (iii) BQL for predictive querying, in BayesDB. All the baselines required custom logic for (i) manual data preprocessing such as reading csv files, (ii) Euclidean embedding of large categorical values, and (iii) heuristic imputation of missing features during train and test time (i.e. either imputing the response from its mean value, or imputing missing predictors from their mean values). The left panel from Figure~\ref{fig:loc-regression-cgpm} shows and end-to-end session in BayesDB which preprocesses the data, builds the hybrid CGPM, runs analysis on the training set and computes predictions on the test set. The right panel from Figure~\ref{fig:loc-regression-baseline} shows a single ad-hoc routine used by the Python baselines, which dummy codes a data frame with missing entries and nominal data types. For nominal variables taking values in a large set, dummy coding with zeros may cause the solvers to fail when the system is under-determined. The workaround in the code for baselines is to drop such problematic dimensions from the feature vector. The regression in the hybrid CGPM does not suffer from this problem because, the default linear regressor in the CGPM library gives all parameters a Bayesian prior \citep{banerjee2008}, which smooths irregularities. Figures~\ref{fig:independence-testing}, \ref{fig:dependence-strength}, \ref{fig:bivariate-classification} and \ref{fig:anomaly-detection} extend the lines of code and accuracy comparisons for CGPMs and baseline methods to several more tasks using diverse statistical methodologies. These figures further illustrate coverage and conciseness of CGPMs -- the captions detail the setup and commentary of each experiment in greater detail. \clearpage \input{tex/applications/fig-mml-hybrid} \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}[t]{.5\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/kepler-scatter.pdf} \end{subfigure}% \begin{subfigure}[t]{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/kepler-samples.pdf} \end{subfigure}\newline \texttt{% \%bql INFER kepler\_cluster, kepler\_noise FROM satellites;} \bcaption{% Finding satellites whose orbits are likely violations of Kepler's Third Law using a causal CGPM in Venturescript, which learns a Dirichlet process mixture on the residuals.}{% Each dot in the scatter plot (left) is a satellite in the dataset, and its color represents the latent cluster assignment learned by the causal CGPM. Both the cluster identity and inferred noise are exposed latent variables. The histogram (right) shows that each of the four distinct clusters roughly translates to a qualitative description for the magnitude of a satellite's deviation from its theoretical period: yellow (negligible), magenta (noticeable), green (large), and blue (extreme). These clusters were learned non-parametrically.} \label{fig:kepler-overall} \end{figure} \clearpage \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}{\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{figures/pca_satellites.pdf} \end{subfigure}\newline \texttt{\small% \%bql INFER EXPLICIT PREDICT pc1, PREDICT pc2, class\_of\_orbit FROM satellites;} \bcaption{% Low dimensional projection of the satellites using the PCA CGPM reveals clusterings in latent space and suggests candidate outliers.}{% The principal component scores are based on the numerical features of a satellite, and the color is the \texttt{class\_of\_orbit}. Satellites in low earth, medium earth, and geosynchronous orbit form tight clusters in latent space along PC1, and exhibit most within-cluster variance along PC2. The distribution on factor scores for elliptical satellites has much higher variability along both dimensions, indicating a collection of weak local modes depending on the regime of the satellite's \texttt{eccentricity} (not shown), and/or many statistical outliers.} \label{fig:pca-satellites} \end{figure} \clearpage \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/confusion_rf.pdf} \captionsetup{margin=10pt} \caption{Crosscat/Random Forest hybrid CGPM.} \label{fig:confusion-rf} \end{subfigure}% \begin{subfigure}[b]{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/confusion_cc.pdf} \captionsetup{margin=10pt} \caption{CrossCat baseline CGPM.} \label{fig:confusion-cc} \end{subfigure}\newline\newline \texttt{% \%bql INFER type\_of\_orbit FROM held\_out\_satellites;} \bcaption{% Confusion matrices for a multiclass classification task show improved prediction accuracy by the hybrid CGPM over the CrossCat baseline.}{% The y-axis shows the true label for ``type of orbit'' of 100 held-out satellites, and the x-axis shows the predicted label by each CGPM. The feature vectors are five dimensional and consist of numerical and categorical variables (lines 57-62 of Figure~\ref{fig:mml-hybrid}), and both test and training sets contained missing data. While both CrossCat and Crosscat + Random Forest systematically confuse ``sun-synchronous''and ``intermediate'' orbits (entries in cyan), the overall error rate is reduced by 11\% in the hybrid CGPM.} \label{fig:confusion} \end{figure} \clearpage \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/cc_vs_kde.pdf} \texttt{\small% \%bql SIMULATE country\_of\_operator, purpose GIVEN class\_of\_orbit = `GEO';} \bcaption{% Simulating from the joint distribution of the country and purpose of a hypothetical satellite, given its orbit type. }{% The y-axis shows the simulated country-purpose pairs, and the x-axis shows the frequency of simulations, compared to the true frequency in the dataset. 500 samples were obtained from CrossCat and multivariate KDE to estimate the posterior probabilities. The posteriors of both CrossCat and KDE are smooth versions of the empirical data -- the smoothing for CrossCat is induced by the inner Dirichlet process mixture over category models, and for KDE is induced by the bandwidth parameters of the Aitchison and Aitken kernels. The plot shows that CrossCat's samples provide a tighter fit to the dataset. The distribution from KDE has a fatter tail, as indicated by the high number of samples classified in the ``Other'' category. } \label{fig:cc-vs-kde} \end{figure} \clearpage \input{tex/applications/fig-mml-loc} \clearpage \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/depprob.pdf} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/depprob-legend.pdf} \end{subfigure} \texttt{\small% \%bql ESTIMATE DEPENDENCE PROBABILITY OF x WITH y;} \bcaption{% Dependence discovery.}{% Binary hypothesis tests of independence for synthetic two-dimensional data drawn from five noisy zero-correlation datasets: sin wave, parabola, x-cross, diamond, and ring. For all datasets the two dimensions are dependent. The y-axis shows the fraction of correct hypotheses achieved by each method, averaged over all datasets. The decision rule for kernel-based tests \citep{gretton2007,gretton2008,gretton2010}, is based on a frequentist significance level of 5\% and 1\%. The decision rule for CrossCat is based on a dependence probability threshold of 50\%.} \label{fig:independence-testing} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/mi.pdf} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/mi-legend.pdf} \end{subfigure} \texttt{\small% \%bql ESTIMATE MUTUAL INFORMATION OF x WITH y;} \bcaption{% Dependence strength}{% Estimating the mutual information of a noisy sin wave. The y-axis shows the squared estimation error, randomized over observed datasets. The ``ground truth'' mutual information was derived analytically, and the integral computed by quadrature. Baseline methods estimate mutual information using K nearest neighbors \citep{kraskov2004} and kernel density estimation \citep{moon1995}. CrossCat estimates the mutual information first by learning a Dirichlet process mixture of Gaussians, and using Monte Carlo estimation by generating samples from the posterior predictive distribution and assessing their density.} \label{fig:dependence-strength} \end{figure} \clearpage \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/classification.pdf} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/classification-legend.pdf} \end{subfigure} \texttt{\small% \%bql SIMULATE country\_of\_operator, purpose GIVEN class\_of\_orbit = `GEO';} \bcaption{% Bivariate categorical density estimation.}{% Simulating from the posterior joint distribution of the country and purpose of a hypothetical satellite, given its orbit type. 500 samples were obtained from each method to estimate the posterior probabilities. The y-axis shows the Hellinger distance between posterior samples from each method and the empirical conditional distribution from the dataset, used as ``ground truth''. Standard discriminative baselines struggle to learn the distribution of a two-dimensional discrete outcome based on a discrete input, where both the predictor and response variables take values in large categorical sets.} \label{fig:bivariate-classification} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/outlier.pdf} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/outlier-legend.pdf} \end{subfigure} \texttt{\small% \%bql ESTIMATE PREDICTIVE PROBABILITY OF period\_minutes;} \bcaption{% Anomaly detection.}{% Detecting satellites with anomalous orbital periods. 18 satellites from the dataset demonstrated a non-trivial deviation (greater than five minutes) from their theoretical period, used as ``ground truth'' anomalies. For each method, the top 20 satellites ranked by ``outlyingness'' score were used as the predicted anomalies. Hybrid CGPMs learn multivariate and multimodal distributions over all variables in the dataset, leading to higher detection rates than baseline methods which use univariate and/or unimodal statistics. The Kepler CGPM identifies most anomalies at the expense of a highly complex program in comparison to baselines.} \label{fig:anomaly-detection} \end{figure} \section{Algorithmic Implementations of Composable Generative Population Models} \label{sec:implementation} In this section, we illustrate that the computational abstraction of CGPMs is applicable to broad classes of modeling approaches and philosophies. Table~\ref{tab:cgpm-examples} shows the collection of models whose internal structure we will develop from the perspective of CGPMs. Section~\ref{sec:applications} shows both comparisons of these CGPMs and their practical application to data analysis tasks. \begin{table}[ht] \centering \small \begin{tabular}{\textwidth}{@{}lll@{}} \toprule & \textbf{Composable Generative Population Model} & \textbf{Modeling Approach} \\ \midrule Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-crosscat} & Cross Categorization & non-parametric Bayesian generative modeling \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-ensemble} & Ensemble Classifiers and Regressors & discriminative machine learning \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-pca} & Factor Analysis \& Probabilistic PCA & dimensionality reduction \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-experts} & Parametric Mixture of Experts & discriminative statistical modeling \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-kde} & Multivariate Kernel Density Estimation & classical multivariate statistics \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-knn} & Generative Nearest Neighbors & clustering based generative modeling \\ Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-venturescript} & Probabilistic Programs in VentureScript & probabilistic programming \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \bcaption{% Examples of composable generative population models, and a modeling framework for data analysis to which they belong.}{} \label{tab:cgpm-examples} \end{table} The two methods from the interface in Listing~\ref{lst:cgpm-interface} whose algorithmic implementations we outline for each CGPM are \begin{itemize} \item $\mathbf{s} \leftarrow$ \texttt{simulate} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{member}: $r$, \texttt{query}: $Q=\set{q_k}$, \texttt{evidence} : $E=\set{x_{[r,e_j]}}\cup \bm{y}_r$) Generate a sample from the distribution \hfill $\mathbf{s} \sim^\mathcal{G} \bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\set{\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm{y}_r,\mathcal{D}}.$ \item $c \leftarrow$ \texttt{logpdf} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{member}: $r$, \texttt{query} : $Q=\set{x_{[r,q_k]}}$, \texttt{evidence} : $E=\set{x_{[r,e_j]}}\cup \bm{y}_r$) Evaluate the log density \hfill $\log p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\set{\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm{y}_r,\mathcal{D}}).$ \end{itemize} In both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}, the target distributions for the query variables $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$ require an implementation of two operations: \begin{itemize} \item Conditioning on the evidence variables $\bm{x}_{[r,E]}$, in addition to the input variables $\bm{y}_r$ and entire measurement set $\mathcal{D}$. \item Marginalizing over all output variables $\set{x_{[r,i]}: i\in[O]\backslash(E\cup{Q})}$ not in the query or evidence. \end{itemize} Both conditioning and marginalizing over joint distributions allow users of CGPMs to pose non-trivial queries about populations that arise in multivariate probabilistic data analysis. All our algorithms generally assume that the information known about member $r$ in \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} is only what is provided for the \texttt{evidence} parameter. Extending the implementations to deal with observed members $r'\in\mathcal{D}$ is mostly straightforward and often implementation-specific. We also note that the figures in these subsections contain excerpts of probabilistic code in the Bayesian Query Language, Metamodeling Language, and VentureScript; most of their syntaxes are outlined in Section~\ref{sec:bayesdb}. Finally, we leave the many possible implementations of \texttt{infer} for each CGPM, which learns the latent state using observed data, primarily to external references. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-primitive} \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-crosscat} \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-ensemble} \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-pca} \clearpage \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-experts} \clearpage \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-knn} \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-kde} \input{tex/implement-cgpms/implement-cgpms-venturescript} \subsection{Primitive univariate distributions and statistical data types} \label{subsec:implement-primitive} The statistical data type of a population variable $v_t$ provides a more refined taxonomy than the ``observation space'' $\mathcal{V}_t$ described in Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-populations}. Table~\ref{tab:stattypes} shows the collection of statistical data types available in the Metamodeling Language (Section~\ref{subsec:bayesdb-mml}), out of which more complex CGPMs are built. The (parameterized) support of a statistical type defines the set in which samples from \texttt{simulate} take values. Each statistical type is also associated with a base measure which ensures \texttt{logpdf} is well-defined. In \textrm{high-dimensional} populations with heterogeneous types, \texttt{logpdf} is taken against the product measure of these univariate base measures. The statistical type also identifies invariants that the variable maintains. For instance, the values of a \texttt{NOMINAL} variable are permutation-invariant; the distance between two values for a \texttt{CYCLIC} variable is defined circularly (modulo the period), etc. The final column in Table~\ref{tab:stattypes} shows the primitive univariate CGPMs that are compatible with each statistical type. For these simple CGPMs, \texttt{logpdf} is implemented directly from their probability density functions, and algorithms for \texttt{simulate} are well-known \citep{devroye1986}. For \texttt{infer}, the CGPMs may have fixed parameters, or learn from data using i.e. maximum likelihood \citep[Ch. 7]{casella2002} or Bayesian priors \citep{fink1997}. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/tab-statistical-types} \subsection{Cross-Categorization} \label{subsec:implementation-crosscat} Cross-Categorization (CrossCat) is a Bayesian non-parametric method for learning the joint distribution over all variables in a heterogeneous, high-dimensional population \citep{mansinghka2015-2}. The generative model begins by first partitioning the set of variables $(v_1,\dots,v_T)$ into blocks. This step is CrossCat's ``outer'' clustering, since it partitions the ``columns''(when viewing the population in terms of its infinite table representation from Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-populations}). Let $\pi$ denote the variable partition, and $\set{B_i: i \in \|\pi\|}$ denote its blocks. $\pi$ is a global latent variable which dictates the structural dependencies between variables; any collection of variables in different blocks are mutually independent, and all variables in the same block are mutually dependent. It follows that for each member $r$, the joint distribution for $\bm{x}_r$ factorizes, \begin{align} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_r\|\bm\theta) = \prod_{B\in\pi}p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,B]}\|\bm\theta_B). \end{align} The bundle of global parameters $\bm\theta$ includes $\pi$ as well as a set of block-specific latent variables $\set{\bm\theta_B}_{B\in\pi}$. Within each block $B$ of dependent variables, the elements $\set{x_{[r,i]}, i \in B}$ are conditionally independent given a member-specific latent variable $z_{[r,B]} \in \mathbb{N}$. This variable is an ``inner'' clustering assignment in CrossCat, since it specifies the cluster identity of row $r$ with respect to the variables in block $B$. The joint distribution over elements then factorizes, \begin{align} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,B]}\|\bm\theta_B) = \sum_{k} \left[ \left( \prod_{i\in{B}} p_{\G}(x_{[r,i]}\|\phi_{[i,k]}) \right) p_{\G}(z_{[r,B]}=k\|\bm\omega_B) \right]. \label{eq:crosscat-naive-bayes} \end{align} The global parameter $\phi_{[i,k]}$ parameterizes the primitive univariate CGPM (of the appropriate statistical type) for $v_i$ in cluster $k$, and $\bm\omega_B$ is a parameter governing the distribution of the latent variable $z_{[r,B]}$. This description fully specifies the CrossCat factorization of the joint distribution $p_{\G}(\bm{x}_r\|\bm\theta)$. This generative template is encoded into a hierarchical Bayesian model by specifying priors over the partition $\pi$, mixture weights $\bm\omega_B$ in each block $B\in\pi$, and distributional parameters $\phi_{[i,k]}$. In contrast to \citep{mansinghka2015-2}, Algorithm~\ref{alg:crosscat-sample} presents (for simplicity) a fully uncollapsed representation of the CrossCat prior, using a GEM distribution \citep{pitman2002} for the inner DP. Having described the generative process and established notation, we now outline algorithms for \texttt{logpdf} and \texttt{simulate}. Since CrossCat is a Bayesian CGPM, the distribution of interest $p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\mathcal{D})$ requires us to marginalize out the latent variables $(\bm\theta,\bm{Z})$. Sampling from the posterior is covered in \citep[Section 2.4]{mansinghka2015-2}, so we only focus on implementing \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} assuming posterior samples of latents are available.% \footnote{Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-venturescript} outlines the Monte Carlo estimator for aggregating the samples in a general probabilistic programming setting.} These implementations are summarized in Algorithms \ref{alg:crosscat-simulate} and \ref{alg:crosscat-logpdf}, where all routines have access to a posterior sample of the latent variables in Algorithm~\ref{alg:crosscat-sample}. While our algorithms are based on an uncollapsed CrossCat, in practice, the \textsc{Parameter-Prior} and primitive CGPMs from lines \ref{alg-line:crosscat-parameter-prior} and \ref{alg-line:crosscat-parameter-likelihood} in Algorithm~\ref{alg:crosscat-sample} form a conjugate pair. The density terms $p_{\G}(x_{[r,c]}\|\phi_{[c,k]})$ are computed by marginalizing $\phi_{[c,k]}$, and using the sufficient statistics in cluster $k$ along with the column hyperparameters $\bm\lambda_i$, i.e. $p_{\G}(x_{[r,c]}\|\set{x_{[r',c]}: z_{[r',B]}=k}, \bm\lambda_i)$. This Rao-Blackwellization enhances the inferential quality and predictive performance of CrossCat, and the one sample approximation on line \ref{alg-line:crosscat-approximate} of Algorithm~\ref{alg:crosscat-weights}, an instance of Algorithm 8 from \citep{neal2000}, becomes exact for evaluating \texttt{logpdf}. Section~\ref{sec:cgpms-processes} contains a discussion on the implications of different internal representations of a generative process (such as collapsed or uncollapsed) from the perspective of CGPMs. \clearpage \begin{subalgorithms} \captionof{algorithm}{Forward sampling a population in the CrossCat CGPM.} \label{alg:crosscat-sample} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \small \State $\alpha \sim \textsc{Crp-Concentration-Prior}$ \Comment{sample a concentration for the outer CRP} \State $\pi \sim \textsc{Crp}(\alpha\|[T])$ \Comment{sample partition of variables $\set{v_1,\dots,v_T}$} \For{$B \in \pi$} \Comment{for each block $B$ in the variable partition} \State $\alpha_B \sim \textsc{Crp-Concentration-Prior}$ \Comment{sample a concentration for the inner CRP at $B$} \State $(\omega_{[B,1]}, \omega_{[B,2]}, \dots) \sim \text{GEM}(\alpha_B)$ \Comment{sample stick-breaking weights of its clusters} \EndFor \For{$i \in [T]$} \Comment{for each variable $v_i$ in the population} \State $\bm\lambda_i \sim \textsc{Parameter-Hyper-Prior}$ \Comment{sample hyperparams from a hyperprior} \State $(\phi_{[i,1]},\phi_{[i,2]},\dots) \overset{iid}{\sim} \textsc{Parameter-Prior($\bm\lambda_i$)}$ \label{alg-line:crosscat-parameter-prior} \Comment{sample component distribution params} \EndFor \For{$r = 1,2,\dots$} \Comment{for each member $r$ in the population} \For{$B \in \pi$} \Comment{for each block $B$ in the variable partition} \State $z_{[r,B]} \sim \textsc{Categorical}(\bm\omega_B)$ \Comment{sample the cluster assignment of $r$ in $B$} \For{$i \in B$} \Comment{for each variable $v_i$ in the block} \State $x_{[r,i]} \sim p_{\G}(\cdot \| \phi_{[i,z_{[r,B]}]})$ \label{alg-line:crosscat-parameter-likelihood} \Comment{sample observable element $v_i$ for $r$} \EndFor \EndFor \EndFor \end{algorithmic} \captionof{algorithm}{\texttt{simulate} for the CrossCat CGPM.} \label{alg:crosscat-simulate} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \small \Function{Simulate}{} \State $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]} \gets \varnothing$ \Comment{initialize empty sample} \For{$B \in \pi$} \Comment{for each block $B$ in the variable partition} \State $\bm{l} \gets \textsc{Compute-Cluster-Probabilities}(B)$ \Comment{retrieve posterior probabilities of proposal clusters} \State $z_{[r,B]} \sim \textsc{Categorical}(\bm{l})$ \Comment{sample a cluster} \For{$q \in (Q \cap B)$} \Comment{for each query variable in the block} \State $x_{[r,q]} \sim p_{\G}(\cdot\|\phi_{[q,z_{[r,B]}]})$ \Comment{sample an observation element} \EndFor \EndFor \State \Return $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$ \Comment{overall sample of query variables} \EndFunction \end{algorithmic} \captionof{algorithm}{\texttt{logpdf} for the CrossCat CGPM.} \label{alg:crosscat-logpdf} \small \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Function{LogPdf}{} \For{$B \in \pi$} \Comment{for each block $B$ in the variable partition} \State $\bm{l} \gets \textsc{Compute-Cluster-Probabilities}(B)$ \Comment{retrieve posterior probabilities of proposal clusters} \State $K \gets \|\bm{l}\|$ \Comment{compute number of proposed clusters} \State $t_B \gets \sum_{k=1}^{K} \left[ \left( \prod\limits_{q\in{(Q\cap B)}}p_{\G}(x_{[r,q]}\|\phi_{[r,k]}) \right) \frac{l_k}{\sum_{k'=1}^{K}l_{k'}} \right]$ \Comment{compute density for query variables in $B$} \EndFor \State \Return $\sum_{B\in\pi}\log(t_B)$ \Comment{overall log density of query} \EndFunction \end{algorithmic} \captionof{algorithm} {Computing the cluster probabilities in a block of the CrossCat partition.} \label{alg:crosscat-weights} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \small \Function{Compute-Cluster-Probabilities}{} (\texttt{block}: $B$) \State $K \gets \underset{r'\in \mathcal{D}}{\max}\set{z_{[r',B]}}$ \Comment{compute number of occupied clusters} \For{$k=1,2,\dots,K$} $c_k = \|\set{r'\in \mathcal{D}: z_{[r',B]} = k}\|$ \Comment{compute number of members in each cluster} \EndFor \For{$k=1,2,\dots,K$} \Comment{for each cluster $k$} \State $l_{k} \gets \left(\frac{c_{k}}{\sum_{j}c_j+\alpha_B}\right) \prod\limits_{e\in{(E \cap B)}}p_{\G}(x_{[r,e]}\|\phi_{[e,k]})$ \Comment{compute probability of $r$ joining $k$} \EndFor \State $l_{K+1} \gets \left(\frac{\alpha_B}{\sum_{j}c_j+\alpha_B}\right) \prod\limits_{e\in{(E \cap B)}}p_{\G}(x_{[r,e]}\|\phi_{[e,K+1]})$ \Comment{compute probability of $r$ in singleton cluster} \label{alg-line:crosscat-approximate} \State \Return{ $(l_{1},\dots,l_{K}, l_{K+1})$} \Comment{normalized probabilities of proposed clusters} \EndFunction \end{algorithmic} \end{subalgorithms} \clearpage \input{tex/implement-cgpms/fig-crosscat} \clearpage \subsection{Ensemble classifiers and regressors} \label{subsec:implementation-ensemble} In this section, we describe how to construct CGPMs for a class of ensemble- based classifiers and regressors that are common in machine learning. These CGPMs are not typically described by a graphical model (Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-statistical}) yet are still able to satisfy the CGPM interface by implementing \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}. For each member $r$, we assume the CGPM $\mathcal{G}$ generates a single output variable $x_r$, and requires as input a feature vector $\bm{y}_r = (y_{[r,1]},\dots,y_{[r,I]})$. In an ensemble method, $\mathcal{G}$ carries a set of learners $\set{L_1,\dots,L_K}$, where each learner $L_k$ returns a point prediction of $x_r$ given $\bm{y}_r$ denoted $L_k(\bm{y}_r)$. As a simple example, $\mathcal{G}$ may represent a random forest, and each learner $L_i$ a constituent decision tree. For \texttt{infer}, $\mathcal{G}$ may construct the ensemble of learners given measurements $\mathcal{D}$ using any meta-learning algorithm such Boosting \citep{freund1995}, Bagging \citep{breiman1996} or others. \subsubsection{Classification} \label{subsubsec:implementation-ensemble-classification} Let $\set{1,\dots,S}$ denote the set of possible values for the output variable $x_r$ (this specification is consistent with a \texttt{BINARY} or \texttt{NOMINAL} statistical data type from Table~\ref{tab:stattypes} in Section~\ref{subsec:bayesdb-mml}). Given an input $\bm{y}_r$, the simplest strategy to define a probability for the event $[x_r=s]$ is to compute the proportion of learners in the ensemble who predict $[L_k(\bm{y}_r) = s]$. This baseline strategy guarantees that the discrete probabilities sum to 1; however, it suffers from degeneracy in that the \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} are undefined when $D$ is empty. To address this issue, we introduce a smoothing parameter $\alpha$. With probability $\alpha$, the output $x_r$ is uniform over the $S$ symbols, and with probability $(1-\alpha)$, it is an aggregate of outputs from the learners, \begin{align} p_{\G}(x_r\|\bm{y}_r,\mathcal{D}) = (1-\alpha)\left( \frac{1}{K} \sum_{s=1}^{S} \left( \mathbb{I}[x_r=s]\sum_{k=1}^K\left(\mathbb{I}[L_k(\bm{y}_r)=s]\right) \right) \right) + \alpha\left(\frac{1}{S}\right). \label{eq:ensemble-classification-logpdf} \end{align} In practice, a prior is placed on the smoothing parameter $\alpha\sim\textsc{Uniform}([0,1])$, which is transitioned by gridded Gibbs sampling \citep{ritter1992} over the prediction likelihood on the measurement set. When the distribution of $x_r$ given $\bm{y}_r$ is in the hypothesis space of the learners, we expect that $\lim_{n\to\infty}p_{\G}(\alpha\|\mathcal{G},\mathcal{D}_n) =0$. Both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} can be implemented directly from \eqref{eq:ensemble-classification-logpdf}. \subsubsection{Regression} \label{subsubsec:implementation-ensemble-regression} In the regression setting, the predictions $\set{L_k(\bm{y}_r)}$ returned by each learner are real-valued, and so the discrete aggregation strategy from \eqref{eq:ensemble-classification-logpdf} does not lead to a well-defined implementation of \texttt{logpdf}. Instead, for an input vector $\bm{y}_r$ the ensemble-based regression CGPM $\mathcal{G}$ first computes the set of predictions $\set{L_1(\bm{y}_r),\dots{L_K(\bm{y}_r)}}$, and then $\texttt{incorporate}$s them into a primitive univariate CGPM compatible with the statistical type of the output variable, such as a \texttt{NORMAL} for \texttt{NUMERICAL}, or \texttt{LOGNORMAL} for \texttt{MAGNITUDE}. This strategy fits a statistical type appropriate noise model based on the variability of responses from the learners, which relates to how noisy the regression is. implementations of \texttt{logpdf} and \texttt{simulate} are directly inherited from the constructed primitive CGPM. \subsection{Parametric mixture of experts} \label{subsec:implementation-experts} The mixture of experts \citep{jacobs1991} is a regression model for data which exhibit highly non-linear characteristics, such as heteroskedastic noise and piecewise continuous patterns. Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a CGPM which generates output variables $\bm{x}_r =(x_{[r,1]},\dots,x_{[r,T]})$ given input variables $\bm{y}_r$, using mixtures of local parametric mixtures. The member latent variable $\bm{z}_r = (z_r)$ takes values in $[K]$ (possibly unbounded) which induces a Naive Bayes factorization over the outputs \begin{align} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{y}_r, \bm\theta) = \sum_{k=1}^K \left( \prod_{t=1}^Tp_{\G}(x_{[r,t]}\|\bm{y}_r,\bm\gamma_{[q,z_r]}) p_{\G}(z_r=k\|\bm{y}_r,\bm\theta) \right), \label{eq:moe-naive-bayes} \end{align} where $\bm\gamma_{[q,k]}$ are the regression parameters for variable $x_{[r,t]}$ when $z_r=k$. While \eqref{eq:moe-naive-bayes} looks similar to the Naive Bayes factorization \eqref{eq:crosscat-naive-bayes} from CrossCat, they differ in important ways. In CrossCat, the variables $x_{[r,t]}$ are sampled from primitive univariate CGPMs, while in the mixture of experts they are sampled from a discriminative CGPM conditioned on $\bm{y}_r$. The term $p_{\G}(x_{[r,t]}\|\bm{y}_r,\bm\gamma_{[q,z_r]})$ may be any generalized linear model for the correct statistical data type (such as a Gaussian linear regression for \texttt{NUMERICAL}, logistic regression for \texttt{NOMINAL}, or Poisson regression for \texttt{COUNTS}). Second, the mixture of experts has a ``gating function'' for $p_{\G}(z_r=k\|\bm{y}_r,\bm\theta)$ which is also conditioned on $\bm{y}_r$ and may be a general function such as a softmax or even a Dirichlet process mixture \citep{hannah2011}. In, CrossCat the member latents $z_{[r,B]}$ are necessarily given a CRP prior in each block. We leave out implementations of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}, and refer to Figure~\ref{fig:moe-crosscat-linear} for a comparison of posterior samples from CrossCat and mixture of experts given data from a piecewise continuous function. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/fig-experts} \subsection{Multivariate kernel density estimation} \label{subsec:implementation-kde} In this section, we show how to express multivariate kernel density estimation with mixed data types, as developed by \citep{racine2004}, using CGPMs. Similarly to ensemble methods (Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-ensemble}) this approach implements the CGPM interface without admitting a natural representation in terms of the graphical model in Figure~\ref{fig:cgpm-graphical}. We extend the exposition of \citep{racine2004} to include algorithms for conditional sampling and density assessment. Given measurements $\mathcal{D}$, the joint distribution over the variables of $\bm{x}_r$ is estimated non-parametrically \begin{align} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_r\|\mathcal{D}) = \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \mathcal{K}(\bm{x}_r\|\bm\gamma) & = \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \left(\prod_{i\in[O]} \frac{1}{\gamma_i} K_i \left( x_{[r,i]},x_{[r',i]}\|\gamma_i \right) \right). \label{eq:kde} \end{align} $\mathcal{K}(\bm{x}_r\|\bm\gamma)$ is a product kernel and $\bm\gamma$ is a global parameter containing the bandwidths for each kernel $K_i$. Note that using a product kernel does not imply independence of elements $x_{[r,i]}$ and $x_{[r,j]}$ within a member. Bandwidths are typically learned by cross-validation or maximum-likelihood. For a \texttt{NOMINAL} statistical type with $S$ symbols the kernel is \begin{align} K_q(x,x'\|\gamma_q) = \left((1-\gamma_q)\mathbb{I}[x=x'] + \gamma_q/(S-1)\mathbb{I}[x\ne x']\right), \end{align} from \citep{aitchison1976}. For a \texttt{NUMERICAL} statistical type the kernel is a standard second order Gaussian \begin{align} K_q(x,x'\|\gamma_q) = \left( \exp(-\frac{1}{2}((x-x')/\gamma)^2)/\sqrt{2\pi}\right). \end{align} To implement \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}, we first show how the product kernel \eqref{eq:kde} ensures marginalization is tractable, \begin{flalign} & \textrm{\underline{Marginalize}} & \notag \\ & p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\mathcal{D}) = \int_{\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]},\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}) d\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]} = \int_{\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}} \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \mathcal{K}(\bm{x}_r\|\bm\gamma) d\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]} & \notag \\ & = \int_{\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}} \left[ \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \left(\prod_{i\in[O]} \frac{1}{\gamma_i} K_i\left(x_{[r,i]},x_{[r',i]}\|\gamma_i\right) \right) d\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]} \right] & \notag \\ & = \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \left( \int_{\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}} \left[ \left(\prod_{q\in{Q}} \frac{1}{\gamma_q} K_q\left(x_{[r,q]},x_{[r',q]}\|\gamma_q\right) \right) \left(\prod_{j\in{\backslash{Q}}} \frac{1}{\gamma_j} K_j\left(x_{[r,j]},x_{[r',j]}\|\gamma_j\right) \right) d\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]} \right] \right) & \notag \\ & = \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}}\left( \left(\prod_{q\in{Q}} \frac{1}{\gamma_q} K_q\left(x_{[r,q]},x_{[r',q]}\|\gamma_q\right) \right) \underbrace{ \int_{\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]}} \left[ \left(\prod_{j\in{\backslash{Q}}} \frac{1}{\gamma_j} K_j\left(x_{[r,j]},x_{[r',j]}\|\gamma_j\right) \right) d\bm{x}_{[r,\backslash{Q}]} \right] }_{\textrm{density normalized to 1}} \right) & \notag \\ & = \frac{1}{\|\mathcal{D}\|} \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \left(\prod_{q\in{Q}} \frac{1}{\gamma_q} K_q\left(x_{[r,q]},x_{[r',q]}\|\gamma_q\right) \right). & \label{eq:kde-marginal} \end{flalign} Conditioning is a direct application of the Bayes Rule, where the numerator and denominator are computed separately using \eqref{eq:kde-marginal}. \begin{flalign} & \textrm{\underline{Condition}} & p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]}, D) = \frac{p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]},\bm{x}_{[r,E]}\|D)}{p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,E]}\|D)} \label{eq:kde-bayes} \end{flalign} Combining \eqref{eq:kde-marginal} and \eqref{eq:kde-bayes} provides an immediate algorithm for \texttt{logpdf}. To implement \texttt{simulate}, we begin by ignoring the normalizing constant in the denominator of \eqref{eq:kde-bayes} which is unnecessary for sampling. We then express the numerator suggestively, \begin{align} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\mathcal{D}) \propto \sum_{r'\in \mathcal{D}} \left( \prod_{q\in Q} \frac{1}{\gamma_q} K_q\left(x_{[r,q]},x_{[r',q]}\|\gamma_q\right) \underbrace {\prod_{e\in E} \frac{1}{\gamma_e} K_e\left(x_{[r,e]},x_{[r',e]}\|\gamma_e\right) }_{\text{weight } w_r'} \right), \label{eq:kde-conditional} \end{align} In particular, the \texttt{simulate} algorithm first samples a member $r' \sim \textsc{Categorical}(\set{w_r':r\in \mathcal{D}})$, where the weight $w_r'$ is labeled in \eqref{eq:kde-conditional}. Next, it samples the query elements $x_{[r,q]}$ independently from the corresponding kernels curried at $r'$. Intuitively, the CGPM weights each member $r'$ in the population by how well its local kernel explains the evidence $\bm{x}_{[r,E]}$ known about $r$. \subsection{Generative nearest neighbors} \label{subsec:implementation-knn} In this section, we present a compositional generative population model which implements \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} by building ad-hoc statistical models on a per-query basis. The method is a simple extension of K Nearest Neighbors to generative modeling. Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a generative nearest neighbor CGPM, and $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$ and $\bm{x}_{[r,E]}$ denote the query and evidence for a \texttt{simulate} or \texttt{logpdf} query. The method first finds the $K$ nearest neighbors to $r$ in dataset $\mathcal{D}$, based on the values of the evidence variables $\bm{x}_{[r,E]}$. Let $\mathcal{N}$ denote the top $K$ neighbors, whose generic member is denoted $\bm{x}_k \in \mathcal{N}$. Within $\mathcal{N}$, we assume the query variables $Q$ are independent, and learn a CGPM $\mathcal{G} = \set{\mathcal{G}_{[q]}: q \in Q}$ which is a product of primitive univariate CGPMs $\mathcal{G}_{q}$ (based on the appropriate statistical data type of each variable $q$ from Table~\ref{tab:stattypes}). The measurements $\set{x_{[k,q]} k \in \mathcal{N}}$ are used to learn the primitive CGPM for $q$ in the neighborhood. This procedure is summarized in Algorithm~\ref{alg:knn-build-local}. Implementations of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} follow directly from the product CGPM, as summarized in Algorithms~\ref{alg:knn-simulate} and \ref{alg:knn-logpdf}. Figure~\ref{fig:knn} illustrates how the behavior of \texttt{simulate} on a synthetic x-cross varies with the neighborhood size parameter K. It should be noted that building independent models in the neighborhood will result in very poor performance when the query variables remain highly correlated even when conditioned on the evidence. Our baseline approach can be modified to capture the dependence between the query variables by instead building one independent CGPM around the local neighborhood of each neighbor $k \in \mathcal{N}$, rather than one independent CGPM for the entire neighborhood. These improvements are left for future work. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/alg-knn} \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{subfigure}{\textwidth} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.325\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth] {figures/xcross-knn-synthetic-baseline.pdf} \caption{Observed data} \label{fig:knn-synthetic} \end{subfigure}% \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.675\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/knn-histogram.pdf} \caption{Samples of \texttt{z GIVEN x=0.5, y=0.5} for various neighborhood sizes} \label{fig:knn-posterior} \end{subfigure}% \begin{Verbatim}[gobble=4, frame=lines] \end{Verbatim} \end{subfigure} \bcaption{% Posterior samples from the generative nearest neighbors CGPM given an x-cross for varying values of neighbors K.}{% \textbf{\subref{fig:knn-synthetic}} Samples from the synthetic x-cross data generator. It produces three variables: \texttt{x} and \texttt{y} are real-valued and are scattered in the 2D plane, and \texttt{z} is a binary variable indicating the functional regime. \textbf{\subref{fig:knn-posterior}} For small neighborhoods (\texttt{K}=2, \texttt{K}=4), most members of the neighborhood satisfy \texttt{z=0}, as reflected by the sharp posterior distribution of \texttt{z} at 0. As the neighborhood size increases (\texttt{K}=8, \texttt{K}=10) they become noisy and include more members with \texttt{z=1}, smoothing out the posterior over \texttt{z} between 0 and 1.} \label{fig:knn} \end{figure} \subsection{Factor analysis \& probabilistic PCA} \label{subsec:implementation-pca} Our development of factor analysis closely follows \citep[Chatper 12]{murphy2012}; we extend the exposition to describe implementations of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} for arbitrary patterns of latent and observable variables. Factor analysis is a continuous latent variable model where the vector of output variables $\bm{x}_r = (x_{[r,1]},\dots,x_{[r,D]})$ is a noisy linear combination of a set of $L$ basis vectors $\set{\bm{w}_1,\dots,\bm{w}_L}$, \begin{align} \bm{x}_r = \bm\mu + \bm{w}_1z_{[r,1]} + \bm{w}_2z_{[r,2]} + \dots + \bm{w}_Lz_{[r,L]} + \bm\epsilon && \bm\epsilon \sim^\mathcal{G} \textsc{Normal}(\bm{0}, \textrm{diag}(\psi_1,\dots, \psi_D)). \label{eq:factor-analysis-linear-combination} \end{align} Each basis vector $\bm{w}_l$ is a $D$-dimensional vector and the dimension of the latent space $L$ (a hyperparameter) is less than $D$. The member latents $\bm{z}_r \in \mathbb{R}^L$ are known as factor scores, and they represent a low-dimensional projection of $\bm{x}_r$. The global latents are the bases $\mathbf{W}=[\bm{w}_1\dots\bm{w}_L]$, covariance matrix $\bm\Psi$ of the noise $\bm\epsilon$, and mean vector $\bm\mu$ of $\bm{x}_r$. To specify a generative model, the member-specific latent variables are given a prior $\bm{z}_r \sim \textsc{Normal}(\bm0, \mathbf{I})$. Combining this prior with \eqref{eq:factor-analysis-linear-combination} the joint distribution over the latent and observable variables is \begin{align} \bm{s}_r = \begin{pmatrix} \bm{z}_r\\ \bm{x}_r \end{pmatrix} \sim^\mathcal{G} \textsc{Normal} \left( \bm{m} = \begin{pmatrix} \bm{0}\\ \bm\mu \end{pmatrix}, \bm\Sigma = \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{I}_{L\times{L}} & \mathbf{W}^\top_{L\times{D}}\\ \mathbf{W}^\top_{D\times{L}} & \left(\mathbf{W}\mathbf{W}^\top+\bm\Psi\right)_{D\times{D}}\\ \end{pmatrix} \right), \label{eq:factor-analysis-joint-distribution} \end{align} where we have defined the joint vector $\bm{s}_r = (\bm{z}_r,\bm{x}_r) \in \mathbb{R}^{D+L}$. The CGPM $\mathcal{G}$ implementing factor analysis exposes the member-specific latent variables as output variables. The multivariate normal \eqref{eq:factor-analysis-joint-distribution} provides the ingredients for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} on any pattern of latent and observable variables with \texttt{query} $\bm{s}_{[r,Q]}$ and \texttt{evidence} $\bm{s}_{[r,E]}$. To arrive at the target distribution, the Bayes theorem for Gaussians \citep{bishop2006} is invoked in a two-step process.% \begin{align} & \textrm{\underline{Marginalize}} & \bm{s}_{[r,Q\cup{E}]} \sim^\mathcal{G} \textsc{Normal} \left( \begin{pmatrix} \bm\mu_Q\\ \bm\mu_E \end{pmatrix}, \begin{pmatrix} \bm\Sigma_{Q} & \bm\Sigma_{Q\cup{E}} \\ \bm\Sigma_{Q\cup{E}}^\top & \bm\Sigma_{E} \\ \end{pmatrix} \right) \\ & \textrm{\underline{Condition}} & \bm{s}_{[r,Q]} \| \bm{s}_{[r,E]} \sim^\mathcal{G} \textsc{Normal} \left( \bm\mu_Q + \bm\Sigma_{Q\cup{E}} \bm\Sigma_{E}^{-1} (\bm{s}_{[r,E]}-\bm\mu_E), \bm\Sigma_{Q} - \bm\Sigma_{Q\cup{E}} \bm\Sigma_{E}^{-1} \bm\Sigma_{Q\cup{E}}^\top \right) \end{align} Our implementation of \texttt{infer} uses expectation maximization for factor analysis \citep{ghahramani1997}; an alternative approach is posterior inference in the Bayesian setting \citep{press1997}. Finally, probabilistic principal component analysis \citep{tipping1999} is recovered when covariance of $\bm\epsilon$ is further constrained to satisfy $\psi_1=\dots=\psi_D$. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/fig-pca-iris} \subsection{Probabilistic programs in VentureScript} \label{subsec:implementation-venturescript} In this section, we show how to construct a composable generative population model directly in terms of its computational and statistical definitions from Section~\ref{sec:cgpms} by expressing it in the VentureScript probabilistic programming language. For simplicity, this section assumes the CGPM satisfies a more refined conditional independence constraint than \eqref{eq:indep-gpm}, namely \begin{align} \exists q, q': (r,c) \ne (r',c') \implies x_{[r,c]} \perp\!\!\!\perp x_{[r',c']} \mid \set{\bm\alpha, \bm\theta, z_{[r,q]}, z_{[r',q']}, \bm{y}_r, \bm{y}_r'}. \label{eq:venturescript-independence} \end{align} In words, for every observation element $x_{[r,c]}$, there exists a latent variable $z_{[r,q]}$ that (in addition to $\bm\theta$) mediates all coupling with other variables in the population. The member latent variables $\bm{Z}$ may still exhibit arbitrary dependencies within and among one another. While not essential, this requirement simplifies exposition of the inference algorithms. The approach for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} is based on approximate inference in tagged subparts of the Venture trace.% \footnote{In Venture, every random choice may be in a \texttt{scope} which is divided into a set of \texttt{block}s. The CGPM places each member $r$ in its own \texttt{scope}, and each observable $x_{[r,i]}$ and latent $z_{[r,i]}$ element in a \texttt{block} within that \texttt{scope}.} The CGPM carries a set of $K$ independent samples $\set{\bm\theta_k}_{k=1}^K$ from an approximate posterior $p_{\G}(\bm\theta\|\mathcal{D})$. These samples of global latent variables are assigned weights on a per-query basis. Since VentureScript CGPMs are Bayesian, the target distribution for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} marginalizes over all internal state, \begin{align} &p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\mathcal{D}) = \int_{\bm\theta} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta,\mathcal{D})p_{\G}(\bm\theta\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\mathcal{D})d\bm\theta \label{eq:venture-no-weighting} \\ &= \int_{\bm\theta}p(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta,\mathcal{D}) \frac{p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,E]}\|\bm\theta,\mathcal{D})p(\bm\theta\|\mathcal{D})}{p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,E]}\|\mathcal{D},\mathcal{G})}d\bm\theta \notag \\ &\approx \frac{1}{\sum_{k=1}^Kw_k} \sum_{k=1}^{K}p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta_k,\mathcal{D})w_k && \bm\theta_k \sim^\mathcal{G} \|\mathcal{D} \label{eq:venture-weighting}. \end{align} The weight $w_k= p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,E]}\|\bm\theta_k,\mathcal{D})$ is the likelihood of the evidence under $\bm\theta_k$. The weighting scheme \eqref{eq:venture-weighting} is a computational trade-off circumventing the requirement to run inference on population parameters $\bm\theta$ on a per-query basis, i.e. when given new evidence $\bm{x}_{[r,E]}$ about $r$.% \footnote{An alternative strategy is to compute a harmonic mean estimator based directly on \eqref{eq:venture-no-weighting}.} It suffices now to consider the target distribution under single sample $\bm\theta_k$: \begin{align} &p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta_k,\mathcal{D}) = \int_{\bm{z}_r} p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}, \bm{z}_r \| \bm{x}_{[r,E]}, \bm\theta_k, \mathcal{D}) d\bm{z}_r \label{eq:joint-local-posterior} \\ &= \int_{\bm{z}_r} \left[ \left( \prod_{q\in Q} p_{\G}(x_{[r,q]} \| \bm{z}_r, \bm\theta_k) \right) p_{\G}(\bm{z}_r \| \bm{x}_{[r,E]}, \bm\theta_k, \mathcal{D}) d\bm{z}_r \right] \label{eq:invoke-independence} \\ &\approx \frac{1}{T}{\sum_{t=1}^T} \prod_{q\in Q} p_{\G}(x_{[r,q]}\|\bm{z}_{[t,r]},\bm\theta_k) && \bm{z}_{[t,r]} \sim^\mathcal{G} \|\set{\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta,\mathcal{D}}. \label{eq:conditional-posterior} \end{align} Eq~\eqref{eq:joint-local-posterior} suggests that \texttt{simulate} for can be implemented by sampling from the joint local posterior $\set{\bm{x}_{[r,Q]},\bm{z}_r\|\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm\theta_k,\mathcal{D}}$, and returning only elements $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$. Eq~\eqref{eq:conditional-posterior} shows that \texttt{logpdf} can be implemented by first sampling the member latents $\bm{z}_r$ from the local posterior. By invoking conditional independence constraint \eqref{eq:venturescript-independence} in Eq \eqref{eq:invoke-independence}, the query $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$ factors into a product of density terms for each element $x_{[r,q]}$ which can be evaluated directly. This description completes the algorithm for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} in trace $\bm\theta_k$, and is repeated for $\set{\bm\theta_1,\dots,\bm\theta_K}$. The CGPM implements \texttt{simulate} by drawing a trace $j \sim \textsc{Categorical}(\set{w_1,\dots,w_K})$ and returning the sample $\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}$ from $\bm\theta_j$. Similarly, \texttt{logpdf} is computed using the weighted Monte Carlo estimator \eqref{eq:venture-weighting}. Algorithms \ref{alg:venturescript-simulate} and \ref{alg:venturescript-logpdf} illustrate implementations in a general probabilistic programming environment. \input{tex/implement-cgpms/fig-inline-venturescript} \clearpage \input{tex/implement-cgpms/alg-venturescript} \subsection{Building populations and networks of composable generative population models with the Metamodeling Language} \label{subsec:bayesdb-mml} As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:architecture}, the MML interpreter in BayesDB interacts with data tables and populations, metamodels, and a library of CGPMs. Population schemas are MML programs which are used to declare a list of variables and their statistical types. Every population is backed by a base table in BayesDB, which stores the measurements. Metamodel definitions are MML programs which are used to declare a composite network of CGPMs for a given population. The internal CGPMs nodes in this network come from the CGPM library available to BayesDB. After declaring a population and a metamodel for it, further MML commands are used to instantiate stochastic ensembles of CGPM networks (\texttt{INITIALIZE}), and apply inference operators to them (\texttt{ANALYZE}). In this section, we describe the surface level syntaxes in the Metamodeling Language for population schemas, metamodel definitions, and other MML commands. We also describe how to use the Bayesian Query Language to query ensembles of CGPMs at varying levels of granularity. A formal semantics for MML that precisely describes the relationship between the compositional surface syntax and a network of CGPMs is left for future work. \subsubsection{Population Schemas} A population schema declares a collection of variables and their statistical types. \begin{itemize} \item[] \texttt{% \oliveg{CREATE POPULATION} <\blue{p}> \oliveg{FOR} <\blue{table}> \oliveg{WITH SCHEMA} (<\red{schemum}>[; ...]);} Declares a new population \texttt{p} in BayesDB. The token \texttt{table} references a database table, which stores the measurements and is known as the base table for \texttt{p}. \item[] \texttt{% \red{schemum} := \oliveg{MODEL} <\blue{var-names}> \oliveg{AS} <\blue{stat-type}>} Uses \texttt{stat-type} as the statistical data type for all the variables named in \texttt{var-names}. \item[] \texttt{% \red{schemum} := \oliveg{IGNORE} <\blue{var-names}>} Excludes \texttt{var-names} from the population. This command is typically applied for columns in the base table representing unique names, timestamps, and other metadata. \item[] \texttt{% \red{schemum} := \oliveg{GUESS STATTYPES FOR} ( \| <\blue{var-names}>)} Uses existing measurements in the base table to guess the statistical data types of columns in the table. When the argument is (\texttt{}), the target columns are all those which do not appear in \texttt{MODEL} or \texttt{IGNORE}. When the argument is (\texttt{var-names}), only those subset of columns are guessed. \end{itemize} Every column in the base table must have a derivable policy (guess, ignore, or explicitly model with a user-provided statistical data type) from the schema. The statistical data types available in MML are shown in Table~\ref{tab:stattypes}. The \oliveg{\textbf{\texttt{GUESS}}} command is implemented using various heuristics on the measurements (such as the number of unique values, sparsity of observations, and SQL \texttt{TEXT} columns) and only assigns a variable to either \texttt{NOMINAL} or \texttt{NUMERICAL}. Using a more refined statistical type for a variable is achieved with an explicit \textbf{\texttt{\oliveg{MODEL}...\oliveg{AS}}} command. Finally, two populations identical same base tables and variables, but different statistical type assignments, are considered distinct populations. \clearpage \subsubsection{Metamodel Definitions} \label{subsubsec:bayesdb-mml-metamodel-definitions} After creating a population $\mathcal{P}$ in BayesDB, we use metamodel definitions to declare CGPMs for the population. This MML program specifies both the topology and internal CGPM nodes of the network (Section~\ref{subsec:composition}). Starting with a baseline CGPM at the ``root''of the graph, nodes and edges are constructed by a sequence overrides that extract variables from the root node and place them into newly created CGPM nodes. The syntax for a metamodel definition is: \begin{itemize} \item[] \texttt{% \oliveg{CREATE METAMODEL} <\blue{m}> \oliveg{FOR} <\blue{population}> \oliveg{WITH BASELINE} <\red{baseline-cgpm}>\newline [(<\red{schemum}>[; ...])];} Declares a new metamodel \texttt{m}. The token \texttt{population} references a BayesDB population, which contains a set of variable names and their statistical types and is known as the base population for \texttt{m}. \item[] \texttt{% \red{baseline-cgpm} ::= (crosscat \| multivariate\_kde \| generative\_knn)} Identifies the automatic model discovery engine, which learns the full joint distribution of all variables in the \texttt{population} of \texttt{m}. Baselines include Cross-Categorization (Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-crosscat}), Multivariate Kernel Density Estimation (Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-kde}), or Generative K-Nearest-Neighbors (Section~\ref{subsec:implementation-knn}). \item[] \texttt{% \red{schemum} := \oliveg{OVERRIDE GENERATIVE MODEL FOR} <\blue{output-vars}>\newline [\oliveg{GIVEN} <\blue{input-vars}>] [\oliveg{AND EXPOSE} (<\blue{exposed-var}> <\blue{stat-type}>)[, ...]]\newline \oliveg{USING} <\blue{cgpm-name}>} Overrides \texttt{baseline-cgpm} by creating a new node in the CGPM network. The node generates \texttt{output-vars}, possibly requires the specified \texttt{input-vars}. Additionally, the CGPM may expose some of its latent variable as queryable outputs. The token \texttt{cgpm-name} refers to the name of the CGPM which is overriding \texttt{baseline-cgpm} on the specified subpart of the joint distribution. \item[] \texttt{% \red{schemum} := \oliveg{SET CATEGORY MODEL FOR} <\blue{output-var}> \oliveg{TO} <\blue{primitive-cgpm-name}>} (This command is only available when \texttt{baseline-cgpm} is \texttt{crosscat}.) Replaces the default category model used by \texttt{crosscat} for \texttt{output-var}, based on its statistical type, with an alternative \texttt{primitive-cgpm} that is also applicable to that statistical type (last column of Table~\ref{tab:stattypes}). \end{itemize} To answer arbitrary BQL queries about a population, BayesDB requires each CGPM to carry a full joint model over all the population variables. Thus, each metamodel is declared with a baseline CGPM, such as CrossCat, a non-parametric Bayesian structure learner for high-dimensional and heterogeneous data tables \citep{mansinghka2015-2}, among others outlined in Section~\ref{sec:implementation}. It is important to note that the \texttt{input-vars} in the \texttt{\oliveg{OVERRIDE MODEL}} command may be the outputs of not only the baseline but any collection of upstream CGPMs. It is also possible to completely override the baseline by overriding all the variables in the population. \subsubsection{Homogeneous Ensembles of CGPM Networks} \label{subsubsec:bayesdb-mml-homogenous} In BayesDB, a metamodel $\mathcal{M}$ is formally defined as an ensemble of CGPM networks $\set{(\mathcal{G}_k,w_k)}_{i=1}^{N}$, where $w_k$ is the weight of network $\mathcal{G}_k$ \citep[Section 3.1.2]{mansinghka2015}. The CGPMs in $\mathcal{M}$ are homogeneous in that (from the perspective of MML) they have the same metamodel definition, and (from the perspective of the CGPM interface) they are all \texttt{create}d with the same \texttt{population}, \texttt{inputs}, \texttt{outputs}, and \texttt{binary}. The ensemble $\mathcal{M}$ is populated with $K$ instances of CGPMs using the following MML command: \begin{itemize} \item[] \texttt{% \oliveg{INITIALIZE} <\blue{K}> \oliveg{MODELS FOR} <\blue{metamodel}>; } Creates $K$ independent replicas of the composable generative population model network contained in the MML definition of \texttt{metamodel}. \end{itemize} CGPM instances in the ensemble are different in that BayesDB provides each $\mathcal{G}_k$ a unique \texttt{seed} during \texttt{create}. This means that invoking \texttt{infer}($\mathcal{G}_k$, \texttt{program}: $\mathcal{T}$) causes each network's internal state to evolve differently over the course of inference (when $\mathcal{T}$ contains non-deterministic execution). In MML surface syntax, \texttt{infer} is invoked using the following command: \begin{itemize} \item[] \texttt{% \oliveg{ANALYZE} <\blue{metamodel}> \oliveg{FOR} <\blue{K}> (\oliveg{ITERATIONS} \| \oliveg{SECONDS}) [(<\red{plan}>)]; } Runs analysis (in parallel) on all the initialized CGPM networks in the ensemble, according to an optional inference \texttt{plan}. \item[] \texttt{% \red{plan} := (\oliveg{VARIABLES} \| \oliveg{SKIP}) <\blue{var-names}> } If \texttt{VARIABLES}, then runs analysis on all the CGPM nodes which have at least one output variable in \texttt{var-names}. If \texttt{SKIP}, then then transitions all the CGPM nodes except those which have a an output variable in \texttt{var-names}. As outlined at the end of Section~\ref{subsec:composition}, each CGPM node is learned independently at present time. \end{itemize} Weighted ensembling of homogeneous CGPMs can be interpreted based on the modeling and inference tactics internal to a CGPM. For example, in Bayesian CGPM network where \texttt{\oliveg{ANALYZE}} invokes MCMC transitions, each $\mathcal{G}_k$ may represent a different posterior sample; for variational inference, each $\mathcal{G}_k$ may converge to a different set of latent parameters due to different random initializations. More extensive syntaxes for inference plans in MML are left for future work. \subsubsection{Heterogeneous Ensembles of CGPM Networks} \label{subsubsec:bayesdb-bql-heterogenous} Section~\ref{subsubsec:bayesdb-mml-homogenous} defined a metamodel $\mathcal{M}$ as an ensemble of homogeneous CGPM networks with the same metamodel definition. It is also possible construct a heterogeneous ensemble of CGPM networks by defining a set of metamodels $\set{\mathcal{M}_1,\dots,M_K}$ for the same population $\mathcal{P}$ but with different metamodel definitions. Let $\mathcal{G}_{[k,t]}$ be the $t\textsuperscript{th}$ CGPM network in the metamodel $\mathcal{M}_k$. The Bayesian Query Language is able to query CGPM networks at three levels of granularity, starting from the most coarse to the most granular. \begin{itemize} \item[] \texttt{% (\oliveg{ESTIMATE} \| \oliveg{SIMULATE} \| \oliveg{INFER}) <\blue{bql-expression}> \oliveg{FROM} <\blue{population}>;} Executes the BQL query by aggregating responses from all metamodels $\set{\mathcal{M}_1,\dots,\mathcal{M}_k}$ defined for \texttt{<population>}. \item[] \texttt{% (\oliveg{ESTIMATE} \| \oliveg{SIMULATE} \| \oliveg{INFER}) <\blue{bql-expression}> \oliveg{FROM} <\blue{population}>\newline \oliveg{MODELED BY} <\blue{metamodel-k}>;} Executes the BQL query by aggregating responses from all the CGPM networks $\set{\mathcal{G}_{[k,t]}}$ that have been initialized with the MML definition for \texttt{<metamodel-k>}. \item[] \texttt{% (\oliveg{ESTIMATE} \| \oliveg{SIMULATE} \| \oliveg{INFER}) <\blue{bql-expression}> \oliveg{FROM} <\blue{population}>\newline \oliveg{MODELED BY} <\blue{metamodel-k}> \oliveg{USING MODEL} <\blue{t}>;} Executes the BQL query by returning the single response from $\mathcal{G}_{[k,t]}$ in \texttt{<metamodel-k>}. \end{itemize} Monte Carlo estimators obtained by \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} remain well-defined even when the ensemble contains heterogeneous CGPMs. All CGPMs across different metamodels are defined for the same population, which determines the statistical types of the variables. This guarantees that the associated supports and (product of) base measures (from Table~\ref{tab:stattypes}) for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} queries are all type-matched. \subsection{Composable generative population models generalize and extend generative population models in BayesDB} \label{subsec:bayesdb-compare} It is informative to compare both the conceptual and technical differences between generative population models (GPMs) in BayesDB \citep{mansinghka2015} with composable generative population models (CGPMs). In its original presentation, the GPM interface served the purpose of being the primary vehicle for motivating BQL as a model-independent query language \citep[Sec.3.2]{mansinghka2015}. Moreover, GPMs were based around CrossCat as the baseline model-discovery engine \citep[Sec. 4.5.1]{mansinghka2015}, which provided good solutions for several data analysis tasks. However, by not accepting inputs, GPMs offered no means of composition; non-CrossCat objects, known as ``foreign predictors'', were discriminative models embedded directly into the CrossCat joint density \citep[Sec. 4.4.2]{mansinghka2015}. By contrast, the main purpose of the CGPM interface is to motivate more expressive MML syntaxes for building hybrid models, comprised of arbitrary generative and discriminative components. Since CGPMs natively accept inputs, they admit a natural form of composition (Section~\ref{subsec:composition}) which does violate the internal representation of any particular CGPM. The computational interface and probabilistic structure of GPMs and CGPMs are different in several respects. Because GPMs were presented as Bayesian models with Markov Chain Monte Carlo inference \citep[Sec. 4.2]{mansinghka2015}, both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} were explicitly conditioned on a particular set of latent variables extracted from some state in the posterior inference chain \citep[Sec. 3.1.1]{mansinghka2015}. On the other hand, CGPMs capture a much broader set of model classes, and \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} do not impose any conditioning constraints internal to the model besides conditioning on input variables and the entire dataset $\mathcal{D}$. Internally, GPMs enforced much stronger assumptions regulating inter-row independences; all the elements in a row are conditionally independent give a latent variable \cite[Sec.3.1]{mansinghka2015}, effectively restricting the internal structure to a directed graphical model. CGPMs allow for arbitrary coupling between elements within a row from Eq~\eqref{eq:indep-gpm}, which uniformly expresses both directed and undirected probabilistic models, as well approaches which are not naturally probabilistic that implement the interface. Finally, unlike GPMs, CGPMs may expose some of member-specific latent variables as queryable outputs. This features trades-off the model independence of BQL with the ability to learn and query the details of the internal probabilistic process encapsulated by the CGPM. \subsection{Querying composable generative population models using the Bayesian Query Language} The BQL interpreter allows users to ask probabilistic questions about populations using a structured query language. Figure~\ref{fig:bql-interpreter} shows how the BQL queries \texttt{SIMULATE} and \texttt{ESTIMATE PROBABILITY OF} translate into invocations of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} for an illustrative population and CGPM. BQL defines a large collection of row-wise and column-wise estimators for CGPMs \citep[Sec. 3.2.2]{mansinghka2015}, such as \texttt{MUTUAL INFORMATION}, \texttt{DEPENDENCE PROBABILITY} and \texttt{SIMILIARITY WITH RESPECT TO}. These quantities admit default implementations in terms of Monte Carlo estimators formed by \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}, and any CGPM may override the BQL interpreter's generic implementations with a custom, optimized implementation. A full description of implementing BQL in terms of the CGPM interface is beyond the scope of this work. \input{tex/integrate-bayesdb/fig-bql-cgpm} \section{Integrating Conditional Generative Population Models into BayesDB} \label{sec:bayesdb} Without probabilistic programming systems and languages that treat data analysis computationally, it is difficult to both utilize the expressive power of CGPMs and use general-purpose inference machinery to develop and query them. In this section, we show how CGPMs have been integrated into BayesDB, a probabilistic programming platform with two languages: the Bayesian Query Language (BQL) for model-independent querying, and the Metamodeling Language (MML) for model discovery and building. We first describe how simple BQL queries map directly to invocations of the CGPM interface. We then show how to compose CGPMs into networks, and outline new expressions in MML used to construct populations and networks of CGPMs. The experiments in Section \ref{sec:applications} illustrate how extending BayesDB with CGPMs can be used for non-trivial data analysis tasks. \input{tex/integrate-bayesdb/fig-architecture} \clearpage \input{tex/integrate-bayesdb/integrate-bayesdb-bql} \clearpage \input{tex/composition/composition} \clearpage \input{tex/integrate-bayesdb/integrate-bayesdb-mml} \input{tex/integrate-bayesdb/integrate-bayesdb-compare} \clearpage \subsection{Compositional networks of composable generative population models} \label{subsec:composition} Our development of CGPMs has until now focused on their computational interface and their internal probabilistic structures. In this section, we outline the mathematical formalism which justifies closure of CGPMs under input/output composition. For a collection of CGPMs $\set{\mathcal{G}_k:k\in[K]}$ operating on the same population $\mathcal{P}$, we will show how they be organized into a generalized directed graph which itself is a CGPM $\mathcal{G}_{[K]}$, and provide a Monte Carlo strategy for performing joint inference over the outputs and inputs to the internal CGPMs. This composition allows complex probabilistic models to be built from simpler CGPMs. They communicate with one another using the \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} interface to answer queries against the overall network. In the next section, we describe the surface syntaxes in MML to construct networks of CGPMs in BayesDB. Let $\bm{v}=(v_1,\dots,v_T)$ be the variables of $\mathcal{P}$, and $\mathcal{G}_a$ be a CGPM which generates outputs $\bm{v}^{out}_a=(v^{out}_{[a,1]},\dots,v^{out}_{[a,O_a]})$, accepts inputs $\bm{v}^{in}_a=(v^{in}_{[a,1]},\dots,v^{in}_{[a,I_a]})$, and satisfies $(\bm{v}^{out}_a\cup\bm{v}^{in}_a)\subset\bm{v}$. Similarly, consider another CGPM $\mathcal{G}_b$ on the same population with outputs $\bm{v}^{out}_b$ and inputs $\bm{v}^{in}_b$. The composition $(\mathcal{G}_{[b, \mathcal{B}]} \circ \mathcal{G}_{[a,\mathcal{A}]})$ applies the subset of outputs $\bm{v}^{out}_{[a,\mathcal{A}]}$ of $\mathcal{G}_a$ to the subset of inputs $\bm{v}^{in}_{[b,\mathcal{B}]}$ of $\mathcal{G}_b$, resulting in a new CGPM $\mathcal{G}^c$ with output $(\bm{v}^{out}_a\cup\bm{v}^{out}_b)$ and input $(\bm{v}^{in}_a\cup\bm{v}^{out}_{[b,\backslash\mathcal{B}]})$. The rules of composition require that $(\bm{v}^{out}_a \cap \bm{v}^{out}_b) = \varnothing$ i.e. $\mathcal{G}_a$ and $\mathcal{G}_b$ do not share any output, and that $\bm{v}^{out}_{[a,\mathcal{A}]}$ and $\bm{v}^{in}_{[b,\mathcal{B}]}$ correspond to the same subset of variables in the original population $\mathcal{P}$. Generalizing this idea further, a collection of CGPMs $\set{\mathcal{G}_k:k\in[K]}$ can thus be organized as a graph where node $k$ represents internal CGPM $\mathcal{G}_k$, and the labeled edge $a_{\mathcal{A}} \to b_{\mathcal{B}}$ denotes the composition $(\mathcal{G}_{[b,\mathcal{B}]} \circ \mathcal{G}_{[a,\mathcal{A}]})$. These labeled edges between different CGPMs in the network must form a directed acyclic graph. However, elements $x_{[k,r,i]}$ and $x_{[k,r,j]}$ of the same member $r$ within any particular $\mathcal{G}_k$ are only required to satisfy constraint \eqref{eq:indep-gpm} which may in general follow directed and/or undirected dependencies. The topology of the overall CGPM network $\mathcal{G}_{[K]}$ can be summarized by its generalized adjacency matrix $\pi_{[K]}:=\set{\pi_k: k\in[K]}$, where $\pi_k=\set{(p,t): v^{out}_{[p,t]}\in\bm{v}^{in}_k}$ is the set of all output elements from upstream CGPMs connected to the inputs of $\mathcal{G}_k$. To illustrate that the class of CGPMs is closed under composition, we need to show how the network $\mathcal{G}_{[K]}$ implements the interface. First note that $\mathcal{G}_{[K]}$ produces as \texttt{outputs} the union of all output variables of its constituent CGPMs, and takes as \texttt{inputs} the collection of variables in the population which are not the output of any CGPM in the network. The latter collection of variables are ``exogenous'' to the network, and must be provided for queries that require them. The implementations of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} against $\mathcal{G}_{[K]}$ are shown in Algorithms~\ref{alg:network-inference-simulate} and \ref{alg:network-inference-logpdf}. Both algorithms use an importance sampling scheme which combines the methods provided by each individual node $\mathcal{G}_k$, and a shared forward-sampling subroutine in Algorithm~\ref{alg:network-inference-forward}. The estimator for \texttt{logpdf} uses ratio likelihood weighting; both estimators derived from lines \ref{alg-line:network-inference-logpdf-joint} and \ref{alg-line:network-inference-logpdf-marginal} of Algorithm~\ref{alg:network-inference-logpdf} are computed using unnormalized importance sampling, so the ratio estimator on line \ref{alg-line:network-inference-logpdf-ratio} is exact in the infinite limit of importance samples $J$ and $J'$. The algorithms explicitly pass the member id $r$ between each CGPM so that they agree about which member-specific latent variables are relevant for the query, while preserving abstraction boundaries. The importance sampling strategy used for compositional \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} may only be feasible when the networks are shallow and the primitive CGPMs are fairly noisy; better Monte Carlo strategies or perhaps even variational strategies may be needed for deeper networks, and are left to future work. The network's \texttt{infer} method can be implemented by invoking \texttt{infer} separately on each internal CGPM node. In general, several improvements on this baseline strategy are possible and are also interesting areas for further research (Section~\ref{sec:discussion}). \clearpage \input{tex/composition/alg-composition} \section{Composable Generative Population Models} \label{sec:cgpms} In this section we describe composable generative population models (CGPMs), a computational abstraction that provides a uniform treatment of a broad class of models and methods in probabilistic data analysis. This section is divided into three parts. The first part formalizes the notion of a statistical population in terms of a random tabular data structure with a finite number of columns and a countably infinite number of rows, and establishes notation used throughout the paper. The second part outlines the computational interface that defines CGPMs. The third part describes a class of statistical graphical models which can be naturally expressed using the CGPM framework. \input{tex/cgpms/cgpms-populations} \input{tex/cgpms/cgpms-computational} \input{tex/cgpms/cgpms-statistical} \input{tex/cgpms/cgpms-processes} \subsection{Statistical description of composable generative population models} \label{subsec:cgpms-statistical} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \input{tex/cgpms/fig-cgpm-graphical} \bcaption{% Internal independence constraints for a broad class of composable generative population models.}{% All nodes in the diagram are multidimensional. Internally, the hyperparameters $\bm\alpha$ are fixed and known quantities. The global latents $\bm\theta$ are shared by all members of the population. Member-specific latents $\bm{z}_r$ interact only with their corresponding observations $\bm{x}_r$, as well as other member-latents $\set{\bm{z}_{s}:s\ne r}$ as indicated by the dashed loop around the plate. Nodes $\bm{x}_r$ and $\bm{x}_s$ across different members $r$ and $s$ are independent conditioned on their member-latents. However, general dependencies are permitted within elements $\set{x_{[r,i]}:i\in[O]}$ of node $\bm{x}_r$. The input variables $\bm{y}_r$ are ambient conditioning variables in the population and are always observed; in general, $\bm{y}_r$ may be the output of another CGPM (Section \ref{subsec:composition}). Externally, $\mathcal{G}$ is specified by an opaque \texttt{binary}, e.g. a probabilistic program, describing the data generating process, and \texttt{outputs} and \texttt{inputs} that specify the variable names for \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}. } \label{fig:cgpm-graphical} \end{figure} The previous section outlined the external interface that defines a CGPM without specifying its internal structure. In practice, many CGPMs can be described using a general graphical model with both directed and undirected edges. The data generating process is characterized by a collection of variables in the graph, \begin{equation} \mathcal{G}=(\bm\alpha, \bm\theta, \bm{Z}=\set{\bm{z}_r}_{r=1}^{\infty}, \bm{X}=\set{\bm{x}_r}_{r=1}^{\infty}, \bm{Y}=\set{\bm{y}_r}_{r=1}^{\infty}). \end{equation} \begin{itemize} \item $\bm\alpha$: Fixed quantities such as input and output dimensionalities, observation spaces, dependence structures and statistical hyperparameters. \item $\bm\theta$: Population-level, or global, latent variables relevant to all members. \item $\bm{z}_r = (z_{[r,1]},\dots,z_{[r,L]})$: Member-specific latent variables governing only member $r$ directly. A subset of these variables may be exposed, and treated as queryable output variables. \item $\bm{x}_r = (x_{[r,1]},\dots,x_{[r,O]})$: Output variables representing observable attributes of member $r$. \item $\bm{y}_r = (y_{[r,1]},\dots y_{[r,I]})$: Input variables that must be present for any query about $\bm{x}_r$, such as the ``feature vectors'' in a discriminative model. \end{itemize} The notion of global and local latent variables is a common motif in the hierarchical modeling literature \citep{blei2016}. They are useful in specifying the set of constraints governing the dependence between observable variables in terms of some latent structure. From this lens, CGPMs satisfy the following conditional independence constraint, \begin{align} \forall r\ne s \in \mathbb{N}, \forall j,k \in [O]: x_{[r,j]} \perp\!\!\!\perp x_{[s,k]} \mid \set{\bm\alpha, \bm\theta, \bm{z}_r, \bm{z}_s}. \label{eq:indep-gpm} \end{align} Equation \eqref{eq:indep-gpm} formalizes the notion that all dependencies across members $r\in\mathbb{N}$ are fully mediated by the global parameters $\bm\theta$ and member-specific variables $\set{\bm{z}_r}$. However, elements $x_{[r,j]}$ and $x_{[r,i]}$ within a member are free to assume any dependence structure, allowing for arbitrary inter-row dependencies. This feature allows CGPMs to express undirected models where the output variables are not exchangeably-coupled, such as Gaussian Markov random fields \citep{rue2005}. A common specialization of constraint \eqref{eq:indep-gpm} further requires that the member-specific latent variables $\set{\bm{z}_r}$ are conditionally independent given $\bm\theta$; a comprehensive list of models in machine learning and statistics satisfying this additional constraint is given in \citep[Section 2.1]{hoffman2013}. However, CGPMs permit more general dependencies in that member latents may be coupled conditioned $\bm\theta$, thus allowing for complex intra-row dependencies. CGPMs can thus be used for models such as Gaussian process regression with noisy observations \citep{rasmussen2006}, where the member-specific latent variables (i.e. the noiseless observations) across different members in the population are jointly Gaussian \citep[Figure 1]{damianou2013}. Figure~\ref{fig:cgpm-graphical} summarizes these ideas by showing a CGPM as a graphical model. Finally, we note it is also possible for a CGPM to fully implement the interface without admitting a ``natural'' representation in terms of the graphical structure from Figure~\ref{fig:cgpm-graphical}, as shown by several examples in Section~\ref{sec:implementation}. \subsection{Composable generative population models are an abstraction for probabilistic processes} \label{sec:cgpms-processes} By providing a computational interface, the CGPM interface provides a layer of abstraction which separates the internal implementation of a probabilistic model from the generative process it represents. In this section we will explore how the computational (external) description of a CGPM provides a fundamentally different understanding than its statistical (internal) description. As an example, consider a Dirichlet process mixture model \citep{antoniak1974} expressed as a CGPM. The hyperparameters $\bm\alpha=(H,\gamma,F)$ are the base measure $H$, concentration parameter $\gamma$, and parametric distribution $F$ of the observable variables $\set{\bm{x}_r}$. The member latent variable $\bm{z}_r=(z_r)$ is the cluster assignment of $r$. Consider now two different representations of the underlying DP, each leading to a different notion of (i) population parameters $\bm\theta$, and (ii) conditional independence constraints. \begin{itemize} \item In the stick breaking representation \citep{sethuraman1994}, the population parameters $\bm\theta=\set{(\phi_i,\pi_i): i\in\mathbb{N}}$, where $\phi_i$ are the atoms that parameterize the likelihood $F(\cdot\|\phi_i)$ (drawn i.i.d from $H$) and $\pi_i$ their weights (drawn jointly from GEM($\gamma$)). Conditioned on $\set{\bm\alpha, \bm\theta}$, the member latents are independent, $z_r \sim^{iid} \textsc{Categorical}(\set{\pi_1,\pi_2,\dots})$. \item In the Chinese restaurant process representation \citep{aldous1985}, the population parameters $\bm\theta=\set{\phi_i:i\in\mathbb{N}}$ are now only the atoms, and the weights are fully collapsed out. Conditioned on $\set{\bm\alpha, \bm\theta}$, the member latents are exchangeably coupled $\set{z_1,z_2,\dots} \sim \textsc{Crp}(\gamma)$. \end{itemize} These internal representation choices are not exposed by the CGPM interface and may be interchanged without altering the queries it can answer.% \footnote{However, it is important to note that interchanging representations may result in different performance characteristics, such as compute time or approximateness of \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}.} It follows that the computational description of CGPMs provides an abstraction boundary between a particular implementation of a probabilistic model and the generative process for the population that it represents. Two implementations of a CGPM may encapsulate the same process by inducing an identical marginal distribution over their observable variables, while maintaining different auxiliary-variable representations internally. The encapsulation of a CGPM's internal state can be relaxed by asking the CGPM to expose member-specific latent variables as outputs. In terms of the infinite table metaphor from Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-populations}, this operation may be conceptualized as the CGPM ``fantasizing'' the existence of new columns in the underlying population. Providing a gateway into the internal state of a CGPM trades-off the model independence of the interface with the ability to query the hidden structure of a particular probabilistic process. Section~\ref{sec:bayesdb} describes surface-level syntaxes for exposing latent variables, and Section~\ref{subsec:experiment-satellites} illustrates its utility for inferring latent cluster assignments in an infinite mixture model, as well simulating projections of high-dimensional data onto low-dimensional latent subspaces. \subsection{Populations} \label{subsec:cgpms-populations} In our framework, a population $\mathcal{P}$ is defined in terms of a finite set of variables $(v_1,\dots,v_T)$, where each variable $v_t$ takes values in a general observation space $\mathcal{V}_t$. Each variable has a qualitative interpretation as a particular property or attribute of the members of the population. The $r\textsuperscript{th}$ member of the population, denoted $\bm{x}_r$, is a $T$-dimensional vector $(x_{[r,1]}, \dots, x_{[r,T]})$, and the element $x_{[r,t]}$ is a variable corresponding to the variable $v_t$ of member $r$. The entire population is then organized as an infinite exchangeable sequence $(\bm{x}_1, \bm{x}_2, \dots)$ of members. The population can be conceptualized as a tabular data structure with a finite number of columns and an infinite number of rows. Column $t$ corresponds to variable $v_t$, row $r$ to member $\bm{x}_r$, and cell $(r,t)$ to element $x_{[r,t]}$. The table is further associated with the observation spaces $\set{\mathcal{V}_t: t \in [T]}$. The exchangeability assumption translates into the requirement that $\mathcal{P}$ is unchanged by permuting the member ids. Finally, a measurement is defined as an observed value for cell $(r,t)$ in the data structure. In general, we use $x_{[r,t]}$ to indicate the element as a variable as well as its measured value (if one exists); the meaning is typically clear from context. A collection of measurements recorded in the infinite table is referred to as a dataset $\mathcal{D}$. It is helpful to compare the standard notion of a statistical population with the formalism described above. In classical multivariate statistics, a data analysis tasks starts with a ``data matrix'', a finite array containing the measurements from some experiment, and additional modeling assumptions then specify that these measurements are a ``random sample'' from a statistical population. The members of the population are generated by a distribution (often a multivariate normal) whose unknown parameters (population mean, population covariance, etc) we wish to discover \citep{timm2002,khattree2000,gelman2006}. This usage of the term ``statistical population'' thus combines domain knowledge (in defining the schema), observed data, and quantitative modeling assumptions (in terms of the random variables) under one umbrella idea. By contrast, our framing characterizes a population only in terms of a set of population variables and their observation spaces. This framing does not commit to a probabilistic description of the data generating process, and is intended to invite questions about populations without reference to an underlying statistical model. Moreover, every member in our definition of a population is associated with a unique identifier -- while this paper only focuses on modeling measurements conditioned on the member ids, in principle the member ids themselves could be modeled by a process that is more complex than random sampling. Moreover, our mathematical specification of a population attempts to be more granular than the standard formalism from multivariate statistics. We explicitly differentiate between a variable $v_t$, and the set of elements $\set{x_{[r,t]}:r=1,2,\dots}$ which are versions of that variable $v_t$ for each member. By separating a variable (a ``column'' in the infinite table) from its related element-level variables (``cells'' in that column), and carefully accounting for all elements in the data structure, we can discuss precisely the mathematical and algorithmic operations performed by CGPMs. This level of analysis would not be possible had we coarsely specified a population as a single random vector $\bm{x} = (x_1,\dots,x_T)$, and viewed measurements collected in a ``data matrix'' as independent realizations of $\bm{x}$. Moreover, specifying measurements at the cell level deals with arbitrary/sparse patterns of observations in the infinite table, in contrast with the standard notion of data matrices which are often treated as objects from linear algebra. Similarly, explicitly notating the observation spaces $\set{\mathcal{V}_t:t\in[T]}$ allows us to capture heterogeneity in population variables, rather than assume the universe is $T$-dimensional Euclidean space. These characteristics are common in real-world populations that arise in probabilistic data analysis. \subsection{% Computational description of composable generative population models} \label{subsec:cgpms-computational} Having established populations, we now introduce composable generative population models in terms of the computational interface they provide. A composable generative population model (CGPM) $\mathcal{G}$ characterizes the data generating process for a population $\mathcal{P}$. The CGPM selects from the population variables $(v_1,v_2,\dots,v_T)$ a set of output variables $(v^{out}_1,\dots,v^{out}_O)$ and a set of input variables $(v^{in}_1,\dots,v^{in}_I)$. For each member $r$, $\mathcal{G}$ is responsible for modeling the full joint distribution of all the output variables conditioned on all the input variables. CGPMs differ from the mathematical definition of a probability density in that they are defined directly in terms of a computational interface, as shown in Listing~\ref{lst:cgpm-interface}. This interface explicitly differentiates between the \textit{sampler} of a random variable from its conditional distribution, and the \textit{assessor} of its conditional density. \begin{algorithm}[ht] \floatname{algorithm}{Listing} \caption{Computational interface for composable generative population models.} \label{lst:cgpm-interface} \begin{itemize}[leftmargin=] \item $\mathcal{G} \leftarrow$ \texttt{create}(% \texttt{population}: $\mathcal{P}$, \texttt{outputs}: $\set{v^{out}_i}_{i \in [O]}$, \texttt{inputs}: $\set{v^{in}_j}_{j \in [I]}$, \texttt{binary}: $\mathcal{B}$, \texttt{seed}: $s$) Create a CGPM for the population, with the specified inputs and outputs. \item $\mathbf{s} \leftarrow$ \texttt{simulate} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{member}: $r$, \texttt{query}: $Q=\set{q_k}$, \texttt{evidence} : $E=\set{x_{[r,e_j]}}\cup \bm{y}_r$) Generate a sample from the distribution \hfill $\mathbf{s} \sim^\mathcal{G} \bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\set{\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm{y}_r,\mathcal{D}}.$ \item $c \leftarrow$ \texttt{logpdf} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{member}: $r$, \texttt{query} : $Q=\set{x_{[r,q_k]}}$, \texttt{evidence} : $E=\set{x_{[r,e_j]}}\cup \bm{y}_r$) Evaluate the log density \hfill $\log p_{\G}(\bm{x}_{[r,Q]}\|\set{\bm{x}_{[r,E]},\bm{y}_r,\mathcal{D}}).$ \item $\mathcal{G}' \leftarrow $ \texttt{incorporate} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{measurement} : $x_{[r,k]}$) Record a measurement $x_{[r,k]}\in \mathcal{V}_k$ into the dataset $\mathcal{D}$. \item $\mathcal{G}' \leftarrow $ \texttt{unincorporate} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{member} : $r$) Eliminate all measurements of input and output variables for member $r$. \item $\mathcal{G}' \leftarrow $ \texttt{infer} ($\mathcal{G}$, \texttt{program} : $\mathcal{T}$) Adjust internal state in accordance with the learning procedure specified by program $\mathcal{T}$. \end{itemize} \end{algorithm} There are several key ideas to draw from the interface. In \texttt{create}, $\mathcal{P}$ contains the set of all population variables and their observation spaces. The \texttt{binary} is an opaque probabilistic program containing implementations of the interface, and \texttt{seed} is the entropy source from which the CGPM draws random bits. The \texttt{outputs} requires at least one entry, the \texttt{inputs} may be an empty set, and any variable which is neither an input nor an output is unmodeled by the CGPM. For simplicity, we use the symbol $x_{[r,t]}$ to denote the output variable $x_{[r,v^{out}_t]}$ and similarly $y_{[r,t]}$ for input variable $y_{[r,v^{in}_t]}$ of member $r$. These elements are often collected into vectors $\bm{x}_r$ and $\bm{y}_r$, respectively In \texttt{incorporate}, measurements are recorded at the cell-level, allowing only a sparse subset of observations for member $r$ to exist. The \texttt{measurement} may be either an output element from $\bm{x}_r$ or input element from $\bm{y}_r$. Both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} are computed for single member $r$ of the population. The \texttt{query} parameter differs between the two methods: in \texttt{simulate}, $Q=\set{q_k}$ is a set of indices of output variables that are to be simulated jointly; in \texttt{logpdf}, $Q=\set{x_{[r,q_k]}}$ is a set of values for the output variables whose density is to be assessed jointly. The \texttt{evidence} parameter is the same for both \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf}, which contains additional information about $r$, possibly including the values of a set of output variables that are disjoint from the query variables. In particular, if $x_{[r,E]}$ is empty, the CGPM is asked to marginalize over all its output variables that are not in the query $Q$; if $x_{[r,E]}$ is not empty, the CGPM is required to condition on those output values. The target distributions in \texttt{simulate} and \texttt{logpdf} are also conditioned on all previously incorporated measurements in the dataset $\mathcal{D}$. Because CGPMs generally model populations with inter-row dependencies, measurements of other members $s\ne r$ are relevant to a \texttt{simulate} or \texttt{logpdf} query about $r$. The CGPM interface allows the user to override a previous measurement of $r$ in $\mathcal{D}$ on a per-query basis; this occurs when an element $x_{[r,e_j]}$ or $\bm{y}_r$ in the \texttt{evidence} contradicts an existing measurement $x'_{[r,e_j]}$ or $\bm{y}'_r$ in $\mathcal{D}$. Asking such hypothetical queries addresses several tasks of interest in probabilistic data analysis, such as simulating ``what-if'' scenarios and detecting outliers in high-dimensional populations. Finally, the \texttt{infer} procedure evolves the CGPM's internal state in response to the inflow of measurements. The inference program $\mathcal{T}$ can be based on any learning strategy applicable to the CGPM, such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo transitions, variational inference, maximum-likelihood, least-squares estimation, or no learning. \section{Related Work} \label{sec:related-work} Directed graphical models from statistics provide a compact, general-purpose modeling language to describe both the factorization structure and conditional distributions of a high-dimensional joint distribution \citep{koller2007}. Each node is a random variable which is conditionally independent of its non-descendants given its parents, and its conditional distribution given all its parents is specified by a conditional probability table or density \citep[Sec 2.3]{nielsen2009}. CGPMs extend this mathematical description to a computational one, where nodes are not only random variables with conditional densities but also computational units (CGPMs) with an interface that allows them to be composed directly as software. A CGPM node typically encapsulates a more complex statistical object than a single variable in a graphical model. Each node has a set of required input variables and output variables, and all variables are associated with statistical data types. Nodes are required to both simulate and evaluate the density of a subset of their outputs by conditioning on all their inputs, as well as either conditioning or marginalizing over another subset of their outputs. Internally, the joint distribution of output variables for a single CGPM node can itself be specified by a general model which is either directed or undirected. CGPMs combine ideas from the vast literature on modeling and inference in graphical models with ideas from probabilistic programming. This paper illustrates CGPMs by integrating them into BayesDB \citep{mansinghka2015}, a probabilistic programming platform for data analysis. BayesDB demonstrated that the Bayesian Query Language (BQL) can express several tasks from multivariate statistics and probabilistic machine learning in a model-independent way. However this idea was illustrated by emphasizing that a domain-general baseline model builder based on CrossCat \citep{mansinghka2015-2}, with limited support for plug-in models called ``foreign predictors'', provides good enough performance for common statistical tasks. Due to limitations in the underlying formalism of generative population models (GPMs), which do not accept inputs and only learn joint distributions over observable variables, the paper did not provide an expressive modeling language for constructing a wide class of models applicable to different data analysis tasks, or for integrating domain-specific models built by experts into BayesDB. By both accepting input variables and exposing latent variables as queryable outputs, CGPMs provide a concrete proposal for mediating between automated and custom modeling using the Metamodeling Language, and model-independent querying using the Bayesian Query Language. The CGPM abstraction thus exposes the generality of BQL to a much broader model class than originally presented, which includes hybrids models with generative and discriminative components. It is helpful to contrast CGPMs in BayesDB with other probabilistic programming formalisms such as Stan \citep{carpenter2015}. Stan is a probabilistic programming language for specifying hierarchical Bayesian models, with built-in algorithms for automated, highly efficient posterior inference. However, it is not straightforward to (i) integrate models from different formalisms such as discriminative machine learning as sub-parts of the overall model, (ii) directly query the outputs of the model for downstream data analysis tasks, which needs to be done on a per-program basis, and (iii) build composite programs out of smaller Stan programs, since each program is an independent unit without an interface. CGPMs provide an interface for addressing these limitations and makes it possible to wrap Stan programs as CGPMs that can then interact, through BayesDB, with CGPMs implemented in other systems. Tabular \citep{gordon2014} is a schema-driven probabilistic programming language which shares some similarity to composable generative population models. For instance, both the statistical representation of a CGPM (Section~\ref{subsec:cgpms-statistical}), and a probabilistic schema in Tabular, characterize a data generating process in terms of input variables, output variables, latent variables, parameters and hyper-parameters. However, unlike Tabular schemas, CGPMs explicitly provide a computational interface, which is more general than the description of their internal structure, and facilitates their composition (Section~\ref{subsec:composition}). In Tabular, probabilistic programs are centered around parametric statistical modeling in factor graphs, where the user manually constructs variable nodes, factor nodes, and the quantitative relationships between them. On the other hand, CGPMs express a broad range of model classes which do not necessarily naturally admit natural representations as factor graphs, and combine higher-level automatic model discovery (using baseline generative CGPMs) with user-specified overrides for hybrid modeling. \section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} Probabilistic techniques are central to data analysis, but can be difficult to apply, combine, and compare. Families of approaches such as parametric statistical modeling, machine learning and probabilistic programming are each associated with different formalisms and assumptions. This paper shows how to address these challenges by defining a new family of probabilistic models and integrating them into BayesDB, a probabilistic programming platform for data analysis. It also gives empirical illustrations of the efficacy of the framework on multiple synthetic and real-world tasks in probabilistic data analysis. This paper introduces composable generative population models (CGPMs), a computational formalism that extends graphical models for use with probabilistic programming. CGPMs specify a table of observable random variables with a finite number of columns and a countably infinite number of rows. They support complex intra-row dependencies among the observables, as well as inter-row dependencies among a field of latent variables. CGPMs are described by a computational interface for generating samples and evaluating densities for random variables, including the (random) entries in the table as well as a broad class of random variables derived from these via conditioning. We show how to implement CGPMs for several model families such as the outputs of standard discriminative learning methods, kernel density estimators, nearest neighbors, non-parametric Bayesian methods, and arbitrary probabilistic programs. We also describe algorithms and new syntaxes in the probabilistic Metamodeling Language for building compositions of CGPMs that can interoperate with BayesDB. The practical value is illustrated in two ways. First, the paper outlines a collection of data analysis tasks with CGPMs on a high-dimensional, real-world dataset with heterogeneous types and sparse observations. The BayesDB script builds models which combine non-parametric Bayes, principal component analysis, random forest classification, ordinary least squares, and a causal probabilistic program that implements a stochastic variant of Kepler's Third Law. Second, we illustrate coverage and conciseness of the CGPM abstraction by quantifying the lines of code and accuracy achieved on several representative data analysis tasks. Estimates are given for models expressed as CGPMs in BayesDB, as well as for baseline methods implemented in Python and MATLAB. Savings in lines of code of \textasciitilde10x at no cost or improvement in accuracy are typical. The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. Section~\ref{sec:related-work} reviews related work to CGPMs in both graphical statistics and probabilistic programming. Section~\ref{sec:cgpms} describes the conceptual, computational, and statistical formalism for CGPMs. Section~\ref{sec:implementation} formulates a wide range of probabilistic models as CGPMs, and provides both algorithmic implementations of the interface as well as examples of their invocations through the Metamodeling Language and Bayesian Query Language. Section~\ref{sec:bayesdb} outlines an architecture of BayesDB for use with CGPMs. We show how CGPMs can be composed to form a generalized directed acyclic graph, constructing hybrid models from simpler primitives. We also present new syntaxes in MML and BQL for building and querying CGPMs in BayesDB. Section~\ref{sec:applications} applies CGPMs to several probabilistic data analysis tasks in a complex real-world dataset, and reports on lines of code and accuracy measurements. Section~\ref{sec:discussion} concludes with a discussion and directions for future work.
\section{Introduction} Financial institutions rely on conditional forecasts of risk measures for the purposes of internal risk management as well as regulatory capital calculations. The two ingredients at the heart of risk measurement are the choice of a suitable risk measure and of a forecasting method, with the forecasting method being typically preceded by the choice of a model and estimation method for the (conditional) loss distribution of the underlying portfolio of risky assets. Traditionally, the choice of a risk measure was based on theoretical considerations linked to practical implications. \citet{Emmer2013} give a recent account of the pros and cons of popular risk measures with an attempt to determine the best risk measure in practice. On the other hand, \citet{Cont2010} highlight the need to consider the entire ``risk measurement procedure", which includes not just the choice of a risk measure but also how it is then estimated from the data. In particular, the notion of robustness as sensitivity to outliers is used to compare several risk measurement procedures. In the risk management context, this should also be balanced with robustness to deviations from model assumptions as well as responsiveness or sensitivity to tail events. \citet{Davis2013} introduces a notion of consistency of risk measures and how this is relevant in the context of financial risk management. The performance of a (trading book) risk measurement procedure can be monitored over time via a comparison of realized losses with risk measure forecasts, a process known as backtesting; see, e.g., \citet{Christoffersen2003} and \citet{McNeil2005}. Based on results of a backtest, the risk measurement procedure is deemed as adequate or not. Traditional backtests perform a statistical test for the null hypothesis: \[ H_0: \quad \text{``The risk measurement procedure is correct.''} \] If the null hypothesis is not rejected, the risk measurement procedure is considered as adequate. For Value-at-Risk (VaR), the \citet[p.~103--108]{BIS2013} has devised a three-zone approach based on a binomial test for the number of exceedances over the VaR threshold. Traditional backtests are concerned with assessing an optimality property of a set of risk measure estimates; for details see Section \ref{sec:calib}. They are not suited to \emph{compare} different risk estimation procedures, and they may be insensitive with respect to increasing information sets; examples of this fact are provided in \citet{HolzmannEulert2014,Davis2013}. Moreover, traditional backtests may not provide banks with the right incentive of developing procedures which aim for accuracy of risk measure forecasts; for an illustration, see Appendix A. In this simulation-based example, we show how optimization with respect to the test statistic of a traditional backtest may lead to unreasonable ordering of forecasting procedures. In view of the anticipated revised standardized approach, which ``should provide a credible fall-back in the event that a bank's internal market risk model is deemed inadequate'' \citep[p.~5--6]{BIS2013}, \citet{FisslerZiegelETAL2015} have recently proposed to replace traditional backtests by comparative backtests based on strictly consistent scoring functions. Comparative backtests also naturally lead to a three-zone approach, which will be described in detail in Section \ref{sec:dom}. Furthermore, they allow for conservative tests and are sensitive with respect to increasing information sets. Roughly, this means that a risk measurement procedure that correctly incorporates more risk factors will always be preferred over a simpler procedure that uses less information. However, comparative backtests necessitate an \emph{elicitable} risk measure. Examples of elicitable risk measures are VaR and expectiles, while expected shortfall (ES) is not elicitable. However, ES turns out to be jointly elicitable with VaR, which allows for comparative backtests also for ES; for details and a literature review on elicitable risk measures, see Section \ref{sec:prelim}. The paper raises the point of distinguishing between traditional backtesting (current regulatory practice) and comparative backtesting. We highlight the deficiency of the former in giving financial institutions the right incentive for forecast accuracy, and argue that the existing regulatory framework can be enhanced by inclusion of comparative backtesting. On the methodological side, we show that traditional backtesting can be formalized in the form of conditional calibration tests, which provide a unifying framework for many of the existing backtests of popular risk measures. This contributes to our understanding of those often ad hoc procedures and allows us to view them as part of a bigger picture. The paper then provides a detailed investigation of the proposal of comparative backtests. In our discussion of traditional and comparative backtests, we are focussing on the following three risk measures: VaR, a popular risk measure that is elicitable; expectiles, the only coherent and elicitable risk measures; and ES, a coherent and comonotonically additive risk measure, which is jointly elicitable together with VaR, and which is the new standard measure in banking regulation. VaR at level $\alpha \in (0,1)$, denoted $\VaR_\alpha$, of a random variable $X$ is defined as \[ \VaR_{\alpha}(X) = \inf\{x \;\|\; F_X(x) \ge \alpha\}, \] where $F_X$ is the cumulative distribution function of $X$. From the statistical perspective, $\VaR_\alpha$ is simply the $\alpha$-quantile of the underlying distribution. Positive values of $X$ are interpreted as losses in this manuscript, hence we are interested in $\VaR_{\alpha}$ for values of $\alpha$ close to one. The \citet[p.103--108]{BIS2013} specifically requests $\VaR_\alpha$ values for $\alpha=0.99$, which we refer to as the standard Basel VaR level. ES of an integrable random variable $X$ at level $\nu \in (0,1)$ is given by \[ \ebbS_{\nu}(X) = \frac{1}{1-\nu}\int_{\nu}^1 \VaR_\alpha(X) d\alpha. \] The \citet{BIS2014} proposes $\nu=0.975$ as the standard Basel ES level, as $\ebbS_{0.975}$ should yield a similar magnitude of risk as $\VaR_{0.99}$ under the standard normal distribution. As introduced by \citet{NeweyPowell1987}, the $\tau$-expectile $e_{\tau}(X)$ of $X$ with finite mean is the unique solution $x = e_{\tau}(X)$ to the equation \begin{equation}\label{eq:expectile} \tau \int_x^{\infty} (y-x)\,\mathrm{d} F_X(y) = (1-\tau) \int_{-\infty}^x (x-y) \,\mathrm{d} F_X(y). \end{equation} As shown in \citet{BelliniKlarETAL2013,Ziegel2014}, $\tau$-expectiles are elicitable coherent risk measures for $\tau \in [1/2,1)$. Expectiles generalize the expectation just as quantiles generalize the median. Considering the level $\tau=0.99855$ leads to a comparable magnitude of risk as $\VaR_{0.99}$ and $\ebbS_{0.975}$ under the standard normal distribution; see \citet{BelliniBernardin2014}. The paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:backtesting} contains the theoretical discussion of backtesting risk measures. In Section~\ref{sec:prelim} we define the notion of elicitability, introduce identifiability and review characterizations of consistent scoring functions for VaR, expectiles and (VaR, ES). In Section \ref{sec:calib} we define what we mean by a calibrated risk measurement procedure and describe how this concept is related to the notion of calibration of \citet{Davis2013} and to traditional backtests in general. We move on to comparative backtests in Section \ref{sec:dom}, where we also explain the comparative three-zone approach. Section~\ref{sec:choice} discusses the choice of the scoring function. Section~\ref{sec:numill} contains numerical illustrations of the proposed backtesting methodologies. We first review some of the existing approaches to forecasting risk measures in Section~\ref{sm}. A simulation study is described in Section~\ref{ssim}, while an application to the returns on the NASDAQ Composite index is presented in Section~\ref{sdat}. Section~\ref{scon} concludes the paper with a summary and a discussion of the findings, in particular, in relation to banking regulation. Appendix B contains the necessary background material for computing and estimation of expectiles, and gives a derivation of an extreme value-based estimator; some of the results here are of interest in their own right. Technical results on characterization of consistent scoring functions with positive-homogeneous score differences are delegated to Appendix C. Finally, Appendix D reports results of a simulation study, which investigates the performance of backtesting procedures in the setting where the out-of-sample size is small. \setcounter{equation}{0} \section{Backtesting of risk measures}\label{sec:backtesting} \subsection{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim} A risk measure $\rho$ is usually defined on some space of random variables. If $\rho$ is law-invariant, it can alternatively be viewed as a map from some collection of probability distributions $\mathcal{P}$ to the real line $\mathbb{R}$. Law-invariance means that for two random variables $X$ and $Y$ that have the same distribution, we have $\rho(X) = \rho (Y)$. All risk measures considered in this manuscript are law-invariant. Therefore, we sometimes abuse notation and write $\rho(F)$ instead of $\rho(X)$, where $F$ is the distribution of $X$. Let $\Theta(X)=(\rho_1(X),\dots,\rho_k(X))$ be a vector of $k \ge 1$ risk measures. \begin{definition} A scoring function $S:\mathbb{R}^k\times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is called \emph{strictly consistent} for $\Theta$ with respect to $\mathcal{P}$ if \begin{equation}\label{eq:argmin} \mathbb{E}(S(\Theta(X),X)) < \mathbb{E}(S(r,X)) \end{equation} for all $r=(r_1,\dots,r_k)\not=\Theta(X)=(\rho_1(X),\dots,\rho_k(X))$ and all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}$. The scoring function $S$ is \emph{consistent} if equality is allowed in \eqref{eq:argmin}. The vector of risk measures $\Theta$ is called \emph{elicitable} with respect to $\mathcal{P}$ if there exists a strictly consistent scoring function for it. \end{definition} Elicitability is useful for model selection, estimation, generalized regression, forecast ranking, and, as we will detail in this paper, allows for comparative backtesting. Elicitable functionals have already been studied in the thesis of \citet{Osband1985}, although the terminology has been coined by \citet{LambertPennockETAL2008}. A comprehensive literature review on elicitability can be found in \citet{Gneiting2011}, where particular emphasis is on the case $k=1$. Recent advances on the case $k \ge 2$ can be found in \citet{FrongilloKash2014,FisslerZiegel2015}. The question of elicitability of risk measures has recently received considerable attention. All available results in the case $k=1$ are based on the simple but powerful observation that a necessary requirement of elicitability are convex level sets in a distributional sense \citep{Osband1985}; see also \citet[Theorem 6]{Gneiting2011}. \citet{Weber2006} was the first to study risk measures with convex level sets. \citet{BelliniBignozzi2013} used his results to study elicitability for the broad class of monetary risk measures. Under weak regularity assumptions, they show that elicitable monetary risk measures are so-called shortfall risk measures \citep{FollmerSchied2002}. For more specific classes of risk measures, such as coherent, convex or distortion risk measures, the same result can be shown without any additional regularity assumptions \citep{Ziegel2014,DelbaenBelliniETAL2014,KouPeng2014,WangZiegel2014}. While expected shortfall is itself not elicitable, \citet{FisslerZiegel2015} have shown that the pair $\Theta=(\VaR_{\alpha},\ebbS_{\alpha})$ is elicitable; see also \citet{AcerbiSzekely2014}. The classes of (strictly) consistent scoring functions for $\VaR_{\alpha}$, $\tau$-expectiles and $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ have been characterized. The following three propositions state sufficient conditions for (strict) consistency. Under mild regularity assumptions given in the cited literature and up to equivalence, these conditions are also necessary. Here, two scoring functions are called \emph{equivalent} if their difference is a function of the realization $x\in \mathbb{R}$ only. Let $\mathcal{P}_0$ denote the class of all Borel-probability distributions on ${\mathbb R}$, and let $\mathcal{P}_1\subseteq \mathcal{P}_0$ denote the class of all distributions with finite mean. \begin{proposition}[\citet{Thomson1979,Saerens2000} All scoring functions of the form \begin{equation}\label{qSVaR} S(r,x) = (1 - \alpha - {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r\})G(r) + {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r\}G(x), \end{equation} where $G$ is an increasing function on ${\mathbb R}$, are consistent for $\VaR_{\alpha}$, $\alpha \in (0,1)$, with respect to $\mathcal{P}_0$. The scoring functions of the above form are stricly consistent for $\VaR_{\alpha}$ with respect to $\mathcal{P}'\subseteq \mathcal{P}_0$ if $G$ is stricly increasing, $G(X)$ is integrable for all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}'$, and all distributions in $\mathcal{P}'$ have a unique $\alpha$-quantile. \end{proposition} \begin{proposition}[\citet{Gneiting2011} All scoring functions of the form \begin{equation}\label{qSexp} S(r,x) = {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r\}(1-2\tau)(\phi(r) -\phi(x) - \phi'(r)(r-x)) - (1-\tau)(\phi(r) - \phi'(r)(r-x)), \end{equation} where $\phi$ is a convex function with subgradient $\phi'$, are consistent for the $\tau$-expectile, $\tau \in (0,1)$, with respect to $\mathcal{P}_1$. If $\phi$ is strictly convex, then the scoring functions of the above form are strictly consistent for the $\tau$-expectile relative to the class $\mathcal{P}' \subseteq \mathcal{P}_1$ such that $\phi(X)$ is integrable for all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}'$. \end{proposition} \begin{proposition}[\citet{FisslerZiegel2015} All scoring functions of the form \begin{equation}\label{qSVaRES} S(r_1,r_2,x) = {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r_1\}\big(-G_1(r_1) + G_1(x) - G_2(r_2)(r_1 - x)\big) + (1-\nu)\big(G_1(r_1) - G_2(r_2)(r_2 - r_1) + \mathcal{G}_2(r_2) \big), \end{equation} where $G_1$ is an increasing function, $\mathcal G_2' = G_2$ and $\mathcal G_2$ is increasing and concave, are consistent for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, $\nu \in (0,1)$, with respect to $\mathcal{P}_1$. If $\mathcal G_2$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave, then the above scoring functions are strictly consistent with respect to the class $\mathcal{P}'\subseteq \mathcal{P}_1$ of distributions which have unique $\nu$-quantiles and $G_1(X)$ is integrable for all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}'$. \end{proposition} In risk management applications, it may be useful to allow only for strictly positive risk measure predictions. As shown in Section \ref{sec:choice}, this opens up the possibility for attractive choices of homogeneous scoring functions in the above propositions. If $r \in (0,\infty)$ is assumed in \eqref{qSVaR} or \eqref{qSexp}, then, for strict consistency, we only need that $G$ or $\phi$ are defined on $(0,\infty)$, and that they are strictly increasing or strictly convex on this domain, respectively. In the case of \eqref{qSVaR} this can be checked by a fairly straightforward computation. For the claim concerning \eqref{qSexp}, it is useful to use the decomposition of the score difference derived in the proof of \citet[Theorem 10]{Gneiting2011}. Furthermore, it is sufficient to require intergrability of $G(X){\mathbbm{1}}\{X > 0\}$ or $\phi(X){\mathbbm{1}}\{X > 0\}$ for all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}'$. If we restrict to predictions with $(r_1,r_2) \in \mathbb{R}\times (0,\infty)$ in \eqref{qSVaRES}, $\mathcal{G}_2$ only has to be defined on $(0,\infty)$ and has to be strictly increasing and strictly concave on this domain. Closely connected to elicitability is the concept of identifiability. In fact, for $k=1$, identifiability implies elicitability under some additional assumptions; see \citet{SteinwartPasinETAL2014}. For $k \ge 2$, it is currently unclear whether such a general result holds; see \citet{FisslerZiegel2015}. \begin{definition} The vector of risk measures $\Theta$ is called \emph{identifiable} with respect to $\mathcal{P}$, if there is a function $V:\mathbb{R}^k \times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ such that \[ \mathbb{E}(V(r,X)) = 0 \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad r = \Theta(X), \] for all $X$ with distribution in $\mathcal{P}$. \end{definition} Identification functions are not uniquely defined. In fact, one can multiply any identification function for a functional by a function depending only on the prediction $r$ and taking values in the space of invertible $k\times k$-matrices to obtain another identification function for the same functional. $\VaR_{\alpha}$ for $\alpha \in (0,1)$ is identifiable with respect to the class $\mathcal{P}_V \subset \mathcal{P}_0$ of distributions with unique quantiles with identification function \begin{equation}\label{eq:VVaR} V(r,x) = 1 - \alpha - {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r\} , \end{equation} the $\tau$-expectile for $\tau \in (0,1)$ is identifiable with respect to $\mathcal{P}_1$ using the identification function \begin{equation}\label{eq:Vexp} V(r,x) = \|1- \tau - {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r\} \|(r-x), \end{equation} and $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ for the level $\nu \in (0,1)$ has identification function \begin{equation}\label{eq:VVaRES} V(r_1,r_2,x) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 - \nu - {\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r_1\} \\ r_1 - r_2 - \frac{1}{1-\nu}{\mathbbm{1}}\{x > r_1\}(r_1 - x)\end{pmatrix} \end{equation} with respect to $\mathcal{P}_1 \cap \mathcal{P}_V$. \subsection{Calibration and traditional backtests}\label{sec:calib} We fix the following notation. Suppose that $\Theta= (\rho_1,\dots,\rho_k)$ is an identifiable functional with identification function $V$ with respect to $\mathcal{P}$. Let $\{X_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ be a series of negated log-returns adapted to the filtration $\mathcal{F} = \{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ and $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ a sequence of predictions of $\Theta$, which are $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$-measurable. Hence, the predictions are based on the information about $\{X_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ available at time $t-1$ represented by the sigma-algebra $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$. Let $\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1})$ denote the conditional law of $X_t$ given the information $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$. We assume that all conditional distributions $\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1})$ and all unconditional distributions $\mathcal{L}(X_t)$ belong to $\mathcal{P}$ almost surely. Inspired by the insightful paper of \citet{Davis2013}, we give the following definition. \begin{definition} The sequence of predictions $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is \emph{calibrated for $\Theta$ on average} if \[ \mathbb{E}(V(R_t,X_t)) = 0 \quad \text{for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$;} \] it is \emph{super-calibrated for $\Theta$ on average} if $\mathbb{E}(V(R_t,X_t)) \ge 0$ component-wise, for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$. The sequence of predictions $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is \emph{conditionally calibrated for $\Theta$} if \[ \mathbb{E}(V(R_t,X_t)\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1}) = 0, \quad \text{almost surely, for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$;} \] it is \emph{conditionally super-calibrated for $\Theta$} if $\mathbb{E}(V(R_t,X_t)\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1}) \ge 0$ component-wise, almost surely, for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$. \emph{Sub-calibration} is defined analogously. \end{definition} If one knows the conditional distributions $\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1})$ and strives for the best possible prediction of $\Theta$ based on the information in $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$, it is natural to use \begin{equation}\label{eq:optcond} \Theta(\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1})) \end{equation} as a predictor, which we term the \emph{optimal $\mathcal{F}$-conditional forecast} for $\Theta$. For the same reason, we call $\Theta(X_t)=\Theta(\mathcal{L}(X_t))$ the \emph{optimal unconditional forecast}. Recall that we freely abuse notation in using $\Theta$ either as a functional defined on a space of random variables or on a space of probability distributions. Calibration characterizes optimal forecasts in the following sense. The optimal unconditional forecast is the only deterministic forecast that is calibrated for $\Theta$ on average. However, there may be other forecasts that are calibrated for $\Theta$ on average which are not deterministic and thus different from the optimal unconditional forecast. Likewise, the optimal conditional forecast is the only $\mathcal{F}$-predictable conditionally calibrated forecast for $\Theta$ up to almost sure equivalence. It is clear that conditional calibration implies calibration on average by the tower property of conditional expectations but the converse is generally false. The notions of calibration introduced here are analogous to the notions of cross-calibration for probabilistic forecasts introduced in \citet{StrahlZiegel2015}. We have introduced the notions of super- and sub-calibration as they can often be related to over- or under-estimation of the risk measure at hand. However, this depends on the specific identification function, so some care must be taken. We give details for a correct interpretation for VaR, expectiles and (VaR,ES) in Section~\ref{sec:ex} For simplicity, we focus on one-step ahead predictions in this paper. Clearly, multi-step ahead predictions are equally important. In some instances the same theory and concepts can be transferred from the former case to the latter. Following \citet{FisslerZiegelETAL2015}, we call any backtest that considers a null hypothesis of the type ``The risk measurement procedure is correct'' a \emph{traditional backtest}. Traditional backtests are similar to goodness-of-fit tests, that is, they allow to demonstrate that the risk measurement procedure under consideration is making incorrect predictions, if the respective null hypothesis can be rejected. Despite the somewhat misleading terminology that a traditional backtest is \emph{passed} if the null hypothesis is not rejected, this does \emph{not} mean that in this case, one can be sure that the null hypothesis is correct (with a pre-specified small probability of error) as this would necessitate that we control the power of the test explicitly. This can virtually never be done as the alternative is too broad; see also \citet[p.~103--105]{BIS2013}. As argued by \citet{FisslerZiegelETAL2015}, these issues may put the use of traditional backtest in regulatory frameworks in question. However, they may be useful for model verification just as goodness-of-fit tests have their established role in statistics. Testing the null hypothesis \begin{equation}\label{eq:tradH0A} H_0: \quad \text{The sequence of predictions $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is calibrated for $\Theta$ on average.} \end{equation} amounts to performing a traditional backtest. We describe here how tests for average calibration can be constructed but we do not implement them because the stronger notion of conditional calibration appears more adequate in a dynamic risk management context. In our data example in Section \ref{sdat}, for the more flexible models, the null hypothesis of conditional calibration cannot be rejected which indicates that testing for average calibration is superfluous. However, there may be situations where achieving average calibration is already difficult and then the following tests may be useful. Given a series of observations $\{X_t\}_{t=1,\dots,n}$ and forecasts $\{R_t\}_{t=1,\dots,n}$, we define $\overline V_n := (1/n)\sum_{t=1}^n V(R_t,X_t)$. Let $\hat{\Sigma}_n$ be a heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (HAC) estimator of the asymptotic covariance matrix $\Sigma_n= \cov(\sqrt{n}\ \overline V_n)$ (see, e.g., \cite{Andrews1991}). Then, one can hope that $\sqrt{n}\ \hat{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2}\ \overline V_n$ is asymptotically standard normal under suitable assumptions on the identification function and the data generating process. For $k=1$, sufficient mixing assumptions are detailed in \citet[Theorem 4]{GiacominiWhite2006} but a multivariate generalization of this result remains to be worked out. \citet[Theorem 4]{GiacominiWhite2006} show that, for $k=1$, the test is consistent against the alternative $\|{\mathbb E}\big(\overline V_n\big)\| \ge \delta > 0$ for all $n$ sufficiently large, for any $\delta > 0$. Conditional calibration is a stronger notion than average calibration, and it appears more natural in a dynamic risk management context. A traditional backtest for conditional calibration considers the null hypothesis \begin{equation}\label{eq:tradH0C} H_0: \quad \text{The sequence of predictions $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is conditionally calibrated for $\Theta$.} \end{equation} The requirement $\mathbb{E}(V(R_t,X_t)\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1}) = 0$, almost surely, is equivalent to stating that $\mathbb{E}(h_t'V(R_t,X_t)) = 0$ for all $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$-measurable $\mathbb{R}^k$-valued functions $h_t$. Following \citet{GiacominiWhite2006}, we consider an $\mathcal{F}$-predictable sequence $\{\mathbf{h}_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$ of $q\times k$-matrices $\mathbf{h}_t$ called \emph{test functions} to construct a Wald-type test statistic: \begin{align}\label{qTh} T_1=n \Big( \frac{1}{n} \sum_{t=1}^{n} \mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t) \Big)'\ \widehat\Omega_n^{-1} \ \Big( \frac{1}{n} \sum_{t=1}^{n} \mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t) \Big), \end{align} where \[ \widehat\Omega_n= \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^{n} (\mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t)) (\mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t))' \] is a consistent estimator of the variance of the $q$-vector $\mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t)$. Ideally, the parameter $q$ should be chosen such that the rows of $\mathbf{h}_t$ generate $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$. In applications, the choice of the test functions is motivated by the principle that they should represent the most important information available at time point $t-1$. In our simulation study, we obtained good results with $q=1$ or $q=2$; for further details see Section \ref{ssim2}. We call this type of traditional backtests \emph{conditional calibration tests}. In cases where $\mathbf{h}_t=1$, we refer to these tests as \emph{simple} conditional calibration tests. Theorem 1 in~\citet{GiacominiWhite2006} says that, under the null hypothesis~\eqref{eq:tradH0C}, $T_1\buildrel\rm d\over\rightarrow \chi^2_q$ as $n\to\infty$, subject to certain assumptions on the data generating process $\{X_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$ and test function sequence $\{\mathbf{h}_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$. This asymptotic result justifies a level $\eta$ test which rejects $H_0$ when $T_1 > \chi^2_{q,1-\eta}$, where $\chi^2_{q,1-\eta}$ denotes the $1-\eta$ quantile of the $\chi^2_q$ distribution. \citet[Theorem 3]{GiacominiWhite2006} provide conditions such that $T_1\buildrel\rm d\over\rightarrow \chi^2_q$ as $n\to\infty$ for multi-step ahead predictions, while Theorem 2 of \citet{GiacominiWhite2006} considers consistency of the test against global alternatives. The theorems of \citet{GiacominiWhite2006} are formulated in terms of score differences and not identification functions but their proofs solely rely on the martingale difference property of $\mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t)$ and can thus be applied in our context. Commonly used backtests for $\VaR_\alpha$ and $\ebbS_\nu$ are closely related to conditional calibration tests for specific choices of the test functions $\mathbf{h}_t$. In fact, choosing $\mathbf{h}_t = 1$ in the case of $\VaR_\alpha$, the conditional calibration test for $\VaR_{\alpha}$ is closely related to the standard backtest for $\VaR_\alpha$ based on the number of VaR exceedances \citep[p.103--108]{BIS2013}. In the case of $\ebbS_\nu$, the conditional calibration test for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ is related to the backtest for $\ebbS_\nu$ of \citet{McNeilFrey2000} based on exceedance residuals. We give further details in Examples \ref{ex:tradVaR}, \ref{ex:tradES}, and \ref{ex:tradexp} below. The notion of a calibrated risk measure (or statistic) of \citet{Davis2013} is closely related to our notion of a calibrated sequence of predictions. \citet{Davis2013} considers which risk measures are calibrated for which classes of models. That is, he attempts to characterize the largest class of data generating processes such that $\overline V_n$ goes to zero a.s. as $n \to \infty$ if $\{R_t\}_{ t\in\mathbb{N}}$ is a sequence of optimal conditional forecasts for the risk measure. It turns out that for quantiles only minimal assumptions are necessary, whereas assumptions need to be stronger to work with the mean, for example. The focus of our work is more statistical. Choosing $\mathcal{F}$-predictable test functions $\mathbf{h}_t$ encoding the available information at time point $t-1$, we investigate whether and how it is possible to test in finite samples that the sequence $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is conditionally calibrated. \subsubsection{One-sided calibration tests}\label{sost} In certain situations, it may be meaningful to assess super- or sub-calibration. For example, the standard backtest for $\VaR_{\alpha}$ described in \citep[p.103--108]{BIS2013} is a test for conditional super-calibration. This is due to the fact that over-estimation of $\VaR_\alpha$ is not a problem as far as the regulator is concerned. Holding more capital then minimally required should always be allowed. Suppose we wish to test the hypothesis of conditional super-calibration that ${\mathbb E}[V(R_t,X_t)\|{\cal F}_{t-1}]\ge {\bf0}$ component-wise, for all $t$. That is, in the case of a $k$-variate risk measure, we are interested in $H_0 = \bigcap_{i=1}^k H_{0,i}$, where $${\rm H}_{0,i}:\ {\mathbb E}[V_i(R_t,X_t)\|{\cal F}_{t-1}]\ge 0\quad {\rm for\ all\ } t,\qquad i=1,\ldots,k. $$ For each component $i$ of the risk measure, let $\mathbf{h}_{i,t}=(h_{i,t,1},\dots,h_{i,t,q_i})$ be an ${\cal F}_{t-1}$-measurable $(q_i\times 1)$-vector of non-negative test functions. If $h_{i,t,1},\dots,h_{i,t,q_i}$ generate ${\cal F}_{t-1}$ then $H_{0,i} = \bigcap_{\ell=1}^{q_i} H_{0,i,\ell}$, where $${\rm H}_{0,i,\ell}:\ {\mathbb E}[V_i(R_t,X_t) h_{i,t,\ell}]\ge 0\quad {\rm for\ all\ } t,\quad i=1,\ldots,k,\quad \ell=1,\ldots,q_i. $$ We combine all of the test functions into a $(q\times k)$ matrix ${\bf h}_t$ with $q=\sum_{i=1}^k q_i$, which has the following structure: $${\bf h}_t = \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{h}_{1,t} & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ 0 & \mathbf{h}_{2,t} & \cdots & 0\\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & \mathbf{h}_{k,t}\end{pmatrix}.$$ Setting $Z_t = {\bf h}_t V(R_t,X_t)$, the above hypothesis of conditional super-calibration can alternatively be expressed as $H_0 = \bigcap_{m=1}^q H_{0,m}$ with $H_{0,m}:\ {\mathbb E}(Z_{t,m})\ge0$ for all $t$. $m=1,\ldots,q$. From the proof of \citet[Theorems 1 and 3]{GiacominiWhite2006} it follows that under $H_0$ given at \eqref{eq:tradH0C}, \begin{equation}\label{eq:tau4} T_2=(T_{2,1},\dots,T_{2,q})'=\sqrt{n}^{-1}\widehat{\Omega}_n^{-1/2} \sum_{t=1}^{n}Z_t \buildrel\rm d\over\rightarrow \mathcal{N}({\bf0},I_q),\qquad n\to\infty, \end{equation} where $I_q$ denotes the $(q\times q)$ identity matrix. Hence, we can obtain an asymptotic test for $H_{0,m}$ with the p-value given by $\pi_m = \Phi\Big(\sqrt{n}^{-1} (\widehat{\Omega}_n)_{mm}^{-1/2} \sum_{t=1}^{n}Z_{t,m}\Big)$, $m=1,\ldots,q$. That is, $\pi_m$ is the (asymptotic) probability of obtaining a more extreme outcome than the one observed, assuming the null hypothesis $H_{0,m}$ is true. Let $\pi_{(1)},\ldots,\pi_{(q)}$ be the ordered p-values. The classical Bonferroni multiple test procedure rejects the global null hypothesis $H_0$ if the smallest of the p-values $\pi_{(1)}<\eta/q$, where $\eta$ is the desired level of the (global) test. As an alternative, following \citet{Hommel1983}, we obtain a level $\eta$ test by rejecting the global hypothesis $H_0$ if for at least one $m$ we have \begin{equation}\label{qHommel} \pi_{(m)} \le \dfrac{m\ \eta}{q\ C_q},\qquad C_q = \sum_{r=1}^q 1/r,\qquad m=1,\ldots,q. \end{equation} Hommel's rejection rule has the advantage of allowing to detect situations with both small effects in many components and with large effects in few components. Other testing procedures in this context could also be used. \subsubsection{Examples}\label{sec:ex} \begin{example}\label{ex:tradVaR} \citet{Christoffersen1998} calls a sequence of $\VaR_{\alpha}$ forecasts efficient with respect to $\mathcal{F}$ if \[ {\mathbb E}[{\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t > R_t\}\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1}] = 1-\alpha, \quad \text{almost surely, $t=1,2,\dots$}. \] This requirement is the same as the one of conditional calibration of $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ by \eqref{eq:VVaR}. In fact, the dynamic quantile test of \citet{Kuester2006} (see also \citet{Christoffersen1998,EngleManganell2004}) has similarities to a conditional calibration test. In analogy to their test, it is natural to consider test functions \[ \mathbf{h}_t = (1,V(r_{t-1},x_{t-1}),\cdots,V(r_{t-p},x_{t-p}),r_t)' \] for $p \ge 1$. This is also in line with the suggestion in \citet{GiacominiWhite2006}, who use $\mathbf{h}_t = (1,V(r_{t-1},x_{t-1}))'$. The standard backtest for $\VaR_\alpha$ specified in the Basel documents \citep[p.103--108]{BIS2013} uses the test statistic \[ \beta = \sum_{t=1}^{n} {\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t > R_t\}, \] which is the number of exceedances over the estimated $\VaR_\alpha$, denoted $R_t$, for time point $t$. Under the null hypothesis \eqref{eq:tradH0C} of conditionally calibrated $\VaR_\alpha$-forecasts, for one-step ahead forecasts, $\beta$ is a binomial random variable with parameters $n$ and $1-\alpha$; see \citet{Rosenblat1952,DieboldGuntherETAL1998,Davis2013}. It is remarkable that this result holds under essentially no assumptions on $\{X_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ or $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$. However, when moving away from one-step ahead forecasts to multi-step ahead forecasts, things become more intricate and one has to resort to general limit theorems such as presented above for testing if $\beta$ has mean $n(1-\alpha)$. This test is a test for conditional super-calibration with $\mathbf{h}_t = 1$, because for $\VaR_\alpha$, we obtain using \eqref{eq:VVaR} \[ T_3:=\sum_{t=1}^n \mathbf{h}_t V(R_t,X_t) = \sum_{t=1}^{n}({\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t \le R_t\} - \alpha) = \sum_{t=1}^n ({\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t > R_t\}- (1- \alpha))=-(\beta - n(1-\alpha)), \] thus, testing the null hypothesis that $\beta$ has mean less or equal to $n(1-\alpha)$ is equivalent to testing that $T_3$ has mean greater or equal to zero. This null hypothesis says that the conditional VaR predictions are at least as large as the true conditional VaR. Assuming that it is an incentive of a bank to state VaR estimates that tend to be lower than the true ones, a more prudent null hypothesis from the viewpoint of a regulator would be the opposite one-sided hypothesis that the conditional VaR predictions are at most as large as the true conditional VaR, that is, a test for conditional sub-calibration. For one-step ahead predictions, alternatively to theory presented in this section, one can exploit the fact that the exceedance indicators ${\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t > R_t\}$, $t=1,\dots,n$ at the boundary of the null hypothesis, are independent Bernoulli random variables with success probability $1-\alpha$, which allows for an exact test rather than an asymptotic one. \end{example} \begin{example}\label{ex:tradES} We consider the vector of risk measures $\Theta(X) = (\rho_1(X),\rho_2(X)) = (\VaR_{\nu}(X),\ebbS_{\nu}(X))$ for some $\nu \in (0,1)$. Let $r_{1,t}$ and $r_{2,t}$ denote forecasts of $\VaR_\nu(X_t)$ and $\ebbS_{\nu}(X_t)$, respectively. Assuming $X_t = \mu_t +\sigma_t Z_t$, where $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ are ${\cal F}_{t-1}$-measurable and the $Z_t$'s form an independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.)~sequence of random variables with zero mean and variance one, for backtesting ES, \citet{McNeilFrey2000} introduced the following test statistic based on exceedance residuals: \begin{equation}\label{eq:tau1} T_4=\frac{1}{\#\{t: X_t > r_{1,t}\}}\sum_{t=1}^n \frac{X_t - r_{2,t}}{\sigma_t} {\mathbbm{1}}\{X_t > r_{1,t}\}. \end{equation} It turns out that the ES backtest of \citet{McNeilFrey2000} is closely related to a conditional calibration test as follows. For $n$ reasonably large, we have that $\#\{t: x_t > r_{1,t}\}/n \approx 1-\nu$. Therefore, for the test statistic $T_4$ in~\eqref{eq:tau1}, we obtain \[ T_4 \approx \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \frac{1}{1-\nu}\frac{x_t - r_{2,t}}{\sigma_t} {\mathbbm{1}}\{x_t > r_{1,t}\} = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \mathbf{h}_t V(r_{1,t},r_{2,t},x_t)\] with $\mathbf{h}_t = \sigma_t^{-1}((r_{2,t} - r_{1,t})/(1-\nu),1)$. Replacing $\sigma_t$ by an estimate $\hat{\sigma}_t$ is natural when considering the test of \citet{McNeilFrey2000} as a conditional calibration test. The estimated volatility $\hat{\sigma}_t$ is then simply a part of the $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$-measurable test function sequence $\{\mathbf{h}_t\}_{t \in \mathbb{N}}$ that supposedly encodes the relevant information of $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$. Of course, this test is only reasonable if $\sigma_t$ is estimated as part of the forecasting model with the information at time point $t-1$. The recently proposed backtests for ES of \citet{AcerbiSzekely2014} are in the same spirit as the test of \citet{McNeilFrey2000}. The backtest for ES suggested by \citet{CostanzinCurran2015} tests if the whole tail of the distribution beyond the $\VaR_\nu$-level has been estimated correctly. Strictly speaking, the test is therefore not a test for the accuracy of a sequence of point forecasts for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ but rather a test for the accuracy of a sequence of probabilistic forecasts for tomorrow's loss distribution with emphasis on the left tail. Other tests in this spirit but of comparative type can be found in \citet{GneitingRanjan2011a}. As ES is only identifiable jointly with VaR, one has to be careful when formulating a one-sided test for ES. Let $(r_1^,r_2^) = \Theta(X)$. Then it holds for all $(r_1,r_2)$ that \[ r_2^* - r_2 \le \mathbb{E}V_2(r_1,r_2,X) \le r_2^* - r_2 + \frac{\nu - F(r_1)}{1-\nu}(r_1^* - r_1). \] This shows that, similarly to the VaR case, testing the null hypothesis of sub-calibration for the ES component ${\mathbb E} V_2(r_1,r_2,X)\le 0$ is equivalent to testing that $r_2^\le r_2$. Hence, the test of conditional sub-calibration of (VaR, ES) is a test that the conditional VaR and ES predictions are at least as large as their optimal conditional predictions. The Hommel's procedure described in Section~\ref{sost} can then be applied with p-value $\pi_m = 1-\Phi(T_{2,m})$, where the $T_{2,m}$'s are defined in \eqref{eq:tau4}. \end{example} \begin{example}\label{ex:tradexp} One could conceive a backtesting framework for expectiles as well, in a similar spirit to the ES backtesting procedure proposed by \citet{McNeilFrey2000}. Assuming, as in the example above, that $X_t = \mu_t +\sigma_t Z_t$, where $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ are ${\cal F}_{t-1}$-measurable and the $Z_t$'s are i.i.d.~with zero mean and variance one, the conditional $\tau$-expectile satisfies \[ e_\tau(X_t\mid {\cal F}_{t-1}) = \mu_t + \sigma_t e_\tau(Z_t) \] and we see that the residuals \[ \dfrac{X_t - e_\tau(X_t\mid {\cal F}_{t-1})}{\sigma_t} = Z_t - e_\tau(Z_t) \] form an i.i.d.~sequence of random variables with zero $\tau$-expectile. This implies that $V(e_\tau(Z_t),Z_t)$ with $V$ given at \eqref{eq:Vexp} is an i.i.d.~sequence of random variables with mean zero, which can be tested using a bootstrap (as in \citet{EfronTibshirany1993}, Section~16.4). Here it is necessary to replace the true volatility $\sigma_t$ by an estimate. This is analogous to the suggestion of \citet{McNeilFrey2000} for ES. Noticing that the identification function for expectiles at \eqref{eq:Vexp} is positively 1-homogeneous, we obtain that \[ \mathbb{E}V(e_\tau(Z_t),Z_t) = \mathbb{E}V(e_\tau(X_t),X_t) \sigma_t^{-1} = 0. \] This equality suggests that it is natural to perform a conditional calibration test for expectiles with test function $\mathbf{h}_t = \hat{\sigma}_t^{-1}$ and test statistic $T_1$ given at \eqref{qTh}. This yields a valid asymptotic test under the assumptions in \citet[Theorem 1]{GiacominiWhite2006}. These assumptions are weaker than the model assumption $X_t = \mu_t +\sigma_t Z_t$. In the case of expectiles, as in the case of VaR, a test for conditional super-calibration assesses the null-hypothesis that all conditional expectile estimates are at least as large as the true conditional expectile. \end{example} \subsection{Elicitability, forecast dominance and comparative backtests}\label{sec:dom} Suppose now that the functional $\Theta= (\rho_1,\dots,\rho_k)$ is elicitable with respect to $\mathcal{P}$. Let $\{X_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ be a series of negated log-returns adapted to the filtration $\mathcal{F} = \{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ as well as to the filtration $\mathcal{F}^ = \{\mathcal{F}^_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$. Let $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ and $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ be two sequences of predictions of $\Theta $, which are $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{F}^$-predictable, respectively. We assume that all conditional distributions $\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1})$, $\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_{t-1}^)$ and all unconditional distributions $\mathcal{L}(X_t)$ belong to $\mathcal{P}$ almost surely. We refer to the predictions $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ as the standard procedure, while $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is the internal model. The two filtrations $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{F}^$ acknowledge the fact that the internal model and the standard model may be based on different information sets. For example, one model may include more risk factors than the other, or, certain expert opinion may be used to adjust one model but not the other. \begin{definition}\label{def:dom} Let $S$ be a consistent scoring function for $\Theta$ with respect to $\mathcal{P}$. Then, $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ \emph{$S$-dominates} $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ \emph{(on average)} if \[ \mathbb{E}(S(R_t,X_t)- S(R_t^,X_t)) \le 0, \quad \text{for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$.} \] Furthermore, $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ \emph{conditionally $S$-dominates} $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ if \begin{equation}\label{eq:conddom} \mathbb{E}(S(R_t,X_t)- S(R_t^,X_t)\|\mathcal{F}^_{t-1}) \le 0, \quad \text{almost surely, for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$.} \end{equation} \end{definition} The definition of conditional dominance is asymmetric in terms of the role of the standard procedure and the internal procedure. The standard procedure and the information $\mathcal{F}^$ it is based on are considered as a benchmark of predictive ability, which is why we condition on $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}^$ and not on $\mathcal{F}_{t-1}$. Any method that dominates the benchmark has superior predictive ability relative to this benchmark. Clearly, conditional $S$-dominance implies $S$-dominance on average. \citet[Definition 2]{EhmGneitingETAL2015} introduced the notion of dominance of one sequence of predictions over the other if one $S$-dominates the other on average for all consistent scoring functions $S$ for $\Theta$. The notion of dominance is a strong one. That is, in the data examples of \citet{EhmGneitingETAL2015} it was almost never observed that one forecast dominates the other. This makes the concept difficult to employ in an applied decision making context. Furthermore, currently, a clear theoretical understanding of the notion of dominance remains elusive. There are several reasons why the predictions $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ should be preferred over $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ if the former dominates the latter. Firstly, comparison of forecasts with respect to the described dominance relations is consistent with respect to increasing information sets. That is, if $\mathcal{F}^_t \subseteq \mathcal{F}_t$ for all $t$ and $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$, $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ are the optimal conditional forecasts with repect to their filtrations as defined at \eqref{eq:optcond}, then the internal procedure dominates the standard procedure, both, conditionally and on average \citep[Theorem 1]{HolzmannEulert2014}. The same is true if $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is $\mathcal{F}^$-conditionally optimal and $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is just $\mathcal{F}^$-predictable \citep[Corollary 2]{HolzmannEulert2014}; see also \citet{Tsyplakov2014}. Secondly, in the case $k=1$, for most important functionals, including VaR and expectiles, strictly consistent scoring functions are \emph{order sensitive} or \emph{accuracy rewarding} in the following sense. Essentially, if $\Theta(X) < r < r^$ or $r^* < r < \Theta(X)$ for some random variable $X$, then \begin{equation}\label{eq:ordersens} \mathbb{E} (S(\Theta(X),X)) < \mathbb{E} (S(r, X)) < \mathbb{E}(S(r^,X)); \end{equation} see \citet{Nau1985,Lambert2012} for details. Therefore, if the risk measure forecasts $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ are always closer than $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ to the optimal $\mathcal{F}^$-conditional forecast, that is, $\Theta(\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_t^)) < R_t < R_t^$ or $\Theta(\mathcal{L}(X_t\|\mathcal{F}_t^)) > R_t > R_t^$ for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$ almost surely, then $\{R_t\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ conditionally dominates $\{R_t^\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$. There are different proposals for notions of order sensitivity in the case $k \ge 2$; see, for example, \citet{LambertPennockETAL2008}, but the situation is less clear in this case. The condition for conditional $S$-dominance in \eqref{eq:conddom} can be formulated equivalently as \[ \mathbb{E}((S(R_t,X_t)- S(R_t^,X_t))h_t) \le 0, \quad \text{for all $h_t \ge 0$, $\mathcal{F}^_{t-1}$-measureable,} \] for all $t \in {\mathbb N}$. It is tempting to work with a vector $\mathbf{h}_t$ of $\mathcal{F}^$-predictable test functions in order to test for conditional $S$-dominance as suggested in the conditional calibration tests. However, we are interested in comparing the standard procedure to the internal procedure and reach a definite answer as to which one is to be preferred. If $\mathbb{E}((S(R_t,X_t)- S(R_t^,X_t))\mathbf{h}_{t,i}) > 0$ but $\mathbb{E}((S(R_t,X_t)- S(R_t^,X_t))\mathbf{h}_{t,j}) < 0$ for different components $\mathbf{h}_{t,i}, \mathbf{h}_{t,j}$ of the vector $\mathbf{h}_t$, no clear preference for either method can be given. Therefore, we do not pursue this approach further. In comparative backtesting we are interested in the null hypotheses \begin{align} H_0^-:& \text{ The internal model predicts at least as well as the standard model.}\\ H_0^+:& \text{ The internal model predicts at most as well as the standard model.} \end{align} The null hypothesis $H_0^-$ is analogous to the null hypothesis of a correct model and estimation procedure but now adapted to a comparative setting. As mentioned in the introduction, considering a backtest as passed if the null hypothesis cannot be rejected is anti-conservative or aggressive in nature and may therefore be problematic in regulatory practice. On the other hand, the null hypothesis $H_0^+$ is such that the comparative backtest is passed if we can reject $H_0^+$. This means that we can explicitly control the type {\rm I} error of allowing an inferior internal model over an established standard model. We assume in the remainder of the paper that the limit \begin{equation}\label{eq:asy} \lambda:= \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \mathbb{E}(S(R_t,X_t) - S(R_t^,X_t)) \in [-\infty,+\infty] \end{equation} exists (while we allow it to take the values $\pm \infty$). It is clear that $S$-dominance on average implies $\lambda\le 0$. If the sequence of score differences $\{S(R_t,X_t) - S(R_t^,X_t)\}_{t \in {\mathbb N}}$ is first-order stationary, then $\lambda \le 0$ implies $S$-dominance on average. Under Assumption \eqref{eq:asy}, we can compare any two sequences of risk measure estimates with respect to their predictive performance. It is a weak assumption as it requires slightly more than that the average expected score differences are eventually of the same sign. It may be weakened at the cost of further technicalities which we have chosen to avoid. If the limit $\lambda$ in~\eqref{eq:asy} is non-positive, then the internal procedure is \emph{at least as good} as the standard procedure, whereas the internal procedure \emph{predicts at most as well} as the standard procedure if $\lambda \ge 0$. Ordering risk measurement procedures is a compromise in the quest for conditional dominance. On the one hand, it is clearly a weaker notion than conditional dominance, but on the other hand it introduces a meaningful total order on all risk measurement procedures given a sensible choice of the scoring function~$S$; see Section \ref{sec:choice}. Therefore, we reformulate our comparative backtesting hypotheses as \begin{align} H_0^-:&\; \lambda \le 0\\ H_0^+:&\; \lambda \ge 0. \end{align} The test statistic \[ \Delta_n\overline S := \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n (S(R_t,X_t) - S(R_t^,X_t)), \] for $n$ large enough, has expected value less or equal to zero under $H_0^-$, whereas under $H_0^+$ its expectation is non-negative. Tests of $H_0^+$ or $H_0^-$ based on a suitably rescaled version of $\Delta_n\overline S$ are so-called \emph{Diebold-Mariano tests}; see \citet{DieboldMariano1995}. Under certain mixing assumptions detailed in \citet[Theorem 4]{GiacominiWhite2006}, \[\frac{\Delta_n\overline S - \mathbb{E}(\Delta_n\overline S)}{\hat{\sigma}_n/\sqrt{n}} \] is asymptotically standard normal with $\hat{\sigma}_n^2$ an HAC estimator of the asymptotic variance, $\sigma_n^2 = \var(\sqrt{n}\Delta_n \overline S)$. Therefore, using the test statistic \begin{equation}\label{eq:DMstat} T_4 = \frac{\Delta_n \overline S}{\hat{\sigma}_n/\sqrt{n}}, \end{equation} we obtain an asymptotic level $\eta$-test of $H_0^+$ if we reject the null hypothesis when $\Phi(T_4)\le \eta$, and of $H_0^-$ if we reject the null hypothesis when $1-\Phi(T_4)\le \eta$. Based on the outcome of the tests of $H_0^+$ and $H_0^-$, \citet{FisslerZiegelETAL2015} suggest the following three-zone approach. We fix a significance level $\eta \in (0,1)$, for example, $\eta=0.05$. If $H_0^-$ is rejected at level $\eta$, then $H_0^+$ will not be rejected at level $\eta$. Similarly, if $H_0^+$ is rejected at level $\eta$, then $H_0^-$ will not be rejected at level $\eta$. Therefore, we say that the internal procedure is in the red region, that is, it fails the comparative backtest if $H_0^-$ is rejected. The internal procedure is in the green region, that is, it passes the backtest, if $H_0^+$ is rejected. The internal procedure needs further investigation, that is, it falls in the yellow region, if neither $H_0^+$, nor $H_0^-$ can be rejected. For an illustration of these decisions, see \citet[Figure 1]{FisslerZiegelETAL2015}. There is one important difference between the three-zone approach described in \citet[p.103--108]{BIS2013} for traditional VaR backtests and the three-zone approach of \citet{FisslerZiegelETAL2015} described here. In the former approach, the zones arise from varying the confidence level of the hypothesis test, whereas in the latter approach the confidence level is fixed a priori, and the zones arise to separate cases where there is enough evidence to clearly decide for superiority of one procedure over the other in contrast to cases where there is no clear evidence. \subsubsection{Choice of the scoring function}\label{sec:choice} Based on \eqref{qSVaR}, \eqref{qSexp} and \eqref{qSVaRES}, one has a large number of choices for strictly consistent scoring functions for VaR, expectiles and (VaR, ES). In the case of $\VaR_\alpha$, the standard choice is to take $G(r) = r$ in \eqref{qSVaR} leading to the classical asymmetric piecewise linear loss, see \eqref{eq:SVaR1} below, also known as linlin, hinge, tick or pinball loss; see \citet{Koenker2005} for its relevance in quantile regression. In the case of expectiles, one could argue that a natural choice is taking $\phi(r)=r^2$ in~\eqref{qSexp}, which simplifies to the squared error function for the mean (up to equivalence). This is also the scoring function suggested by \citet{NeweyPowell1987} for expectile regression. Consistent scoring functions for (VaR, ES) have only recently been discovered; see \citet{AcerbiSzekely2014,FisslerZiegel2015}. Therefore, there is no natural classical choice for the functions $G_1$, $G_2$ in \eqref{qSVaRES}. A scoring function $S$ is called \emph{positive homogeneous} of degree $b$ (or \emph{$b$-homogeneous}) if for all $r = (r_1,\dots,r_k)$ and all $x$ \[ S(c r, cx) = c^b S(r,x), \quad \text{for all $c > 0$.} \] \citet{Efron1991} argues that it is a crucial property of a scoring function to be positive homogeneous in estimation problems such as regression. \citet{Patton2011} underlines the importance of positive homogeneity of the scoring function for forecast ranking. Positive homogeneous scoring functions are also favorable because they are so-called ``unit consistent''; see, for example, \citet{AcerbiSzekely2014}. That is, if $r$ and $x$ are given in say U.S.~dollars with $r = \$10$ and $s=\$5$, then, for a positive homogeneous scoring function $S$, the score $S(r,x)=S(\$10,\$5) = (\$)^b S(10,5)$ will have unit $(\text{U.S. dollars})^b$. In particular, changing the units, from, say, U.S.~dollars to million U.S.~dollars, will not change the ordering of forecasts assessed by this scoring function, and will thus also leave the results of comparative backtests unchanged. Concerning the choice of the degree $b$ of homogeneity, \citet{Patton2006} shows that in the case of volatility forecasts, $b=0$ requires weaker moment conditions than a larger choice of $b$ for the validity of Diebold-Mariano tests which are used in comparative backtesting. Concerning the power of Diebold-Mariano tests, \citet{PattonSheppard2009} find the best overall power for volatility forecasts for the choice $b=0$. Appendix C presents results, which characterize positive homogeneous scoring functions for the risk measures that are of interest in this paper. Note that we only allow for predictions $r > 0$ or $r = (r_1,r_2)$ with $r_2 > 0$. As we are interested in risk measures for losses, this is not a real restriction; see also Section \ref{ssim}. For some orders of homogeneity $b$, there is no strictly consistent scoring function for the risk measures of interest in this paper. In particular, the attractive choice $b=0$ can often not be realized. However, for comparative backtesting we are not interested in absolute values of expected scores but only in \emph{differences} of expected scores. Therefore, it is sufficient to have a scoring function such that the resulting score differences are homogeneous. Such homogeneous score differences of order $b=0$ exist for VaR, expectiles and (VaR,ES) as shown by the results in Appendix C. Examples below list scoring functions, which will be used subsequently in the simulation study and real data analysis. \begin{example}\label{ex:compVaR} For the comparative backtests for VaR that we investigate in Section \ref{ssim}, we consider the classical 1-homogeneous choice obtained by choosing $G(r) = r$ in~\eqref{qSVaR} leading to the scoring function \begin{equation}\label{eq:SVaR1} S(r,x) = (1-\alpha - \mathbbm{1}\{x > r\})r + \mathbbm{1}\{x > r\}x. \end{equation} Guided by the arguments given above, we alternatively consider the 0-homogeneous score differences by choosing $G(r) = \log r$, $r > 0$ which leads to the score \begin{equation}\label{eq:SVaR2} S(r,x) = (1-\alpha - \mathbbm{1}\{x > r\})\log r + \mathbbm{1}\{x > r\}\log x,\qquad r>0. \end{equation} \end{example} \begin{example}\label{ex:compexp} The choice $\phi(r) = r^2$ in~\eqref{qSexp} leads to the strictly consistent scoring function \begin{equation}\label{eq:Sexp1} S(r,x) = -\mathbbm{1}\{x > r\}(1-2\tau)(x-r)^2 + (1-\tau)r(r - 2x) \end{equation} for the $\tau$-expectile $e_\tau$. Besides this 2-homogeneous choice, in Section \ref{ssim}, we also investigate the 0-homogeneous alternative that arises by choosing $\phi(r) = -\log(r)$, $r > 0$, hence we obtain the scoring function \begin{equation}\label{eq:Sexp2} S(r,x) = \mathbbm{1}\{x > r\}(1-2\tau)\Big(\log\frac{x}{r} + 1 - \frac{x}{r}\Big) + (1-\tau)\Big(\log r - 1 + \frac{x}{r}\Big). \end{equation} \end{example} \begin{example}\label{ex:compES} For $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, we consider the $(1/2)$-homogeneous scoring function given by choosing $G_1(x) = 0$, $\mathcal{G}_2(x) = x^{1/2}$, $x > 0$ in \eqref{qSVaRES} for comparative backtesting in Section \ref{ssim}. It is given by \begin{equation}\label{eq:SVaRES1} S(r_1,r_2,x) = \mathbbm{1}\{x > r_1\}\frac{x-r_1}{2\sqrt{r_2}} + (1-\nu)\frac{r_1 + r_2}{2\sqrt{r_2}}. \end{equation} As for the other risk measures, we also consider the 0-homogeneous alternative by choosing $G_1(x) = 0$, $\mathcal{G}_2(x) = \log x$, $x > 0$ which yields the scoring function \begin{equation}\label{eq:SVaRES2} S(r_1,r_2,x) = \mathbbm{1}\{x > r_1\}\frac{x - r_1}{r_2} + (1-\nu)\Big(\frac{r_1}{r_2} - 1 + \log(r_2)\Big). \end{equation} \end{example} \citet{AcerbiSzekely2014} proposed a class of 2-homogeneous scoring functions for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ depending on a parameter $W > 0$. It is strictly consistent when the class $\mathcal{P}$ of distributions is restricted to contain only distributions $F$ with \[ \ebbS_\nu(F) < W \VaR_\nu(F). \] In practice, it is generally not possible to say what magnitude of $W$ is realistic to cover all possible applications. Therefore, we prefer to work with the homogeneous choices of strictly consistent scoring functions above and, more generally, of the form in Theorem~C.3. \setcounter{equation}{0} \section{Numerical illustrations}\label{sec:numill} \subsection{Forecasting of risk measures}\label{sm} In this section we discuss a number of estimation procedures for producing conditional forecasts of the three risk measures discussed in this paper, namely the VaR, expectile and ES. Owing to the widespread use of VaR in the banking sector, a great number of methods exist to produce its point forecasts; see, e.g., \citet{Kuester2006} for an extensive review. In contrast, estimation and forecasting of expectiles in the risk measurement context is a relatively recent topic; see, e.g., \citet{KuanYehETAL2009}. However, in many cases, similar methods as those used for VaR forecasting can be adopted for expectiles. For illustrative purposes, we consider the following framework for forecasting of the risk measures. Suppose the series of negated log-returns $\{X_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$ can be modeled as \begin{equation}\label{qfm}X_t=\mu_t +\sigma_t Z_t, \end{equation}\noindent where $\{Z_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$ is a sequence of i.i.d.~random variables with zero mean and unit variance, and $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ are measurable with respect to the sigma algebra ${\cal F}_{t-1}$, representing the information about the process $\{X_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$ available up to time $t-1$. In order to capture typical time dynamics of financial time series, one possibility is to assume that the conditional mean $\mu_t$ follows an ARMA process, while the condition variance $\sigma_t^2$ evolves according to a GARCH model specification. Let $\rho$ denote any of the three risk measures we consider. In the above setting, conditionally on the information up to time $t-1$, the one-step ahead forecast of $\rho$ is \begin{equation}\label{qfR}\rho(X_t\mid{\cal F}_{t-1})=\mu_t + \sigma_t \rho(Z),\end{equation}\noindent where $Z$ is used to denote a generic random variable with the same distribution as the $Z_t$'s. Following \citet{McNeilFrey2000} and \citet{Diebold2000}, one can adopt a two-stage estimation procedure for the forecast $\rho(X_t\mid{\cal F}_{t-1})$. First $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ are estimated via the maximum likelihood procedure under a specific assumption\footnote{An alternative is to use the quasi-maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) procedure in which innovations $Z_t$ are assumed to be standard normal. This is justified by the result in \citet{Bollerslev1992} saying that $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ would be consistently estimated even if the distribution of innovations is not normal, provided that the models for $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ are correctly specified. As pointed out in \citet{Kuester2006}, the correct specification of dynamics for $\mu_t$ and $\sigma_t$ may be difficult to fulfil in practice.} on the distribution of the innovations $Z_t$ in \eqref{qfm}. The second stage involves estimation of $\rho(Z)$, the risk measure for i.i.d.~sequence $\{Z_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$, based on the sample of standardized residuals \begin{equation}\label{qsr} \{\hat z_t = (x_t - \hat \mu_t)/\hat\sigma_t\}. \end{equation} We consider the following three approaches to handle the second stage in the forecasting procedure: fully parametric (FP), filtered historical simulation (FHS), and a semi-parametric estimation based on extreme value theory (EVT). \subsubsection{Fully parametric estimation}\label{sm1} Under the fully parametric approach, a specific (parametric) model is assumed for the sequence of innovations $\{Z_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb N}}$. Examples of typically used probability distributions include the normal, Student's t and a skewed t distribution (see, e.g.,~\citet{Fernandez1998}). Parameters of the assumed distribution for $Z_t$'s, denoted $F_Z$, can be estimated based on the standardized residuals $\{\hat z_t\}$ in~\eqref{qsr} using, for example, the maximum likelihood method. If the model for $Z_t$'s coincides with the one used to estimate the filter in the first stage, then no additional estimation is required at the second stage with all model parameters coming directly from the first stage estimation. The fitted distribution is used to compute the estimate of a given risk measure. In the case of $\VaR_\alpha(Z)$, this is given by the $\alpha$-quantile, $\hat F_Z^{-1} (\alpha)$, whereas a $\tau$-expectile $e_\tau(Z)$ can be computed as discussed in Appendix B.1, where we give analytic expressions for expectiles of several commonly used distributions. Since we consider only continuous distributions $F_Z$, the ES can be computed as $$\ebbS_\nu(Z) = {\mathbb E}(Z\|Z\ge \VaR_\nu(Z)),$$ where we use numerical integration to evaluate the conditional expectation. \subsubsection{Filtered historical simulation}\label{sm2} The method employs a non-parametric estimation of the risk measures based on the standardized residuals $\{\hat z_t\}$ in~\eqref{qsr}, which can be seen as representing a filtered time series; see, e.g., \citet[Chapter~5.6]{Christoffersen2003}. In particular, we draw a sample $\{\hat z_i^\ast; 1\le i \le N\}$ of a large size $N$ (e.g., $N=10,000$) from $\{\hat z_t; 1\le t \le n\}$ and then take the empirical estimate of a given risk functional as the estimate for $\rho (Z)$. The empirical $\alpha$-quantile gives the VaR estimate $\widehat{\VaR}_\alpha^{\text{{\tiny FHS}}}(Z)$. The empirical $\tau$-expectile $\hat e_\tau^{\text{{\tiny FHS}}}(Z)$ is obtained using the least asymmetric weighted squares via iterative minimization of $$\sum_{i=1}^N \omega_i(\tau) (\hat z_i^\ast - e_\tau)^2,\qquad \omega_i(\tau) = \tau{\mathbbm{1}}\{\hat z_i^\ast > e_\tau\} + (1-\tau) {\mathbbm{1}}\{\hat z_i^\ast < e_\tau\} \qquad {\rm with\ respect\ to\ } e_\tau.$$ The ES is estimated by the empirical version of the conditional expectation given that the residual exceeds the corresponding VaR estimate: $$\widehat{\ebbS}_\nu^{\text{{\tiny FHS}}}(Z) = \dfrac1{\# \{i: i=1,\ldots,N, \hat z^_i> \widehat{\VaR}_\alpha^{\text{{\tiny FHS}}}(Z)\}} \sum_{i=1}^N \hat z^_i {\mathbbm{1}}\{\hat z^_i> \widehat{\VaR}_\alpha^{\text{{\tiny FHS}}}(Z)\}.$$ \subsubsection{EVT-based semi-parametric estimation}\label{sm3} Risk is naturally associated with extremal events, and hence risk measure estimates rely on accurate estimation of a tail of the underlying distribution. However, inference about the distributional tails is notoriously difficult as there are frequently not enough data points in the tail regions neither to give a proper justification for a parametric model nor to obtain reliable empirical estimates. Hence, unless a sufficiently long time series is available relative to the desired risk level for risk measure estimation, the two methods outlined in Sections~\ref{sm1} and~\ref{sm2} are unlikely to produce accurate forecasts. An alternative is to base estimation on asymptotic results of extreme value theory (EVT). For a detailed account, refer to, e.g., \citet{EKM1997}. The main premise is that, for a sufficiently high threshold $u$, conditional excesses of random variable $Z$ satisfy: \begin{equation}\label{qgpd} Z-u\mid Z>u\sim GP(\beta_u,\xi),\end{equation} where $GP(\beta,\xi)$ denotes the generalized Pareto distribution with scale $\beta>0$ and shape parameter $\xi\in{\mathbb R}$. It is common in applications to set the threshold at an upper order statistic; i.e., $u=z_{(k+1)}$ for some $k<n$, where $z_{(1)}>z_{(2)}>\cdots>z_{(n)}$ are the decreasing order statistics of the sample $\{z_1,\ldots, z_n\}$ from $F_Z$. This leads to the following EVT-based estimates of $\VaR_\alpha(Z)$ and $\ebbS_\nu(Z)$ (see \citet{McNeilFrey2000}): \begin{equation}\label{qVaRevt} \widehat{ \VaR}_\alpha^{\text{{\tiny EVT}}} (Z) = u +\dfrac{\hat\beta_u}{\hat\xi}\Big(\Big(\dfrac{k}{\alpha\ n}\Big)^{\hat\xi} -1 \Big),\qquad \hat\xi\neq 0, \end{equation} and \begin{equation}\label{qESevt} \widehat{ \ebbS}_\nu^{\text{{\tiny EVT}}} (Z) = \widehat{ \VaR}_\nu^{\text{{\tiny EVT}}} (Z) \Bigg( \dfrac1{1-\hat\xi} + \dfrac{\hat\beta - \hat\xi\ u}{(1-\hat\xi) \widehat{ \VaR}_\nu^{\text{{\tiny EVT}}} (Z)} \Bigg), \end{equation} with $(\hat \beta_u,\hat \xi)$ being parameter estimates of the GP distribution fitted to excesses over~$u$. In the spirit of the above EVT-based estimators for VaR and ES, we derive an estimator for the $\tau$-expectile. The details are provided in Appendix B.2. In the discussion above we assume that threshold $u$ or equivalently $k$, the number of upper order statistics, is given so as to ensure adequacy of the approximation in~\eqref{qgpd}. However, in practice, an accurate choice has to be made to balance the bias-variance trade-off as a too large value of $u$ increases variability of the parameter estimates of $\beta_u$ and $\xi$, while insufficiently large $u$ introduces the bias due to invalidity of~\eqref{qgpd}. Various techniques have been proposed to assist with the choice of threshold such as graphical tools based on linearity of the mean excess function. As such methods require judgement at every time step at which conditional forecasts of risk measures are to be made, they are prohibitive for our purposes. Hence, we adopt a pragmatic approach as in \citet{McNeilFrey2000}, and take $k=60$ in samples of size $n=500$. \subsection{Simulation study}\label{ssim} In practice, traditional backtesting is perhaps the most commonly used way to evaluate and subsequently choose among a number of competing forecasting procedures. While traditional backtesting is certainly suitable to capture some aspects of forecasting procedures, it does not provide information on the relative performance of different procedures with respect to the accuracy of forecasts, a seemingly natural criterion for a forecasting method. The aim of the present simulation study is to illustrate the use of the methodologies for traditional and comparative backtests discussed in the paper as well as to highlight the different messages delivered by the two types of backtests. \subsubsection{Set-up and forecasting methods}\label{ssim1} The data $\{X_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb Z}}$ used for the analysis are generated from an AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) process: \begin{align}\label{qsimDGP} X_t = \mu_t + \epsilon_t,\qquad \mu_t = -0.05 + 0.3 X_{t-1},\qquad \epsilon_t = \sigma_t Z_t,\qquad \sigma_t^2 = 0.01 + 0.1\epsilon_{t-1}^2 + 0.85 \sigma_{t-1}^2, \end{align} where innovations $\{Z_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb Z}}$ form a sequence of independent random variables with a common skewed~t distribution (see Example~B.6) with shape parameter $\nu=5$ and skewness parameter $\gamma=1.5$. Quality of a forecasting procedure is determined by various factors. In a parametric or semi-parametric set-up, potential model misspecification as well as estimation uncertainty in small samples can be detrimental for prediction. Non-parametric methods, while requiring no assumptions on the underlying model, are also subject to sampling variability and have strong limitations when dealing with extreme or tail events. The forecasting procedures we consider in the simulation study aim to cover a spectrum of models and estimation methods. We assume that the underlying process follows an AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) dynamics with innovations $\{Z_t\}_{t\in{\mathbb Z}}$ coming from one of the following three distributions: the normal, the Student's t and the skewed t distribution as in Example~B.6. We then consider the following estimation procedures: \begin{itemize} \item fully parametric estimation (Section~\ref{sm1}) with the methods abbreviated as "n-FP", "t-FP" and "st-FP" under the assumption of normal, t and skewed t distributed innovations, respectively; \item filtered historical simulation (Section~\ref{sm2}) with the methods abbreviated as "n-FHS", "t-FHS" and "st-FHS"; \item EVT-based estimation (Section~\ref{sm3}) with the methods abbreviated as "n-EVT", "t-EVT" and "st-EVT". \end{itemize} In addition to the above-mentioned methods, we supplement results with the optimal forecasts (abbreviated as "opt"), which uses the knowledge of the data generating process. Estimation is conducted using the moving window of size 500, and forecasts are evaluated based on the out-of-sample size of 5000 verifying observations. \subsubsection{Backtesting of risk measure forecasts}\label{ssim2} Table~\ref{tabsimsum} contains an overview of the one-step ahead forecasts obtained under the procedures described in the previous section. In particular, we report the average forecasts based on the series of moving estimation windows for each of the three considered risk measures, denoted $\overline{\VaR}_\alpha$, $\overline{e}_\tau$ and $\overline{\ebbS}_\nu$. The $\alpha$ levels for VaR are chosen in accordance with typical values used for internal risk management (such as $\alpha=0.90$ and $\alpha=0.95$) as well as the standard Basel VaR level $\alpha=0.99$. For expectiles and ES, the levels are selected in such a way that the risk measure forecasts agree under the standard normal model. In order to link to the previously used approaches to assess the quality of VaR forecasts (and to make comparisons between the methods), we computed the percentage of times the observations exceeded the $\VaR_\alpha$ forecasts, commonly referred to as the percentage of violations. Based on the values reported under the column "\% Viol." in Table~\ref{tabsimsum} , we observe that some of the misspecified models were actually able to hit nearly exactly the expected proportion of violations by matching the risk measure level $(1-\alpha)$. This is the case, for instance, for "n-EVT" and "t-EVT" methods at $\alpha=0.99$. Although large deviations from the risk measure confidence level do suggest substantial method deficiencies (as in the case of "n-FP" and "t-FP" methods), these values also highlight that the deviations from the $(1-\alpha)$ level alone are unlikely to provide a good basis for differentiating the methods' performance in terms of prediction. Table~\ref{tabTB} illustrates the traditional backtesting methodology presented in Section~\ref{sec:calib}. Test statistics $T_1$ in~\eqref{qTh} and $T_2$ in~\eqref{eq:tau4} are used, respectively, for two-sided and one-sided conditional calibration tests. The one-sided tests for $\VaR_\alpha$ and $\tau$-expectile are tests for super-calibration with p-values given by $\Phi(T_2)$. In the case of $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, we make use of the Hommel's procedure with the adjusted p-values computed as $\tilde \pi = q\ C_q\min\{\pi_{(m)}/m; m=1,2\}$ and capped at one, where $\pi_m = 1-\Phi(T_{2,m})$ for the one-sided tests of sub-calibration; see~\eqref{qHommel}. (The classical Bonferroni multiple test procedure resulted in qualitatively similar conclusions.) For the simple conditional calibration tests, we set $\boldsymbol{h}_t = 1$. The test functions that were found to work well in this simulation study for general conditional calibration tests are \begin{equation}\label{qtf2} {\bf h}_t = \begin{cases} (1,r_t)' & {\rm for\ }\VaR_\alpha,\\ \hat\sigma_t^{-1} & {\rm for\ expectile\ } e_\tau ,\\ \hat\sigma_t^{-1}((r_{2,t}-r_{1,t})/(1-\nu),1) & {\rm for\ } (\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu) \end{cases} \end{equation} in the case of two-sided tests, and \begin{equation}\label{qtf1} {\bf h}_t = \begin{cases} (1,\|r_t\|)' & {\rm for\ }\VaR_\alpha,\\ \hat\sigma_t^{-1} & {\rm for\ expectile\ } e_\tau ,\\ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & \|r_{1,t}\| & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 1 & \hat\sigma_t^{-1}\end{pmatrix}' & {\rm for\ } (\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu) \end{cases} \end{equation} in the case of one-sided tests. The choice of test functions is important as it affects the properties of the test. For example, we found that inclusion of the lagged values of the identification function as in Example~\ref{ex:tradVaR} resulted in tests which rejected all of the models including the optimal forecaster for $\VaR_{0.99}$ in the two-sided conditional calibration tests. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is that for a chosen test function the distribution of the test statistic becomes heavily skewed, making convergence to the asymptotic distribution slow. Another contributing factor, suggested by a referee, could be the instability of the $\hat\Omega^{-1}$ estimate in~\eqref{qTh} due to high correlation of lagged values of the identification function. As discussed in \citet{GiacominiWhite2006}, the choice of the test function with too few or too many components will also have direct implications on the power of the tests. As expected, the numerical results in Table~\ref{tabTB} show that the backtesting decisions based on the general conditional calibration tests are more conservative in comparison to the corresponding simple conditional calibration tests, subject to a sensible choice of the test function. This is particularly visible for one-dimensional risk measures (VaR and expectiles) when performing the two-sided tests. The two-sided conditional calibration tests for these two risk measures suggest the importance of the correct specification of the likelihood used in fitting the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter. The entirely parametric methods with misspecified models (here "n-FP" and "t-FP") fail traditional backtests even when testing for simple conditional calibration (with the exception of $\VaR_{0.90}$). The general conditional tests are able to pick-up the misspecified likelihoods at least in some instances; for example, when forecasting $\VaR_{0.90}$ and using the (symmetric) t distribution instead of the true asymmetric underlying model, and similarly for $\tau$-expectiles with $\tau=0.96561$ and $\tau=0.98761$. The general conditional two-sided calibration tests also detect the differences in the second stage of risk measure forecasting when different methods are applied to filtered series of innovations. For instance, at the highest risk measure levels, the EVT-based methods tend to pass the conditional backtests in contrast to their empirical and in some cases even parametric (correctly specified) counterparts; see panels for $\VaR_{0.99}$ and $0.99855$-expectile. This is true even under a misspecified likelihood model in the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter. We also note that the tests for one-dimensional risk measures appear to have better power properties than the tests for the two-dimensional risk measure, $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, although a more thorough investigation into finite sample properties of these tests would be necessary to draw more definitive conclusions. It can also be observed that the one-sided tests are less conclusive than their two-sided analogues. This is perhaps not a surprise as it may well happen that a method is not good at predicting the risk measure but gives a correct bound and thus should not be rejected by a one-sided calibration test. \begin{sidewaystable} \scriptsize \caption{Risk measure forecasts and method comparisons based on the sample average of consistent scoring functions in the simulation study; see Section~\ref{ssim} for details. The average scores are scaled by one minus the risk measure level to avoid very small values for presentation purposes. "\% Viol." column shows the percentage of times observations exceeded the corresponding forecasts of $\VaR_\alpha$. The values in brackets indicate method ranks based on their average scores. } \label{tabsimsum} \begin{tabular}{1\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} \| l \| c c c c \| c c c \| c c c \| } \hline Method & $\overline{\VaR}_\alpha$ & \% Viol. & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaR1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaR2}] & $\overline{e}_\tau$ & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:Sexp1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:Sexp2}] & $\overline{\ebbS}_\nu$ & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaRES1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaRES2}] \\\hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\alpha=0.90$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\tau=0.96561$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\nu=0.754$}\\\hline n-FP & 0.440 & 9.4 & 0.7496 ( ~9 ) & -0.4325 ( 7 ) & 0.440 & 1.0149 ( 9 ) & -1.0526 ( 9 ) & 0.440 & 0.6685 ( 10 ) & -0.8119 ( 9 ) \\ n-FHS & 0.406 & 10.2 & 0.7484 ( ~8 ) & -0.4288 ( 9 ) & 0.542 & 1.0006 ( 7 ) & -1.3076 ( 7 ) & 0.450 & 0.6626 ( 5 ) & -0.8361 ( 4 ) \\ n-EVT & 0.406 & 10.2 & 0.7477 ( ~7 ) & -0.4304 ( 8 ) & 0.553 & 1.0039 ( 8 ) & -1.3188 ( 5 ) & 0.449 & 0.6655 ( 9 ) & -0.8270 ( 8 ) \\ t-FP & 0.348 & 12.2 & 0.7527 ( 10 ) & -0.3944 ( 10 ) & 0.424 & 1.0200 ( 10 ) & -0.904 ( 10 ) & 0.421 & 0.6645 ( 7 ) & -0.8040 ( 10 ) \\ t-FHS & 0.413 & 10.0 & 0.7473 ( ~6 ) & -0.4350 ( 5 ) & 0.550 & 0.9899 ( 5 ) & -1.3055 ( 8 ) & 0.456 & 0.6622 ( 4 ) & -0.8356 ( 5 ) \\ t-EVT & 0.410 & 10.3 & 0.7471 ( ~5 ) & -0.4329 ( 6 ) & 0.562 & 0.9944 ( 6 ) & -1.3137 ( 6 ) & 0.457 & 0.6654 ( 8 ) & -0.8289 ( 7 ) \\ st-FP & 0.417 & 9.9 & 0.7442 ( ~2 ) & -0.4391 ( 2 ) & 0.559 & 0.9865 ( 4 ) & -1.3378 ( 3 ) & 0.461 & 0.6606 ( 2 ) & -0.8460 ( 3 ) \\ st-FHS & 0.412 & 10.1 & 0.7451 ( ~4 ) & -0.4387 ( 3 ) & 0.550 & 0.9808 ( 2 ) & -1.3342 ( 4 ) & 0.455 & 0.6606 ( 3 ) & -0.8488 ( 2 ) \\ st-EVT & 0.410 & 10.2 & 0.7449 ( ~3 ) & -0.4363 ( 4 ) & 0.561 & 0.9844 ( 3 ) & -1.3409 ( 2 ) & 0.457 & 0.6642 ( 6 ) & -0.8350 ( 6 ) \\ opt & 0.424 & 9.5 & 0.7431 ( ~1 ) & -0.4454 ( 1 ) & 0.565 & 0.9643 ( 1 ) & -1.4257 ( 1 ) & 0.467 & 0.6575 ( 1 ) & -0.8704 ( 1 ) \\ \hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\alpha=0.95$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\tau=0.98761$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\nu=0.875$}\\\hline n-FP & 0.586 & 5.9 & 0.9925 ( ~8 ) & -0.1055 ( 9 ) & 0.586 & 1.9845 ( 10 ) & -0.4650 ( 10 ) & 0.587 & 0.8177 ( 10 ) & -0.3975 ( 10 ) \\ n-FHS & 0.632 & 5.0 & 0.9910 ( ~7 ) & -0.1123 ( 7 ) & 0.801 & 1.8718 ( 7 ) & -0.8939 ( 5 ) & 0.667 & 0.8121 ( 8 ) & -0.4261 ( 7 ) \\ n-EVT & 0.628 & 5.1 & 0.9930 ( ~9 ) & -0.1080 ( 8 ) & 0.810 & 1.8756 ( 8 ) & -0.8935 ( 6 ) & 0.670 & 0.8121 ( 7 ) & -0.4259 ( 8 ) \\ t-FP & 0.518 & 7.3 & 1.0106 ( 10 ) & -0.0555 ( 10 ) & 0.631 & 1.9008 ( 9 ) & -0.6419 ( 9 ) & 0.716 & 0.8137 ( 9 ) & -0.4233 ( 9 ) \\ t-FHS & 0.631 & 5.1 & 0.9902 ( ~5 ) & -0.1148 ( 5 ) & 0.822 & 1.8428 ( 5 ) & -0.8929 ( 7 ) & 0.675 & 0.8112 ( 5 ) & -0.4292 ( 5 ) \\ t-EVT & 0.630 & 5.1 & 0.9910 ( ~6 ) & -0.1128 ( 6 ) & 0.826 & 1.8506 ( 6 ) & -0.8885 ( 8 ) & 0.677 & 0.8117 ( 6 ) & -0.4274 ( 6 ) \\ st-FP & 0.639 & 4.9 & 0.9858 ( ~2 ) & -0.1227 ( 2 ) & 0.832 & 1.8313 ( 4 ) & -0.9156 ( 3 ) & 0.688 & 0.8096 ( 3 ) & -0.4356 ( 3 ) \\ st-FHS & 0.632 & 5.0 & 0.9887 ( ~3 ) & -0.1161 ( 3 ) & 0.821 & 1.8164 ( 2 ) & -0.9174 ( 2 ) & 0.675 & 0.8096 ( 2 ) & -0.4357 ( 2 ) \\ st-EVT & 0.630 & 5.1 & 0.9890 ( ~4 ) & -0.1154 ( 4 ) & 0.825 & 1.8221 ( 3 ) & -0.9153 ( 4 ) & 0.677 & 0.8100 ( 4 ) & -0.4341 ( 4 ) \\ opt & 0.649 & 4.7 & 0.9834 ( ~1 ) & -0.1267 ( 1 ) & 0.837 & 1.7481 ( 1 ) & -1.0189 ( 1 ) & 0.696 & 0.8070 ( 1 ) & -0.4503 ( 1 ) \\ \hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\alpha=0.99$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\tau=0.99855$} & \multicolumn{3}{c\|}{$\nu=0.975$}\\\hline n-FP & 0.859 & 2.5 & 1.8649 ( 10 ) & 0.7041 ( 10 ) & 0.859 & 8.4605 ( 10 ) & 2.1097 ( 10 ) & 0.863 & 1.1638 ( 10 ) & 0.3969 ( 10 ) \\ n-FHS & 1.193 & 1.1 & 1.7398 ( ~8 ) & 0.4992 ( 7 ) & 1.492 & 6.1819 ( 7 ) & 0.0652 ( 6 ) & 1.218 & 1.1268 ( 8 ) & 0.2453 ( 8 ) \\ n-EVT & 1.189 & 1.0 & 1.7115 ( ~5 ) & 0.4801 ( 5 ) & 1.480 & 6.1153 ( 5 ) & 0.0651 ( 5 ) & 1.243 & 1.1240 ( 7 ) & 0.2381 ( 7 ) \\ t-FP & 0.948 & 1.8 & 1.7605 ( ~9 ) & 0.5679 ( 9 ) & 1.186 & 6.0364 ( 3 ) & 0.2244 ( 9 ) & 1.781 & 1.1472 ( 9 ) & 0.2847 ( 9 ) \\ t-FHS & 1.207 & 1.1 & 1.7392 ( ~7 ) & 0.5025 ( 8 ) & 1.629 & 6.7232 ( 9 ) & 0.0771 ( 8 ) & 1.246 & 1.1205 ( 5 ) & 0.2334 ( 6 ) \\ t-EVT & 1.203 & 1.0 & 1.7064 ( ~4 ) & 0.4755 ( 4 ) & 1.546 & 6.1387 ( 6 ) & 0.0658 ( 7 ) & 1.266 & 1.1208 ( 6 ) & 0.2328 ( 5 ) \\ st-FP & 1.214 & 0.9 & 1.6987 ( ~3 ) & 0.4734 ( 3 ) & 1.583 & 5.9688 ( 2 ) & -0.0491 ( 2 ) & 1.287 & 1.1156 ( 2 ) & 0.2195 ( 2 ) \\ st-FHS & 1.209 & 1.1 & 1.7339 ( ~6 ) & 0.4991 ( 6 ) & 1.614 & 6.4895 ( 8 ) & 0.0236 ( 3 ) & 1.245 & 1.1161 ( 3 ) & 0.2221 ( 4 ) \\ st-EVT & 1.202 & 0.9 & 1.6929 ( ~2 ) & 0.4651 ( 2 ) & 1.543 & 6.0779 ( 4 ) & 0.0306 ( 4 ) & 1.265 & 1.1164 ( 4 ) & 0.2215 ( 3 ) \\ opt & 1.227 & 0.9 & 1.6614 ( ~1 ) & 0.4369 ( 1 ) & 1.574 & 4.9567 ( 1 ) & -0.3749 ( 1 ) & 1.297 & 1.1066 ( 1 ) & 0.1887 ( 1 ) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{sidewaystable} \begin{sidewaystable} \scriptsize \caption{P-values for traditional backtests in the simulation study; see Section~\ref{ssim} for details. The one-sided tests for $\VaR_\alpha$ and $\tau$-expectile are tests of super-calibration, and of sub-calibration for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$. The test functions used in general conditional calibration tests are given in~\eqref{qtf2} and~\eqref{qtf1}. Values in boldface are significant at 5\% level. } \label{tabTB} \begin{tabular}{1\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} \| l \| c c c c \|\| c c c c \|\| c c c c \| } \hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\VaR_\alpha$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\tau$-expectile} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$} \\\hline & \multicolumn{2}{c\|}{two-sided}& \multicolumn{2}{c\|\|}{one-sided}& \multicolumn{2}{c\|}{two-sided}& \multicolumn{2}{c\|\|}{one-sided}& \multicolumn{2}{c\|}{two-sided}& \multicolumn{2}{c\|}{one-sided}\\\hline Method & simple & general & simple & general & simple & general & simple & general & simple & general & simple & general \\\hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\alpha=0.90$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\tau=0.96561$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\nu=0.754$}\\\hline n-FP & 0.146 & {\bf 0.018} & 0.927 & 1.000 & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} \\ n-FHS & 0.576 & 0.058 & 0.288 & 0.863 & 0.887 & {\bf 0.048} & 0.443 & 0.193 & 0.881 & 0.184 & 0.712 & 0.744 \\ n-EVT & 0.608 & 0.056 & 0.304 & 0.911 & 0.684 & {\bf 0.042} & 0.658 & 0.364 & 0.754 & 0.672 & 1.000 & 0.629 \\ t-FP & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 0.086 & {\bf 0.006} & {\bf 0.041} & {\bf 0.011} \\ t-FHS & 0.962 & {\bf 0.006} & 0.481 & 1.000 & 0.728 & {\bf 0.030} & 0.636 & 0.330 & 0.936 & 0.512 & 0.960 & 0.256 \\ t-EVT & 0.514 & {\bf 0.011} & 0.257 & 0.772 & 0.360 & {\bf 0.023} & 0.820 & 0.542 & 0.880 & 0.475 & 0.815 & {\bf 0.008} \\ st-FP & 0.740 & 0.090 & 0.630 & 1.000 & 0.429 & 0.084 & 0.786 & 0.546 & 0.569 & 0.824 & 1.000 & 0.991 \\ st-FHS & 0.851 & 0.091 & 0.425 & 1.000 & 0.708 & 0.123 & 0.646 & 0.400 & 0.909 & 0.796 & 0.956 & 0.744 \\ st-EVT & 0.674 & 0.066 & 0.337 & 1.000 & 0.377 & 0.098 & 0.812 & 0.596 & 0.935 & 0.706 & 0.851 & {\bf 0.032} \\ opt & 0.228 & 0.294 & 0.886 & 1.000 & 0.234 & 0.458 & 0.883 & 0.850 & 0.401 & 0.337 & 0.732 & 1.000 \\ \hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\alpha=0.95$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\tau=0.98761$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\nu=0.875$}\\\hline n-FP & {\bf 0.006} & {\bf 0.004} & {\bf 0.003} & {\bf 0.009} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} \\ n-FHS & 0.948 & {\bf 0.042} & 0.526 & 1.000 & 0.702 & 0.067 & 0.351 & 0.158 & 0.912 & 0.349 & 0.997 & 0.609 \\ n-EVT & 0.797 & 0.075 & 0.398 & 1.000 & 0.868 & 0.062 & 0.434 & 0.208 & 0.720 & 0.549 & 1.000 & 0.762 \\ t-FP & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ t-FHS & 0.700 & 0.053 & 0.350 & 1.000 & 0.793 & {\bf 0.027} & 0.603 & 0.325 & 0.951 & 0.492 & 0.864 & 0.368 \\ t-EVT & 0.654 & 0.106 & 0.327 & 0.981 & 0.713 & {\bf 0.033} & 0.643 & 0.363 & 0.699 & 0.771 & 1.000 & 0.845 \\ st-FP & 0.794 & 0.261 & 0.603 & 1.000 & 0.568 & 0.066 & 0.716 & 0.467 & 0.655 & 0.898 & 0.907 & 0.249 \\ st-FHS & 0.897 & 0.111 & 0.449 & 1.000 & 0.729 & 0.073 & 0.635 & 0.393 & 0.908 & 0.690 & 0.904 & 0.875 \\ st-EVT & 0.797 & 0.180 & 0.398 & 1.000 & 0.643 & 0.077 & 0.679 & 0.435 & 0.599 & 0.968 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ opt & 0.284 & 0.552 & 0.858 & 1.000 & 0.315 & 0.523 & 0.843 & 0.798 & 0.311 & 0.624 & 0.263 & 0.194 \\ \hline & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\alpha=0.99$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|\|}{$\tau=0.99855$} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{$\nu=0.975$}\\\hline n-FP & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} \\ n-FHS & 0.420 & {\bf 0.007} & 0.210 & 0.630 & 0.377 & {\bf 0.045} & 0.188 & 0.100 & 0.653 & 0.231 & 0.549 & 0.538 \\ n-EVT & 1.000 & 0.186 & 0.500 & 1.000 & 0.300 & 0.080 & 0.150 & 0.085 & 0.886 & 0.226 & 0.804 & 0.577 \\ t-FP & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.003} & {\bf 0.010} & {\bf 0.002} & {\bf 0.001} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ t-FHS & 0.679 & {\bf 0.029} & 0.339 & 1.000 & 0.783 & {\bf 0.013} & 0.391 & 0.212 & 0.697 & 0.717 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ t-EVT & 0.888 & 0.140 & 0.444 & 1.000 & 0.509 & 0.067 & 0.254 & 0.145 & 0.995 & 0.498 & 0.807 & 1.000 \\ st-FP & 0.454 & 0.221 & 0.773 & 1.000 & 0.601 & {\bf 0.048} & 0.301 & 0.169 & 0.695 & 0.419 & 0.597 & 0.511 \\ st-FHS & 0.584 & {\bf 0.018} & 0.292 & 0.876 & 0.826 & {\bf 0.026} & 0.413 & 0.238 & 0.843 & 0.758 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ st-EVT & 0.554 & 0.270 & 0.723 & 1.000 & 0.552 & 0.087 & 0.276 & 0.162 & 0.962 & 0.564 & 0.868 & 1.000 \\ opt & 0.364 & 0.576 & 0.818 & 1.000 & 0.825 & 0.491 & 0.588 & 0.513 & 0.131 & 0.571 & 0.073 & 0.101 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{sidewaystable} In addition to risk measure average forecasts, Table~\ref{tabsimsum} also reports the average scores along with the corresponding method rankings using two different (consistent) scoring functions for each of the three considered risk measures. As the scoring functions we use require risk measure forecasts to be positive, we set the scores across all methods to zero in those few cases where forecasts are negative. Note that in the case of $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, only the forecasts for $\ebbS_\nu$ are restricted to be positive. The method rankings based on the average scores appear to be reasonable, and suggest some more general conclusions with respect to method selection on the basis of forecasting accuracy. Similar to the results of traditional backtesting, the numerical values in Table~\ref{tabsimsum} provide further support to the observation that the choice of the likelihood model in fitting the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter has an appreciable influence on the accuracy of forecasts, perhaps more than previously thought in the context of using the quasi-maximum-likelihood methods. Within each likelihood model, at lower levels for risk measure, fully parametric and FHS approaches tend to demonstrate better predictive performance, whereas at higher levels EVT-based methods seem to have an advantage, in particular, in the case of VaR. When the likelihood model is misspecified in fitting the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter, the non-parametric methods such as FHS and semi-parametric methods such as EVT-based estimation allow for greater flexibility to diminish the effects of model misspecification than the fully parametric approaches do. While in many cases, rankings obtained from each pair of consistent scoring functions coincide, there also exist some discrepancies. This is not a surprise in the presence of misspecified models and estimation uncertainty as already pointed out by \citet{Patton2014}. For models for which the mean score is finite, the weak law of large numbers suggests convergence of the sample average (score) to the true mean (score) as the out-of-sample size tends to infinity. However, the convergence can be fairly slow. We found that in our simulation study, the out-of-sample size of at least 1000 data points is necessary to achieve some stability in rankings. Hence, in finite sample situations, one has to be aware of the effects of sampling variability on the final rankings of the forecasting methods. Appendix D discusses results of a study where only 250 verifying observations were considered to perform backtesting. In small samples, results of both traditional and comparative backtesting may be greatly distorted by unrepresentative samples even when the underlying data generating process is stationary. Finally, Figures~\ref{fig:TLMVaR} -~ \ref{fig:TLMVaRES} display the traffic light matrices for the three risk measures and two forms of consistent scoring functions for each. These plots complement the method rankings on the basis of just the average scores with the tests of predictive ability at the test level $\eta=5\%$. Along the vertical axis we consider hypothetical "standard" models with the investigated "internal" models displayed along the horizontal axis. The red and green cells correspond to situations in which the comparative backtest is failed or passed, while yellow cells indicate cases where no conclusive evidence is available to pass or fail the comparative backtest. The rows in each figure correspond to different scoring functions used to compare the methods. Inconclusive traffic light matrices can result if all methods are performing reasonably well, or, if the chosen scoring function has poor discrimination ability. In the case of VaR, as the discrimination ability of both chosen scoring functions seems good at level $\alpha=0.99$, it is likely that at $\alpha=0.90$ several models show a reasonable predictive ability. This is in line with the largely inconclusive traditional backtests at level $\alpha=0.90$. At $\alpha=0.90$, the scoring function in \eqref{eq:SVaR1} is better at identifying models with the correctly specified likelihood than the scoring function in \eqref{eq:SVaR2}, for which with just a few exceptions only the "t-FP" method fails the comparative backtests as an internal method against all the other possible standard methods. At $\alpha=0.99$, the two scoring functions result in a good agreement with "n-FP" being the worst forecaster (i.e., failing the comparative backtests against all the other methods), the optimal method passing comparative backtests against all other methods (the exception is "st-EVT" under the scoring function in \eqref{eq:SVaR2}). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{plot_sim_tlm_VaR2.eps} \caption{Traffic light matrices for $\VaR_\alpha$ forecasts at the test confidence level $\eta=0.05$. The top and bottom rows are based on the scoring functions in \eqref{eq:SVaR1} and \eqref{eq:SVaR2}, respectively.} \label{fig:TLMVaR} \end{figure} The situation is less clear for the $\tau$-expectile. At level $\tau=0.96561$, the "n-FP" method fails the comparative backtest against most of the other methods under both scoring functions; the use of the scoring function in \eqref{eq:Sexp2} suggests failing the "t-FP" method as well. The "st-EVT" method would pass the comparative backtest against the models with the normal likelihood and "t-FP". At level $\tau = 0.99855$, both scoring functions do not discriminate the methods much except for flagging the optimal forecaster as better than most other methods and failing the "n-FP" method. Expectiles have been used much less as a risk measure and it may be possible that the present methods are indeed suboptimal for expectile prediction at high levels. Again, this is in line with the results of the traditional backtests, in particular, the conditional two-sided tests. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{plot_sim_tlm_EXP2.eps} \caption{Traffic light matrices for $\tau$-expectile forecasts at the test confidence level $\eta=0.05$. The top and bottom rows are based on the scoring functions in \eqref{eq:Sexp1} and \eqref{eq:Sexp2}, respectively.} \label{fig:TLMexp} \end{figure} For $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$, the large number of conclusive comparative backtesting results indicates that we can discriminate well between methods, and, as in the case of VaR it appears less important which method to use at a lower level than at a higher level. In particular, we once again see that the methods with the correctly specified likelihood show superior predictive performance. According to the scoring function in \eqref{eq:SVaRES1}, the "st-EVT" method fails the comparative backtest against its parametric and non-parametric counterparts "st-FP" and "st-FHS" at lower levels of $\nu$. No definitive conclusions with respect to these models can be drawn at $\nu=0.975$. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{plot_sim_tlm_VaRES2.eps} \caption{Traffic light matrices for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ forecasts at the test confidence level $\eta=0.05$. The top and bottom rows are based on the scoring functions in \eqref{eq:SVaRES1} and \eqref{eq:SVaRES2}, respectively.} \label{fig:TLMVaRES} \end{figure} \subsection{Data analysis}\label{sdat} We have fitted an AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) model to the negated log-returns of the NASDAQ Composite index using a moving estimation window of 500 data points. The time series we consider is from Feb. 8, 1971 until May 18, 2016, which gives us an out-of-sample size $n=$10,920 to perform backtesting. Table~\ref{tabdata} summarizes results of traditional and comparative backtesting for six forecasting methods (refer to Section~\ref{ssim} for details on these methods) and, as before, for the three risk measures (VaR, expectile and the (VaR, ES) pair) at their standard Basel levels. In the case of $\VaR_{0.99}$, the traditional backtests based on the two-sided simple conditional calibration tests are passed only under the n-EVT and st-EVT methods. So, here, the choice of the likelihood function in fitting the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter seems to have a lower impact than the choice of the method at the second stage of forecasting applied to the fitted residuals. At this relatively high risk measure level, the EVT-based methods outperform their other competitors based on both the traditional backtests and the average scores. It should also be noted that the two scoring functions have lead to the same rankings of the forecasting procedures. The fully parametric methods (n-FP and st-FP) show the worst performance in terms of their predictive ability. n-FP falls into the red region against all other methods, whereas st-FP fails against the EVT methods and cannot win against the FHS methods; see the traffic light matrices in Figure~\ref{fig:TLMdata} (top row). On the other hand, for the 0.99855-expectile, the tests of simple conditional calibration are rejected (at 5\% level) for all the methods that use the normal likelihood. Those methods that use the skewed-t likelihood also tend to rank higher; although, in terms of significance, most methods fall into the yellow region (apart from the n-FP method). The ranking of forecasts is different for the two scoring functions used. The 0-homogeneous choice at \eqref{eq:Sexp2} clearly ranks the methods using the normal likelihood lower than those using the skewed-t likelihood in agreement with the results of the simple conditional calibration tests which is an argument in favour of using \eqref{eq:Sexp2} rather than \eqref{eq:Sexp1}. For both $\VaR_{0.99}$ and 0.99855-expectile, the conditional calibration tests with the test functions as in the simulation study, lead to the failure of the corresponding traditional backtest; see Table~\ref{tabdata} for the expectile. This may seem overly-conservative for practical purposes, and suggests either re-examining suitability of the GARCH-type filter for these data, or the use of a more appropriate test function. For $\VaR_{0.99}$, we performed the conditional calibration tests also with the test function $\mathbf{h}_t = (1,V(r_{t-1},x_{t-1}))'$ (see Example~\ref{ex:tradVaR}) and the resulting p-values are reported in Table~\ref{tabdata}. They lead to conclusions similar to those based on the simple conditional calibration tests. This example underlines the importance of further studies on appropriate choices of test functions. The results for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ with $\nu=0.975$ suggest better performance when a more flexible model such as the skewed-t is used to fit the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter, although the use of EVT-based methods has a potential to compensate for likelihood mis-specifications. Again, fully parametric methods (n-FP and st-FP) fall into the red region in the comparative backtests against most of the other more flexible alternatives; see bottom panels in Table~\ref{tabdata} and Figure~\ref{fig:TLMdata}. The outcomes show one interesting aspect which is not in contradiction with the theory but may be puzzling and merit further investigation in future studies: The conditional calibration test rejects all methods using a normal likelihood but the scoring functions rank the n-EVT method as the best or second best performing method. It seems that the test function used in the conditional calibration test is sensitive to the likelihood function used in fitting the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter whereas the scoring functions are more sensitive to the method at the second stage giving preference to the EVT methods. \begin{table} \caption{Summary of traditional and comparative backtesting based on the negated log-returns on the NASDAQ Composite index with an AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) filter fitted over moving estimation window of 500 observations, and the out-of-sample size of $n=$10,920; refer to Section~\ref{sdat} for details. The second column reports the average risk measure forecasts. ``\%~Viol." gives the percentage of $\VaR_{0.99}$ forecast exceedances. The simple CCT and general CCT columns contain the p-values for two-sided simple and general conditional calibration tests, respectively. The final two columns show the average scores, scaled by one minus the risk measure confidence level for presentation purposes, based on the specified scoring functions along with the corresponding method ranks (in brackets).} \label{tabdata} \begin{tabular}{1\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l c c c c c c } \hline Method & $\overline{\VaR}_{0.99}$ & \% Viol. & simple CCT & general CCT & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaR1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaR2}] \\\hline n-FP & 2.363 & 2.3 & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 3.8497 ( 6 ) & 1.3017 ( 6 ) \\ n-FHS & 2.758 & 1.3 & {\bf 0.017} & {\bf 0.028} & 3.5842 ( 3 ) & 1.1604 ( 3 ) \\ n-EVT & 2.774 & 1.2 & 0.112 & 0.152 & 3.5675 ( 2 ) & 1.1550 ( 2 ) \\ st-FP & 2.739 & 1.3 & {\bf 0.004} & {\bf 0.012} & 3.5976 ( 5 ) & 1.1669 ( 5 ) \\ st-FHS & 2.785 & 1.2 & {\bf 0.046} & 0.108 & 3.5904 ( 4 ) & 1.1609 ( 4 ) \\ st-EVT & 2.811 & 1.1 & 0.181 & 0.290 & 3.5654 ( 1 ) & 1.1517 ( 1 ) \\ \hline &&&&& \\ \hline & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\overline{e}_{0.99855}$} & simple CCT & general CCT & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:Sexp1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:Sexp2}] \\\hline n-FP & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.363} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 25.9030 ( 6 ) & 0.9660 ( 6 ) \\ n-FHS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.986} & {\bf 0.049} & {\bf 0.002} & 19.7333 ( 2 ) & 0.2933 ( 4 ) \\ n-EVT & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.966} & {\bf 0.023} & {\bf 0.001} & 19.8196 ( 5 ) & 0.3084 ( 5 ) \\ st-FP & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3.041} & 0.163 & {\bf 0.011} & 19.8159 ( 4 ) & 0.2509 ( 1 ) \\ st-FHS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3.078} & 0.227 & {\bf 0.011} & 19.7533 ( 3 ) & 0.2589 ( 2 ) \\ st-EVT & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3.037} & 0.112 & {\bf 0.006} & 19.6963 ( 1 ) & 0.2687 ( 3 ) \\ \hline &&&&& \\\hline & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\overline{\ebbS}_{0.975}$} & simple CCT & general CCT & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaRES1}] & $\overline{S}$ [eq.~\eqref{eq:SVaRES2}] \\\hline n-FP & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.375} & {\bf 0.000} & {\bf 0.000} & 1.7020 ( 6 ) & 1.0492 ( 6 ) \\ n-FHS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.777} & {\bf 0.022} & {\bf 0.035} & 1.6587 ( 4 ) & 0.9637 ( 4 ) \\ n-EVT & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.813} & 0.261 & {\bf 0.015} & 1.6560 ( 1 ) & 0.9607 ( 2 ) \\ st-FP & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.810} & {\bf 0.001} & 0.248 & 1.6622 ( 5 ) & 0.9691 ( 5 ) \\ st-FHS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.816} & 0.139 & 0.067 & 1.6582 ( 3 ) & 0.9617 ( 3 ) \\ st-EVT & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.857} & 0.327 & 0.117 & 1.6563 ( 2 ) & 0.9597 ( 1 ) \\ \hline \end{tabular*} \end{table} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{plot_NASDAQ_TLMs.eps} \caption{Traffic light matrices for $\VaR_\alpha$ (top row) based on scoring functions in~\eqref{eq:SVaR1} (left) and~\eqref{eq:SVaR2} (right), for $\tau$-expectile (middle row) based on scoring functions in~\eqref{eq:Sexp1} (left) and~\eqref{eq:Sexp2} (right), and for $(\VaR_\nu,\ebbS_\nu)$ (bottom row) based on scoring functions in~\eqref{eq:SVaRES1} (left) and~\eqref{eq:SVaRES2} (right) at the test confidence level $\eta=0.05$, for the data analysis in Section~\ref{sdat}. } \label{fig:TLMdata} \end{figure} \setcounter{equation}{0} \section{Discussion}\label{scon} In the paper, we have discussed two approaches to backtesting risk measure forecasts. We differentiate between traditional backtesting, which gives a ``yes" or ``no" answer to the question of whether a method is acceptable or not, and comparative backtesting, specifically aimed at comparing the predictive performance of different forecasting methods. In general, there appears to be a need for both traditional and comparative backtesting methodologies. The former poses a requirement of identifiability on the risk measure functional, and serves the purpose of categorizing methods based on whether the backtest is passed or not, albeit with a somewhat limited ability to fail misspecified models. However, traditional backtesting does not provide a statistically justifiable basis for method comparisons often sought when assessing the performance of say a newly proposed forecasting procedure against an existing one, or when defending an internal procedure against some standard procedure. Comparative backtesting provides a methodology to serve exactly these purposes. For methods that are deemed acceptable under a traditional backtest, comparative backtesting allows to rank methods according to their predictive performance based on a chosen consistent scoring function, provided that the risk measure under consideration is an elicitable functional. Traditional backtesting, which we formalize in the form of conditional calibration tests, provides a unifying framework for currently available backtests of risk measures. To assess performance of different calibration tests in a controlled environment, a simulation study was conducted. It emerged that in fact many methods based on misspecified models may pass traditional backtests. And while the outcome of the backtest is the same in all such cases (a pass), differences in risk measure forecasts under different methods will ultimately lead to different capital requirements. One practical implication of this is that such backtests may create a wrong incentive of minimizing the capital, subject to passing the backtest, rather than aiming for a more accurate forecasting method. From the simulation study, we have also seen that general conditional calibration tests have a slightly better ability at detecting methods with misspecified models in comparison to the corresponding simple conditional calibration tests, with the latter being able to flag only the most under-performing methods. However, for the real data, often, simple and general conditional calibration tests produced similar results, suggesting that in practice the use of simple conditional calibration tests may suffice. General conditional calibration tests offer a more refined alternative, but require the choice of a test function. Further research is necessary to gain more insight into the choice of the test function for different risk measures and how this choice affects the outcomes of the tests. In light of the above mentioned limitations of traditional backtests, regulators may additionally apply a comparative backtest in cases where a traditional backtest is passed. This necessitates a standard model against which the bank's internal model is to be tested. Such a standard model should not be confused with the standardized approaches currently used by regulators for trading book risk management of banks that either are not able to go for the (internal) model-based approach or do not pass the regulatory backtesting. These standardized approaches do not produce risk measure forecasts, and hence could not be incorporated into the comparative backtesting framework. However, comparative backtests will create the correct incentive for the banks to develop risk measure forecasting methods that aim for accuracy of forecasts and hence can adequately quantify the risks. If the Basel committee were to introduce comparative backtesting, a foresting method to serve as the ``standard model" should be chosen among flexible methods that have low model risk and are known to do well under fairly broad range of circumstances. One such possibility could be the filtered historical simulation with a GARCH filter fitted using a flexible likelihood model such as the skew-t in our numerical examples. In summary, our recommendation to the Basel committee would be to adopt a two-stage backtesting framework. At stage~{\rm I}, a calibration test is applied in line with the current practice. In terms of implementation, the easiest option is to use the two-sided simple conditional calibration test. Conditionally on passing the stage~{\rm I} test, stage~{\rm II} will then assess the bank's ``internal model" against the regulator's ``standard model" via a comparative backtest. From the regulatory point of view, the statistical significance of the comparative backtests can be nicely summarized by means of traffic light matrices highlighting which methods pass or fail against a standard procedure, and when not enough evidence is available to make a conclusive statement. Provided that the regulatory risk measure is elicitable, comparative backtests require a choice of a consistent scoring function for that risk measure. In the case of backtesting ES, the current regulatory risk measure for banks' trading books, the 0-homogeneous scoring function in equation~\eqref{eq:SVaRES2} would be a reasonable choice as it is unit consistent and has milder moment restrictions on the underlying stochastic process than other positive homogeneous alternatives. Additionally, based on the data analysis, it yields results in rankings which are in better agreement with the outcomes of the calibration tests and leads to slightly more conclusive results in terms of the traffic light matrix entries versus the considered 1/2-homogeneous alternative. It is worth noting that the comparative backtesting methodology can also be used by financial institutions internally to select better performing methods among competing alternatives. The same would apply to academic literature seeking to compare different forecasting methods, with the comparison done on the basis of forecast accuracy, in addition to calibration. There are still many open problems and follow-up questions that require further investigation to create a fuller understanding of the usability of the presented backtesting methodologies. In the context of traditional backtesting, we found conditional calibration tests to be better at detecting model mis-specifications. However, these conditional tests require the user to choose a set of test functions. An exploration of potential test function choices and their influence on finite sample properties of the tests in a broader context than covered in our simulation study would be beneficial to guide practical applicability of these backtests. A choice problem also arises in the context of comparative backtesting where it is possible to make use of any member of the family of consistent scoring functions for a given risk measure functional. Here, different aspects of the resulting backtests can be assessed. One particular aspect to consider is the existence of the mean score (or difference in scores) for the underlying process. Financial time series tend to have fairly heavy tails and this would place restrictions on the choice of a suitable scoring function. From this perspective, the proposed scoring functions with 0-homogeneous score differences allow to study heavier-tailed processes than the $b$-homogeneous choices (with $b>0$). Finally, we have not explored the potentially promising possibility of using conditional comparative backtests. There are many open questions on how they should be formulated and implemented to be informative in practice. Some of the risk measures used in practice are in fact non-elicitable. A prominent example here is the ES. In such cases the notion of joint elicitability may open the door to the ability to conduct backtests, in this case for multivariate risk measure functionals. We have explored the joint elicitability of VaR and ES, and, on the basis of our simulation study, the backtesting results show a good ability to identify and differentiate among methods relying on correct and misspecified model formulations. However, further research is needed to provide a clearer interpretation of both traditional and comparative backtests. For example, in the case of the pair (VaR, ES), the question would be whether it is a poor forecasting of VaR or ES or both that caused a (traditional or comparative) backtest to fail. \vspace{0.5cm} {\large {\bf Acknowledgements.}} We would also like to thank Prof.~Paul Embrechts for a number of inspiring discussions, as well as RiskLab at ETH Zurich for its hospitality when we began working on this project. Financial support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (N.~Nolde) and Swiss National Foundation via grant 152609 (J.~F.~Ziegel) is gratefully acknowledged. \bibliographystyle{plainnat}
\section{Introduction} The study of integrable models has a long history scattered with many significant achievements, including a deeper understanding of phase transitions and other non-perturbative properties of interacting statistical mechanical systems, the study of important low dimensional condensed matter models \cite{onsager1944crystal,baxter2007exactly,essler2005one}, and the link with gauge theories in two, three and four space-time dimensions and with the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Beisert:2010jr}. The discovery of a connection between the exact S-matrix method, the Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz (TBA) \cite{ZamolodchikovTBA} and the effective string theory description of the chromoelectric flux tube in confining gauge theories is a further surprising result recently obtained within the integrable model setup \cite{dubovsky2012solving,Dubovsky:2013gi}. In particular, it has been discovered that the finite-size spectrum of a theory of free massless bosons modified by the inclusion of a very simple scalar scattering phase (CDD factor) can be computed exactly with the TBA method and that its analytic form is precisely the well-known expressions for the energy levels of the Nambu-Goto model obtained in the early days of string theory via covariant quantization \cite{goddard1973quantum}. This idea was readily adapted in \cite{Caselle:2013dra} to encompass the open string case, a framework more directly relevant to the study of the quark-anti-quark potential. In the same paper, the setup was generalised to describe the deformation, via the same CDD factor, of an arbitrary 2D conformal field theory (CFT). A tight link was observed to previous studies on massless RG flows with leading IR attracting operator given by the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ composite operator built with the chiral and anti-chiral components of the CFT stress-energy tensor (see \cite{zamolodchikov1991tricritical},\cite{zamolodchikov1994thermodynamics},\cite{klassen1992spectral}, \cite{dorey2000new}, \cite{dunning2002massless}). Earlier observations on the special r\^ole played by the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ operator in integrable perturbations of CFTs were recorded in a few occasions, mainly in the framework of Form Factors \cite{Fateev:1998xb, Delfino:2006te} for correlation functions, and hints on possible links with CDD factors and TBA may be envisaged in \cite{Mussardo:1999aj}. A general quantum field theory definition of this special composite operator away from criticality was proposed by Sasha Zamolochikov in \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce}, a paper of central importance for the purposes of the current work. In the context of relativistic integrable field theories with factorised scattering \cite{Zamolodchikov:1978xm}, the irrelevant perturbations considered in this paper are described by formally modifying the S-matrix with an extra diagonal phase shift, depending on a deformation parameter $t$\footnote{ In the effective string theory context, this parameter is related to the string tension $\sigma = \frac{1}{2 t}$. }: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:massiveCDD} S_{ij}^{kl}(\theta) \rightarrow S_{ij}^{kl}(\theta) \, e^{i \delta^{(t)}_{ij}(\theta) } , \end{eqnarray} where $\theta=\theta_i-\theta_j$ denote the relative particles' rapidity and \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:genCDD} \delta^{(t)}_{ij}(\theta) = \delta^{(t)}(m_i, m_j , \theta) =t \, m_i m_j \, \sinh(\theta ) . \end{eqnarray} When the masses of all physical particles are sent to zero, the net effect of the presence of the CDD factor is to introduce an interaction between left and right-moving massless excitations. The phase shift for this process is simply \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:NGCDD} \delta_{ij}^{(t)}(\theta_i-\theta_j) = t \, \frac{M_i M_j }{2} \, e^{\theta_i-\theta_j}= -2 t \, p^{(+)}_i\, p^{(-)}_j , \end{eqnarray} where $ p^{(+)}_i$ and $ p^{(-)}_j $ are the momenta of right and left moving particles, respectively, and $M_i$, $M_j$ fix the relative energy scales. The CDD factor (\ref{eq:genCDD}) was introduced in \cite{Dubovsky:2013ira} as a generalization of the proposal of \cite{dubovsky2012solving} to theories with more than one particle species. It was first pointed out in \cite{Caselle:2013dra} that this deformation corresponds to perturbing the CFT theory with a series of irrelevant operators whose leading term is $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$. As we shall discuss in this paper, the introduction of the phase factor in the nonlinear integral equations describing the spectrum at finite-size leads to a characteristic deformation of the energy levels as $t$ is varied, which flows according to the inviscid Burgers equation of hydrodynamics. Further, the wave-breaking phenomenon, typical of the solutions to this simple fluid equation, is seen to correspond to the appearance of a spectral singularity at physical values of the system size: the famous tachyon singularity of effective string theories. While the specific form of the deformation of the spectrum was obtained for integrable theories, the result is strongly connected to the general properties of the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ operator studied in \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce}, suggesting that the latter results might have a broader range of validity. Indeed, we believe that the formula for the deformation of the energy levels is universal and valid also for non-integrable theories deformed by the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ composite field\footnote{The definition based on CDD factors may appear to be only meaningful in an integrable context, however it has been pointed out in \cite{Dubovsky:2013ira} (see also \cite{Conkey:2016qju}) that a natural generalization of (\ref{eq:genCDD}) can be also defined in a theory with non-integrable scattering. It would be very interesting to find a more precise link between the work \cite{Dubovsky:2013ira} and the general properties of $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ invoked in this paper and show the equivalence between the two approaches.}. However, without a precise characterization, at least at the level of an effective action, of the deformed theory, this might seem a void statement. It was put forward in \cite{Caselle:2013dra} that the full effective action might be obtainable by a universal method involving the recursive re-definition of the stress-energy tensor. In this paper, we show that this idea can be realized (although with some subtle variation). We demonstrate this by reconstructing the full Nambu-Goto action in D dimensions in static gauge starting from the action of $D-2$ free massless bosons; we also apply the same method to single boson Lagrangians with generic potential. Next, we use an idea first proposed by L\"uscher and Weisz \cite{Luscher:2004ib} to reconstruct the cylinder partition function of $t$-deformed rational CFTs, linking the result to the exact g-function formula proposed for massless TBA flows in \cite{Dorey:2009vg}. The effect of this deformation appears to be easily computable also for other physical observables; the last example we briefly discuss concerns one-point functions on a cylinder geometry. Finally, we would like to mention that, while we were working on this project, F. Smirnov and A. B. Zamolodchikov were independently addressing the question of integrability of $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$-related perturbations using the form factor method \cite{AZTalk0,FSTalk} (see also \cite{Lashkevich:2016gev} for a related work). The current project was mainly motivated by the questions raised in \cite{Caselle:2013dra} in connection to the results of \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce}, and we had already obtained all the results on the spectrum, including the connection to hydrodynamic equations, before we became aware that the same observation was made in a seminar by Zamolodchikov \cite{AZTalk}. The results in Section \ref{sec:FreeBoson} on the recursive construction of the perturbed effective action, were instead triggered by the observation made in \cite{AZTalk} on the deformation of the action. \section{The NLIE for CFTs and its CDD-factor deformation}\label{subsec:DDV} Although most of the results discussed in the following have a more general validity, for concreteness we shall illustrate them in a very simple class of models, corresponding to the sine-Gordon model, its quantum reductions \cite{Smirnov:1990vm,Bernard:1990cw} and their CFT limits. Finite-size effects in these theories are compactly described by a single nonlinear integral equation (NLIE) \cite{klumper1991central, KlumperPearce0, KlumperPearce, DDV, DDV2}. We will briefly review this formulation and then discuss the effects of the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ deformation. \subsection{The NLIE for CFTs}\label{sec:masslessDDV} Let us start by recalling the application of the NLIE approach in the context of 2D CFTs with (effective) central charge $\leq 1$, developed in \cite{Bazhanov:1994ft,BLZ2}. The object of these works was the unified description of the infinite set of integrals of motion (IMs) of the CFT. It was shown that, for any state of the theory, this information is stored into a pair of counting functions, $f^{(+)}$ and $f^{(-)}$ (corresponding to the right- and left-moving sector, respectively), each determined by a nonlinear integral equation. We consider the theory defined on a cylinder of radius $R$. The pair of NLIEs is characterized by a coupling $\xi$ and a twist parameter $\alpha$, and reads as follows: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:DDVCFT} f^{(\pm)}(\theta) &=& \pm i\alpha -i \frac{M R}{2} \, e^{\pm \theta} \\ & \mp& \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\mp f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right) \pm \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_2} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\pm f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right), \nn \end{eqnarray} where $M$ sets the energy scale, and the kernel is related to the sine-Gordon soliton-soliton scattering amplitude: \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{ K } (\theta) &=& \frac{1}{2 \pi i } \partial_{\theta} \log S_{sG}(\theta) , \\ \log S_{sG}(\theta) &=& - i \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{d k}{k} \sin( k \theta) \,\frac{ \sinh\left( \pi k (\xi - 1)/2 \right) }{ \cosh\left( \pi k/2 \right) \, \sinh\left( \pi k \xi/2 \right) } . \end{eqnarray} Local IMs are related to the solutions of the NLIE \cite{BLZ2}. In particular, energy and momentum are expressible in terms of the lowest-order IMs: \begin{eqnarray} E(R) = I^{(+)}(R) + I^{(-)}(R) , \;\;\;\;\; P(R) = I^{(+)}(R) - I^{(-)}(R) , \end{eqnarray} where \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:LocalIMs} I^{(\pm)}(R) &=& \frac{M}{2} \,\left[\int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_1} \frac{d\theta}{2 \pi i} \, e^{\pm\theta} \, \log\left( 1 + e^{-f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right)- \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_{2}} \frac{d\theta }{2 \pi i}\, e^{\pm\theta} \, \, \log\left( 1 + e^{f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right) \right] . \nn \end{eqnarray} The information on the state is encoded in the choice of the integration contours $\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_{1}$, $\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_{2}$; for the ground state, one may take them to be straight lines slightly displaced from the real axis: $\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_{1} = \mathbb{R} + i 0^{+} $, $\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_{2} = \mathbb{R} - i 0^+$. Equations describing excited states have the same form but in general with deformed contours encircling a number of singularities $\{\theta^{\pm}_i\}$ with $\left(1+ e^{f_{\pm}(\theta_i^{\pm})}\right) =0 $, see \cite{Bazhanov:1996aq, DT, FioravantiDDV, Feverati:1998dt}. It is not difficult to check that $E(R)$ and $P(R)$ have exactly the form predicted by conformal invariance. In particular, one may use the so-called dilogarithm Lemma \cite{DDV2} to show that \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Ipm} I^{(+)}(R) = 2 \pi \, ( n_0 - c_{\text{eff}} /24 )/R, \;\;\;\;\; I^{(-)}(R) = 2 \pi \, ({\bar{n}}_0 - c_{\text{eff}} /24 )/R, \end{eqnarray} where $c_{\text{eff}}$ is the effective central charge, parametrized as \begin{eqnarray} c_{\text{eff}} = 1 - \frac{6 \, \alpha^2 }{\pi^2} \,\frac{\xi}{\xi+1}, \end{eqnarray} and $n_0, \; \bar{n}_0 \in \mathbb{Z}$ characterize the excited state level and come about from the monodromies of the dilogarithm. \subsection{The deformation} Let us now come to the deformation. It is natural to conjecture that the CDD factor (\ref{eq:NGCDD}) is equivalent to introducing a coupling between the counting functions corresponding to left and right movers. This is encoded in a new integral kernel $\chi_{CDD}$: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:chiCDD} \chi_{CDD}(\theta- \theta') = \frac{1}{2 \pi } \partial_{\theta} \delta_{CDD}(p^{(+)}(\theta), p^{(-)}(\theta')) = t \frac{M^2}{4 \pi} \,e^{\theta - \theta'}, \end{eqnarray} so that equations (\ref{eq:DDVCFT}) are replaced by the system of two coupled nonlinear integral equations: \begin{eqnarray} f^{(\pm)}(\theta) &=& \pm i \alpha -i \frac{M}{2} \, e^{\pm\theta} \, R \\ && \mp \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\mp f^{(\pm)}(y)} \right) \pm \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_2} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\pm f^{(\pm)}(y)} \right) \nn\\ &&\mp \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\mp)}_1} d y \, \chi_{CDD}(\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\pm f^{(\mp)}(y)} \right) \pm \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\mp)}_2} d y \, \chi_{CDD}(\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\mp f^{(\mp)} (y)} \right). \nn \end{eqnarray} Plugging in (\ref{eq:chiCDD}), it is simple to show that these equations can be rewritten as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:chiCDDrewr} f^{(\pm)}(\theta) &=& \pm i \alpha -i \frac{M}{2} \, e^{\pm\theta} \, \left( R + 2 t E^{(\mp)}(R,t) \right) \\ && \mp \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\mp f^{(\pm)}(y)} \right) \pm \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_2} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{\pm f^{(\pm)}(y)} \right) , \nn \end{eqnarray} where $E^{(\pm)}(R,t)$ denote the canonical expressions for $I^{(\pm)}$, evaluated on the solutions of the deformed NLIE system: \begin{eqnarray} E^{(\pm)}(R,t) = \frac{M}{2}\left[\int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_1} \frac{d\theta}{ 2 \pi i } \, e^{\pm\theta} \, \log\left( 1 + e^{-f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right)- \int_{\mathcal{C}^{(\pm)}_2} \frac{d\theta}{ 2 \pi i } \, e^{\pm\theta} \, \, \log\left( 1 + e^{f^{(\pm)}(\theta)} \right) \right]. \end{eqnarray} Equations (\ref{eq:chiCDDrewr}) reveal that the deformation can be interpreted as a redefinition of the length-parameters appearing in the NLIEs, $R \rightarrow R + 2t E^{(\pm)}(R,t)$. Consistency with (\ref{eq:Ipm}) then yields the following conditions: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:consistencyNG} E^{(+)}(R,t) = 2 \pi \,\left( \frac{ n_0 - c_{\text{eff}}/24 }{ R + 2 t E^{(-)}(R,t) } \right), \;\;\;\;\; E^{(-)}(R,t) = 2 \pi \,\left(\frac{ \bar{n}_0 - c_{\text{eff}}/24 }{ R + 2t E^{(+)}(R,t) } \right). \end{eqnarray} These are precisely the relations found in \cite{Caselle:2013dra} starting from (generic) TBA equations and imply that the energy levels have the form \cite{Dubovsky:2013gi,Caselle:2013dra}: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:NGEP} E(R,t) &=& E^{(+)}(R,t) + E^{(-)}(R,t) \nn\\ &=&- \frac{R}{2 t} + \sqrt{ \frac{R^2}{4 t^2 } + \frac{2 \pi }{t} \, \left(n_0 + \bar{n}_0 -\frac{c_{\text{eff}}}{12} \right) + \left(\frac{2 \pi (n_0 - \bar{n}_0 )}{R}\right)^2 }, \\ P(R) &=& E^{(+)}(R) - E^{(-)}(R) = \frac{ 2 \pi ( n_0 - \bar{n}_0 )}{R} . \end{eqnarray} As reviewed in the introduction, for $c_{\text{eff}} = D-2$ this coincides with the spectrum of the Nambu-Goto string in $D$-dimensional target space obtained through light-cone quantization (for more comments on this relation, see the Conclusions). \\ Let us also briefly mention that there are other NLIEs describing integrable CFTs, as well as massless flows between minimal models \cite{zamolodchikov1994thermodynamics,dorey2000new,dunning2002massless}. The analysis of this section could be repeated without essential modifications to study the $t$-deformation of these systems as well. The purpose of the following Section \ref{sec:sGDDV} is to illustrate the generalization of these results to the case of a massive integrable QFT, the sine-Gordon model. \section{Deforming the sine-Gordon model}\label{sec:sGDDV} The sine-Gordon model can be seen as a relevant perturbation of the CFT corresponding to a single massless boson. The integrals of motion of the model are encoded in the single counting function $f(\theta)$, solution to the following nonlinear integral equation \cite{DDV2}: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:DDVsG} f(\theta) &=& -i m R \sinh(\theta) + i \alpha \nn\\ &&- \int_{\mathcal{C}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{ -f(y)} \right) + \int_{\mathcal{C}_2} dy \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{f(y)} \right) , \end{eqnarray} where the kernel $ \mathcal{ K } $ is the same defined in Section \ref{sec:masslessDDV}, $m$ denotes the soliton mass, $R$ is the radius of the cylinder on which the theory is quantized, and the twist parameter $\alpha$ selects the vacuum (e.g., see \cite{Zamolodchikov:1994uw}). Again, the integration contours formally encode the characteristics of the state under consideration; for the ground state, $\mathcal{C}_{1} = \mathbb{R} + i 0^{+} $, $\mathcal{C}_{2} = \mathbb{R} - i 0^+$. Energy and momentum can be obtained from the counting function through the relations: \begin{eqnarray} E(R) &=& m \, \left[ \int_{\mathcal{C}_1} \frac{dy}{2 \pi i} \sinh(y) \log\left( 1 + e^{-f(y)} \right)-\int_{\mathcal{C}_2} \frac{dy}{2 \pi i} \sinh(y) \log\left( 1 + e^{f(y)} \right) \right], \label{eq:EE}\\ P(R) &=& m \, \left[ \int_{\mathcal{C}_1} \frac{dy}{2 \pi i} \cosh(y) \log\left( 1 + e^{ -f(y)} \right)-\int_{\mathcal{C}_2} \frac{dy}{2 \pi i} \cosh(y) \log\left( 1 + e^{f(y)} \right) \right] .\label{eq:PP} \end{eqnarray} In the case of two particles with equal mass, the CDD phase in (\ref{eq:massiveCDD}) takes the simple form \begin{eqnarray} \delta_{CDD}( \theta_1, \theta_2 ) = t\, m^2 \sinh( \theta_1 - \theta_2 ). \end{eqnarray} This prompts us to deform the kernel appearing in the NLIE by \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{ K } (\theta) \rightarrow \mathcal{ K } (\theta) + \frac{1}{2 \pi} \partial_{\theta} \delta_{CDD}(\theta) = \mathcal{ K } (\theta) + t \frac{m^2}{2 \pi} \cosh(\theta) . \end{eqnarray} Inserting this new kernel in (\ref{eq:DDVsG}), after simple manipulations we find the deformed version of the NLIE: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:modsGDDV} f(\theta) &=& -i\, m\, \sinh(\theta) \left[ R + t \,E(R, t) \right] - i\, m\, \cosh(\theta) \, t \, P(R, t) \\ &&- \int_{\mathcal{C}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{-f(y)} \right) + \int_{\mathcal{C}_2} dy \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{f(y)} \right) ,\nn \end{eqnarray} where $E(R, t)$ and $P(R,t)$ are defined by the rhs of (\ref{eq:EE}),(\ref{eq:PP}) in terms of the solution to (\ref{eq:modsGDDV}). \section{Deformation of the energy levels and hydrodynamic equations}\label{sec:FuncRels} In this section, we describe the exact form of the energy levels in the presence of the CDD factor, showing that their deformation is ruled by a hydrodynamic equation. We will obtain this result starting from the deformed NLIE for the sine-Gordon model (\ref{eq:modsGDDV}), but the derivation can easily be adapted to other integrable models and to other frameworks such as the TBA. As a first preliminary observation, we point out that the quantization rule for the momentum does not change with the deformation. We expect that, for every state of the theory, the momentum will be quantized as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:quantP} P(R, t) = P(R) &=& \frac{2 \pi k}{R}, \;\;\;\; k \in \mathbb{Z}, \end{eqnarray} where the integer $k$ is the same as for the undeformed solution, and depends on the topology of the integration contour\footnote{ It is not difficult to prove (\ref{eq:quantP}) using the standard dilogarithm trick, see for example the Lemma in Section 7 of \cite{DDV2}.}. The $k=0$ case is simpler and we shall treat it separately. \paragraph{Zero-momentum case: } Equation (\ref{eq:modsGDDV}) shows that, when $k=0$, the effect of the deformation can be regarded as an energy-dependent redefinition of the length, \begin{eqnarray} f(\theta \,\| R \,, \, t) = f(\theta \, \| \,(R + t E(R , t) )\, , 0 ) . \end{eqnarray} This observation implies a very simple relation between the energy, $E(R, t)$, computed in the presence of the deformation, and the undeformed energy: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:functionalm} E( R \,,\, t) = E((R + t E(R , t)) \, , 0 ) , \end{eqnarray} which allows to compute the exact form of the $t$-deformed energy level once its $R$-dependence is known at $t=0$. It can be recognised that (\ref{eq:functionalm}) is precisely the implicit form of a solution of a well-known hydrodynamic equation: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:invBurg} \partial_{t} E(R,t) = E(R,t) \, \partial_{R} E(R,t) , \end{eqnarray} where the deformation parameter plays the role of ``time'' variable, and the undeformed energy level serves as initial condition at $t=0$. Equation (\ref{eq:invBurg}) describes an incompressible fluid in the absence of viscosity and pressure \cite{whitham2011linear}. It is often denoted as the inviscid Burgers equation. A crucial and well known aspect of the model is that its solutions tend to develop shock singularities, namely points where the gradient $\partial_{R} E$ blows up. As we will discuss shortly, they correspond to spectral singularities that may signal the breakdown of the theory at short distances, such as the famous Hagedorn singularity of the Nambu-Goto spectrum (see \cite{dubovsky2012solving,Caselle:2013dra} for a recent discussion of this phenomenon in the framework of TBA). \paragraph{General case: } As observed in \cite{AZTalk}, a slightly more general hydrodynamic equation governs states with nonzero spin, $P(R) = 2 \pi k / R$, $k \neq 0$. To derive this result within the NLIE formalism, we start by rewriting equation (\ref{eq:modsGDDV}) as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:modsGDDV2} f(\theta) &=& -i \, m \, \mathcal{R}_0 \, \sinh\left(\theta + \theta_0 \right) + i \alpha \\ &&- \int_{\mathcal{C}_1} d y \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{-f(y)} \right) + \int_{\mathcal{C}_2} dy \, \mathcal{ K } (\theta - y) \, \log\left( 1 + e^{f(y)} \right) ,\nn \end{eqnarray} where the new parameters $\mathcal{R}_0 = \mathcal{R}_0\left(t, R , E(R , t) \, \right) $, $\theta_0=\theta_0(t, R , E(R , t)) \,$ are defined through: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:defineRtheta} \, \mathcal{R}_0 \, \, \cosh\left( \theta_0 \right) &=& R + t E(R , t) , \\ \mathcal{R}_0 \, \, \sinh\left( \theta_0 \right) &=& t P(R) . \end{eqnarray} Equation (\ref{eq:modsGDDV2}) suggests that the solutions of the NLIE are still modified simply by a redefinition of the length and by a rapidity shift: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:fsigma} f(\theta \| R , t ) = f(\theta + \theta_0 \| \mathcal{R}_0 , 0 ). \end{eqnarray} We can now use plug (\ref{eq:fsigma}) into (\ref{eq:EE}) to express the deformed energy $E(R \, , t)$ in terms of quantities at $t=0$. After a change of variable in the integral, we obtain \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Funct} E(R \,, \, t ) &=& \cosh(\theta_0 ) \, E( \mathcal{R}_0 , 0 ) - \sinh(\theta_0 ) \, P(\mathcal{R}_0) , \end{eqnarray} where $E( \mathcal{R}_0 , 0 )$ and $P( \mathcal{R}_0 )$ are energy and momentum evaluated in the unperturbed model at lengthscale $\mathcal{R}_0$. \begin{eqnarray} E(R \, , \, t ) &=& \frac{1}{\mathcal{R}_0} \, \left[ \left(R + t E(R \, , \, t) \right) \, E(\mathcal{R}_0 , 0 ) - t P(R) \, P(\mathcal{R}_0) \right] \\ &=& \frac{1}{\mathcal{R}_0} \, \left[ \left(R + t E(R \, , \, t) \right) \, E(\mathcal{R}_0 , 0 ) - t \frac{ 4 \pi^2 \, k^2 }{ R \, \mathcal{R}_0 } \right]. \label{eq:inSol} \end{eqnarray} It can be checked explicitly that (\ref{eq:inSol}) is an implicit form of the solution of the inviscid Burgers equation with a source term: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:inhomBurg} \partial_{t} E(R,t) = E(R,t) \, \partial_R E(R,t) + \fract{P(R)^2}{R} , \end{eqnarray} where again the undeformed energy $E(R, 0)$ plays the role of initial condition at $t= 0$. Although our derivation was based on the NLIE, we expect that the hydrodynamic equations (\ref{eq:invBurg}) and (\ref{eq:inhomBurg}) (which were also found in \cite{AZTalk}) describe a uniquely-defined deformation of a generic 2D quantum field theory, generated by the operator $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$. This is strongly suggested by the fact that the general properties of $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ established in \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce} hold for a generic 2D local quantum field theory, integrable or not. \subsection{Shock singularities and the Hagedorn transition}\label{sec:Hagedorn} To understand the occurrence of spectral singularities, let us briefly review a few well-known facts on the wave-breaking phenomenon in the inviscid Burgers equation, restricting to the $P=0$ case. For a generic initial condition, $E(R, 0)$, the model can be solved implicitly as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:ERt} E(R, t) = E( \tilde{R}(R, t),0 ), \end{eqnarray} with $\tilde {R}(R, t) = R + t \, E(R,t)$. It can be shown (see, \cite{bessis1984pole}), that, at any fixed time $t > 0$, the map $R \rightarrow \tilde{R}(R, t) $ has in general a number of square-root branch points in the complex $R$-plane. To find their location (which depends on $t$)\footnote{For simplicity of notation, we will simply write $R_c$, $\tilde R_c$ for the position of a singularity in the $R$ and $\tilde R$-plane. However notice that these quantities depend on $t$.}, it is convenient to consider the inverse map $ \tilde R \rightarrow R( \tilde R,t ) = \tilde R - t \, E( \tilde R,0 )$. A singularity is characterised by the condition \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:R0c} \partial_{\tilde R} \, R( \tilde R \, , \, t )\|_{\tilde R =\tilde R_c} = 1 - t \,\partial_{\tilde R} \, \left. E( \tilde R,0 ) \right\|_{\tilde R = \tilde R_{c} }= 0 . \end{eqnarray} Indeed, around a solution of equation (\ref{eq:R0c}), we can expand: \begin{eqnarray} R( \tilde R,t ) \sim R_c + \mathcal{O}\left( \tilde R - \tilde R_c \right)^2 , \;\;\;\; \text{ for } \tilde R \sim \tildeR_c, \end{eqnarray} where $R_c \equiv R( \tilde R_{c},t ) = \tilde R_{c} - t \, E( \tildeR_{c},0 )$, and correspondingly, \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:branchcut} \tilde{R}(R, t) \sim \tilde R_c + \mathcal{O}\left( R - R_c \right)^{\frac{1}{2} } , \;\;\;\; \text{ for } R \sim R_c . \end{eqnarray} Relations (\ref{eq:ERt}),(\ref{eq:branchcut}) imply that, for any solution $\tilde R_{c}$ of (\ref{eq:R0c}), one finds a singularity in the solution at $R = R_c$, which is generically a square-root branch point: $E(R, t) = E( \tilde R_c, 0 ) + \mathcal{O} ( R - R_c )^{\frac{1}{2} }$. In typical hydrodynamic applications, the initial profile is smooth on the real-$R$ axis, and for short times all branch points lie in the complex plane. The time evolution however in general brings one of the singularities on the real domain in a finite time, producing a shock in the physical solution. Let us now turn to the typical situation one would encounter for the energy levels of a (UV-complete) QFT. Here, the ground state energy displays a pole at $R=0$, \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:CFTpole} E( R , 0 ) \sim - \pi \frac{ c_{\text{eff}}}{6 \, R} , \;\;\; R \sim 0 , \end{eqnarray} where $c_{\text{eff}}$ is the effective central charge of the UV CFT. This behaviour implies that, for small times $t > 0$, equation (\ref{eq:R0c}) has two solutions very close to $\widetilde R = 0$, satisfying \begin{eqnarray} (\widetilde R_c )^2 = \pi \frac{ c_{\text{eff}}}{6 } \, t + \mathcal{O}( t^2 ) , \end{eqnarray} and correspondingly the solution is singular at \begin{eqnarray} R_c = \tilde R_c - t \, E( \tilde R_c , 0 ) \sim t^{\frac{1}{2} } \, \sqrt{ \frac{2 \, \pi \, c_{\text{eff}}}{3}} + \mathcal{O}(t^{\frac{3}{2}}) . \end{eqnarray} In other words, as soon as $t > 0$, the pole at $R=0$ resolves into a pair of branch points. For the vacuum states with $c_{\text{eff}} > 0$, one of the branch points moves rightwards on the positive real-$R$ axis, producing a singularity for physical values of the radius as soon as $t > 0$. This is the above mentioned Hagedorn singularity (see Figure \ref{fig:NG} for an illustration). For states with $ c_{\text{eff}} \leq 0 $, instead, the branch points move off along the imaginary axis and there is no singularity for physical values of $R$ (see Figure \ref{fig:NG2}). All the features we have described are visible very clearly when the deformed theory is a pure CFT at $t=0$, as can be seen from the explicit form of the energy levels (\ref{eq:NGEP}). In particular, in that case the position of the singularities is exact: $R_c = \pm \sqrt{ \frac{2 \pi \, t \, c_{\text{eff}} }{3} } $. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}{0.45 \textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{plotbranch1.pdf} \caption{ Real part of $E(R, t)$ for $t=0$ (dashed line) and $t=0.025$ (solid line), for $c_{\text{eff}}=1$ \label{fig:NG} } \end{minipage} \hspace{1 cm} \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{plotbranch2.pdf} \caption{ Real part of $E(R, t)$ for $t=0$ (dashed line) and $t=0.025$ (solid line), for $c_{\text{eff}}=-1$ \label{fig:NG2} } \end{minipage} \end{figure} As a last comment, one may wonder whether, for a generic model, the flow could produce more exotic types of singularities occurring at later times, not originating from the pole at $R=0$. However, while in general a solution of the hydrodynamic equation will undergo a sequence of wave-breaking events (depending on the number of bumps in its initial profile), we found no evidence that these should occur in the physical region $R > 0$. \section{Identification of the perturbing operator} Let us now establish a direct link between the CDD-factor introduced in (\ref{eq:chiCDD}) and the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ operator. We start from equation (\ref{eq:inhomBurg}): \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:inhomBurg1} \partial_{t} E_n(R,t)= E_n(R,t) \partial_R E_n(R,t) + \fract{1}{R} P_n(R)^2 , \end{eqnarray} where $E_n(R,t)$ denotes the $n$-th excited state of the system on a ring of size $R$. It is convenient to consider the theory as defined on a cylinder or torus, with Euclidean coordinates $(x, y) \sim (x+R, y)$. The expectation values of the components of the stress-energy tensor on the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian defined on constant-$y$ slices, satisfy \cite{ZamolodchikovTBA}, \begin{eqnarray} E_n(R,t) = - R \langle n\| T_{yy}\|n \rangle ,\,\,\,\, \partial_R E_n(R,t) = -\langle n\| T_{xx}\|n \rangle, \,\, \,\, P_n= -i R \langle n\| T_{xy}\|n \rangle , \end{eqnarray} so that (\ref{eq:inhomBurg1}) can be rewritten as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:inhomBurg2} \partial_{t} E_n(R,t) &=& R \left(\langle n\| T_{yy}\|n \rangle \langle n\| T_{xx}\|n \rangle - \langle n\| T_{xy}\|n \rangle \langle n\| T_{xy}\|n \rangle \right) \nn \\ &=& -\fract{R}{\pi^2} \left( \langle n\| T\|n \rangle \langle n\| \bar{T}\|n \rangle - \langle n\| \Theta\|n \rangle \langle n\| \Theta\|n \rangle \right). \end{eqnarray} In (\ref{eq:inhomBurg2}), we have used the standard conversion between the energy-momentum tensor components in Euclidean and complex coordinates, \begin{eqnarray} T_{xx}=- \fract{1}{2\pi} (\bar{T}+T - 2 \Theta)\,,\,\, T_{yy}= \fract{1}{2\pi} (\bar{T}+T + 2 \Theta)\,,\,\,\ T_{xy}= \fract{i}{2 \pi} (\bar{T} -T) . \end{eqnarray} One of the main results of \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce} is the important identity \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:zam} \langle n\| \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}\|n \rangle = \langle n\| T\|n \rangle \langle n\| \bar{T}\|n \rangle - \langle n\| \Theta\|n \rangle \langle n\| \Theta\|n \rangle, \end{eqnarray} which was established for a generic QFT in 2D and is based on a consistent, general definition, of the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ composite operator: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:TTbar} \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}(z,\bar{z}) := \lim_{(z,\bar{z}) \rightarrow (z',\bar{z}')} T(z,\bar{z})\bar{T}(z',\bar{z}') - \Theta(z,\bar{z}) \Theta(z',\bar{z}') + \text{total derivatives }. \end{eqnarray} Comparing (\ref{eq:zam}) with the rhs of (\ref{eq:inhomBurg2}) leads to the identification: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:pE} \partial_{t} E_n(R,t) = - \fract{R}{\pi^2} \langle n\| \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}\|n \rangle = -\fract{1}{\pi^2} \langle n\| \int_0^R dx \, \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}(z,\bar{z}) \|n \rangle. \end{eqnarray} After multiplying by $L e^{ -L E_n(R,t)}$ and taking the trace, equation (\ref{eq:pE}) can be rewritten as \begin{eqnarray} \partial_{t} \ln Z(R,L,t) =\fract{1}{\pi^2}\langle \int_0^R dx \int_0^L dy \, \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}(z,\bar{z}) \rangle, \end{eqnarray} where $Z(R,L,t)$ is the partition function of the perturbed system on a torus with characteristic lengths $(L,R)$. This suggests that, apart for total derivative terms, the Lagrangian density fulfils a simple local differential equation: \begin{eqnarray} \partial_{t} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t)= -\frac{1}{\pi^2} \, \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}(z, \bar{z},t) . \label{eq:lagrangian} \end{eqnarray} We conclude that \begin{eqnarray} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t) = {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z} ,0) -\frac{t}{\pi^2} \, \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}(z, \bar{ z } ) + \mathcal{O}\left(t^2\right) , \end{eqnarray} generalizing the CFT result of \cite{Caselle:2013dra} to a massive quantum field theory. Equation (\ref{eq:lagrangian}) first appeared in \cite{AZTalk} and is the main motivation for the analysis of the next Section. \section{From the free boson to Nambu-Goto }\label{sec:FreeBoson} \subsection{Single free boson} The aim of this Section is to show how the perturbed action can be computed recursively from equation (\ref{eq:lagrangian}), and to verify that, starting from the free-boson theory, the deformation generates the Nambu-Goto action for a string moving in $3D$ target space written in static gauge. We shall also present a closed formula for the infinite set of conserved currents, leading to local integrals of motion of this integrable theory. Our starting point is the free boson action : \begin{eqnarray} A_{\text{CFT}} = \frac{1}{4} \int dx \, dy \, \left( (\partial_x\phi )^2 + (\partial_y\phi )^2 \right) = \frac{1}{2} \int dz \,d\bar{z} \, \left( \partial_z \phi \, \partial_{\bar{z}} \phi \right) = \int dx \, dy \, \mathcal{L}_{\text{free}}, \end{eqnarray} where $z = x+i y$, $\bar{z}=x-i y$, $\mathcal{L}_{\text{free}} = \partial \phi \, \bar \partial \phi$. For conciseness, let us introduce the rescaled energy-momentum components, $\tau = T/\pi$, $\bar{\tau}=\bar{T}/\pi$, $\theta=\bar \theta= \Theta/\pi$, and the composite operator $\tau \bar{\tau }= \text{T}\bar{\text{T}}/\pi^2 $, so that the differential equation (\ref{eq:lagrangian}) will take the form \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:lagrnew} \partial_{t} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t)= - \tau \bar{\tau }(z, \bar{z},t) . \end{eqnarray} We will use the canonical expression for the energy-momentum tensor in a generic Lagrangian theory with a single boson field, which yields \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Trule} \tau = - \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi $}\partial\phi ,\quad \bar \tau = - \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\bar\partial\phi ,\quad \theta = \frac{1}{2} \,\left( \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\partial\phi + \,\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi$}\bar\partial\phi- 2 \mathcal L \right), \end{eqnarray} so that (\ref{eq:lagrnew}) takes the form of a simple partial differential equation for the Lagrangian density \begin{eqnarray} \partial_{t} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t) = - \left( \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi $}\partial\phi \right)\, \left( \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\bar\partial\phi\right) + \frac{1}{4} \left( \frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\partial\phi + \,\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi$}\bar\partial\phi- 2 \mathcal L \right)^2 ,\label{eq:lagrdiff} \end{eqnarray} where we are taking into account the definition of the composite field $\tau \bar{\tau}$ as \begin{eqnarray} \tau\bar{\tau}(z,\bar{z}) = \tau(z ,\bar{z}) \, \bar{\tau}(z, \bar{z}) -\theta^2(z, \bar{z}). \end{eqnarray} In order to solve (\ref{eq:lagrnew}), we can setup a perturbative expansion in $t$, \begin{equation} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t) = \sum_{j =0}^{\infty} t^j \ell^{(j)} \;, \end{equation} with initial condition $\ell^{(0)} \equiv \ell_{\text{free}}$, so that (\ref{eq:lagrdiff}) translates into \begin{equation} \ell^{(j+1)}=-\frac{1}{j+1}\sum_{k=0}^j \left(\tau ^{(k)}\; \bar \tau^{(j-k)} - \theta^{(k)} \; \theta^{(j-k)} \right) , \label{eq:pertEQfor} \end{equation} with \begin{eqnarray} \tau^{(j)} = - \frac{\partial\ell^{(j)}}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi $}\partial\phi ,\quad \bar \tau^{(j)} = -\frac{\partial \ell^{(j)}}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\bar\partial\phi\;, \quad \theta^{(j)} = \frac{1}{2} \,\left( \frac{\partial \ell^{(j)}}{\partial$\partial \phi $}\partial\phi + \,\frac{\partial\ell^{(j)}}{\partial$\bar\partial \phi$}\bar\partial\phi- 2 \ell^{(j)} \right)\; .\nn \end{eqnarray} The first order is the familiar result for the energy-momentum tensor of the free boson: \begin{eqnarray} \tau^{(0)} = \tau_{\text{free}} = - (\partial \phi )^2 \;\;\;\;\;\; \bar \tau^{(0)} =\bar \tau_{\text{free}} = -(\bar \partial \phi )^2 , \;\;\;\;\; \theta^{(0)} = \theta_{\text{free}} =0 . \end{eqnarray} Going through a few more orders, it is rather simple to find the form of the general solution \begin{equation} \ell^{(j)} = \binom{1/2}{j+1} \; 2^{2j+1} \; $\ell^{(0)}$^{j+1}\; , \end{equation} which can be verified by induction. Resumming the series, we find \begin{eqnarray} {\mathcal{L}}(z, \bar{z},t) = \frac{1}{ 2 t}\left( -1 + \sqrt{ 1 +4 t \, \ell^{(0)} } \right) = -\frac{1}{2 t} + \mathcal{L}_{\text{NG}} \;. \label{eq:def_lagr_oneBos} \end{eqnarray} The Lagrangian density $\mathcal{L}_{\text{NG}} $ appearing above is the Nambu-Goto Lagrangian for a bosonic string in $D=3$ target space: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:genNG} \mathcal{L}_{\text{NG}} \; dx dy=\frac{1}{2 t}\, \sqrt{\text{det}(\sum_{\mu=1}^{D}\partial_{\alpha} X^{\mu} \, \partial_{\beta} X^{\mu} ) } \; dx dy, \end{eqnarray} with $D=3$, in the so-called static gauge: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:staticgauge} X^1 \rightarrow x \;\;\;\; X^2 \rightarrow y , \end{eqnarray} where $x,\, y$ are Euclidean worldsheet coordinates, and where the transverse direction of oscillation $X^3$ is identified with the bosonic field, $ X^3 \rightarrow t^{\frac{1}{2}} \; \phi $. \paragraph{Integrals of motion:} Let us conclude this Section by presenting the explicit form of the higher conserved currents of the model, $\left\{\tau_n, \; \bar \tau_n \right\}_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$, satisfying the conservation equations: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:conservedNG} {\bar \partial } { \tau }_n = {\partial} { \theta }_{n-2} , \;\;\;\;\;\; {\partial } { \bar \tau }_n = { \bar \partial} { \bar \theta }_{n-2} , \end{eqnarray} which imply that the following quantities are local integrals of motion: \begin{eqnarray} I_{n-1} = \oint \left( \tau_n(z, \bar{z} ) \, dz + { \theta }_{n-2}(z, \bar z ) \, d{\bar z} \right) , \;\;\; \bar I_{n-1} = \oint \left( \bar \tau_n(z, \bar{z} ) \, d{\bar z} + {\bar \theta }_{n-2}(z, \bar z ) \, dz \right), \end{eqnarray} where $I_1 + \bar I_1$ corresponds to the Hamiltonian of the theory. We obtained these currents as a deformation of following currents for the free theory at $t=0$: \begin{eqnarray} \tau^{(0)}_n = -({ \partial} \phi )^{n} , \;\;\; \bar \tau^{(0)}_n = -({ \bar \partial} \phi )^{n} . \end{eqnarray} The strategy of the construction is simply to enforce perturbatively at every order in $t$, the compatibility between the conservation equation (\ref{eq:conservedNG}) and the equations of motion descending from the variation of the Lagrangian (\ref{eq:def_lagr_oneBos}), \begin{equation} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (-1)^n \left(\partial^n \fract{\partial {\cal L}}{\partial \partial^n \phi} + \bar{\partial}^n \fract{\partial {\cal L}}{\partial \bar{\partial}^n \phi} \right)=0 , \end{equation} which take the form \begin{equation} \partial \bar \partial \phi= t \fract{ \bar{\partial}^2 \phi (\partial \phi)^2 + \partial^2 \phi ( \bar{\partial} \phi)^2}{ 1 + 2 t \partial \phi \, {\bar \partial} \phi}. \end{equation} Omitting the details of the calculation, the exact form of the currents is the following: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:tautheta} { \tau }_n &=& -\frac{({ \partial} \phi )^{n} }{ \sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal{L}_{\text{free}} } } \, \left( \frac{ 2}{\sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal{L}_{\text{free}} }+1}\right)^{n-2} , \\ { \theta }_{n-2} &=& -t \, \frac{ ({ \partial} \phi )^{n} \,({ \bar \partial} \phi )^{2} }{\sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal{L}_{\text{free}} } } \; \left( \frac{ 2}{\sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal{L}_{\text{free}} }+1}\right)^n , \end{eqnarray} with a similar definition for $\bar \tau_n$ and $\bar \theta_{n-2}$. Notice that ${ \tau }_2= \tau$ and ${ \theta }_0= \theta$, where $\tau$ and $\theta$ are the components of the stress-energy tensor defined above, see (\ref{eq:Trule}). Finally, it is noteworthy that the following rather surprising relation between the trace of the stress-energy tensor and the composite field $\tau \bar{\tau}$ holds at all orders in $t$: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:thetattb} \theta(z,\bar{z})=-t\, \tau\bar{\tau}(z,\bar{z}) , \end{eqnarray} which implies \begin{eqnarray} \tau\bar{\tau}(z,\bar{z}) = \frac{1}{2 t^2} \, \left( \sqrt{1 + 4 t^2 \tau(z, \bar{z}) \, \bar{ \tau}(z, \bar{z}) } -1 \right). \end{eqnarray} \subsection{$N$ free bosons} \label{subsec:Nfree} Let us now consider the $t=0$ model as a theory of $N$ massless free bosons. It is simple to check directly that the Lagrangian: \begin{equation} \mathcal L=-\frac{1}{2t}+ \mathcal L_{\textrm{NG}}^{N+2} , \,\, \mathcal L_{\textrm{NG}}^{N+2} =\frac{1}{2t} \, \sqrt{1 + 4 t\, \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N - 4 t^2 \mathcal{B}_N}\; , \label{eq:Ddimboson_NG} \end{equation} with \begin{equation} \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N = \sum_{i=1}^N \partial\phi_i\bar\partial\phi_i \;,\;\;\;\; \mathcal B_N =\; \sum_{i=1}^N $\partial \phi_i$^2 \, \sum_{j=1}^N $\bar{\partial}\phi_j$^2-$ \sum_{i=1}^N \partial\phi_i\bar\partial\phi_i$^2\;, \end{equation} fulfils the appropriate generalization of (\ref{eq:lagrdiff}) to a system of $N$ bosonic fields. The Lagrangian $\mathcal L_{\textrm{NG}}^{N+2}$ defined above can again be derived from the Nambu-Goto action (\ref{eq:genNG}), now in $D=N+2$ dimensions, imposing the static-gauge condition (\ref{eq:staticgauge}) and identifying the fields as transverse oscillation modes of the string: $X^{j+2} = t^{\frac{1}{2}} \; \phi_j $, $j=1, \dots, N$. One could also recover the same result from a perturbative construction similar to the one presented in the previous section. For completeness, we report the first few terms: setting $\mathcal L= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} t^k \mathcal L^{(k)}$, we have \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{L}^{(0)} &=& \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N \,,\,\, \mathcal L^{(1)} = - $ \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N $^2- \mathcal B_N\,,\,\, \mathcal L^{(2)}= 2$\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N $^3+2\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N \,\mathcal B_N\;, \nn \\ \mathcal L^{(3)} &=&- 5$\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N $^4-6$\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N $^2 \, \mathcal B_N- \mathcal B_N^2\,, \,\,\dots \label{eq:L_expans_NBos3} \eea \paragraph{Integrals of motion:} An infinite set of integrals of motion can also be constructed for the $N>1$ case. The equations of motion in this case generalize to: \begin{equation} \partial \bar \partial \phi_i = t \;\left({ \bar{\partial}^2 \phi_i \; \sum_{j=1}^N (\partial \phi_j )^2 + \partial^2 \phi_i \; \sum_{j=1}^N (\bar{\partial} \phi_j )^2 }\right)/{\left(1 + 2 t \; \sum_{j=1}^N \partial \phi_j {\bar \partial} \phi_j \right)}. \label{EOMN} \end{equation} Using (\ref{EOMN}), we proved that the following currents are conserved: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:tauthetaN} { \tau }_n &=& -\frac{(-\tau_2^{(0)})^{n/2} }{ \sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N - 4 t^2 \; \mathcal{B}_N } } \, \left( \frac{1}{2} + t \;\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N + \sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N - 4 t^2 \; \mathcal{B}_N } \right)^{1-n/2} , \\ { \theta }_{n-2} &=& t \, \frac{ (-\tau_2^{(0)} )^{n/2} \,{ \bar{ \tau}_2^{(0)} } }{\sqrt{1 + 4 t \; \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N - 4 \;t^2 \; \mathcal{B}_N } } \; \left(\frac{1}{2} +t \; \mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N + \sqrt{1 + 4 t \;\mathcal L_{\textrm{free}}^N - 4 t^2 \; \mathcal{B}_N } \right)^{-n/2},\end{eqnarray} with \begin{eqnarray} \tau_2^{(0)} &=& -\sum_{j=1}^N (\partial \phi_j )^2 \,,\,\, \bar{\tau}_2^{(0)} = -\sum_{j=1}^N (\bar \partial \phi_j )^2 . \end{eqnarray} Also in this case, there is a surprisingly simple relation between $\theta$ and $\tau\bar{\tau}$, given by (\ref{eq:thetattb}). \subsection{Single bosonic field with generic potential} \label{subsec:FreeBosonPotential} Finally we would like to consider another generalisation of the free boson, namely a system consisting of one boson interacting with an arbitrary potential $V(\phi)$: \begin{equation} \mathcal L^V = \, \partial\phi\bar\partial\phi + m^2 V[\phi]\;. \end{equation} Much in the same spirit as what we discussed for the free boson, we would like to follow the flow defined by the equation \begin{equation} \partial_{t} \mathcal L_t^V = -\tau \bar \tau\;,\qquad \mathcal L_{t=0}\equiv \mathcal L^{(0)} = \mathcal L^V . \label{eq:diff_eq_again} \end{equation} Note that we are not requiring the potential $V[\phi]$ to give rise to an integrable theory. The only assumption we are making is that $V$ does not depend on the derivatives $\partial\phi$ and $\bar\partial\phi$. For $V[\phi] = \sin(\beta \phi)$, in particular, we recover the sine-Gordon model considered as our primary example in this paper -- however integrability does not play any special role in the following analysis. The first few terms in the perturbative expansion $\mathcal L^V_t = \sum_{j=0}^\infty t^j \ell^{(j)}\;$ are easily computed similarly to the previous sections: \begin{align} \ell^{(1)} &= -\mathcal F^2 + \mathcal V^2 \;,\qquad \ell^{(2)} = 2\mathcal F^3+\mathcal F^2\mathcal V + \mathcal V^3\;,\qquad \ell^{(3)} = -5\mathcal F^4 - 4\mathcal F^3\mathcal V + \mathcal V^4\;,\nonumber\\ \\ \ell^{(4)} &= 14\mathcal F^5+15\mathcal F^4\mathcal V + 2\mathcal F^3\mathcal V^2+\mathcal V^5\;,\nonumber \end{align} where \begin{equation} \mathcal F = \partial\phi \bar\partial\phi\ \;,\qquad \mathcal V = m^2 V[\phi]\;. \end{equation} The general form of $\mathcal L^{(j)}$ is that of a polynomial in $\mathcal F$ and $\mathcal V$, whose coefficients are some combinatorial numbers. Although it is not immediately clear, it is easy to verify that the following closed form is valid: \begin{eqnarray} \ell^{(j)}&=& \mathcal{V}^{j+1} + (-1)^j \, \sum_{k=0}^{\lfloor \frac{j+1}{2} \rfloor } \frac{4^{j-k}}{\sqrt{\pi}} \frac{\Gamma$j-k+\frac{1}{2}$}{ ( {j-k+1} )\Gamma$j-2k+1$}\,\frac{\mathcal F^{j-k+1}\mathcal V^k}{k!}\; \\ &=&\mathcal V^{j+1}+\frac{(-4)^j}{\sqrt{\pi}}\frac{\Gamma$j+\frac{1}{2}$}{\Gamma$j+2$} \;\mathcal F^{j+1}\; {}_3F_2$\left.\begin{array}{c c c c c} -1-j&,&\frac{1-j}{2}&,&-\frac{j}{2}\\ &\frac{1}{2}-j&,&-j \end{array}\,\right\vert-\frac{\mathcal V}{\mathcal F}$\;.\nonumber \end{eqnarray} The final expression for the $t \neq 0$ Lagrangian is \begin{align} \mathcal L_t^V &= \frac{m^2V[\phi]}{1 - t m^2 V[\phi]}+\frac {1}{\sqrt{\pi}}\sum_{j=0}^\infty$-4t$^j \frac{\Gamma$j+\frac{1}{2}$}{\Gamma$j+2$} \, $\,\partial\phi\bar\partial\phi$^{j+1} \nonumber \\ & \;\;\times \,{}_3F_2$\left.\begin{array}{c c c c c} -1-j&,&\frac{1-j}{2}&,&-\frac{j}{2}\\ &\frac{1}{2}-j&,&-j \end{array}\,\right\vert-m^2\frac{V\[\phi\]}{\partial\phi\bar\partial\phi}$\; ,\label{eq:VLagrangian} \end{align} which we did not manage to simplify further. This expression reduces to the Nambu-Goto result (\ref{eq:def_lagr_oneBos}) in the limit $m\rightarrow0$, as can be checked using the fact that ${}_3F_2\rightarrow 1$ when its argument vanishes. Finally, we remark that the CDD factor deformation of a free massive boson theory was considered in \cite{Dubovsky:2013ira}, where the first two orders of the perturbed action were constructed by a direct diagrammatic analysis, in perfect agreement with (\ref{eq:VLagrangian}), which generalizes this result to all orders and to a generic potential. \section{Exact cylinder partition function}\label{subsec:PartFunc} In this Section we consider the $t$-deformation of rational CFTs and show how to compute the modified cylinder partition function. This can be achieved, at least in principle, using exact formulas for the perturbed Affleck and Ludwig ``ground-state degeneracy'' (commonly known as g-function) \cite{Affleck:1991tk, LeClair:1995uf, Dorey:1999cj, Dorey:2004xk, Dorey:2009vg, Pozsgay:2010tv}. In the following, this method is applied to the theory of a free massless Majorana fermion: the Ising model CFT with conformal boundary conditions. The final analytic expression for the excited state g-functions is very simple, suggesting that the form of the result might be model independent. To support this conjecture, we will not work in the framework of the exact g-function formula extracted from \cite{Dorey:2009vg}, which would need to be generalized on a case-by-case basis. Instead, we shall adapt an alternative method originally devised by L\"uscher and Weisz \cite{Luscher:2004ib} for free massless bosons in the effective string theory context. This more general and powerful approach is implemented in Section \ref{sec:dualityOC}, leading to a confirmation of the Ising model result, which appears to be valid for a generic CFT. The construction also provides a compact integral expression for the cylinder partition function in terms of the CFT data. Let us start by setting the stage. The cylinder partition function of the theory, with boundary conditions $(\alpha, \beta)$ applied at the bottom and top of a cylinder of length $L$ and circumference $R$, can be written in two equivalent representations: \begin{align} \mathcal{Z}_{(\alpha,\beta)}(L,R) &= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}e^{-R E^{(\alpha, \beta)}_{n}(L)} , &\text{(open channel)} \label{eq:open},\\ &= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} g^{(\alpha)}_n(R) \, g^{(\beta)}_n(R) e^{-L E_n(R)}, &\text{(closed channel)} \label{eq:closed}. \end{align} The excited state g-function $g^{(\alpha)}_n(R)$ is defined by: \begin{equation} g^{(\alpha)}_n(R) = \langle \alpha\|n \rangle , \end{equation} where $\|n \rangle$ are the, properly normalized, energy eigenvectors of the Hamiltonian defined on a ring with circumference $R$. For the $t$-deformed theory, the closed channel energies are given by (\ref{eq:NGEP}), while the energies in the open channel take the generic form \cite{Caselle:2013dra}: \begin{eqnarray} E_n^{(\alpha, \beta)}(R, t ; c_{\text{eff}} ) = - \frac{R}{2 t} + \sqrt{ \frac{R^2}{4 t^2} +\frac{\pi}{t} \, \left( n-\frac{c_{\text{eff}}}{24} \right) }, \end{eqnarray} where $c_{\text{eff}}$ depends on the conformal family of the state and the choice of boundary conditions translates into selection rules for the propagating states. In the following we will determine the form of the sub-leading coefficients $g_n^{(\alpha)}(R)$. \subsection{The Ising model CFT perturbed by $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$} \label{subsec:g} We shall consider the theory of free massless Majorana fermions. Denoting with $p$ the momentum of the right mover and with $−q$ the momentum of the left mover, the two-body scattering amplitudes are \begin{equation} S_{\pm \pm }(p,q)= -1,\,\, S_{+-}(p,q)=S_{-+}(p,q)=S(p,q) = e^{-i 2 t p_+ p_-}= e^{i 2 t p q}, \end{equation} where $p=p_+$ and $q=-p_-$ are the energies of right and left-moving pseudoparticles, respectively. The fundamental boundary reflection factor is \cite{Caselle:2013dra} \begin{equation} \mathcal{R}_0(p) = e^{i t p^2}, \end{equation} while the general boundary-perturbing reflection factor has the form \begin{equation} \mathcal{R}_{\vec{\delta}}(p) = \mathcal{R}_0(p) \prod_{j=1}^{\infty} \left( \mathcal{R}_{\delta_j}^{2j-1}(p) \right)\,,\,\,\,\, \mathcal{R}_{\delta_j}^{2j-1}(p) = e^{(ip)^{2j-1}\delta_j}. \label{RFfull} \end{equation} Each factor in the product appearing in the rhs of (\ref{RFfull}) corresponds to a specific perturbation of the CFT boundary with a descendant of the identity operator, with coupling $\delta_j$. Let us first consider the ground state g-function. Following \cite{Dorey:2009vg}, this quantity can be computed as: \begin{equation} \ln \left(g^{(\alpha)}_0(R,t) \right)= \ln \langle \alpha\|0 \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} + \ln\left( {g_{0,\Sigma}}(R,t)\right) + \ln \left({g_0}(R,t)\right) + \ln\left({g_{\vec{\delta}}}(R,t)\right) , \,\, \end{equation} with $\alpha$ denoting one of the conformal boundary conditions $\alpha=(+),(-),(f)$ \cite{Dorey:2009vg}. The four terms contributing to $g^{(\alpha)}_0(R,t)$ are in general: \begin{equation} \ln \langle (+)\|0 \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}}=\ln \langle (-)\|0 \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}}= -\ln \sqrt{2}, \,\,\,\ \ln \langle (f)\|0 \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}}=0, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \ln ({g_{0,\Sigma}}(R,t)) = \sum_{j = 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2j - 1} \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp_1}{2\pi}...\int_{\gamma_0}\frac{dp_{2j - 1}}{2\pi}\frac{\varphi(p_1,p_2)}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p_1)}}...\frac{\varphi(p_{2j - 1},p_1)}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p_{2j - 1})}}, \end{equation} \begin{equation}\label{gibi} \ln({g_0}(R,t)) = \int_{\gamma_0}(\varphi_0(p) - \varphi(p,p)) {\cal L}(p)\frac{dp}{2\pi}, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \ln({g_{\delta}}(R,t)) = \sum_j \ln{g_{\delta_j}}(R,t) = \sum_j \int_{\gamma_0} \varphi_{\delta _j}(p) {\cal L}(p) \frac {dp}{2\pi}, \end{equation} where the integration contour is $\gamma_0 = {\mathbb{R}}^+$ \bea\label{eq:kernels} \varphi(p,q) &=& -i \partial_q \ln{S(p,q)}=2 t p\,, \,\,\,\varphi_0(p) = -i \partial_p \ln{\mathcal{R}_0(p)}=2 t p , \\ \varphi_{\delta_j}(p) &=& -i \partial_p \ln{\mathcal{R}_{\delta_j}^{(2j - 1)}(p)} =(-1)^{j-1} (2j-1)\delta_jp^{2j-2}, \eea ${\cal L}(p) = \ln{(1 + e^{-\epsilon(p)})}$ and the pseudoenergy $\epsilon(p)$ solves the (periodic) TBA equation. From (\ref{eq:kernels}), we see that $\ln \left(g_0(R,t) \right) = 0$, and \begin{align}\label{sigma} \begin{split} \ln\left({g_{0,\Sigma}}(R,t) \right)&= \sum_{j = 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2j-1} \int_{\gamma_0}\frac{dp_1}{\pi} \frac{t \, p_1}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p_1)}} ... \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp_{2j-1}}{\pi} \frac{ t \, p_{2j-1}}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p_{2j-1})}}\\ &= \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{2j-1} \left( \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp}{\pi} \frac{t \, p}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p)}} \right)^{2j-1} = \ln \sqrt{{\frac{1 + A_0}{1 - A_0}}}, \end{split} \end{align} where \begin{equation} A_0 = \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp}{\pi} \frac{t \, p}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p)}}. \end{equation} To find $A_0$, we recall that the relevant TBA equation is: \begin{equation} \epsilon(p) = R p + p t \, E_0(R,t) \quad \Rightarrow \quad \partial_p \epsilon(p) = R + t \, E_0(R,t), \end{equation} \begin{equation} E_0(R, t) = - \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp}{\pi} {\cal L}(p) = - \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{dp}{2\pi} \frac{2p}{1 + e^{\epsilon(p)}} \partial_p \epsilon(p). \end{equation} Therefore, \begin{equation}\label{eq:A0} E_0(R,t) = - \left(R + t E_0(R,t) \right)A_0/t \quad \Rightarrow \quad A_0 = -\frac{t \, E_0(R,t)}{R+ t \, E_0(R,t)}. \end{equation} Considering that the boundary conditions impose that only zero-momentum states contribute to $\mathcal{Z}_{(\alpha, \beta)}(L, R)$, the generalization to excited states is obtained by replacing $\gamma_0 = {\mathbb{R}}^+$ with a contour $\gamma_n$ encircling zeros of $(1+e^{\varepsilon(p)} )$ \cite{DoreyPerturbedCFT}. This means that $E_0 \rightarrow E_n$ in (\ref{eq:A0}). Going back to (\ref{sigma}), the final result for the case $\vec{\delta}=0$ is \begin{equation} g_n^{(\alpha)}(R, t) = \langle \alpha\|n \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \, \sqrt{\frac{ R}{ R +2 t \, E_n(R,t)}}. \label{eq:finalg} \end{equation} Equation (\ref{eq:finalg}) is the above mentioned simple formula for the deformed g-function. In the following section we shall prove that it remains valid for more general CFTs. One interesting aspect of the formula is that the ``ground state degeneracy'' $g_0$ diverges precisely at the critical value of the radius $R_c$ already discussed in Section \ref{sec:Hagedorn}. This is a further manifestation of the Hagedorn (tachyon) transition in the model. Concerning the boundary corrections $(\ln{g_{\delta_i}})$, we find that the case $j=1$ is special: \begin{equation} \ln({g_{n,\delta_1}(R,t)}) = \delta_1 \int_{\gamma_n} \frac{dp}{2\pi}\,{\cal L}(p) = - \delta_1 \frac{E_n(R,t)}{2}, \end{equation} as it amounts to a shift $L \rightarrow L+\delta_1$ (see also \cite{Caselle:2013dra}): \begin{equation} \mathcal{Z}_{(\alpha,\beta)}(L,R,\delta_1) = \mathcal{Z}_{(\alpha,\beta)}(L+\delta_1,R, 0) . \end{equation} The associated boundary correction to the action $ {\cal A}$ is: \begin{equation} \delta {\cal A}_{\delta_1} = \fract{\delta_1}{2} \int_0^R dx \left( T_{yy}(x,0) + T_{yy}(x,L) \right). \end{equation} For general values of $j$, we have \bea \ln\left({g_{\delta_j}}(R,t)\right) &=& (-1)^{j-1}\delta_j(2j-1)\int_{\gamma_n}\frac{dp}{2\pi} p^{2j-2} \ln{\left(1 + e^{-(R + t \,E_n(R,t) )p}\right)} \nn \\ &=& (2j-1)(-1)^{j-1}\delta_j\left( R + t \, E_n(R,t) \right)^{1-2j}\int_{\gamma_n}\frac{dz}{2\pi}z^{2j-2}\ln{(1 + e^{-z})} \nn \\ &=& \frac{(-1)^{j}}{2 \pi} \, \delta_j\left( R + t \, E_n(R,t) \right)^{1-2j} \, \Gamma(2j-1) \, {\text{Li}}^{(\gamma_n)}_{2j}(-1) . \label{poly} \eea In (\ref{poly}) a continuous branch of the polylogarithm, denoted as ${\text{Li}}^{(\gamma)}_{m}(z)$, is involved. \subsection{Cylinder partition function for more general perturbed CFT}\label{sec:dualityOC} To treat a more general case, let us recall that, on a cylinder geometry, the set of Virasoro characters $\chi_i$ (corresponding to a conformal module labelled by $i$) of a rational CFT fulfil the following duality property (see, \cite{DiFrancesco:1997nk}): \bea \chi_i(q) &=& q^{-c/24} \text{Tr}_{i} \left(q^{L_0} \right)\,,\, \,\, q=e^{-2 \pi R/(2 L)}\, , \nn\\\ \chi_i(q) &=& \sum_j S_{ij}\, \chi_j(\tilde{q})\,, \,\,\, \tilde{q}=e^{-4 \pi L/R} . \eea This equation is directly related to the equivalence of the open/closed channel descriptions (\ref{eq:open}),(\ref{eq:closed}) of the CFT partition function: \begin{align} \begin{split} \mathcal{Z}^{\text{\tiny CFT}}_{\alpha \beta}(L,R) &= \text{Tr}(e^{-R \hat{H}_{(\alpha \beta)}(L)})= \sum_{i} n^i_{\alpha \beta} \chi_i(q) = \sum_j \langle \alpha\|j \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \langle j\|\beta \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \chi_j(\tilde q) = \langle \alpha\|e^{-L \hat{H}(R)} \|\beta \rangle. \label{Z1} \end{split} \end{align} Adapting an idea by L\"uscher and Weisz \cite{Luscher:2004ib}, we can recover the $t$-deformed partition function as: \bea \mathcal{Z}_{\alpha\beta}(L,R) &=& \text{Tr}(e^{-R \hat{H}_{(\alpha \beta)}(L,t)}) \nn \\ &=& e^{-\frac{L R}{2 t} } \, \sum_{i} n^i_{\alpha\beta} \int_0^{\infty} \fract{dv}{\sqrt{4 \pi} v^{3/2}} e^{-\left(\fract{1}{4 v} + (\frac{L R}{2 t} )^2 v\right)} \chi_i(e^{-\frac{\pi R^2 v }{t} }) \nn \\ &=& e^{-\frac{L R}{2 t}} \, \sum_{j} \langle \alpha\| j \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \langle j \|\beta \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \int_0^{\infty} \fract{dv}{\sqrt{4 \pi} v^{3/2}} e^{- \left(\fract{1}{4 v} + (\frac{L R}{2 t})^2 v \right)} \chi_j(e^{-4 t \pi/( R^2 v)}) \nn \\ &=& \sum_{j,n} \langle \alpha\|j \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \langle j\|\beta \rangle^{\text{\tiny CFT}} \frac{R}{ R +2 t \, E_{(j,n)}(R,t)} e^{-L E_{(j,n)}(R,t)}\nn \\ &=& \langle \alpha\|e^{-L \hat{H}(R,t)} \|\beta \rangle . \label{Z11} \eea Therefore, \begin{equation} g_{\alpha,(j,n)}(R,t)= \langle \alpha\| j \rangle^{\text{CFT}} \, \sqrt{\frac{ R }{ R + 2 t \, E_{(j,n)}(R,t)}}. \label{general} \end{equation} Equation (\ref{general}) generalises the Ising model result (\ref{eq:finalg}) to arbitrary CFTs, correspondingly equations (\ref{Z11}) provides a nice and compact integral representation for the perturbed partition function on a cylinder geometry. \section{Deformation of one-point correlation functions} The simple deformation rule (\ref{eq:invBurg}) for the energy spectrum leads to similarly simple changes of other physical quantities, such as one-point correlation functions on a cylinder. In the following we shall implicitly assume that the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ perturbation deforms the spectrum of a generic 2D quantum field theory as \begin{equation} E_n(R,t)=E_n(R+ t \, E_n(R,t),0)\,, \label{eq:mapping1} \end{equation} independently from the integrability property of the original model. Consider a set $\{ \varphi_{i} \}$ of scalar fields and the corresponding perturbed action on a cylinder: \begin{equation} {\cal A}_{(\vec{ \bf g } , 0)} = \int_{cyl} \, dx dy \, {\cal L}_{(\vec{ \bf g } , 0)} \, = \int_{cyl} \, dx dy \left( {\cal L}_{\text{CFT}} + \sum_i \, g_i \varphi_i (x,y) \right). \label{eq:PAction} \end{equation} One-point expectation values on this geometry can be obtained by differentiating the partition function $\mathcal{Z}(L, R, \vec{ \bf g } )$ as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:onepoint} \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle_{R} = -\lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{L R} \partial_{g_i}\ln \mathcal{Z}(L, R, \vec{ \bf g } ) = \frac{1}{R} \partial_{g_i} E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } ),\,\,\, \end{eqnarray} where $E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } )$ is the ground state energy on the ring with circumference $R$. Without loss of generality, we can choose a normalization of the spectrum consistent with the TBA/NLIE framework, such that $E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } )$ vanishes in the $R \rightarrow \infty$ limit. One-point expectation values on the plane are then encoded into the (anti) bulk coefficient ${\cal E}^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } )$ in $E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } )$ \cite{ZamolodchikovTBA}: \begin{eqnarray} E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } )= E_0^{(\text{pert})}(R,\vec{ \bf g } )- {\cal E}^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } ,0) \,R , \end{eqnarray} where, at least in principle, the regular part $E_0^{(\text{pert})}(R,\vec{ \bf g } )$ can be obtained using CFT perturbation theory. Therefore \begin{eqnarray} \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle_{R} = \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle_{R}^{(\text{pert})} - \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle^{(\text{plane})}\,, \, \,\, \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle^{(\text{plane})} = \partial_{g_i} {\cal E}^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } ,0)\,. \end{eqnarray} For integrable QFTs, a standard technique allows to identify ${\cal E}^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } ,0)$ by studying the $R \sim 0$ behaviour of TBA/NLIE equations \cite{ZamolodchikovTBA, KlassenMelzer}. For the current discussion, it is not necessary to set the couplings $\left\{g_i\right\}$ in (\ref{eq:onepoint}) to zero, so that the argument is valid also outside the (trivial) CFT limit, where all one-point functions would be zero on the cylinder. According to our assumptions, the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ deformation affects the ground state energy according to (\ref{eq:mapping1}), and correspondingly one-point functions such as the ones defined in (\ref{eq:onepoint}) are modified as \begin{eqnarray} \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle_{R} \rightarrow \langle \varphi_i^{(t)}(0,0) \rangle_{R, t} &=& \frac{1}{R} \, \frac{1}{(1 - \left. t \, \partial_{R} E_0(R , \vec{ \bf g } ) \right\|_{R=\widetilde{R}}) } \left. \partial_{g_i} E_0(R, \vec{ \bf g } )\right\|_{R=\widetilde{R}} \, \nn \\ &=& \frac{\widetilde{R}}{R} \frac{ \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle_{ \widetilde{R}, t=0} }{(1- \left. t \, \partial_{R} E_0(R ,\vec{ \bf g } ) \right\|_{R=\widetilde{R}}) }, \label{eq:def1p} \end{eqnarray} where $\varphi_i^{(t)}(x,y) $ is a redefined field, \begin{eqnarray} \varphi_i^{(t)}(x,y) = \partial_{g_i} {\cal L}_{(\vec{ \bf g } ,t)}(x,y) , \end{eqnarray} and $\widetilde{R} = R + t \, E_0(\widetilde{R},\vec{ \bf g } )$. Notice that in (\ref{eq:def1p}) the denominator vanishes precisely at the critical points discussed in Section \ref{sec:Hagedorn}. Apart from the universal factor in the denominator, the expectation values of the deformed fields $\varphi_i^{(t)}$ are simply connected by a change $R \rightarrow \tilde R$ to the undeformed ones in the $t=0$ theory. This replacement governs both the spectrum and one-point functions, and it is tempting to imagine that general correlation functions could also be obtainable by an equally simple rule. However, even for the deformed free boson case, there are many points in the previous derivation which cannot be straightforwardly adapted to the calculation of multi-point correlators. Finally, identifying the $\mathcal{O}(R)$ bulk coefficient $\Epsilon^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } , t) $ from the small-$R$ behaviour of the ground state energy\footnote{An alternative way to obtain the same result is to note that, as shown in detail in \cite{FedorSasha}, the energy with bulk included $E_0^{(\text{pert})}(R, \vec{ \bf g } )$ satisfies the same Burgers equation but for a simple change of variables. Notice that in the scheme used in \cite{FedorSasha} the mass scale depends on the deformation parameter, while throughout this paper we are keeping it fixed at its undeformed value.}, we also find: \begin{eqnarray} \langle \varphi_i^{(t)}(0,0) \rangle^{(\text{plane})}_t = \frac{ \langle \varphi_i(0,0) \rangle^{(\text{plane})}_{t=0} }{( 1 + t \, {\cal E}^{(\text{bulk})}(\vec{ \bf g } , 0) )^2 }. \end{eqnarray} The deformation of the fields, $\varphi_i \rightarrow \varphi_i^{(t)}$, appearing in (\ref{eq:def1p}) is a consequence of the nonlinearity of the definition of the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ operator, which generates, through (\ref{eq:lagrangian}), a nontrivial $\vec{ \bf g } $-dependence in the Lagrangian ${\cal L}_{(\vec{ \bf g } ,t)}$. It is interesting to look at the explicit expression for the deformed fields $\varphi_i^{(t)}$ for the models discussed in Section \ref{sec:FreeBoson}. $\bullet$ \emph{Free massless bosons: } \noindent Let us start by considering the Lagrangian \begin{eqnarray} {\cal L}_{(g, 0)} = \partial \phi \, \bar \partial \phi + g \, \varphi, \end{eqnarray} where $\varphi = f(\phi)$ is a generic field. We will apply the ideas of the previous section, setting $g \rightarrow 0$ at the end of the calculation to study the case of the pure $t$-deformation of a free massless boson. Therefore, we will compute $\left. \varphi^{(t)} = \partial_{g} {\cal L}_{(g,t)} \right\|_{g=0}$. The deformed action ${\cal L}_{(g,t)} $ can be simply obtained from (\ref{eq:VLagrangian}) with the replacement $m^2 V(\phi) \rightarrow g \, \varphi$. We find \begin{eqnarray} \partial_{g}\mathcal{L}_{(g, t)}\Big\vert_{g=0} & = & \varphi +\frac{\varphi}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}(-4t)^{j}\frac{\Gamma\left(j+\frac{1}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(j+2\right)}\left(\partial\phi\bar{\partial}\phi\right)^{j}\frac{j^{2}-1}{2j-1}\\ & = & \varphi-\frac{\varphi}{2}\left(1-\frac{1+2t\partial\phi\bar{\partial}\phi}{\sqrt{1+4t\partial\phi\bar{\partial}\phi}}\right). \end{eqnarray} Comparing with (\ref{eq:tautheta}), the result above can be rewritten as \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:NGtheta} \partial_{g}\mathcal{L}_{(g, t)}\Big\vert_{g=0} = \varphi^{(t)} = \varphi \,[1 -t\,\theta ] , \end{eqnarray} where the trace of the stress-energy tensor $\theta=\theta_0$ is defined in (\ref{eq:tautheta}). While the formulae are more intricate, we checked that the final result (\ref{eq:NGtheta}) holds for the case of an arbitrary number of free bosons, with $\theta=\theta_0$ defined in (\ref{eq:tauthetaN}). $\bullet$ \emph{Single interacting boson: } \noindent In this case, the starting point is the Lagrangian for a single bosonic field with a generic potential: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Lagrg} {\cal L}_{(g, m, 0)} = \partial \phi \, \bar \partial \phi + m^2 \, V(\phi) + g \, \varphi , \end{eqnarray} Setting ${\cal V} = m^2 V(\phi)$, in this case we find \begin{eqnarray} \varphi^{(t)} &=& \partial_{g}\mathcal{L}_{(g,m, t)}\Big\vert_{g=0} = \frac{\varphi}{\left(t {\cal V} -1\right)^{2}}\\ &+&\frac{\varphi}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}(-4t)^{j}\frac{\Gamma\left(j+\frac{1}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(j+2\right)}\left(\partial\phi\bar{\partial}\phi\right)^{j}\frac{j^{2}-1}{2j-1}\;_{3}F_{2}\left(\left.\begin{array}{ccccc} -j & , & \frac{3-j}{2} & , & 1-\frac{j}{2}\\ & \frac{3}{2}-j & , & 1-j \end{array}\right\|-\frac{{\cal V} }{\partial\phi\bar{\partial}\phi}\right)\;.\label{eq:caseV} \end{eqnarray} By a term by term inspection we found that the result can be rewritten in a very simple form: \begin{eqnarray} \varphi^{(t)} =\varphi \, \left[1-2t\theta-t^{2}\left(\tau\bar{\tau}\right)\right]\;, \end{eqnarray} where the trace of the stress-energy tensor $\theta$ and the composite field $\tau \bar \tau $ are defined in the standard way in terms of the Lagrangian (\ref{eq:Lagrg}). Expression (\ref{eq:caseV}) reduces to the previous result (\ref{eq:NGtheta}) when ${\cal V}=0$, thanks to equation (\ref{eq:thetattb}). \section{Conclusions}\label{Sec:Conc} The study of 2D quantum field theories perturbed by irrelevant operators is still a largely unexplored research topic. These perturbations may lead to singular RG flows where the UV fixed point is not well-defined. An important arena where such flows appear prominently is the study of effective string theories, such as the ones used to describe confining flux tubes in non-Abelian gauge theories. Recently, some of the powerful tools associated to integrable models have made an appearance in this context, suggesting that exact results can be obtained for some of these irrelevant deformations. In this paper we investigated some general exact properties of a class of such flows related to the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ composite operator. Among the infinite number of possible perturbations of a given QFT, the latter operator displays very special and universal features. From the point of view of a Lagrangian description, this deformation is formally defined through (\ref{eq:lagrangian}),(\ref{eq:TTbar}). These equations were deduced using integrable models tools, such as the TBA and the NLIE, together with Zamolodchikov's formula in \cite{Zamolodchikov:2004ce}, but can be considered as a definition of a special way of deforming an arbitrary QFT, irrespective of integrability. Moreover, under such a deformation, the energy levels evolve according to the simple hydrodynamic equation (\ref{eq:inhomBurg}), where the deformation parameter $t$ enters as a formal time variable. This, in turn, allows to reconstruct the perturbed spectrum from the unperturbed energy levels through the simple non-linear mapping (\ref{eq:inSol}). For zero momentum states, in particular, (\ref{eq:inSol}) reduces to \begin{equation} E_n(R,t)=E_n(R+ t \, E_n(R,t),0)\,. \label{mapping} \end{equation} Therefore, while the study of generic irrelevant perturbations in QFT by means of perturbative and non-perturbative methods remains very problematic, thanks to the exact mapping (\ref{eq:inSol}), (\ref{mapping}), this perturbation appears to be surprisingly easy to treat. This fact may open the way to the study of conformal field theories perturbed by $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$ plus arbitrary, non necessarily integrable, combinations of relevant operators using the standard Truncated Conformal Space Approach (TCSA) \cite{Yurov:1989yu} method or its RG-improved variant \cite{Giokas:2011ix}. We feel that research on this topic may clarify important aspects concerning the appearance of singularities in effective QFT, and hopefully be useful in the effective string framework. It is well known that the flux tube spectrum is very well approximated, at relative large inter-quark separation, by the formula (\ref{eq:NGEP}) or by its open-string analogous, but deviations are observed at intermediate length scales (see, for example \cite{Brandt:2016xsp} for a nice up-to-date compact review). Particularly interesting is the idea that also massive excitations could propagate on the flux-tube. It would be wonderful if TCSA could help to find a precise perturbed CFT interpretation of the pseudoscalar particle whose presence on the 4D QCD flux tube was recently conjectured on the basis of numerical data and TBA-inspired computations \cite{Dubovsky:2013gi}, or the massive mode discovered through Monte Carlo simulations in the 3D $U(1)$ gauge-theory \cite{Caselle:2014eka}. It is important to stress that (\ref{eq:NGEP}) was originally found by a light-cone-gauge quantization of the string, and that there is no known way to obtain this spectrum from a direct quantization of the static gauge action in a generic target space dimension $D \geq 3$. Furthermore, the light-cone spectrum is known to be incompatible with Lorentz invariance in the D-dimensional target space, except for the cases $D=3$ and $D=26$. In particular, a universal deviation from the spectrum (\ref{eq:NGEP}) is observed at order $\mathcal{O}(1/R^5)$ (for the excited states), when the string is quantized preserving target-space Lorentz invariance \cite{Aharony:2010db} (see also \cite{Aharony:2013ipa},\cite{dubovsky2012effective},\cite{Brandt:2016xsp} for reviews). For this reason, we find remarkable that within the current setup, a direct correspondence between the spectrum (\ref{eq:NGEP}) and the Nambu-Goto action written in static gauge is established in an arbitrary dimension\footnote{A related but not totally equivalent result shows that, in $D=3$ and $D=26$, the CDD factor (\ref{eq:genCDD}) corresponds to the correct Lorentz-invariant quantization of the Nambu-Goto action \cite{Dubovsky:2015zey}. Further, the latter analysis shows that, without the inclusion of extra worldsheet degrees of freedom, integrability is incompatible with target space Lorentz symmetry in $D \neq 3$, $26$. }. A possible explanation is suggested by the fact that perturbative calculations in \cite{Aharony:2013ipa} using the static-gauge action with a continuum, strictly two-dimensional regularization scheme show that the light-cone spectrum is reproduced at least up to -- and including -- order $\mathcal{O}(1/R^5)$. The approach taken in this paper is indeed strictly two-dimensional, suggesting that, within the same class of schemes, the result is valid at all orders\footnote{We thank Marco Meineri for suggesting this interpretation. }. Coming back to the problem of target space Lorentz invariance, from the point of view of the current setup one may try to enforce this symmetry by adding further irrelevant operators, associated to corrections of the S-matrix, on top of the $\text{T}\bar{\text{T}}$-related ones considered in this paper. The form of the extra phase shift proposed in \cite{dubovsky2015flux} for the $D=4$ case seems to suggest that the first additional perturbing operator is related to odd-spin symmetry generators, perhaps associated to some extended symmetry such as the $W_3$- algebra of the three states Potts model \cite{Zamolodchikov:1987zf}. Despite obvious complications, it would be nice to study this issue and understand if the current approach can at least partially be modified to better approximate Lorentz-invariant effective string models. %
\section{Introduction} Spectral clustering \cite{nips01,nips04}, which aims at exploring the local nonlinear manifold (spectral graph) structure inherently embedded in high-dimensional data to partition data into disjoint meaningful groups, is a fundamental clustering problem. Because of its elegance, efficiency and good performance, spectral clustering has become one of the most popular clustering methods. Recently, great attention have shifted from conventional single view/graph to multi-view spectral clustering, with the motivation of leveraging the complementary information from multi-view data sources where the same data set can be decomposed by different features \emph{e.g.,\ } an image can be described by its color histogram or shape feature; one document can be represented by page link or document text. As explicitly claimed by numerous pieces of multi-view research \cite{TaoPAMIA,MVL13,WangTNN2015,YangMM14}, an individual view is unlikely to be sufficiently faithful for effective multi-view learning. Therefore, the integration of multi-view information is both valuable and necessary. \subsection{Motivation} Essentially, the critical issue of multi-view learning is to achieve the agreement/consensus \cite{TaoTIP14,WangTIP2015,YangPAKDD14,YangKAIS16} among all views given the complementary information from multi-views to yield a substantial superior performance in clustering over the single view paradigm. Numerous multi-view based methods are proposed for spectral clustering. \cite{CVPR12,M-V-C} performs multi-view information incorporation into the clustering process by optimizing certain objective loss function. \emph{Late fusion} strategy \cite{ecmlpkdd09} designed for multi-view spectral clustering works by first deriving the spectral clustering performance regarding each view, and then combining multiple view-induced results into an optimal one. Such strategy, however, cannot ideally achieve the multi-view agreement, as each view cannot co-regularize with each other during the clustering process. Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) based methods \cite{CSC,ICML09} for multi-view spectral clustering are developed by projecting the multi-view data sources into one common lower dimensional subspace, where the spectral clustering is subsequently conducted. One limitation of such method lies in the fact that one common lower-dimensional subspace cannot flexibly characterize the local spectral graph structures from heterogeneous views, resulting into an inferior multi-view spectral clustering. Kumar \textit{et al.\ } \cite{NIPS11} proposed a state-of-the-art co-regularized spectral clustering for multi-view data. They attempted to regularize the eigenvectors of view-dependent graph laplacians and achieve consensus clusters across views. Similarly, a co-training \cite{COLT98,ICML10} framework is proposed for multi-view spectral clustering \cite{icml11}, where the similarity matrix from one view is projected into the subspaces spanned by the eigenvectors from other views, then spectral clustering is conducted on such projected similarity matrix. This process is alternately performed until convergence, and the final result is formed by aggregating the clustering results from each individual view. The above co-regularized \cite{NIPS11} and co-training \cite{icml11} based methods can effectively achieve the clustering consensus under the scenario with noise corruption free in view-dependent feature representations. However, such assumption is hard to be satisfied in practice. To address such stand-out limitation, Low-Rank Representation (LRR) \cite{RMVSC,LRRICML2010,ICCV2011,LiuPAMI13} based approaches have been proposed for multi-view spectral clustering. The basic idea is to decompose data representation from any view into a view-dependent noise corruption term and a common low rank based representation shared by all views, which further leads to common data affinity matrix for clustering. The typical LRR \cite{RMVSC,LRRICML2010} model is formulated below. \begin{equation}\label{eq:intro} \begin{aligned} & \min_{Z, E_i} \|\|Z\|\|_{} + \lambda\sum_{i \in V}\|\|E_i\|\|_1\\ & \textmd{s.t.} ~~~~~ X_i = X_iZ(or~~Z~~only) + E_i, i = 1,\ldots,V, \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $V$ denotes the number of all views; $X_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d_i \times n}$ denotes the data feature representation for the $i^{th}$ view, $n$ is the number of data objects for each view; $d_i$ is the feature representation dimensions for the $i^{th}$ view. $Z \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ represents the self-expressive linear sample correlations \cite{LRRICML2010} shared by all views with the assumption that the similar samples can be linearly reconstructed by each other. $E_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d_i \times n}$ models the possible noise corruptions in the feature representations for the $i^{th}$ view. $\|\|E_i\|\|_1$ is the $\ell_1$ norm of $E_i$ representing the summation of the absolute value of all entries from $E_i$; $\lambda$ is the balance parameter. Despite the effectiveness of LRR for multi-view spectral clustering, they still arguably face the following fundamental limitations: \begin{itemize} \item LRR attempts to learn a common lowest-rank representation revealing a low-dimensional subspace structure, but inattentively ignore the distinct manifold structures in each view, which turns out to be critically important to multi-view spectral clustering. \item Low-rank constraint is imposed to enforce all views to share the consensus $Z$ in Eq.\eqref{eq:intro} \cite{RMVSC}, however, such enforced common representation may not flexibly preserve the local manifold structure from heterogeneous views, resulting into a non-ideal multi-view clustering performance. \end{itemize} \subsection{Our contributions} To address those stand-out limitations, our method delivers the following novel features: \begin{itemize} \item To characterize the non-linear spectral graph structure from each view, inspired by \cite{PAMI16}, we propose to couple LRR with multi-graph regularization, where each graph laplacian regularization can characterize the view-dependent non-linear local data similarity. \item To achieve the view agreement while preserving the data correlations within each view, we present an iterative view agreement process in optimizing our objective function. During each iteration, the low-rank representation yielded from each view serves as the constraint to regulate the representation learning from other views. This process iteratively boosts these representations to be more agreeable. \item To model the above intuitions, we figure out a novel objective function and the Linearized Alternating Direction Method with Adaptive Penalty (LADMAP) \cite{LinNIPS2011} method is deployed to solve it. \end{itemize} \section{Iterative Low-Rank based Structured Optimization Method to Multi-view Spectral Clustering} It is well known that the critical issue for spectral clustering lies in how to effectively model the local nonlinear manifold structure \cite{nips04}. Hence, for each view, we aim at preserving such nonlinear manifold structure of original high-dimensional data set within the space spanned by the low-rank sparse representations $Z_i$ for the $i^{th}$ view. This can be formulated as: \begin{equation}\label{eq:spectral} \begin{aligned} & \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j,k}^{n}\|\|z_j^i - z_k^i\|\|^2W_{jk}^i \\ & = \sum_{j = 1}^{N}(z_j^i)^Tz_j^iD_{jj}^i - \sum_{j,k}^{N}(z_k^i)^Tz_j^iW_{jk}^i \\ & = \textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TD_iZ_i) - \textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TW_iZ_i) = \textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i), \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $z_k^i \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ is the $k^{th}$ row of $Z_i \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ representing the linear correlation representation between $x_k$ and $x_j(j \neq k)$ in the $i^{th}$ view; $W_{jk}^i$ is the $(j,k)^{th}$ entry of the similarity matrix $W_i$, which encodes the similarity between $x_j$ and $x_k$ from the original high dimensional space for the $i^{th}$ view; $W_i \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ is the similarity matrix for all the data objects from $X_i$; $D_i$ is a diagonal matrix with its $k^{th}$ diagonal entry to be the summation of the $k^{th}$ row of $W_i$, and $L_i = D_i - W_i$ is the graph laplacian matrix for the $i^{th}$ view; thus Eq.\eqref{eq:spectral} is always dubbed \emph{graph laplacian regularizer}. In this paper, we choose Gaussian kernel to calculate $W_{jk}^i$ as \begin{equation}\label{eq:gaussian} W_{jk}^i = e^{-\frac{\|\|x_j^i - x_k^i \|\|^2_2}{2\sigma^2}}, \end{equation} where $\sigma$ is the bandwidth parameter and $\|\|\cdot\|\|_2$ denotes the $\ell_2$ norm; Eq.\eqref{eq:gaussian} holds if $x_k^i$ is within the $s$ nearest neighbors of $x_j^i$ or vice versa, and it is 0 otherwise. $W_{jj}^i (\forall j)$ is set to 0 to avoid self-loop. Eq.\eqref{eq:spectral} explicitly requires $Z_i$ to well characterize the local manifold structure inherently embedded in original high-dimensional $X_i$ for the $i^{th}$ view, which is of importance to spectral clustering. Based on the above, we leverage the above graph laplacian regularizer with the low-rank representation. Considering the global clustering structure captured by low-rank representation may prevent us from directly imposing graph Laplacian regularizer for local manifold structure, we propose to impose the sparsity norm $\ell_1$ on $Z_i$, denoted as $\|\|Z_i\|\|_1$, which can discriminatively extract the local sparse representative neighborhood of each data object. As explicitly revealed by most of the multi-view clustering research \cite{NIPS11,icml11,M-V-C}, it is always anticipated that a data point should be assigned to the same cluster irrespective of views. In other words, the critical issue to ensure ideal multi-view clustering performance is to achieve the clustering agreement among all views. Based on that, we aim to minimizing the difference of such low-rank and sparse representations from different views by proposing a consensus term to coordinate all views to reach clustering agreement. \begin{equation}\label{eq:object} \begin{aligned} & \min_{Z_i, E_i (i \in V)} \sum_{i \in V} ( \underbrace{\|\|Z_i\|\|_}_\text{Low-rank representation} + \underbrace{\lambda_{1} \|\|E_i\|\|_1}_\text{noise and corruption robustness}\\ &+\underbrace{\lambda_{2}\|\|Z_i\|\|_1}_\text{local sparsity modeling} + \underbrace{\lambda_{3}\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i)}_\text{Graph regularization}\\ &+ \underbrace{\frac{\beta}{2}\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|^2_2)}_\text{Views-agreement}\\ &~~~~~~~~~~~\textmd{s.t.}~~~~ i = 1, \ldots, V, ~~X_i = X_iZ_i + E_i, Z_i \geq 0, \end{aligned} \end{equation} where \begin{itemize} \item $\|\|Z_i\|\|_$ denotes the low-rank representation revealing the global clustering structure regarding $X_i$. \item $\|\|Z_i\|\|_1$ aims at extracting the local sparse representation of each data object in $X_i$. \item $\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i)$ characterizes the local manifold structure. \item $\sum_{i,j \in V}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|_2^2$ characterizes the agreement among the sparse and low-rank representations from all $V$ views. \item $\|\|E_i\|\|_1$ models the possible Laplacian noise contained by $X_i$, we pose $\ell_1$ on $\|\|E_i\|\|$ for noise robustness. \item $Z_i \geq 0$ is a non-negative constraint to ensure that each data object is amid its neighbors, through $X_i = X_iZ_i + E_i$, so that the data correlations can be well encoded for the $i^{th}$ view. \item $\lambda_{1}, \lambda_{2}, \lambda_{3}, \beta$ are all trade-off parameters \end{itemize} Eq.\eqref{eq:object} is a typical low-rank optimization problem, and a lot of methods are available to solve it. Among these methods, the Alternating Direction Method is the typical solution, which aims at updating each variable alternatively by minimizing the augmented lagrangian function in a Gauss-Seidel fashion. In this paper, we deploy the method of \textbf{L}inearized \textbf{A}lternating \textbf{D}irection \textbf{M}ethod with \textbf{A}daptive \textbf{P}enalty, dubbed \textbf{LADMAP} \cite{LinNIPS2011}. The underlying philosophy of \textbf{LADMAP} is to linearly represent the smooth component, which enables Lagrange multipliers to be updated within the feasible approximation error. Observing that solving all the $Z_i, E_i (i \in V)$ pairs follows the same type of optimization strategy, we only present the optimization strategy for the $i^{th}$ view. To resolve this, we first introduce an auxiliary variable $G_i$, then solving the Eq.\eqref{eq:object} with respect to $Z_i, E_i$ and $G_i$ can be written as follows \begin{equation}\label{eq:variation} \begin{aligned} & \min_{Z_i, E_i, G_i} \|\|Z_i\|\|_ + \lambda_{1}\|\|E_i\|\|_1 + \lambda_2\|\|G_i\|\|_1 \\ & + \lambda_{3}\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i) + \frac{\beta}{2}\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|^2_2 \\ & ~~~~~\textmd{s.t.}~~~~~ X_i = X_iZ_i + E_i, G_i = Z_i, G_i \geq 0. \end{aligned} \end{equation} We then present the augmented lagrangian function of Eq.\eqref{eq:variation} below \begin{equation}\label{eq:argumented} \begin{aligned} & \mathcal{L}(Z_i, E_i, G_i, K_1^{i}, K_2^{i}) \\ & = \|\|Z_i\|\|_* + \lambda_{1}\|\|E_i\|\|_1 + \lambda_{2}\|\|G_i\|\|_1 + \lambda_{3}\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i)\\ & + \frac{\beta}{2}\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|^2_2 + \langle K_1^{i}, X_i - X_iZ_i - E_i \rangle + \\ &\langle K_2^{i}, Z_i - G_i \rangle + \frac{\mu}{2}(\|\|X_i - X_iZ_i - E_i\|\|_2^2 + \|\|Z_i - G_i\|\|_2^2), \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $K_1^{i} \in \mathbb{R}^{d_i \times n}$ and $K_2^{i} \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ are Lagrange multipliers, $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ is the inner product and $\mu > 0$ is a penalty parameter. We update each of the above variables alternatively by minimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:argumented} while with other variables fixed. In what follows, we will provide the details of optimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:argumented} with respect to each variable in next section. \section{Optimization Strategy} \subsection{Updating $Z_i$} Minimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:argumented} w.r.t. $Z_i$ is equivalent to minimizing the following \begin{equation}\label{eq:Zi} \begin{aligned} & \mathcal{L}_1 = \|\|Z_i\|\|_* + \lambda_{3}\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i) + \frac{\beta}{2}\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|^2_2 \\ & + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|X_i - X_iZ_i - E_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i}\|\|_2^2 + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|Z_i - G_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i}\|\|_2^2 \end{aligned} \end{equation} It cannot yield a closed form throughout Eq.\eqref{eq:Zi}. Thanks to \textbf{LADMAP}, we can approximately reconstruct the smooth terms of $\mathcal{L}_1$ via a linear manner. The smooth terms of $\mathcal{L}_1$ are summarized below \begin{equation}\label{eq:smooth} \begin{aligned} & \mathcal{Q}_l(Z_i, E_i, G_i, K_1^{i},K_2^{i}) \\ & = \lambda_{3}\textmd{Tr}(Z_i^TL_iZ_i) + \frac{\beta}{2}\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}\|\|Z_i - Z_j\|\|^2_2 \\ & + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|X_i - X_iZ_i - E_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i}\|\|_2^2 + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|Z_i - G_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i}\|\|_2^2 \end{aligned} \end{equation} Based on Eq.\eqref{eq:smooth}, we convert the problem of minimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:Zi} to minimize Eq.\eqref{eq:equivalent} below \begin{equation}\label{eq:equivalent} \mathcal{L}_1 = \|\|Z_i\|\|_* + \langle\frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_k}, Z_i - Z_i(k)\rangle + \frac{\xi}{2}\|\|Z_i - Z_i(k)\|\|_2^2, \end{equation} where $\frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)}$ denotes the partial gradient of $\mathcal{Q}_l$ w.r.t. Z at $Z_i(k)$, and $\mathcal{Q}_l$ is approximated by the linear representation $\langle\frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_k}, Z_i - Z_i(k)\rangle$ w.r.t. $Z_i(k)$ together with a proximal term $\frac{\xi}{2}\|\|Z_i - Z_i(k)\|\|_2^2$. The above replacement is valid provided that $\xi > 2\lambda_3e(L_i) + \mu(1 + \|\|X_i\|\|_2^2)$, where $e(L_i)$ denotes the largest eigenvalue of $L_i$. Then the following closed form holds for Eq.\eqref{eq:equivalent} for each update. \begin{equation}\label{eq:Zifinal} Z_i = \Theta_{\frac{1}{\xi}}(Z_i(k) - \frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)} \cdot \frac{1}{\xi}), \end{equation} where $\Theta_{\epsilon} (A) = US_{\epsilon}(\Sigma)V^T$ represents the Singular Value Threshold (SVT) operation. \textmd{$U \Sigma V^T$} is the singular value decomposition of matrix $A$, and $S_{\epsilon}(x) = sign(x)max(\|\|x\|\| - \epsilon, 0)$ is called the soft threshold operator, $sign(x)$ is 1 if it is positive and 0 otherwise. \subsubsection{Insights for Iterative Views Agreement.} We remark that the intuitions for iterative (during each iteration) views-agreement can be captured by expanding $\frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)}$ below \begin{equation}\label{eq:separable} \begin{aligned} & \frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)} = \lambda_3Z_i(k)(L_i^T + L_i) \\ & + \mu X_i^T(X_iZ_i(k) - X_i + E_i - \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i}) \\ & + \mu(Z_i(k) - G_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i}) + \beta \underbrace{\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} \|\|Z_i(k) - Z_j\|\|}_\text{$\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}Z_i(k) - \sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}Z_j$} \end{aligned} \end{equation} We expand the last term $\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} \|\|Z_i(k) - Z_j\|\| = \sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}Z_i(k) - \sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}Z_j$, then we re-write Eq.\eqref{eq:separable} below \begin{equation}\label{eq:sep1} \frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)} = C_i -\beta \sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} Z_j, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{eq:Ci} \begin{aligned} & C_i = \lambda_3Z_i(k)(L_i^T + L_i) + \mu X_i^T(X_iZ_i(k)\\ & - X_i + E_i \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i}) + \\ & \mu(Z_i(k) - G_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i}) + \beta\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i}Z_i(k) \nonumber \end{aligned} \end{equation} Substituting Eq.\eqref{eq:sep1} into Eq.\eqref{eq:Zifinal} yields Eq.\eqref{eq:mutual} \begin{equation}\label{eq:mutual} \begin{aligned} & Z_i = \Theta_{\frac{1}{\xi}}(Z_i(k) - (C_i -\beta \sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} Z_j) \cdot \frac{1}{\xi})\\ & = \Theta_{\frac{1}{\xi}}(Z_i(k) - \frac{C_i}{\xi} + \beta \underbrace{\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} Z_j}_\text{Influence from other views} \cdot \frac{1}{\xi}), \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $Z_i$ updating is explicitly influenced from other views \emph{i.e.,\ } $\sum_{j \in V, j \neq i} Z_j$, which reveals that such low-rank representations \emph{e.g.,\ } $Z_i$ updating from each view \emph{e.g.,\ } the $i^{th}$ view are formed by referring to the other views, while served as a constraint to update other views for each iteration so that the complementary information from all views are intuitively leveraged towards a final agreement for clustering. \subsection{Updating $E_i$} Minimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:argumented} w.r.t. $E_i$ is equivalent to solving the following optimization problem \begin{equation}\label{eq:Ei} \min_{E_i} \lambda_1 \|\|E_i\|\|_1 + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|E_i - (X_i - X_iZ_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i})\|\|_2^2, \end{equation} where the following closed form solution is hold for $E_i$ according to \cite{CaiSIAMJ08} \begin{equation}\label{eq:EiS} E_i = S_{\frac{\lambda_1}{\mu}}(X_i - X_iZ_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_1^{i}) \end{equation} \subsection{Updating $G_i$} Minimizing Eq.\eqref{eq:argumented} w.r.t. $G_i$ is equivalent to solving the following optimization problem \begin{equation}\label{eq:Gi} \min_{G_i \geq 0} \lambda_2 \|\|G_i\|\|_1 + \frac{\mu}{2}\|\|G_i - (Z_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i})\|\|_2^2, \end{equation} where the following closed form solution holds for $G_i$ according to \cite{CaiSIAMJ08} \begin{equation}\label{eq:GiS} G_i = \textmd{max}\{S_{\frac{\lambda_2}{\mu}}(Z_i + \frac{1}{\mu}K_2^{i}), 0\} \end{equation} \subsection{Updating $K_1^{i}$ and $K_2^{i}$} We update Lagrange multipliers $K_1^{i}$ via \begin{equation}\label{eq:K1s} K_1^{i} = K_1^{i} + \mu(X_i - X_iZ_i - E_i) \end{equation} and $K_2^{i}$ via \begin{equation}\label{eq:K1s} K_2^{i} = K_2^{i} + \mu(Z_i - G_i) \end{equation} We remark that $\mu$ can be tuned using the adaptive updating strategy as suggested by \cite{LinNIPS2011} to yield a faster convergence. The optimization strategy alternatively update each variable while fixing others until the convergence condition is met. Thanks to \textbf{LADMAP} \cite{LinNIPS2011}, the above optimization process converges to a globally optimal solution enjoyed. Besides, we may employ the Lanczos method to compute the largest singular values and vectors by only performs multiplication of $Z_i(k) - \frac{\partial \mathcal{Q}_l}{\partial Z_i(k)} \cdot \frac{1}{\xi}$ with vectors, which can be efficiently computed by such successive matrix-vector multiplications. \subsection{Clustering with $Z_i(i = 1,\ldots,V)$} Once the converged $Z_i(i = 1,\ldots,V)$ are learned for each of the $V$ views, we normalize all column vectors of $Z_i(i = 1,\ldots,V)$ while set small entries under given threshold $\tau$ to be 0. After that, we can calculate the similarity matrix $W_i (j,k) =\frac{Z_i(j,k) + Z_i(k,j)}{2}$ for the $i^{th}$ view between the $j^{th}$ and $k^{th}$ data objects. The final data similarity matrix for all views are defined as \begin{equation}\label{eq:simi-all} W = \frac{\sum_{i}^{V}W_i}{V} \end{equation} The spectral clustering is performed on $W$ calculated via Eq.\eqref{eq:simi-all} to yield the final multi-view spectral clustering result. \section{Experiments} We evaluate our method on the following data sets: \begin{itemize} \item \underline{UCI handwritten Digit set}\footnote{http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Multiple+Features}: It consists of features of hand-written digits (0-9). The dataset is represented by 6 features and contains 2000 samples with 200 in each category. Analogous to \cite{LinNIPS2011}, we choose 76 Fourier coefficients (FC) of the character shapes and the 216 profile correlations (PC) as two views. \item \underline{Animal with Attribute} (AwA)\footnote{http://attributes.kyb.tuebingen.mpg.de}: It consists of 50 kinds of animals described by 6 features (views): Color histogram ( CQ, 2688-dim), local self-similarity (LSS, 2000-dim), pyramid HOG (PHOG, 252-dim), SIFT (2000-dim), Color SIFT (RGSIFT, 2000-dim), and SURF (2000-dim). We randomly sample 80 images for each category and get 4000 images in total. \item \underline{NUS-WIDE-Object (NUS)} \cite{NUS-Wide}: The data set consists of 30000 images from 31 categories. We construct 5 views using 5 features as provided by the website \footnote{lms.comp.nus.edu.sg/research/NUS-WIDE.html}: 65-dimensional color histogram (CH), 226-dimensional color moments (CM), 145-dimensional color correlation (CORR), 74-dimensional edge estimation (EDH), and 129-dimensional wavelet texture (WT). \end{itemize} These data sets are summarized in Table \ref{table:dataset}. \begin{table}[t] \caption{Summary of the multi-view data sets used in our experiments.} \begin{tabular}{cccc} \hline Features&UCI & AwA& NUS\\ \hline 1 & FC (76) & CQ (2688) & CH(65)\\ 2 & PC (216) & LSS (2000) & CM(226)\\ 3 & - & PHOG (252)& CORR(145)\\ 4 & - &SIFT(2000) & EDH(74)\\ 5 & -& RGSIFT(2000) & WT(129)\\ 6 & - & SURF(2000) & -\\ \hline \# of data & 2000 & 4000 & 26315\\ \# of classes & 10 & 50 & 31\\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{table:dataset} \end{table} \subsection{Baselines} We compare our approach with the following state-of-the-art baselines: \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{MFMSC}: Using the concatenation of multiple features to perform spectral clustering. \item Multi-view affinity aggregation for multi-view spectral clustering (\textbf{MAASC}) \cite{CVPR12}. \item Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) based multi-view spectral clustering (\textbf{CCAMSC}) \cite{ICML09}: Projecting multi-view data into a common subspace, then perform spectral clustering. \item Co-regularized multi-view spectral clustering (\textbf{CoMVSC}) \cite{NIPS11}: It regularizes the eigenvectors of view-dependent graph laplacians and achieve consensus clusters across views. \item \textbf{Co-training} \cite{icml11}: Alternately modify one view's eigenspace of graph laplacian by referring to the other views' graph laplacian and their corresponding eigenvectors, upon which, the spectral clustering is conducted. Such process is performed until convergence. \item Robust Low-Rank Representation method (\textbf{RLRR}) \cite{RMVSC}, as formulated in Eq.\eqref{eq:intro}. \end{itemize} \subsection{Experimental Settings and Parameters Study} For fair comparison, we implement these competitors by following their experimental setting and the parameter tuning steps in their papers. The Gaussian kernel is used throughout experiments on all data sets and $\sigma$ in Eq.\eqref{eq:gaussian} is learned by self-tuning method \cite{nips04}, and $s=20$ to construct $s$-nearest neighbors for each data object to calculate Eq.\eqref{eq:gaussian}. To measure the clustering results, we use two standard metrics: clustering accuracy (\textsf{ACC}) (Ratio for the number of data objects having same clustering label and ground truth label against total data objects), and normalized mutual information (\textsf{NMI}). Pleaser refer to \cite{Chen-TPAMI11} for details of these two clustering metrics. All experiments are repeated 10 times, and we report their averaged mean value.\\ \textbf{\underline{Feature noise modeling for robustness}}: Following \cite{CV155}, for each view-specific feature representation, 20\% feature elements are corrupted with uniform distribution over the range [5,-5], which is consistent to the practical setting while matching with \textbf{RLRR} and our method. We set $\lambda_1=2$, $\lambda_2=0.08$ in Eq.\eqref{eq:object}. \emph{To validate the effectiveness of Multi-graph regularization and iterative views agreement, we test the value of \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI} over a range of $\lambda_3$ and $\beta$ in Eq.\eqref{eq:object} in the next subsection.} \subsection{Validating Multi-graph regularization and Iterative views agreement} We test $\lambda_3$ for multi-graph regularization term and $\beta$ for iterative views agreement within the interval [0.001,10] over the AwA data set and adopt such setting for other data sets. Specifically, we test each value of one parameter while fixing the value of the other parameter, the results are then illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:parameter}. From both Fig.\ref{fig:parameter} (a) and (b), the following observations can be identified: \begin{itemize} \item when fixing the value of $\lambda_3$, increasing the value of $\beta$ can basically improves the \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI} value of our method. The similar observation can be identified vice versa; that is, fixing the value of $\beta$, meanwhile increasing the $\lambda_3$ can always lead to the clustering improvement in terms of both \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI}. \item Both the above clustering measures \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI} will unsurprisingly increase when both $\lambda_3$ and $\beta$ increases until reach the optimal pair-combinations, then slightly decrease. \end{itemize} Upon the above observations, we choose a balance pair values: $\lambda_3=0.5$ and $\beta=0.1$ for our method. \subsection{Experimental Results and Analysis} \begin{table}[t] \caption{Clustering results in terms of \textsf{ACC} on three benchmark data sets.} \begin{tabular}{cccc} \hline\hline \textsf{ACC} (\%) & UCI digits & AwA & NUS \\ \hline \textbf{MFMSC} & 43.81 & 17.13& 22.81\\ \textbf{MAASC} & 51.74 & 19.44& 25.13\\ \textbf{CCAMSC} & 73.24 & 24.04& 27.56\\ \textbf{CoMVSC} & 80.27 & 29.93 & 33.63\\ \textbf{Co-training} & 79.22 & 29.06 & 34.25\\ \textbf{RLRR} & 83.67 & 31.49 & 35.27\\ \textbf{Ours} & \textbf{86.39} & \textbf{37.22} & \textbf{41.02}\\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{table:acc} \end{table} \begin{table}[t] \caption{Clustering results in terms of \textsf{NMI} on three benchmark data sets.} \begin{tabular}{cccc} \hline\hline \textsf{NMI} (\%) & UCI digits & AwA & NUS \\ \hline \textbf{MFMSC} & 41.57 & 11.48 & 12.21\\ \textbf{MAASC} & 47.85 & 12.93& 11.86\\ \textbf{CCAMSC} & 56.51 & 15.62& 14.56\\ \textbf{CoMVSC} & 63.82 & 17.30 & 7.07\\ \textbf{Co-training} & 62.07 & 18.05 & 8.10\\ \textbf{RLRR} & 81.20 & 25.57 & 18.29\\ \textbf{Ours} & \textbf{85.45} &\textbf{31.74} & \textbf{20.61}\\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{table:nmi} \end{table} We report the compared clustering results in terms of \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI} in Table \ref{table:acc} and Table \ref{table:nmi}, upon which, the following observations can be drawn: \begin{itemize} \item Nearly most of the clustering performance in terms of both \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI} are better than \textbf{RLRR}, which further demonstrates the effectiveness of our multi-graph regularization and iterative views agreement scheme combining with LRR scheme for multi-view spectral clustering. \item First, comparing with view-fusion methods like \textbf{MFMSC} and \textbf{MAASC}, our method improves the clustering performance by a notable margin on all data sets. Specifically, it highly improves the clustering performance in terms of \textsf{ACC} from 43.81\% (\textbf{MFMSC}), 51.74\% (\textbf{MAASC}) to 86.39\% on UCI digits data set. Such notable improvement can be also observed on AwA and NUS data sets. \item Second, \textbf{CCAMSC} that learns a common low-dimensional subspace among multi-view data is less effective in clustering due to its incapability of encoding local graph structures from heterogeneous views within only a common subspace. In contrast, our method can well address such problem with a novel iterative views-agreement scheme, which is notably evidenced in terms of both \textsf{ACC} and \textsf{NMI}. \item Comparing with co-regularized paradigms (\textbf{CoMVSC}, and \textbf{Co-training}), our method works more effectively in the presence of noise corruptions. For example, in NUS data set, it improves the clustering accuracy from 33.63\%(\textbf{CoMVSC}), 34.25\% (\textbf{Co-training}) to 41.02\%. Although \textbf{RLRR} is also effective to deal with practical noise-corrupted multi-view data. However, as aforementioned, learning only one common low-rank correlation representation shared by all views is failed to flexibly capture all the local nonlinear manifold structures from all views, which is crucial to spectral clustering, while our technique can deliver a better performance. \end{itemize} \begin{figure}[t] \begin{tabular}{c} \includegraphics[width=8cm, trim=250 10 30 28, clip]{parameter_acc_awa.png}\\ (a)\\ \includegraphics[width=8cm, trim=200 10 30 28, clip]{parameter_nmi_awa.png}\\ (b) \end{tabular} \caption{Parameters study of $\lambda_3$ and $\beta$ for our multi-graph regularization and iterative views agreement scheme on AwA dataset. (a) \textsf{ACC} against parameters $\lambda_3$ and $\beta$. (b) \textsf{NMI} against parameters $\lambda_3$ and $\beta$.}\label{fig:parameter} \end{figure} \section{Conclusions} In this paper, we propose an iterative structured low-rank optimization method to multi-view spectral clustering. Unlike existing methods, Our method can well encode the local data manifold structure from each view-dependent feature space, and achieve the multi-view agreement via an iterative fashion, while better preserve the flexible nonlinear manifold structure from all views. The superiorities are validated by extensive experiments over real-world multi-view data sets. One future direction is to adapt the proposed iterative fashion technique to cross-view based research \cite{YangMM13,YangSIGIR} by dealing with multiple data source yet corresponding to the same latent semantics. We aim to develop the novel iterative technique to learn the projections for multiple data sources into the common latent space to well characterize the shared latent semantics. \bibliographystyle{named}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:1} \setcounter{section}{1} Fractional calculus has become increasingly popular in recent years due to their frequent appearance in various applications in fluid mechanics, signal processing, viscoelasticity, porous media flow, quantum mechanics, biology, medicine, physics and engineering, see~\cite{cushman, hall, hilfer2, lazarov,li_xu,metzler_klafter, purohit} for example. In particular it has attracted much attention within the natural and social sciences, since it can properly model phenomena dominated by memory effects~\cite{11hesthaven,10hesthaven} and problems exhibiting non-Markovian behavior in time. A lot of effort has been focused in attempting to find robust and stable numerical and analytical methods for solving ordinary and partial differential equations of fractional order. A wide growth in the number of numerical analysis papers studying differential equations with fractional-order derivatives have arisen in the last decade~\cite{BLY, lazarov, lazarov2, li_xu, lin_xu, mustapha, martin1}. Due to the nonlocal property of the fractional differential operator, numerical methods usually generate systems of equations for which the coefficient matrix is dense. This is the main reason why most of these problems have been traditionally solved by Gaussian elimination, which requires a very high computational cost of $O(n^3)$ in addition to a high storage cost of $O(n^2)$, where $n$ is the total number of grid-points. Some efforts have been done to reduce this computational cost by approximating the coefficient matrix by a banded matrix \cite{GE_banded}, for example, obtaining a computational complexity of $O(n\log^2(n))$. This is quite different from the integer differential operators, which typically yield sparse coefficient matrices that can be efficiently solved by fast iterative methods with $O(n)$ complexity. Therefore, the design of efficient solvers that reduce the computational cost is one of the challenges for the numerical simulation of fractional PDEs. For space-fractional PDEs, some efficient solvers, such as preconditioned Krylov subspace methods \cite{Pan_SISC,Wang_SISC} and multigrid methods \cite{Pang2012}, have already been proposed. The key is to take advantage of the Toeplitz-like structure of the coefficient matrix which arises from the discretization method proposed by Meerschaet and Tadjeran \cite{Meerschaert2006}. In this way, the storage requirements can be reduced to $O(N)$, and the matrix-vector multiplication can be done in $O(N \log(N))$ operations by using the fast Fourier transform (FFT). Recently, a fast solver based on a geometric multigrid method for nonuniform grids has been proposed in~\cite{fractional_xiaozhe}. The approach is based on the use of H-Matrices to approximate the dense matrices. Regarding time-fractional PDEs, the coefficient matrix usually has an $M \times M$ block lower triangular Toeplitz structure, with each block of size $N \times N$, where $N$ is the number of spatial grid-points and $M$ the number of time levels. A fast direct method taking advantage of the Toeplitz structure of the coefficient matrix is proposed in \cite{GE_time_fractional} with a complexity of $O(NM\log^2(M))$. As an alternative, in \cite{Zhang2014} the authors proposed the use of alternating direction implicit schemes (ADI) with a computational complexity of $O(NM^2)$. An approximate inversion method with $O(N M \log(M))$ has been recently proposed in \cite{Lin2016}. Their idea is to approximate the coefficient matrix by a block $\varepsilon$-circulant matrix, which can be block diagonalized by FFT. To solve the resulting complex block system, the authors use a multigrid method. Our main contribution is to propose an efficient and robust multigrid method based on the waveform relaxation approach to solve the time-fractional heat equation. Exploiting the Toeplitz-like structure of the coefficient matrix, the computational complexity of the proposed method is $O(N M \log(M))$ with a storage requirement of $O(NM)$, being only $O(M)$ for the storage of the coefficient matrix. Opposite to the method introduced in \cite{Lin2016}, the algorithm proposed here is directly applied to the original discretization of the problem, and also is better suited for nonlinear problems. We wish to emphasize that the proposed method is parallel-in-time in contrast to the classical sequential time-integration methods based on time-stepping. Waveform relaxation methods consist of continuous-in-time iterative algorithms for solving large systems of ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Their application to the solution of parabolic partial differential equations is based on the numerical method of lines, in which the spatial derivatives are replaced by discrete analogues obtaining a large system of ODEs, which is solved by standard iterative methods. The requirement of extra storage for unknowns represents a classical disadvantage of waveform methods, however in our case this is not a drawback anymore since the time-fractional PDEs also need the solutions in previous time-steps to be stored. Since the waveform relaxation method is based on the numerical method of lines, it is not clear how to combine it with techniques such as dynamic grid adaptation, although recently some efforts have been carried out to combine parallel-in-time techniques with moving meshes~\cite{Falgout2016, Haynes_SISC}. The convergence of the waveform relaxation methods was studied by Miekkala and Nevanlinna~\cite{miekkala}, who showed that the convergence could be too slow for the waveform relaxation to be competitive with standard time-stepping methods. Recently, some authors have investigated the convergence of some waveform relaxation methods for solving fractional differential equations~\cite{jiang_ding}. We wish to point out that for time-fractional PDEs, the fact of that each spatial grid point at a fixed time is connected to all the values of the previous time steps makes the application of waveform relaxation methods to these problems very natural. Multigrid methods (see~\cite{Stu_Tro, TOS01, Wess} for an introduction) are often used for the convergence acceleration of iterative methods, although they have a wider use and significance than just being acceleration techniques. These methods are among the most efficient methods for solving large algebraic systems arising from discretizations of partial differential equations, with optimal computational complexity, due to their ability to handle different scales present in the problem. Here, we propose the application of a multigrid approach based on the waveform relaxation method for solving time-fractional differential equations. This method combines the very fast multigrid convergence with the high parallel efficiency of waveform relaxation. Basically, it consists of applying a red-black zebra-in-time line relaxation together with a coarse-grid correction procedure based on coarsening only in the spatial dimension. Note that there is no coarsening in time in such a multigrid method, and the time is kept continuous. In this way, the coarsest grid is composed of only one spatial grid-point and all the corresponding points in time. The multigrid waveform relaxation was firstly developed by Lubich and Ostermann in~\cite{lubich_ostermann}, who showed that the basic waveform relaxation process can be accelerated by using the multigrid idea. Their work is based on the application of multigrid (in space) directly to the evolution equation. Since its introduction, this approach has been successfully applied to a variety of parabolic problems~\cite{horton_vandewalle, oosterlee_wesseling, computing, vandewalle_piessens, vandewalle_piessens3, vandewalle_piessens2}, but never within a fractional context. Local Fourier analysis (LFA) or local mode analysis~\cite{Bra77, Bra94, TOS01, Wess, Wie01} has become a very useful predictive tool for the analysis of the convergence of multigrid methods. The idea of this analysis is to focus on the local character of the operators involved in the multigrid algorithm, and to analyze their behavior on a basis of complex exponential functions. However, the failure of this analysis for the prediction of the multigrid convergence for convection-dominated or parabolic problems has been observed by different authors~\cite{Brandt_singular, sama, OGWW}. To overcome this difficulty, a semi-algebraic mode analysis (SAMA) was proposed in~\cite{sama}. This analysis, which is essentially a generalization of the classical local mode analysis, combines standard LFA with algebraic computation that accounts for the non-local character of the operators. It is clear that this is the approach that we should consider for the analysis of the multigrid waveform relaxation method for the time-fractional diffusion problem dealt with in this work. Notice the non-local character of this differential operator in time. Finally, we wish to emphasize that the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method, as well as the semi-algebraic mode analysis for the study of its convergence, give rise an efficient solution strategy for the time-fractional heat equation, which seems a very natural way to deal with this problem. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:2} is devoted to introduce the considered one-dimensional model problem and its discretization. The proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method for its solution is described in Section~\ref{sec:3}. Next, the semi-algebraic mode analysis used for studying the convergence of this algorithm is explained in Section~\ref{sec:4}, together with some analysis results showing its suitability for the prediction of the behavior of the multigrid method. In Section~\ref{sec:5} the computational complexity of the proposed algorithm is discussed. After that, Section~\ref{sec:6} focuses on the generalization of the proposed methodology for a two-dimensional model problem. Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:7}, we illustrate the good behavior of the multigrid waveform relaxation method for solving the time-fractional diffusion problems considered in this work, by means of three different test problems, which include a nonlinear model problem with applications in porous media. Conclusions are drawn in Section~\ref{sec:8}. \section{Model problem and discretization}\label{sec:2} \setcounter{section}{2} We consider the time-fractional heat equation, arising by replacing the first-order time derivative with the Caputo derivative of order $\delta$, where $0<\delta<1$. In this section, we restrict ourselves to the one-dimensional case for simplicity in the presentation. Therefore, we can formulate our model problem as the following initial-boundary value problem, \begin{eqnarray} D_t^{\delta} u - \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2} = f(x,t),\quad 0<x<L,\; t>0,\label{model_IVP_1}\\ u(0,t) = 0,\; u(L,t)=0,\quad t>0,\label{model_IVP_2}\\ u(x,0) = g(x), \quad 0\leq x\leq L.\label{model_IVP_3} \end{eqnarray} As mentioned above, $D_t^{\delta}$ denotes the Caputo fractional derivative, defined as follows~\cite{Diethelm,martin1} \begin{equation}\label{caputo} D_t^{\delta} u (x,t):= \left[J^{1-\delta}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}\right)\right](x,t),\quad 0\leq x\leq L,\; t>0, \end{equation} where $J^{1-\delta}$ represents the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator of order $1-\delta$, given by \begin{equation}\label{RiemanLiouville} \left(J^{1-\delta}u\right)(x,t):=\left[\frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\delta)}\int_{0}^{t} (t-s)^{-\delta}u(x,s)ds\right],\quad 0\leq x\leq L,\; t>0, \end{equation} where $\Gamma$ is the Gamma function~\cite{gamma}. Model problem~\eqref{model_IVP_1}-\eqref{model_IVP_3} is discretized on a uniform rectangular mesh $G_{h,\tau} = G_h \times G_{\tau},$ with \begin{eqnarray} G_{h} &=& \left\{x_n = nh,\, n=0,1,\ldots,N+1\right\},\label{spatial_mesh}\\ G_{\tau} &=& \left\{t_m= m\tau,\, m=0,1,\ldots,M\right\},\label{temporal_mesh} \end{eqnarray} where $h=\displaystyle \frac{L}{N+1}$, $\tau = \displaystyle\frac{T}{M}$ with $T$ the final time and $N+1$ and $M$ positive integers representing the number of subdivisions in the spatial and temporal intervals, respectively. We denote as $u_{n,m}$ the nodal approximation to the solution at each grid point $(x_n,t_m)$.\\ In the nodal points, the Caputo fractional derivative $D_t^{\delta}u$ can be written as follows \begin{equation}\label{caputo_nodal} D_t^{\delta}\, u(x_n,t_m) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\delta)}\sum_{k=0}^{m-1}\int_{t_k}^{t_{k+1}}(t_m-s)^{-\delta}\,\frac{\partial u(x_n,s)}{\partial t}ds, \end{equation} and it is approximated by using the well-known L1 scheme~\cite{Oldham_Spanier} which uses $\displaystyle \frac{\partial u(x_n,s)}{\partial t}\approx\frac{u_{n,k+1}-u_{n,k}}{\tau},\; t_k\leq s\leq t_{k+1}$ to obtain \begin{eqnarray} D_M^{\delta}u_{n,m}&:=&\frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\delta)}\sum_{k=0}^{m-1}\frac{u_{n,k+1}-u_{n,k}}{\tau} \int_{t_k}^{t_{k+1}}(t_m-s)^{-\delta}ds \label{L1_scheme1} \\&=&\frac{\tau^{-\delta}}{\Gamma(2-\delta)}\left[d_1 u_{n,m} - d_m u_{n,0} + \sum_{k=1}^{m-1}(d_{k+1}-d_k)u_{n,m-k}\right],\label{L1_scheme2} \end{eqnarray} by defining $d_k = k^{1-\delta}-(k-1)^{1-\delta},\; k\geq 1$.\\ Regarding the diffusive term, we use standard central finite differences to approximate the spatial derivatives. Summarizing, we treat with the following discrete problem \begin{eqnarray} D_M^{\delta} u_{n,m} - \frac{u_{n+1,m}-2u_{n,m}+u_{n-1,m}}{h^2} = f(x_n,t_m), \; &1\leq n\leq N, \; 1\leq m\leq M,& \label{discrete_model_IVP_1} \\ u_{0,m} = 0,\; u_{N+1,m}=0, &0<m\leq M,& \label{discrete_model_IVP_2} \\ u_{n,0} = g(x_n), &0\leq n\leq N+1.& \label{discrete_model_IVP_3} \end{eqnarray} \section{Multigrid waveform relaxation in 1D}\label{sec:3} \setcounter{section}{3} For solving time dependent partial differential equations, the multigrid waveform relaxation method uses the numerical method of lines, replacing any spatial derivative by discrete formulas (obtained by the finite element, finite difference or finite volume methods) in the discrete spatial domain. Thus, the PDE is transformed to a large set of ordinary differential equations. In our case, that is, considering time-fractional derivatives of order $\delta$, we have \begin{equation}\label{system_ODEs} D_t^{\delta} u_h(t) + A_hu_h(t) = f_h(t),\; u_h(0) = g_h,\; t>0, \end{equation} where $u_h$ and $f_h$ are functions of time $t$ defined on a discrete spatial mesh, and $A_h$ is the discrete approximation in space of the continuous operator defining the considered PDE. Since discrete operators are usually represented by matrices and grid-functions by vectors, in the following we will use either the terminology of discrete differential operators and grid-functions or that of matrices and vectors. Next step is the solution of the large system of ODEs by an iterative algorithm. For instance, if we consider a splitting of the spatial discrete operator $A_h = M_h-N_h$, one step of the iterative scheme for~\eqref{system_ODEs} can be written as \begin{equation}\label{GS_ODEs} D_t^{\delta} u_h^{k}(t) + M_hu_h^k(t) = N_h u_h^{k-1}(t) + f_h(t),\; u_h^k(0) = g_h, \; \hbox{for} \; k\geq 1, \end{equation} where $u_h^k(t)$ denotes the approximation obtained at iteration $k$. The initial iterate $u_h^0(t)$ is defined along the whole time-interval, being natural to choose a constant initial approximation equal to the initial condition in~\eqref{system_ODEs}, that is, $u_h^0(t) = g_h,\; t>0$. \\ In this work, for the one-dimensional problem, we will consider a red-black Gauss-Seidel iteration which consists of a two-stage procedure, given by \begin{eqnarray}\label{red-black} && D_t^{\delta}u_{n}^k(t) +\frac{2}{h^2}u_{n}^k(t) = \frac{1}{h^2}\left(u_{n-1}^{k-1}(t)+u_{n+1}^{k-1}(t) \right)+f_n(t),\; \hbox{if} \; n\; \hbox{is even},\\ && D_t^{\delta}u_{n}^k(t) -\frac{1}{h^2}\left(u_{n-1}^{k}(t)-2u_{n}^k(t)+u_{n+1}^{k}(t) \right) = f_n(t),\; \hbox{if} \; n\; \hbox{is odd}, \end{eqnarray} that is, first the even points in space are visited and after that we solve the unknowns in the grid points with odd numbering. To accelerate the convergence of the red-black Gauss-Seidel waveform relaxation, a coarse-grid correction process based on a coarsening procedure only in the spatial dimension is performed, resulting the so-called linear multigrid waveform relaxation algorithm~\cite{Vandewalle_book}. This method consists essentially in the standard multigrid algorithm but applied to systems of ODEs as the one in~\eqref{system_ODEs}. Considering the standard full-weighting restriction and the linear interpolation as transfer-grid operators, the algorithm of the multigrid waveform relaxation (WRMG) is given in Algorithm~\ref{wrmg_1}. \begin{algorithm}[htb] \caption{ \textbf{: Multigrid waveform relaxation: ${\mathbf{u_{h}^k(t) \rightarrow u_{h}^{k+1}(t)}}$}}\label{wrmg_1} \vspace{0.5cm} \begin{algorithmic} \IF{we are on the coarsest grid-level (with spatial grid-size given by $h_0$)} \STATE \STATE $D_t^{\delta} u_{h_0}^{k+1}(t) + A_{h_0}u_{h_0}^{k+1}(t)= f_{h_0}(t)$ \hspace{0.9cm} {Solve with a direct or fast solver.} \STATE \ELSE \STATE { \begin{tabular}{lr} \\ [-1.5ex] $\overline{u}_{h}^k(t)=S_{h}^{\nu_1}(u_{h}^k(t))$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}\textbf{(Pre-smoothing)}\\ & \hspace{-3.5cm}$\nu_1$ steps of the \textbf{red-black waveform relaxation}.\\ \\ [-1.5ex] $\overline{r}_{h}^k(t)=f_{h}(t) - (D_t^{\delta} + A_{h})\, \overline{u}_{h}^k(t)$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}Compute the defect. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] $\overline{r}_{2h}^k(t)=I_h^{2h}\, \overline{r}_{h}^k(t)$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}Restrict the defect. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] $(D_t^{\delta}+A_{2h}) \widehat{e}_{2h}^k(t) = \bar{r}_{2h}^k(t),\; \widehat{e}_{2h}^k(0) = 0$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}Solve the defect equation \\ [1.2ex] & \hspace{-3.5cm} on $G_{2h}$ by performing $\gamma \ge 1$ cycles of WRMG. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] $\widehat{e}_{h}^k(t) = I_{2h}^h \, \widehat{e}_{2h}^k(t) $ & \hspace{-3.5cm}Interpolate the correction. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] $\overline{u}_{h}^{k+1}(t) = \overline{u}_{h}^k(t) + \widehat{e}_{h}^k(t)$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}Compute a new approximation. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] $u_{h}^{k+1}(t)=S_{h}^{\nu_2}(\overline{u}_{h}^{k+1}(t))$ & \hspace{-3.5cm}\textbf{(Post-smoothing)}\\ & \hspace{-3.5cm}$\nu_2$ steps of the \textbf{red-black waveform relaxation}. \\ \\ [-1.5ex] \end{tabular}} \ENDIF \end{algorithmic} \vspace{0.5cm} \end{algorithm} After discretizing in time, that is, replacing the differential operator $D_t^{\delta}$ by $D_M^{\delta}$, the previous algorithm can be interpreted as a space-time multigrid method with coarsening only in space. Thus, the red-black Gauss-Seidel waveform relaxation can be seen as a zebra-in-time line relaxation, and standard full-weighting restriction and linear interpolation in space are considered for the data transfer between the levels in the multigrid hierarchy. Thus, the whole multigrid waveform relaxation combines a zebra-in-time line relaxation with a standard semi-coarsening strategy only in the spatial dimension. \section{Semi-algebraic mode analysis in 1D}\label{sec:4} \setcounter{section}{4} The analysis that we perform here is based on an exponential Fourier mode analysis or local Fourier analysis technique only in space and an exact analytical approach in time. This kind of semi-algebraic mode analysis was introduced for the first time in~\cite{sama}, where the authors mainly study the convergence of multigrid methods on space-time grids for parabolic problems. Furthermore, they extend the application of this analysis to non-parabolic problems like elliptic diffusion in layered media and convection diffusion. The main idea of this analysis is to study the evolution of the spatial Fourier modes over time. This semi-algebraic analysis provides very accurate predictions of the performance of multigrid methods, and indeed, it can be made rigorous if appropriate boundary conditions are considered. Next, we describe the basics of this analysis. Although in~\cite{sama} the authors give a detailed explanation, here we present a slightly different description of this analysis. \subsection{Basics of the analysis}\label{sec:4_1} It is well-known that LFA assumes the formal extension to all multigrid components to an infinite grid, neglecting the boundary conditions, and considers discrete linear operators with constant coefficients. Therefore, we define the following infinite grid: \begin{equation}\label{infinite_grid} {\mathcal G}_h = \left\{x_n = n\,h,\; n\in {\mathbb Z}\right\}, \end{equation} where $h$ is the spatial discretization step. For a fixed $t$, any discrete grid-function $u_h(\cdot,t)$ defined on ${\mathcal G}_h$ can be written as a formal linear combination of the so-called Fourier modes given by $\varphi_h(\theta,x) = e^{\imath\theta x}$, where $\theta\in\Theta_h=(-\pi/h,\pi/h]$, that is, \begin{equation}\label{linear_combination} u_h(x,t) = \sum_{\theta\in\Theta_h} c_{\theta}(t) \varphi_h(\theta,x), \quad x\in {\mathcal G}_h. \end{equation} Notice that coefficients $c_{\theta}(t)$ depend on the time variable. The Fourier modes, which generate the so-called Fourier space ${\mathcal F}({\mathcal G}_h) = \left\{\varphi_h(\theta,\cdot),\; \theta\in \Theta_h\right\}$, result to be eigenfunctions of any discrete operator with constant coefficients defined formally on ${\mathcal G}_h$. For instance, for the discrete operator $A_h = \displaystyle\frac{1}{h^2}\left[-1 \; 2\; -1\right]$, considered in discrete model problem~\eqref{discrete_model_IVP_1}, it is fulfilled that $$A_h \varphi_h (\theta,\cdot) = \widehat{A}_h(\theta)\,\varphi_h(\theta,\cdot),$$ where $$\widehat{A}_h(\theta) = \displaystyle\frac{4}{h^2}\sin\left(\frac{\theta h}{2}\right)$$ is the Fourier representation of operator $A_h$, which is also called the Fourier symbol of $A_h$. The aim of the local Fourier analysis is to analyze how the operators involved in the multigrid algorithm act on such Fourier modes. We can study how efficiently the relaxation process eliminates the high-frequency components of the error, through a smoothing analysis, or how the two-grid operator acts on the Fourier space, through a two-grid analysis. \\ First, we proceed to explain the smoothing analysis for a standard relaxation procedure. After that, we describe the analysis for the coarse-grid correction operator, and finally we combine both analysis in order to perform a complete study of the two-grid cycle. For this purpose, we need to distinguish high- and low-frequency components. This classification is done with respect to the coarsening strategy, which is chosen as standard coarsening, that is, the step size is double on the coarse grid, which is denoted by ${\mathcal G}_{2h}$. Remind that in a typical multigrid waveform relaxation procedure the coarsening applies only in the spatial domain. The space of low frequencies is defined as $ \Theta_{2h} = (-\pi/2h,\pi/2h]$, and the high-frequencies are given by $ \Theta_h\backslash \Theta_{2h}$.\\ \noindent {\bf Smoothing analysis.} We describe the semi-algebraic smoothing analysis for a standard relaxation procedure based on a decomposition of the spatial discrete operator $A_h$ as $A_h = M_h - N_h$. Denoting $e_h^k(\cdot,t)$ and $e_h^{k-1}(\cdot,t)$ the error grid-functions at the $k$ and $k-1$ iterations of this procedure, an iteration of this waveform relaxation method is given by \begin{equation}\label{waveform_error} D_t^{\delta}e_h^{k}(x,t) + M_h e_h^k(x,t) = N_h e_h^{k-1}(x,t), \; \hbox{for} \; k\geq 1, \;\hbox{and} \; x\in{\mathcal G}_h, \; t>0, \end{equation} with initial condition $e_h^k(x,0) = 0,\; x\in{\mathcal G}_h$.\\ From~\eqref{linear_combination}, we can write the error at $j$ iteration, $e_h^j(x,t)$, in the following way, \begin{equation}\label{error_combinations_j} e_h^j(x,t) = \sum_{\theta\in\Theta_h} c_{\theta}^j(t) \varphi_h(\theta,x), \quad x\in {\mathcal G}_h,\; t>0,\\ \end{equation} and then by using that $\varphi_h(\theta,x)$ are eigenfunctions of operators $M_h$ and $N_h$ (that is, $M_h\varphi_h(\theta,x) = \widehat{M}_h(\theta) \varphi_h(\theta,x)$ for example, where $\widehat{M}_h(\theta)$ is the symbol of $M_h$), it follows for each frequency $\theta\in\Theta_h$ that \begin{equation}\label{GS_error_theta} D_t^{\delta}c_{\theta}^k(t) + \widehat{M}_h(\theta)c_{\theta}^k(t) = \widehat{N}_h(\theta) c_{\theta}^{k-1}(t),\; \hbox{for} \; k\geq 1,\; t>0. \end{equation} Considering the discretization of $D_t^{\delta}$ on the uniform grid $G_{\tau}$, $D_M^{\delta}$, defined in~\eqref{L1_scheme2}, and denoting $\left( c_{\theta}^{k,1},\ldots, c_{\theta}^{k,M}\right)$ the approximation of $c_{\theta}^{k}(t)$ on grid $G_{\tau}$, we obtain the following relation \begin{equation}\label{algebraic_system} \left(\begin{array}{c} c_{\theta}^{k,1} \\ c_{\theta}^{k,2}\\ \vdots \\ c_{\theta}^{k,M} \end{array}\right) = \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta) \widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta) \left(\begin{array}{c} c_{\theta}^{k-1,1} \\ c_{\theta}^{k-1,2}\\ \vdots \\ c_{\theta}^{k-1,M} \end{array}\right), \end{equation} where $\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau} (\theta)= \hbox{diag}(\widehat{N}_h(\theta))$, and $$\widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}(\theta) = \left(\begin{array}{cccc} r_1 +\widehat{M}_h(\theta) & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ r_2 & r_1 + \widehat{M}_h(\theta) & \cdots & 0 \\ \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\ r_M & \cdots & r_2 & r_1 + \widehat{M}_h(\theta) \end{array}\right),$$ with $r_i = \displaystyle \frac{\tau^{-\delta}}{\Gamma(2-\delta)} (d_i-d_{i-1}), i = 1, \ldots, M$, assuming $d_0 = 0$.\\ Denoting $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau} (\theta)=\widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta) \widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)$, we can define the smoothing factor of the relaxation procedure as follows \begin{equation}\label{smoothing_factor} \mu = \sup_{\Theta_h\backslash\Theta_{2h}} \left(\rho\left(\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)\right)\right). \end{equation} \noindent {\bf Coarse-grid correction analysis.} We now proceed to explain the analysis of the coarse-grid correction method. An error $e_h^k$ is transformed by this method as $e_h^{k+1} = C_h^{2h} e_h^k$, where $C_h^{2h} = I_h - I_{2h}^h (D_t^{\delta} + A_{2h})^{-1} I_h^{2h} (D_t^{\delta} + A_h)$ is the coarse-grid correction operator. Here $I_h$ is the identity operator, $D_t^{\delta}+A_h$ and $D_t^{\delta} + A_{2h}$ are the fine- and coarse-grid operators, respectively, and $I_{2h}^h$, $I_h^{2h}$ are transfer operators from coarse to fine grids and vice versa. \\ As we have chosen standard coarsening, the fine-grid Fourier mode $\varphi_h(\theta,x)$ when injected into the coarse grid, aliases with the coarse-grid Fourier mode $\varphi_{2h}(2\theta,x)$. Thus, for any low-frequency $\theta^0 \in \Theta_{2h}$, we define the high-frequency $\theta^1 = \theta^0 - {\rm sign}(\theta^0) \pi/h$. Taking this into account, the Fourier space is decomposed into two-dimensional subspaces, known as 2h-harmonics (see~\cite{TOS01,Wie01} for more details): \[ {\mathcal F}^2(\theta) = {\rm span} \{ \varphi_h(\theta^0,\cdot), \varphi_h(\theta^1,\cdot) \}, \quad \theta = \theta^0 \in \Theta_{2h}. \] The coarse-grid correction operator $C_h^{2h}$ leaves the two-dimensional subspace of harmonics ${\mathcal F}^2(\theta^0)$ invariant for an arbitrary Fourier frequency $\theta^0 \in \Theta_{2h}$. Let us define for any $\theta^0 \in \Theta_{2h}$ the vector $\boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta^0,\cdot) = (\varphi_h(\theta^0,\cdot),\varphi_h(\theta^1,\cdot))$. As the error at the iteration k can be written as $e_h^k(x,t) = \sum_{\theta \in \Theta_{2h}} {\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,x)^T$, with ${\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) = (c_{\theta^0}^k(t),c_{\theta^1}^k(t))$, the error at the iteration $k+1$ after application of the coarse-grid correction method is given by $\sum_{\theta \in \Theta_{2h}} \widehat{C}_h^{2h}(\theta) {\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,\cdot)^T$, where $\widehat{C}_h^{2h}(\theta)$ is a $2\times2$ matrix given by the expression \[ \widehat{C}_h^{2h}(\theta) = I_2- \widehat{I}_{2h}^h(\theta) (D_t^{\delta} + \widehat{A}_{2h}(\theta))^{-1} \widehat{I}_h^{2h}(\theta) (D_t^{\delta} + \widehat{A}_h(\theta)), \] where $I_2$ is the $2\times 2$ identity matrix, and $\widehat{A}_h(\theta), \widehat{A}_{2h}(\theta), \widehat{I}_{2h}^h(\theta), \widehat{I}_h^{2h}(\theta)$ denote the symbols of the fine- and coarse-grid spatial operators, the prolongation operator, and the restriction operator, respectively. The Fourier symbol of the fine-grid operator is given by $\widehat{A}_h(\theta) = {\rm diag}(\widehat{A}_h(\theta^0),\widehat{A}_h(\theta^1))$, and the symbol of the coarse grid operator by $\widehat{A}_{2h}(\theta)$. The Fourier symbols of the prolongation and restriction operators for $\theta = \theta^0\in\Theta_{2h}$ are given by \[ \widehat{I}_{2h}^h(\theta) = \left( \begin{array}{c} \widehat{I}_{2h}^h(\theta^0) \\ \widehat{I}_{2h}^h(\theta^1) \end{array} \right), \qquad \qquad \widehat{I}_{h}^{2h}(\theta) = (\widehat{I}_{h}^{2h}(\theta^0) ,\widehat{I}_{h}^{2h}(\theta^1)). \] Let us suppose that the error at the iteration $k$ is given by $${\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,\cdot)^T = c_{\theta^0}^k(t) \varphi_h(\theta^0,\cdot) + c_{\theta^1}^k(t) \varphi_h(\theta^1,\cdot).$$ By considering the discretization of $D_t^{\delta}$ on the uniform grid $G_{\tau}$, $D_M^{\delta}$, defined in~\eqref{L1_scheme2}, we obtain that the error after application of the coarse-grid correction is given by $\widetilde{{\mathcal C}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta) {\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,\cdot)^T$, with $\widetilde{{\mathcal C}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta)$ a $2M \times 2M$ matrix, given by \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal C}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta) = I_{2M}- \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_{2h}^h(\theta) (\widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{2h,\tau}(\theta))^{-1} \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_h^{2h}(\theta) \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta). \] Here, $I_{2M}$ is the identity matrix of order $2M$, $\widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)$ is the $2M\times 2M$ matrix \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0) & 0 \\ 0 & \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1) \end{array} \right), \quad \theta = \theta^0\in \Theta_{2h}, \] where for $\alpha=0,1$, \begin{equation}\label{fine_grid_operator_symbol} \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^{\alpha}) = \left(\begin{array}{cccc} r_1 + \widehat{A}_h(\theta^{\alpha}) & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ r_2 & r_1 + \widehat{A}_h(\theta^{\alpha}) & \cdots & 0 \\ \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\ r_M & \cdots & r_2 & r_1 + \widehat{A}_h(\theta^{\alpha}) \end{array}\right), \end{equation} with $\widehat{A}_h(\theta^{\alpha})$ the symbol of the fine-grid spatial operator, and $r_i = \displaystyle \frac{\tau^{-\delta}}{\Gamma(2-\delta)} (d_i-d_{i-1})$, for $i=1,\ldots, M$, assuming $d_0 = 0$. \\ About the restriction and interpolation, $\widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_h^{2h}(\theta)$ is the matrix $M\times 2M$ \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_h^{2h}(\theta) = \left[ \widehat{I}_{h}^{2h}(\theta^0) I_M ,\widehat{I}_{h}^{2h}(\theta^1) I_M \right], \] and $\widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_{2h}^{h}(\theta)$ is the matrix $2M\times M$ \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_{2h}^{h}(\theta) = \left[ \widehat{I}_{2h}^{h}(\theta^0) I_M ,\widehat{I}_{2h}^{h}(\theta^1) I_M \right]^T. \] \noindent {\bf Two-grid analysis.} Combining the Fourier smoothing analysis and the Fourier coarse-grid correction analysis previously introduced, we perform the semi-algebraic two-grid analysis. The two-grid operator ${\mathcal T}_{h,\tau}^{2h}$ is defined as ${\mathcal T}_{h,\tau}^{2h} = {\mathcal S}_{h,\tau}^{\nu_2} {\mathcal C}_{h,\tau}^{2h} {\mathcal S}_{h,\tau}^{\nu_1}$, where ${\mathcal C}_{h,\tau}^{2h}$ is the coarse-grid operator, ${\mathcal S}_{h,\tau}$ a smoothing operator, and $\nu_1$, $\nu_2$ indicate the number of pre- and post-smoothing steps, respectively. \\ We remind that the coarse grid correction operator ${\mathcal C}_{h,\tau}^{2h}$ leaves the two-dimen\-sional subspaces of harmonics ${\mathcal F}^2(\theta)$ invariant for an arbitrary Fourier frequency $\theta = \theta^0 \in \Theta_{2h}$. This same invariance property is true for the smoothers ${\mathcal S}_{h,\tau}$ considered in this work. Therefore, the two-grid operator ${\mathcal T}_{h,\tau}^{2h}$ also leaves the 2h-harmonic subspaces invariant. \\ Let us suppose that the error at the iteration $k$ is given by ${\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,\cdot)^T = c_{\theta^0}^k(t) \varphi_h(\theta^0,\cdot) + c_{\theta^1}^k(t) \varphi_h(\theta^1,\cdot)$. By considering the discretization of $D_t^{\delta}$ on the uniform grid $G_{\tau}$, $D_M^{\delta}$, defined in~\eqref{L1_scheme2}, we obtain that the error after application of the two-grid method is given by $\widetilde{{\mathcal T}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta) {\mathbf c}_{\theta}^k(t) \boldsymbol{\varphi}_h(\theta,\cdot)^T$, with $\widetilde{{\mathcal T}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta)$ a $2M \times 2M$ matrix, given by \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal T}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta) = \widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{\nu_2}(\theta) (I_{2M}- \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_{2h}^h(\theta) (\widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{2h,\tau}(\theta))^{-1} \widetilde{{\mathcal I}}_h^{2h}(\theta) \widetilde{{\mathcal A}}_{h,\tau}(\theta))\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{\nu_1}(\theta). \] If the chosen smoother is an iterative method which does not couple frequencies, then $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)$ is the $2M\times 2M$ matrix \[ \widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0) & 0 \\ 0 & \widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1) \end{array} \right), \] where for $\alpha=0,1$, $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^{\alpha})$ is given as previously. \\ In the case of a pattern waveform relaxation method, as the red-black waveform relaxation, it is well-known that the smoother couples frequencies but leaves invariant the two-dimensional subspaces ${\mathcal F}^2(\theta)$. In particular, for the red-black waveform relaxation considered in this work, the symbol is given by $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}(\theta) = \widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{black}(\theta)\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{red}(\theta)$, where $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{black}(\theta)$ and $\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{red}(\theta)$ are $2M\times 2M$ matrices coupling frequencies $\theta^0$ and $\theta^1$. More concretely, $$\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{red}(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc} \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^0)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0)+I_M & \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^1)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1)-I_M \\ \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^0)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0)-I_M & \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^1)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1)+I_M \end{array}\right),$$ $$\widetilde{{\mathcal S}}_{h,\tau}^{black}(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc} \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^0)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0)+I_M & -\widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^1)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1)+I_M \\ -\widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^0)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^0)+I_M & \widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}^{-1}(\theta^1)\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta^1)+I_M \end{array}\right),$$ where $I_M$ is the identity matrix of size $M\times M$, and $\widetilde{{\mathcal M}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)$ and $\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}_{h,\tau}(\theta)$ are given as explained in the smoothing analysis section, using that $M_h$ is the diagonal part of matrix $A_h$ as usual for a Jacobi-type relaxation. For a more detailed explanation of the semi-algebraic mode analysis for this smoother we refer to the reader to~\cite{sama}.\\ Finally, the convergence factor of the two-grid method, can be estimated as \begin{equation}\label{two_grid_factor} \rho = \sup_{\Theta_{2h}} \left(\rho\left(\widetilde{{\mathcal T}}_{h,\tau}^{2h}(\theta)\right)\right), \end{equation} \subsection{Analysis results}\label{sec:4_2} This section is focused on the analysis of the robustness of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method for the considered problem. When studying the multigrid convergence for the standard heat equation, it is well-known that parameter $\tau/h^2$ describes the anisotropy in the operator, resulting the relevant parameter for its analysis, see~\cite{paper_schrodinger} for example. However, as it can be observed in Figure~\ref{delta_lambda_star}, this parameter is not the important one for the time-fractional heat equation. In Figure~\ref{delta_lambda_star}, we depict the two-grid convergence factors provided by the semi-algebraic mode analysis for a range of values of parameter $\tau/h^2$ from $2^{-12}$ to $2^{12}$, for different fractional orders $\delta$. Only one smoothing step is considered, and the zebra-in-time smoother is used as previously described. It is clearly seen that, although the convergence rates are bounded by $0.2$ for all cases, we do not obtain a $\delta-$independent convergence for a fixed value of $\tau/h^2$. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{varias_deltas_lambda_star_sin_color_BBB_R.eps} \caption{Two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau/h^2$ from $2^{-12}$ to $2^{12}$ and different fractional orders $\delta$.} \label{delta_lambda_star} \end{center} \end{figure} In this case, the relevant parameter is $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$, as shown in Figure~\ref{delta_lambda}, where it is observed that the obtained multigrid convergence becomes robust for any value of $\delta$ with respect to parameter $\lambda$. In this figure, the number of time-steps is chosen as $M = 32$. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{varias_deltas_lambdas_sin_color_B_R.eps} \caption{Two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$ and various fractional orders $\delta$.} \label{delta_lambda} \end{center} \end{figure} Notice that, for any fixed value of $\delta$, the multigrid convergence is satisfactory for any value of parameter $\lambda$, which is very important for the global behavior of the method since this parameter will vary from grid-level to grid-level within the multigrid algorithm. The corresponding MATLAB function used to carry out the SAMA results in this figure is available as supplementary material. The results obtained by the semi-algebraic mode analysis match very accurately the real asymptotic convergence factors experimentally computed. This can be seen in Figure~\ref{comparison}, where the two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis (denoted as $\rho$ and displayed as a solid line) are compared with those asymptotic convergence factors experimentally computed (represented by $\rho_h$ and depicted by using circles). To compute these latter, we consider a grid of size $256\times32$, and we use a $W-$cycle, a random initial guess and a zero right-hand side in order to avoid round-off errors. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{SAMA_code_1d_B_R.eps} \caption{Comparison between the two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis ($\rho$) and the asymptotic convergence factor of a $W-$cycle experimentally computed ($\rho_h$), for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$ and fractional order $\delta = 0.4$.} \label{comparison} \end{center} \end{figure} We can see in the picture a very accurate prediction of the semi-algebraic mode analysis, making its use very useful for the analysis of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method. Finally, we would like to show that the behavior of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation is very satisfactory with respect to the number of time-levels considered. Since it is usually sufficient to analyze the behavior of the two-grid method to estimate the convergence of the multigrid method (see~\cite{TOS01}), in Table~\ref{lambdas_m}, we show the two-grid convergence factors provided by the analysis by considering a wide range of values of $M=2^k, \; k=5,\ldots,10$, together with the experimentally computed asymptotic convergence factors obtained by using the multilevel $W$-cycle with one smoothing step. As expected, the predicted two-grid convergence factors provide a very accurate estimation of the real asymptotic convergence of the method. These results are shown for different values of parameter $\lambda$, and a fixed value of the fractional order $\delta = 0.4$. \begin{table} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{ccccccc} \hline $\log_2 \lambda$ & $M=32$ & $M=64$ & $M=128$ & $M=256$ & $M=512$ & $M=1024$ \\ \hline -8 & 0.004 & 0.005 & 0.006 & 0.008 & 0.010 & 0.013 \\ & (0.004) & (0.005) & (0.006) & (0.009) & (0.012) & (0.014) \\ -6 & 0.016 & 0.018 & 0.023 & 0.028 & 0.036 & 0.045 \\ & (0.017) & (0.018) & (0.027) & (0.033) & (0.041) & (0.051) \\ -4 & 0.054 & 0.061 & 0.072 & 0.085 & 0.098 & 0.110 \\ & (0.055) & (0.065) & (0.079) & (0.088) & (0.091) & (0.112) \\ -2 & 0.116 & 0.120 & 0.125 & 0.128 & 0.132 & 0.134 \\ & (0.122) & (0.125) & (0.135) & (0.137) & (0.137) & (0.137) \\ 0 & 0.114 & 0.117 & 0.119 & 0.120 & 0.121 & 0.121 \\ & (0.120) & (0.120) & (0.120) & (0.121) & (0.122) & (0.122) \\ 2 & 0.054 & 0.058 & 0.060 & 0.062 & 0.062 & 0.063 \\ & (0.057) & (0.063) & (0.063) & (0.063) & (0.063) & (0.063) \\ 4 & 0.016 & 0.017 & 0.019 & 0.019 & 0.019 & 0.020 \\ & (0.020) & (0.020) & (0.020) & (0.020) & (0.020) & (0.020) \\ 6 & 0.004 & 0.004 & 0.005 & 0.005 & 0.005 & 0.005 \\ & (0.005) & (0.005) & (0.005) & (0.005) & (0.005) & (0.005) \\ 8 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.001 \\ & (0.001) & (0.001) & (0.001) & (0.001) & (0.001) & (0.001) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis together with the corresponding experimentally computed multilevel asymptotic convergence factors (between brackets) for different values of parameter $\lambda$ and for increasing number of time-steps, $M$, considering a fractional order $\delta = 0.4$. } \label{lambdas_m} \end{center} \end{table} \section{Fast implementation and computational cost}\label{sec:5} In Algorithm~\ref{wrmg_1}, we observe that the most time-consuming part of the multigrid waveform relaxation method is the calculation of the defect and the smoothing step. The remaining components of the algorithm can be performed with a computational cost proportional to the number of unknowns. In the calculation of the residual, for each spatial grid-point a matrix-vector multiplication $T_M x$ is required for some vector $x$, where $T_M$ is the low-triangular matrix \begin{equation} T_M = \left( \begin{array}{cccc} r_1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ r_2 & r_1 & \cdots & 0 \\ \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\ r_M & \cdots & r_2 & r_1 \end{array} \right), \label{Toeplitz_matrix} \end{equation} with $r_i = \displaystyle \frac{\tau^{-\delta}}{\Gamma(2-\delta)} (d_i-d_{i-1}), i = 1, \ldots, M$, assuming $d_0 = 0$. \\ Moreover, the smoothing part involves the solution of triangular linear systems. The matrix ${\mathcal A}_{h,\tau}$ of the discrete system to solve can be written as ${\mathcal A}_{h,\tau} = T_M \otimes I_N + A_h$, where $I_N$ denotes the identity matrix of order $N$, $A_h$ corresponds to the spatial discretization, $\otimes$ denotes the Kronecker product and $T_M$ is the low-triangular matrix given in \eqref{Toeplitz_matrix}. \\ In a standard implementation, the method would have a computational cost of at least $O(NM^2)$ operations due to the matrix-vector multiplication $T_M x$ and the solution of the triangular systems in the smoothing part of the algorithm. However, due to the special structure of matrix $T_M$, the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method can be implemented with a computational cost of $O(N M \log (M))$ operations with an storage cost for the system matrix of $O(M)$. To see this, we discuss the following issues in the next subsections: a fast matrix-vector multiplication, a fast solution of the low-triangular systems, an efficient storage of matrix ${\mathcal A}_{h,\tau}$ and an estimation of the computational cost of the complete multigrid waveform relaxation method. \subsection{An ${\mathbf {O(N M \log (M))}}$ calculation of the defect} To compute the residual in the multigrid waveform relaxation method, a matrix-vector multiplication ${\mathcal A}_{h,\tau} u$ is required. The matrix-vector multiplication corresponding to the spatial discretization can be calculated with a computational cost of $O(NM)$. Apart from this, for each spatial grid-point we have to perform a matrix-vector multiplication $T_M x$ for some vector $x$. Notice that matrix $T_M$ is an $M\times M$ Toeplitz matrix, and therefore it can be embedded into a $2M \times 2M$ circulant matrix $C_{2M}$ in the following way: \[ C_{2M} = \left( \begin{array}{cc} T_M & R_M \\ R_M & T_M \end{array} \right), \] where $$ R_M = \left( \begin{array}{ccccc} 0 & r_{M} & r_{M-1} & \cdots & r_2 \\ 0 & 0 & r_M & \cdots & r_3 \\ \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\ 0 & \cdots & 0 & \hdots & r_{M} \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \hdots & 0 \end{array} \right). $$ Taking into account that \[ \left( \begin{array}{cc} T_M & R_M \\ R_M & T_M \end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}{c} x \\ 0 \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{c} T_M x \\ * \end{array} \right), \] the matrix-vector multiplication is reduced to a circulant matrix-vector multiplication. It is known that a circulant matrix can be diagonalized by the Fourier matrix $F_{2M}$ as $C_{2M} = F_{2M}^* D_{2M} F_{2M}$, where $D_{2M}$ is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal elements are the eigenvalues of $C_{2M}$. By taking the fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the first column of $C_{2M}$, we can determine $D_{2M}$ in $O(M \log (M))$ operations. Once $D_{2M}$ is obtained, the multiplication $C_{2M} v$ for some vector $v$ can be calculated by using a couple of FFTs with $O(M \log (M))$ complexity. As this is the computational cost for each spatial grid-point, the product ${\mathcal A}_{h,\tau} u$ can be performed in $O(N M \log (M))$ operations. \subsection{An ${\mathbf {O(N M \log (M))}}$ implementation of the smoothing procedure} Other of the most consuming components of the multigrid waveform relaxation method for solving the time-fractional diffusion equation is the relaxation step, since dense low triangular systems must be solved. In the particular case of discrete problem \eqref{discrete_model_IVP_1}, for each spatial grid-point we need to solve a system of $M$ equations of the type $(T_M + 2/h^2 I_M) x = b$ for some known vector $b$. Due to the Toeplitz-structure of the matrix, the solution of the system can be obtained in $O(M \log (M))$ operations by using well-developed algorithms for the inversion of triangular Toeplitz matrices. With the inverse matrix obtained, which is again a Toeplitz matrix, the solution of the system is obtained by a matrix-vector multiplication with complexity of $O(M \log (M))$ operations by using the algorithm described in the previous subsection. Classical algorithms for the inversion of triangular Toeplitz matrices with complexity $O(M \log (M))$ include the Bini's algorithm \cite{bini}, its revised version \cite{lin_ching}, and the divide and conquer method \cite{commenges,morf}. In our implementation, we have chosen the latter, which is briefly described to make this work more self-contained. A low-triangular Toeplitz matrix $T_M$, with $M=2^p, p>1$, can be partitioned as follows \[ T_{M} = \left( \begin{array}{cc} T_{M/2} & \\ P_{M/2} & T_{M/2} \end{array} \right), \] where $T_{M/2}$ and $P_{M/2}$ are Toeplitz matrices of order $2^{p-1}$. Based on this partition, it is easy to see that the inverse of matrix $T_{M}$ can be written as \[ T_M^{-1} = \left( \begin{array}{cc} T_{M/2}^{-1} & \\ -T_{M/2}^{-1} P_{M/2} T_{M/2}^{-1}& T_{M/2}^{-1} \end{array} \right). \] This expression gives us a recurrent method to calculate the inverse of matrix $T_M$. Since the inverse of this matrix is Toeplitz, it is enough to calculate its first column. Given a small number $p_0$, we compute the inverse of the submatrix $T_{2^{p_0}}$ by the forward substitution method, for instance. Then we subsequently apply the recurrent formula to compute the inverse of $T_{M}$ in $p - p_0$ steps. On each step the first column of the Toeplitz matrix $-T_{M/2}^{-1} P_{M/2} T_{M/2}^{-1}$ is required, which can be calculated by FFTs. The total computational cost of the smoothing algorithm is therefore only $O(N M \log (M))$ at each iteration step. Moreover, since we need to solve several triangular systems with the same matrix but different right-hand sides, the first column of the inverse matrix can be computed a priori. \subsection{Storage cost and computational complexity of the multigrid waveform relaxation method} The non-local nature of the fractional derivatives results in a dense coefficient matrix yielding a bottleneck for the traditional numerical methods for fractional diffusion problems which require $O(M^2)$ units of storage. Due to the Toeplitz-structure of matrix $T_M$ the memory requirement for the storage of the coefficient matrix can be significantly reduced to $O(M)$, since to perform all the calculations in our algorithm, we only need to store its first column. \\ We consider a grid-hierarchy $G_0, G_1, \ldots, G_l$, where $G_k := G_{h_k,\tau}$ and $h_0>h_1>\ldots>h_l$. It is well-known that the computational work ${\cal W}_l$ per $V-$cycle on a grid $G_l$ is given by \cite{Stu_Tro} \[ {\cal W}_l = \sum_{k=1}^l {\cal W}_k^{k-1} + {\cal W}_0, \] where ${\cal W}_k^{k-1}$ is the computational work of a two-grid cycle excluding the work needed to solve the defect equation on $G_k$, and ${\cal W}_0$ is the work needed to compute the exact solution on the coarsest grid $G_0$. In the computational work ${\cal W}_k^{k-1}$, it is included the cost of a smoothing iteration, the calculation of the defect and its transfer to $G_{k-1}$, and the interpolation of the correction to $G_k$ and its addition to the previous approximation. From the previous subsections, we can estimate that the computational cost of a two-grid cycle is ${\cal W}_k^{k-1} = O(N_k M \log (M))$ and on the coarsest grid ${\cal W}_0 = O(M \log (M))$, where $N_k$ is the number of spatial grid-points on the grid $G_k$ and $M$ is the number of time steps. Therefore, we can say that the computational cost of a $V-$cycle on level $l$ is roughly \[ {\cal W}_l = (1+ \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2^2} + \ldots + \frac{1}{2^l}) O(N_l M \log (M)) = O(N_l M \log (M)), \] Thus, since the $V-$ cycle converges in a small number of iterations independent of the number of unknowns, the total computational cost for solving the time-fractional problem by the multigrid waveform relaxation method is roughly $O(N_l M \log (M))$. \section{Extension to 2D}\label{sec:6} \setcounter{section}{6} This section is devoted to the extension of the presented methodology to problems with two spatial dimensions. \\ \noindent {\bf Model problem and discretization.} We consider the two-dimensional time-frac\-tional diffusion equation as model problem, that is, \begin{eqnarray} D_t^{\delta} u - \Delta u &=& f(x,y,t),\quad (x,y)\in\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2,\; t>0, \label{2D_model_BVP_1}\\ u(x,y,t) &=& 0,\quad (x,y)\in \partial\Omega, \; t>0,\label{2D_model_BVP_2}\\ u(x,y,0) &=& g(x,y), \quad (x,y)\in\overline{\Omega},\label{2D_model_BVP_3} \end{eqnarray} where $\Delta$ denotes the two-dimensional Laplace operator, $\Omega$ is a square domain of length $L$, $\partial \Omega$ is its boundary and $\overline{\Omega} = \Omega \cup \partial \Omega$. $D_t^{\delta}$ denotes again the Caputo fractional derivative, \begin{equation}\label{caputo_bis} D_t^{\delta} u (x,y,t):= \left[\frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\delta)}\int_{0}^{t} (t-s)^{-\delta}\frac{\partial u(x,y,s)}{\partial s} ds\right],\quad (x,y)\in\Omega,\; t\geq 0. \end{equation} Let us consider a uniform grid $G_{h,\tau} = G_h\times G_{\tau}$, with \begin{equation}\label{spatial_mesh_2d} G_h = \left\{(x_n,y_l)\,\| \, x_n = nh,\, y_l = lh, \, n,l=0,1,\ldots,N+1\right\}, \end{equation} where $h=\displaystyle \frac{L}{N+1}$, and with $G_{\tau}$ given as in~\eqref{temporal_mesh}. The nodal approximation to the solution at each grid point $(x_n,y_l,t_m)\in G_{h,\tau}$ is denoted by $u_{n,l,m}$.\\ Standard central finite differences are used again to approximate the spatial derivatives, whereas the Caputo fractional derivative is discretized as \begin{equation} D_M^{\delta}u_{n,l,m}:=\frac{\tau^{-\delta}}{\Gamma(2-\delta)}\left[d_1 u_{n,l,m} - d_m u_{n,l,0} + \sum_{k=1}^{m-1}(d_{k+1}-d_k)u_{n,l,m-k}\right],\label{L1_scheme_2d} \end{equation} where coefficients $d_k$ are identically defined as in Section~\ref{sec:2}.\\ This results in the following discrete problem \begin{eqnarray} D_M^{\delta} u_{n,l,m}- \Delta_h u_{n,l,m} &=& f(x_n,y_l,t_m), 1\leq n,l\leq N,\; 1\leq m\leq M,\label{discrete_model_IVP_2d_1}\\ u_{n,l,m} &=& 0,\; (x_n,y_l)\in\partial \Omega\cap G_{h,\tau},\; 0<m\leq M,\label{discrete_model_IVP_2d_2}\\ u_{n,l,0} &=& g(x_n,y_l), 0\leq n,l\leq N+1,\label{discrete_model_IVP_2d_3} \end{eqnarray} where $$\Delta_h u_{n,l,m} = \frac{u_{n+1,l,m}+u_{n,l+1,m}-4u_{n,l,m}+u_{n-1,l,m}+u_{n,l-1,m}}{h^2}.$$ \noindent {\bf Multigrid waveform relaxation in 2D.} Regarding the solver for the considered two-dimensional time-fractional model problem~\eqref{2D_model_BVP_1}-\eqref{2D_model_BVP_3}, a red-black Gauss-Seidel waveform relaxation can be defined, after discretizing in space, as follows, \begin{eqnarray}\label{red-black_2d} &&D_t^{\delta}u_{n,l}^k(t) +\frac{4}{h^2}u_{n,l}^k(t) = \frac{1}{h^2}\left(u_{n-1,l}^{k-1}(t)+u_{n,l-1}^{k-1}(t)+u_{n+1,l}^{k-1}(t)+u_{n,l+1}^{k-1}(t) \right)\nonumber\\ && \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad+f_{n,l}(t),\; \hbox{if} \; n+l\; \hbox{is even},\\ &&D_t^{\delta}u_{n,l}^k(t)-\frac{1}{h^2}\left(u_{n-1,l}^{k}(t)+u_{n,l-1}^{k}(t)-4u_{n,l}^k(t)+u_{n+1,l}^{k}(t)+u_{n,l+1}^{k}(t)\right)\nonumber \\ && \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad= f_{n,l}(t),\; \hbox{if} \; n+l\; \hbox{is odd}. \end{eqnarray} Thus, the fully discrete problem given in~\eqref{discrete_model_IVP_2d_1}-\eqref{discrete_model_IVP_2d_3} can be solved by using an extension of the multigrid waveform relaxation algorithm proposed in Section~\ref{sec:3}. In this case, the method combines a two-dimensional coarsening strategy in the space variables and again a line-in-time smoother based on the red-black Gauss-Seidel waveform relaxation, that is, the lines in time are visited following a red-black or chessboard manner. Regarding the inter-grid transfer operators, the standard two-dimensional full-weighting restriction and bilinear interpolation are considered.\\ \noindent {\bf Semi-algebraic mode analysis in 2D.} The semi-algebraic mode analysis presented in Section~\ref{sec:4} can be also extended to study the convergence of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method. For this analysis, very little has to be changed from the theory developed in Section~\ref{sec:4}. The infinite grid ${\mathcal G}_h$ is defined as the extension of the spatial mesh given in~\eqref{spatial_mesh_2d}, and then, the grid-functions defined on such a grid can again be expressed as formal linear combinations of the Fourier components which in this case are given by the product of two complex exponential functions, i.e. $\varphi_h({\boldsymbol \theta},{\mathbf x}) = e^{\imath {\boldsymbol \theta} \cdot {\mathbf x}} = e^{\imath \theta_x \, x}e^{\imath \theta_y\, y},$ where ${\boldsymbol \theta} = (\theta_x,\theta_y)\in{\boldsymbol \Theta}_h = (-\pi/h,\pi/h]\times (-\pi/h,\pi/h]$, and which form the new Fourier space. In the two-dimensional spatial case, it is well-known that the Fourier space is decomposed in four-dimensional subspaces $${\mathcal F}^4 ({\boldsymbol \theta}) = \hbox{span}\left\{\varphi_h({\boldsymbol \theta}^{00},\cdot), \, \varphi_h({\boldsymbol \theta}^{11},\cdot), \, \varphi_h({\boldsymbol \theta}^{10},\cdot), \, \varphi_h({\boldsymbol \theta}^{01},\cdot) \right\},$$ generated by four Fourier modes associated with one low frequency ${\boldsymbol \theta} = {\boldsymbol \theta}^{00}\in {\Theta}_{2h} = [-\pi/2h,\pi/2h)^2$ and three high frequencies ${\boldsymbol \theta}^{11}$, ${\boldsymbol \theta}^{10}$ and ${\boldsymbol \theta}^{01}$ such that, $${\boldsymbol \theta}^{\alpha_1,\alpha_2} = {\boldsymbol \theta}^{00} - (\alpha_1\, \hbox{sign}(\theta_1^{00})\pi, \, \alpha_2\,\hbox{sign}(\theta_2^{00})\pi), \; \alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\{0,1\},$$ which are coupled on the coarse grid by the aliasing effect. \\ Similarly as in the one-dimensional case, the semi-algebraic mode analysis in 2D is based on a two-dimensional spatial local Fourier analysis combined with an exact analysis in time. In this way, the resulting Fourier representations of the smoothing, coarse-grid and two-grid operators are $4M\times 4M$ matrices.\\ \noindent {\bf Analysis results.} Next, we present some results obtained by using the semi-algebraic analysis. Similarly as we saw for the 1D model problem, if we analyze the convergence of the method depending on parameter $\tau/h^2$, although the convergence rates are bounded by $0.25$ for all cases, we do not obtain a $\delta-$independent convergence for a fixed value of $\tau/h^2$. This can be seen in Figure~\ref{delta_lambda_star_2d}. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{deltas_lambda_star_2d_B} \caption{Two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau/h^2$ and various fractional orders $\delta$.} \label{delta_lambda_star_2d} \end{center} \end{figure} However, we can show that the obtained multigrid convergence becomes robust for any value of $\delta$ with respect to parameter $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$. This is shown in Figure~\ref{delta_lambda_2d}, where $M = 32$ time-levels have been considered, and the two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis for one smoothing step are shown for different values of parameter $\lambda$ and for different fractional orders $\delta$. Notice that the graphs corresponding to the different values of $\delta$ are almost indistinguishable, and for any value of $\lambda$ the multigrid convergence results very satisfactory. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{deltas_robusto_lambda_B_R} \caption{Two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$ and various fractional orders $\delta$.} \label{delta_lambda_2d} \end{center} \end{figure} These results can be confirmed with the asymptotic convergence factors experimentally computed. In particular, for $\delta = 0.4$, we show this comparative in Figure~\ref{comparison_2d}, where the two-grid convergence factors predicted by the semi-algebraic mode analysis are displayed together with the asymptotic convergence rates computed by using a $W(1,0)-$multigrid waveform relaxation algorithm on a fine grid of size $256\times256\times 32$. Again, a random initial guess and a zero right-hand side are used to perform these calculations. Similar pictures can be obtained for other fractional orders $\delta$. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{SAMA_code_2d_B_R.eps} \caption{Comparison between the two-grid convergence factors predicted by the analysis ($\rho$) and the asymptotic convergence factor of a $W-$cycle experimentally computed ($\rho_h$), for different values of parameter $\lambda = \tau^{\delta} \Gamma(2-\delta)/h^2$ and fractional order $\delta = 0.4$.} \label{comparison_2d} \end{center} \end{figure} We can observe a very accurate match between the analysis results and the rates experimentally obtained. \noindent \textbf{Remark.} In Figures~\ref{comparison} (1d case) and ~\ref{comparison_2d} (2d case), it is observed a different behavior of the multigrid method when $\lambda$ becomes big enough, that is, in the limit case of the steady problem. In that case, it is well-known that the multigrid method based on a red-black smoother is an exact solver in the one-dimensional case whereas for a two-dimensional diffusion problem the convergence rate is about $0.25$ for a $W-$cycle with one smoothing step (see~\cite{TOS01}). \section{Numerical results}\label{sec:7} In this section, we consider three different numerical experiments to illustrate the efficiency of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method for solving the time-fractional heat equation. For all cases we perform $V-$cycles since they provide similar convergence rates to $W-$cycles and therefore a more efficient multigrid method is obtained. We will start solving both one- and two-dimensional linear problems and finally we will solve a non-linear one-dimensional problem. All numerical computations were carried out using MATLAB.\\ \noindent{\bf One-dimensional linear time-fractional heat equation.} We show the efficient performance of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation for a problem which considers reasonably general and realistic hypotheses on the behavior of the solution near the initial time. In particular, we consider a problem whose solution is smooth away from the initial time ($t=0$) but it has a certain singular behavior at $t=0$ presenting a boundary layer. The theoretical convergence analysis of the considered finite difference discretization has been deeply studied in~\cite{martin1}. Here, we will show that the convergence of the WRMG is satisfactory for this representative model problem. We consider problem~\eqref{model_IVP_1}-\eqref{model_IVP_3} defined on a domain $[0,\pi]\times [0,1]$, with a zero right-hand side ($f(x,t) = 0$) and an initial condition $g(x) = \sin\, x$. Then, function $u(x,t) = E_{\delta}(-t^{\delta})\sin\, x$, where $E_{\delta}:{\mathbb R} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ is given by $$E_{\delta}(z) := \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{z^k}{\Gamma(\delta \, k + 1)},$$ satisfies our initial-boundary value problem~\cite{Luchko, martin1}. In Figure~\ref{solution_picture}, we can observe the sharpness of the analytical solution near the initial time, where a boundary layer appears. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{Solution_analytical_delta_0_1_B.eps} \caption{Analytical solution $u(x,t)$ of the first test problem, for fractional order $\delta=0.1$.} \label{solution_picture} \end{center} \end{figure} In~\cite{martin1}, it is proved rigorously that for ``typical'' solutions of~\eqref{model_IVP_1}-\eqref{model_IVP_3} (no excessive smooth solutions) a rate of convergence of ${\mathcal O}(h^2+\tau^{\delta})$ is obtained. This is shown in Figure~\ref{error_reduction} for four different values of $\delta$, where the maximum errors between the analytical and the numerical solution are displayed for various numbers of time-steps $M$ and assuming a sufficiently fine spatial grid. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{log_log_plot_figure_7_B.eps} \caption{Reduction of the maximum errors obtained for four different values of $\delta$, for the first test problem.} \label{error_reduction} \end{center} \end{figure} It can be seen that the slopes of the obtained graphs match with the expected convergence rates. For small values of $\delta$, a very fine temporal mesh would be required to attain the asymptotic rate of convergence, and this is the case of $\delta = 0.1$ in the picture where a slow convergence of the rates to the expected asymptotic rate of $0.1$ is observed. Next, we show the independence of the convergence of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation method with respect to the discretization parameters. For this purpose, we consider different values of the fractional order $\delta$ and different grid-sizes varying from $128\times 128$ to $2048\times 2048$ doubling the mesh-size in both spatial and temporal dimensions. In Table~\ref{table_it_1d} we display the number of WRMG iterations necessary to reduce the initial residual in a factor of $10^{-10}$, together with the mean convergence factors and the corresponding CPU time, when considering a $V(0,1)-$cycle. We can observe that the performance of the $V-$cycle is also satisfactory for any value of $\delta$ and for increasing mesh-sizes, as it was already seen for the $W-$cycle in the analysis results section. Moreover, we choose only one post-smoothing step since this approach provides much better convergence factors than a $V(1,0)-$cycle. Taking into account these considerations, we observe from Table~\ref{table_it_1d} a robust convergence of the considered WRMG.\\ \begin{table} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{cccccc} \hline $\delta$ & $128\times 128$ & $256\times 256$ & $512\times 512$ & $1024\times 1024$ & $2048\times 2048$ \\ \hline 0.1 & 8 (0.03) 0.54s & 8 (0.03) 1s & 8 (0.03) 2.96s & 8 (0.03) 10.54s & 7 (0.03) 36.16s \\ 0.4 & 7 (0.03) 0.49s & 7 (0.03) 0.91s & 7 (0.03) 2.60s & 7 (0.03) 9.31s & 7 (0.03) 36.34s \\ 0.7 & 7 (0.04) 0.47s & 7 (0.04) 0.90s & 7 (0.04) 2.54s & 7 (0.04) 9.15s & 7 (0.04) 36.10s \\ 1.0 & 7 (0.05) 0.46s & 7 (0.05) 0.88s & 7 (0.05) 2.54s & 6 (0.05) 7.96s & 6 (0.05) 30.69s \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Number of $V(0,1)-$WRMG iterations necessary to reduce the initial residual in a factor of $10^{-10}$ for different fractional orders $\delta$ and for different grid-sizes. The corresponding average convergence factors (between brackets) and the CPU times in seconds are also included.} \label{table_it_1d} \end{center} \end{table} \noindent{\bf Two-dimensional linear time-fractional heat equation.} The second numerical experiment deals with the solution of a two-dimensional linear time-fractional diffusion problem. We consider the following model problem defined on the spatial domain $\Omega=(0,2)\times (0,2)$ \begin{eqnarray} D_t^{\delta} u - \Delta u &=& f(x,y,t),\quad (x,y)\in\Omega, \; t>0, \label{2D_model_BVP_1_ex}\\ u(x,y,t) &=& 0,\quad (x,y)\in \partial\Omega, \; t>0,\label{2D_model_BVP_2_ex}\\ u(x,y,0) &=& 0, \quad (x,y)\in\overline{\Omega},\label{2D_model_BVP_3_ex} \end{eqnarray} where $$f(x,y,t) = \left(\frac{2t^{2-\delta}}{\Gamma(3-\delta)}+\left(1+\frac{\pi^2}{2}\right)t^2\right)\sin \frac{\pi\,x}{2}\sin\frac{\pi\, y}{2},$$ in the way that the analytic solution of the problem is $$u(x,y,t) = t^2 \sin\frac{\pi\, x}{2}\sin \frac{\pi\,y}{2}.$$ We consider the multigrid waveform relaxation method described in Section~\ref{sec:6}, by using a $V(1,1)-$cycle. This choice is based on the semi-algebraic mode analysis results presented in Section~\ref{sec:6}. Due to the difference of the behavior of the method between the one- and two-dimensional problems, we have chosen two-smoothing steps to perform the calculations in this test case. \\ In Table~\ref{table_it_2d} we display the number of WRMG iterations necessary to reduce the initial residual in a factor of $10^{-10}$ for different grid-sizes varying from $32\times 32\times 32$ to $256\times 256\times 256$ and for different values of the fractional order $\delta$. We can observe that the convergence of the proposed multigrid waveform relaxation is very robust with respect to the considered parameters. In the table, we also show the mean convergence factors and the corresponding CPU times. \begin{table} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{ccccc} \hline $\delta$ & $32\times 32\times 32$ & $64\times 64\times 64$ & $128\times 128\times 128$ & $256\times 256\times 256$ \\ \hline 0.1 & 12 (0.10) 2.46s & 12 (0.10) 10.31s & 12 (0.11) 55.52s & 12 (0.11) 349.98s \\ 0.4 & 12 (0.09) 2.51s & 12 (0.10) 10.45s & 12 (0.11) 55.86s & 12 (0.11) 348.29s \\ 0.7 & 11 (0.09) 2.27s & 12 (0.10) 10.31s & 12 (0.11) 55.63s & 12 (0.11) 344.57s \\ 1.0 & 11 (0.09) 2.29s & 11 (0.10) 9.68s & 12 (0.11) 55.73s & 12 (0.11) 346.44s \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Number of $V(1,1)-$WRMG iterations necessary to reduce the initial residual in a factor of $10^{-10}$, together with the corresponding average convergence factors (between brackets) and the CPU times in seconds, for different fractional orders $\delta$ and for different grid-sizes.} \label{table_it_2d} \end{center} \end{table} We can observe a very satisfactory convergence in all cases, making the multigrid waveform relaxation method a good choice for an efficient solution of the time-fractional two-dimensional heat equation. \\ \noindent{\bf One-dimensional nonlinear problem.} The last numerical experiment is devoted to deal with a nonlinear problem which appears in the modeling of anomalous diffusion in porous media~\cite{Hilfer, SIAM_plociniczak}. We consider the following time-fractional partial differential equation \begin{equation}\label{anomalous_diffusion} D_t^{\delta} u = \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(D(u)\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)+c\frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + f(x,t), \end{equation} where $D_t^{\delta}$ denotes again the Caputo fractional derivative operator with $0<\delta<1$, and $f(x,t)$ represents a source term. In this test problem we assume homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions and a zero initial condition. \\ Choosing $c=0$, model problem~\eqref{anomalous_diffusion} has been used to describe the moisture distribution in construction materials~\cite{paper_plociniczak} for example, whereas if the convective term is included it is used to describe transport models for single-phase gas through tight rocks~\cite{shale_gas} or in groundwater hydrology~\cite{Baeumer}. For the discretization of problem~\eqref{anomalous_diffusion}, we consider again a uniform grid in space and time with step-sizes $h$ and $\tau$, respectively. The fractional temporal derivative is discretized as previously by using the L1 scheme (see~\eqref{L1_scheme2}). Regarding the spatial discretization, in an interior point $(x_n,t_m)$ the diffusion term is approximated by \begin{equation}\label{spatial_discretization} \frac{1}{h}\left[a_{n+1/2,m}\frac{u_{n+1,m}-u_{n,m}}{h} - a_{n-1/2,m}\frac{u_{n,m}-u_{n-1,m}}{h}\right], \end{equation} where $a_{n\pm 1/2,m} = \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\left[D(u_{n\pm1,m})+D(u_{n,m})\right]$, and for the convective term a standard upwind scheme is considered.\\ For the solution of the resulting discrete problem, we propose a nonlinear multigrid waveform relaxation method, that is, the well-known waveform relaxation FAS method. This algorithm is easily derived from the standard FAS method~\cite{TOS01} for solving elliptic equations. For a detailed description of the proposed algorithm we refer the reader to the book~\cite{Vandewalle_book}. A nonlinear Gauss-Seidel waveform relaxation with a red-black ordering is considered, together with standard transfer-grid operators. Again, a $V(0,1)-$cycle is chosen to perform the calculations. \\ In Table~\ref{table_nonlinear}, we show the convergence of the proposed algorithm for the case of $D(u) = 1+u^2$, $c=1$ and $f(x,t) = 1$, and for different values of the fractional order $\delta$. In particular, we display the number of iterations required to reduce the maximum initial residual by a factor of $10^{-10}$ for different grid-sizes and the corresponding mean convergence factors (between brackets). \begin{table} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{ccccc} \hline $\delta$ & $32\times 32$ & $64\times 64$ & $128\times 128$ & $256\times 256$ \\ \hline 0.1 & 11 (0.09) & 11 (0.10) & 11 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) \\ 0.4 & 11 (0.09) & 11 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) \\ 0.7 & 11 (0.09) & 11 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) \\ 1.0 & 11 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) & 12 (0.10) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Number of $V(0,1)-$iterations of the waveform relaxation FAS method required to reduce the initial residual in a factor of $10^{-10}$ for different fractional orders $\delta$ and for different grid-sizes, together with the corresponding mean convergence factors (between brackets).} \label{table_nonlinear} \end{center} \end{table} From the results in Table~\ref{table_nonlinear}, we can conclude that the waveform relaxation FAS method shows a similar behavior as the linear multigrid waveform relaxation method for the time-fractional diffusion problems. \section{Conclusions}\label{sec:8} A multigrid waveform relaxation method has been proposed for solving the time-fractional heat equation. The convergence of this method has been studied by a suitable semi-algebraic mode analysis, which combines a classical exponential Fourier analysis in space with an algebraic computation in time. The results of this analysis show the efficiency and robustness of the proposed algorithm for the solution of the considered problem for different fractional orders. The proposed method has a computational cost of $O(N M \log(M))$ operations, where $M$ is the number of time steps and $N$ is the number of spatial grid points. Moreover, three numerical experiments confirm the good behavior of the WRMG method. In particular a linear one-dimensional representative problem, a linear two-dimensional model problem and a nonlinear one-dimensional problem with applications in porous media are efficiently solved in this work. \section*{Acknowledgments} The authors thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions which helped to improve the paper. \bibliographystyle{plain}
\subsection{S1.\ \ Isolated oscillator dynamics} In the absence of coupling, each isolated oscillator in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:system} of the main text belongs to the class oscillators whose governing equation can be written in polar form as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:single-oscillator} \begin{split} \dot{\theta} &= \omega + a(r - r_c),\\ \dot{r} &= b r \left( 1 - \frac{r}{r_c} \right). \end{split} \end{equation} This system has a limit cycle, which is given by $\theta = \theta_0 + \omega t$ and $r = r_c$, has constant angular frequency $\omega$ and constant amplitude $r_c>0$, and is exponentially stable with convergence rate $b > 0$. Note that we may assume $a = 1$ and $r_c = 1$ without loss of generality, since we can transform Eq.~\eqref{eqn:single-oscillator} into equations of the same form with $a = 1$ and $r_c = 1$ by scaling the time variable as $a r_c t \to t$ and the amplitude as $r/r_c \to r$, while redefining the other parameters as $\omega/(a r_c) \to \omega $ and $b/(a r_c) \to b$. In writing Eq.~\eqref{eqn:system} of the main text, we have assumed that the oscillators have the same value for $\omega$, $a$ ($=1$), and $r_c$ ($=1$), but can have different values for $b$. Note that we have made both coupling terms to be proportional to $r_i$ in order to ensure that the r.h.s.\ of Eq.~\eqref{eqn:system} of the main text is continuous and differentiable at $r_i = 0$, $\forall i$. In the synchronous state~\eqref{eqn:sync-state} of the main text, each oscillator in the network follows the limit cycle mentioned above. \subsection{S2.\ \ Stability of synchronous state} We analyze the stability through the eigenvalues of the $2n \times 2n$ Jacobian matrix of system described by Eq.~\eqref{eqn:system} of the main text, evaluated at the synchronous state. The Jacobian matrix can be written in a block form as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:jacob1} \mathbf{J} = \begin{pmatrix} \gamma \mathbf{K} & \mathbf{1} \\ - \varepsilon\mathbf{L} & - \mathbf{D} \end{pmatrix}, \end{equation} where $\mathbf{K}$ is the $n \times n$ Laplacian matrix for the all-to-all coupling topology, $\mathbf{1}$ is the $n \times n$ identity matrix, $\mathbf{L}$ is the $n \times n$ Laplacian matrix corresponding to the adjacency matrix $\mathbf{A}$, and $\mathbf{D}$ is the diagonal matrix whose diagonal components are $b_1,\ldots,b_n$. Let us denote the eigenvalues of $\mathbf{J}$ by $\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \ldots, \lambda_{2n}$, noting that $\mathbf{J}$ always has a zero eigenvalue, $\lambda_1 = 0$, associated with eigenvector $u_1$, whose components are given by $u_{1j} = 1$ if $1 \le j \le n$ and $u_{1j} = 0$ if $n+1 \le j \le 2n$. Since perturbations along this eigenvector do not destroy synchronization, the condition for synchronization stability is then written as \begin{equation} \Lambda := \max_{2 \le j \le 2n} \text{Re}(\lambda_j) < 0. \end{equation} Here $\Lambda$ is the maximum Lyapunov exponent, which measures the exponential rate of convergence to (or divergence from, if $\Lambda > 0$) the synchronous state, thus providing a quantitative measure of the strength of synchronization stability. \subsection{S3.\ \ Networks of coupled Stuart-Landau oscillators} The Stuart-Landau equation is derived from the normal form of a supercritical Hopf bifurcation~\cite{kuramoto2003chemical} and takes the following general form: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:SL1} \dot{z} = c_1 z - c_3 z \|z\|^2, \end{equation} where $z$ is a complex variable, and $c_1$ and $c_3$ are complex coefficients. Assuming that a limit cycle exists, normalizing $z$ by the amplitude of the limit cycle, and re-parameterizing the coefficients in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:SL1}, we obtain \begin{equation}\label{eqn:SL2} \dot{z} = [b + \mathbf{i} (\omega + a)] z - (b + \mathbf{i} a) z \|z\|^2, \end{equation} where $b>0$ follows from the existence of the limit cycle (thus making Eq.~\eqref{eqn:SL2} correspond to the post-bifurcation regime of this supercritical Hopf bifurcation) and we denote the imaginary unit as $\mathbf{i} := \sqrt{-1}$. The limit cycle follows the unit circle in the complex plane with constant angular frequency $\omega$, and hence is given by $z(t) = e^{ \mathbf{i} (\omega t + \theta_0)}$ for some constant $\theta_0$. The constant $a$ parametrizes the dependence of the angular frequency on the amplitude $\|z\|$. This can be seen when writing Eq.~\eqref{eqn:SL2} in polar form using $z = r e^{\mathbf{i} \theta}$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:SL3} \begin{split} \dot{\theta} &= \omega + a(1 - r^2 ),\\ \dot{r} &= b r (1 - r^2). \end{split} \end{equation} In this form the limit cycle is given by $\theta(t) = \omega t + \theta_0$, $r(t) = 1$. Equations~\eqref{eqn:SL2} and \eqref{eqn:SL3} are thus equivalent descriptions of the dynamics of a single Stuart-Landau oscillator. While Eq.~\eqref{eqn:SL3} is different from Eq.~\eqref{eqn:single-oscillator}, the role of parameter $b$ is the same because in both cases $b$ gives the exponential rate of convergence to the limit cycle. We consider a network of $n$ diffusively coupled Stuart-Landau oscillators whose dynamics is governed by \begin{equation}\label{eqn:coupled-SL1} \dot{z_i} = [b_i + \mathbf{i} (\omega + a)] z_i - (b_i + \mathbf{i} a) z_i \|z_i\|^2 + \sum_{j=1}^n C_{ij} \left(\frac{z_j}{\|z_j\|} - \frac{z_i}{\|z_i\|} \right). \end{equation} Note that the coupling is through $z_i/\|z_i\| = e^{\mathbf{i}\theta_i}$, which depends only on the angle variable $\theta_i$. The matrix $\mathbf{C} := (C_{ij})_{1 \le i,j \le n}$ of coupling coefficients can be interpreted as a complex-valued adjacency matrix of the network. Defining the corresponding Laplacian matrix $\mathbf{G}$ by $G_{ij} = - C_{ij}$ if $i \neq j$ and $G_{ii} = \sum_{k \neq i} C_{ik}$, the coupling term in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:coupled-SL1} can also be written as $- \sum_{j=1}^n G_{ij} z_j/\|z_j\|$. Note that we have assumed that the limit cycle frequency $\omega$ and the parameter $a$ are identical for all oscillators, while the parameter $b_i$ can be different for different oscillators. System~\eqref{eqn:coupled-SL1} has a synchronous state (which can be stable or unstable) given by $z_i(t) = e^{ \mathbf{i} (\omega t + \theta_0)}$ for all $i$. In polar form, Eq.~\eqref{eqn:coupled-SL1} can be written as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:coupled-SL2} \begin{split} \dot{\theta_i} &= \omega + a(1 - r_i^2 ) + \frac{1}{r_i} \sum_{j=1}^n \text{Re}(C_{ij}) \sin(\theta_j - \theta_i) + \frac{1}{r_i} \sum_{j=1}^n \text{Im}(C_{ij}) [\cos(\theta_j - \theta_i) - 1],\\ \dot{r_i} &= b_i r_i (1 - r_i^2) + \sum_{j=1}^n \text{Re}(C_{ij}) [\cos(\theta_j - \theta_i) - 1] - \sum_{j=1}^n \text{Im}(C_{ij}) \sin(\theta_j - \theta_i). \end{split} \end{equation} It can be shown that the Jacobian matrix of this system, evaluated at the synchronous state, can be written using the Laplacian matrix $\mathbf{G}$ as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:jacob2} \begin{pmatrix} -\text{Re}(\mathbf{G}) & -2a\mathbf{1} \\ \text{Im}(\mathbf{G}) & -2\mathbf{D} \end{pmatrix}, \end{equation} where we recall that $\mathbf{1}$ denotes the $n \times n$ identity matrix and $\mathbf{D}$ is the diagonal matrix whose diagonal components are $b_1,\ldots,b_n$. We see that this Jacobian matrix becomes identical to the one in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:jacob1} if we set $a = -1/2$, scale the parameters $b_i$ as $b_i \to b_i/2$, and let $\text{Re}(\mathbf{C}) = -\gamma \mathbf{A}'$, $\text{Im}(\mathbf{C}) = - \varepsilon \mathbf{A}$, where $\mathbf{A}'$ is the adjacency matrix of the (unweighted) all-to-all network (i.e., $A'_{ij} = 1$, $\forall i \neq j$) and $\mathbf{A}$ is the same adjacency matrix used for Eq.~\eqref{eqn:jacob1}. Since the maximum Lyapunov exponent is the maximum real part of the eigenvalue of the Jacobian matrix in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:jacob2}, we see that the $b_i$-dependence of the stability of the synchronous state is identical to system (1) of the main text. \subsection{S4.\ \ Simulation of network dynamics} To simulate the dynamics for Fig.~\ref{fig1} of the main text we integrated Eq.~\eqref{eqn:system} using $\delta = 0.3$, $\gamma = 0.1$, $\varepsilon = 2$, and $\omega = 1$. For $0 \le t < 75$ we set $b_i$ as indicated by the red numbers in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a). The common value $b^* \approx 1.868$ for $b_i$ was computed by numerically minimizing $\Lambda$ under the constraint of equal $b_i$, using Matlab's implementation of the simplex algorithm in Ref.~\cite{Lagarias1998}. For $75 \le t \le 150$ we set $b_i$ as indicated by the blue numbers in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a), which was found by the numerical minimization of $\Lambda$ without the equal $b_i$ constraint but with the constraint $b_i > 0$, $\forall i$. To solve this constrained optimization problem we used Matlab's implementation of the interior point algorithm~\cite{Byrd1999}. \subsection{S5.\ \ Animated demonstration of asymmetry-induced symmetry} \href{https://youtu.be/zP_6EuMzt1I}{Supplemental Movie} (\url{https://youtu.be/zP_6EuMzt1I}) shows the dynamics of the example network in Fig.~1 of the main text, in which oscillator heterogeneity is required to stabilize a homogeneous, synchronous state. In panel~(a), circles represent the limit cycle each oscillator would follow in the absence of coupling. The $b_i$ value of the $i$th oscillator is shown inside the corresponding circle. Starting nearly synchronized, the oscillators with homogeneous $b_i$ desynchronize and approach a traveling-wave state; after making $b_i$ values suitably heterogeneous at $t = 75$, the oscillators converge spontaneously to the synchronous state, indicating that the state is now stable. Panels~(b)--(f) show an animation of Fig.~1(b)--(f) of the main text, in which moving colored dots are used to visualize the dynamics of the individual oscillators. \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=7in]{supp_movie_snapshot.png} \mbox{FIG.~S1. Snapshot from \href{https://youtu.be/zP_6EuMzt1I}{Supplemental Movie} demonstrating asymmetry-induced symmetry.} \end{center} \clearpage \subsection{S6.\ \ Nonuniform networks requiring oscillator heterogeneity for synchronization stability} To demonstrate that there are nonuniform networks for which nonuniform $b_i$ values are necessary for the stability of the (uniform) synchronous state, we have generated random undirected unweighted networks of size $n = 5$ with $4$, $6$, and $8$ links. Figure~S2 below shows, for each number of links, one representative network that has a $\gamma$ value for which (1) the maximum Lyapunov exponent $\Lambda>0$ for all possible uniform $b_i$ (i.e., for all $b$ with $b_1 = \cdots = b_5 = b$), and (2) there are nonuniform $b_i$ values for which $\Lambda<0$. \begin{center} \includegraphics{non_uniform_fig.pdf}\\ \end{center} FIG.~S2. Maximum Lyapunov exponent $\Lambda$ vs.\ parameter $b$ with $b_i = b$ for all $i$ (middle column) and vs.\ the distance from the best uniform $b_i$ values in the five-dimensional $b_i$-space (right column) for three examples of nonuniform networks (left column). The nodes are labeled with the optimal uniform (red) and nonuniform (blue) $b_i$ values. In these examples we used $\delta = 0.3$, $\varepsilon = 2$, and $\gamma=0.205$ (top row), $\gamma=0.290$ (middle row), or $\gamma=0.420$ (bottom row). \subsection{S7.\ \ Scaling property of $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$} Let us write $\mathbf{J} = \mathbf{J}(\varepsilon, \gamma, \mathbf{D}, \mathbf{L})$ and define $\mathbf{D'}$ to be the diagonal matrix with diagonal elements $b'_1,\ldots,b'_n$. The characteristic polynomial of $\mathbf{J}$ can be written as \begin{equation} \begin{split} \det&(\mathbf{J} - \lambda \mathbf{1}) = \det\bigl((-\gamma \mathbf{K}\mathbf{D} + \varepsilon\mathbf{L}) + \lambda(\mathbf{D} - \gamma\mathbf{K}) + \lambda^2\mathbf{1}\bigr)\\ &= \det\Bigl(\textstyle\frac{\varepsilon}{\varepsilon_0}(-\gamma'\mathbf{K}\mathbf{D}' + \varepsilon_0\mathbf{L}) + \textstyle\frac{\varepsilon}{\varepsilon_0}\lambda'(\mathbf{D}' - \gamma'\mathbf{K}) + \textstyle\frac{\varepsilon}{\varepsilon_0}(\lambda')^2\mathbf{1} \Bigr)\\ &= \bigl(\textstyle\frac{\varepsilon}{\varepsilon_0}\bigr)^n \det\Bigl((-\gamma'\mathbf{K}\mathbf{D}' + \varepsilon_0\mathbf{L}) + \lambda'(\mathbf{D}' - \gamma'\mathbf{K}) + (\lambda')^2\mathbf{1} \Bigr), \end{split} \end{equation} where $\lambda' := \lambda\sqrt{\varepsilon_0/\varepsilon}$. Notice that the determinant in the last expression is precisely the characteristic polynomial of $\mathbf{J}(\varepsilon_0, \gamma', \mathbf{D}', \mathbf{L})$ with $\lambda$ replaced by $\lambda'$. Thus, we have that $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $\mathbf{J}(\varepsilon, \gamma, \mathbf{D}, \mathbf{L})$ if and only if $\lambda'$ is an eigenvalue of $\mathbf{J}(\varepsilon_0, \gamma', \mathbf{D}', \mathbf{L})$. This immediately leads to the scaling result in Eq.~(3) of the main text. \subsection{S8.\ \ Verifying asymmetry-induced symmetry for any $\boldsymbol{\delta>0}$} We formulate a bi-layer optimization problem to identify a value of $\gamma$ and a direction $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ for each $\delta > 0$, so that $\Lambda(\boldsymbol{b}^) > 0$ and $\Lambda(\boldsymbol{b}^ + s \Delta\boldsymbol{b}) < 0$ for some $s$. For a given $\delta > 0$, we define an objective function \begin{equation} F(\gamma) := \frac{1}{2}\Bigl\vert \Lambda(\boldsymbol{b}^; \gamma, \delta) + \min_{0 \le s \le 10} \Lambda(\boldsymbol{b}^ + s \Delta\boldsymbol{b}; \gamma, \delta) \Bigr\vert, \end{equation} where $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ is the normalized eigenvector corresponding to the smallest eigenvalue of the Hessian matrix of the function $\Lambda(\boldsymbol{b})$ at $\boldsymbol{b}^$. Note that $\boldsymbol{b}^$ and $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ generally depend on $\gamma$ and that our choice of $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ ensures that the quadratic decrease of $\Lambda$ near $\boldsymbol{b}^$ along this direction is the fastest possible. By minimizing $F(\gamma)$ on the interval $[0,10]$, we seek to make the average between the $\Lambda$ value at $\boldsymbol{b}^$ and the minimum $\Lambda$ value at $\boldsymbol{b}^* + s \Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ as close to zero as possible. This allows us to search for a $\gamma$ value for which the two $\Lambda$ values straddle zero. The two levels of minimization involved in this procedure were solved using Matlab's \texttt{fminbnd} function, which is based on golden section search and parabolic interpolation~\cite{Forsythe1976}. Using the resulting value of $s$, we set $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{b}}:=\boldsymbol{b}^* + s \Delta\boldsymbol{b}$. For the $n=3$ case in Fig.~\ref{fig3} of the main text, the choice of $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ is not unique, since the smallest eigenvalue of the Hessian matrix is doubly degenerate. We thus made a specific choice within the two-dimensional eigenspace: $\Delta\boldsymbol{b} = (1,1,-2)^T/\sqrt{6}$. For the $n=63$ case, we first compute $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ for $\gamma=0$ and use this fixed direction as an approximation to $\Delta\boldsymbol{b}$ for all $\gamma$ values to make this case computationally tractable. \end{document}
\section{Introduction} Multivariate regression models have been of increased interest in the statistical literature. Recent applications include functional disability data \citep{Vallier:2014}, cognitive functioning \citep{Anderlucci:2015}, evolutionary biology \citep{Cybis:2015}, multi-species distribution \citep{Hui:2015,Ovaskainen:2011}, social, economic \citep{Klein:2015,Klein:2015a} and political sciences \citep{Lagona:2015} to cite a few. The mentioned methodologies apply latent variables or finite mixture of regression models to describe the covariance structure introduced by the multiple response variables. In contrast to these approaches \citet{Bonat:2016} proposed the multivariate covariance generalized linear models (McGLMs), which explicitly model the marginal covariance matrix combining a covariance link function and a matrix linear predictor composed of known matrices. McGLMs have much in common with the GEE (Generalized Estimating Equations) \citep{Zeger:1988} approach popular in the analysis of longitudinal data. However, McGLMs were explicitly designed to deal with multiple response variables and allow for a flexible modelling of the covariance structure. On the other hand, current GEE implementations~\citep{Hojsgaard:2006} deal only with one response variable and include a short list of pre-specified covariance structures, such as autoregression and compound symmetry. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) \citep{Breslow:1993} are flexible models for handling multivariate data \citep{Verbeke:2014}. GLMMs are computationally demanding, and many algorithms have been proposed in the past three decades, see \citet{McCullogh:1997} and \citet{Fong:2010} for reviews and further references. \citet{Motta:2013} presented a specific example of GLMM for count data. An aspect of GLMMs that gives rise to concern is the general lack of a closed-form expression for the likelihood and the marginal distribution of the data vector. A related question is the special interpretation of parameters inherent from the construction of GLMMs. Thus, the covariate effects are conditional on the latent variables, whereas the correlation structure is marginal for the latent variables rather than for the response variables. The multivariate Poisson \citep{Tsionas:1999} and negative binomial \citep{Shi:2014} distributions are suitable approaches to deal with multivariate count data. The multivariate Poisson has the restriction to deal only with equidispersed and positive correlated data. The last restriction is also shared by the multivariate negative binomial model. The assumption of a common error distribution required for these models may not be satisfied in practice, and methods for handling the case of unequal marginal distributions do not seem easily available. Additional methods for specifying models for dependent data include the Gaussian copula marginal regression models \citep{Masarotto:2012} and the class of hierarchical generalized linear models \citep{Lee:1996}. In the context of multivariate longitudinal models, besides the modelling of the covariance structure between response variables, we also have to model the longitudinal and repeated measures structures for each response variable, i.e. the within covariance structure. The question of how to model the within covariance structure in the univariate case is often solved by choosing from a short list of options, such as compound symmetry, autoregressive and unstructured~\citep{Diggle:2002}. Such choices are, however, not suitable for the combination of multivariate, repeated measures and longitudinal structures found in the application described in the Section~\ref{dataset}. It motivates the development of a more general and flexible approach for covariance modelling in multivariate longitudinal count models. In this paper, we adopt the McGLM framework in order to present a multivariate model suitable to deal with count response variables. Our model also relies on the structure of the multivariate discrete dispersion models~\citep{Jorgensen:2014}, where the Poisson-Tweedie distribution provides a flexible framework for modelling discrete response variables. In this framework multivariate extensions of the Neyman Type A, P{\'o}lia-Aepply, negative binomial and Poisson-inverse Gaussian distributions appear as special cases. One advantage of this class of models is that similar to the exponential dispersion models \citep{Jorgensen1997b} the whole family is described by the power dispersion function, analogous to ordinary Tweedie exponential dispersion models with power variance functions. This fact allows us to specify models based on second-moment assumptions and use the engine of McGLMs for estimation and inference. For further references and regression models based on the Poisson-Tweedie distribution, see~\citet{Bonat:2016c}. The model is motivated by a data set consisting of the number of blue duikers and other small animals shot or snared by $52$ commercial hunters over a $33$-month period in Pico Basil{\'e}, Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea \citep{Vega:2015}. Bushmeat trade is an important resource in the livelihoods of many rural communities in West and central Africa. Overhunting for profit is known to cause immediate reductions in the density of targeted animals \citep{Fa:2000}. In extreme cases it may precipitate the disappearance of local populations and eventually result in the complete extirpation of a species \citep{Fa:2009}. It is also known that hunted island animal populations are often at a greater risk of extinction because of their small geographic ranges and usually low population numbers \citep{Vega:2015}. In Bioko Island, the blue duiker (\textit{Philantomba monticola}) is the most hunted species among $18$ species of mammals and birds consumed as food. The main goal of this data analysis is to investigate whether the number of hunted blue duikers declined during the study period. The data analysis should take into account the severely unbalanced repeated measures and longitudinal structures introduced by the hunters and a set of potential covariates affecting both the mean and covariance structures. Determining whether the decline of hunted animals is instrumental, since it could suggest a reduction in the population of this species, with important applications for establishing policies of sustainable hunting practices. In this scenario, a bivariate count model is useful, since a significant negative correlation could indicate that hunters target another species as a result of the decline in the target species, while a non-significant correlation may push hunter to turn to alternative sources of income. In view of the recent developments in the McGLMs framework the main contributions of this article are: i) introduces a suitable specification of the McGLMs to deal with the combination of longitudinal and repeated measures in the context of multivariate count data. ii) describes how to specify the components of the matrix linear predictor in order to take into account the effects of known covariates in a linear mixed model fashion. iii) extends the score information criterion (SIC) to select the components of the matrix linear predictor. iv) applied the methods to analyse the Hunting data set and v) provides \texttt{R} code for constructing the components of the matrix linear predictor as well as fitting the models through the \texttt{mcglm}~\citep{Bonat:2016a} package for the \texttt{R} statistical software. We present the Hunting data set in Section~\ref{dataset}. Section~\ref{model} discusses the model and its properties. We emphasize the specification of the matrix linear predictor. Section~\ref{sic} extends the score information criterion for selecting the components of the matrix linear predictor. Section~\ref{results} describes the application of the model to the data. Section~\ref{discussion} discusses the main results. Finally, Section~\ref{conclusion} presents the concluding remarks. The data set that is analysed in the paper and the programs that were used to analyse it can be obtained from\\ \texttt{http://www.leg.ufpr.br/doku.php/publications:papercompanions:hunting\\bioko2016}. \section{Data set} \label{dataset} The case study analysed in this paper uses data of animals hunted in the village of Basil{\'e} Fang, Bioko Norte Province, Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea. The monthly number of blue duikers and other small animals shot or snared were collected from a random sample of $52$ commercial hunters from August $2010$ to September $2013$. For each animal caught, the species, sex, method of capture and altitude were documented. The data set has $1216$ observations. For additional description of the field work, see \citet{Vega:2015}. In this analysis, we opted to aggregate the species into two levels blue duikers (\texttt{BD}) and other small animals (\texttt{OT}), since \texttt{BD} is the target species and \texttt{OT} are hunted at random. The covariates \texttt{sex} (Female, Male) and \texttt{method} (Firearm, Snare) are factors with two levels. The covariate \texttt{alt} is a factor with $5$ levels ($300\--600$, $601\--900$, $901\--1200$, $1201\--1500$ and $>1500$) indicating the altitude where the animal was caught. Finally, the number of hunter days per month was recorded. It is important, because represents the effort employed by the hunter and should be used as an \texttt{offset}(in logarithm scale) for modelling the counts of hunted animals. The study design introduces some sources of dependence in the data. We call \texttt{hunter-month} the effect of all observations taken at the same hunter and month. The \texttt{hunter} effect is represented by all observations taken at the same hunter. The \texttt{longitudinal} effect is introduced by the observations taken at sequentially months. The within covariance for each outcome can also be affected by the covariates in a linear mixed model fashion, see Section~\ref{model} and \citet{Demidenko:2013} for details. Finally, the correlation between response variables should be taken into account, since it plays an important role in terms of model interpretation. The number of observations per \texttt{hunter-month} and \texttt{hunters} varied between $1$ and $16$ and $1$ and $104$, respectively. These numbers show the severely unbalanced repeated measures and longitudinal structures present in the data set. \setkeys{Gin}{width=0.99\textwidth} \begin{figure}[h] \centering \includegraphics{Dataset-001} \caption{Histograms (A and F). Taylor plot (hunter mean and variance in double logarithmic scale) (B and G). Boxplots for \texttt{sex} (C and H), \texttt{method} (D and I) and \texttt{alt} (E and J). Individual average (gray) and overall average (black) trajectories (K and L) for \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively.} \label{fig:descritiva} \end{figure} Histograms in Figure~\ref{fig:descritiva} suggest that the two error distributions may not be identical, and hint at potential problems with excess of zeroes and overdispersion. Boxplots suggest an effect of all covariates, whereas the approximate linearity of the Taylor plots suggest a variance function of power form. \section{Multivariate longitudinal models for count data} \label{model} Let $\mathbf{Y}_{N \times R} = \{\boldsymbol{Y}_1, \ldots, \boldsymbol{Y}_R\}$ be a response variable matrix and let $\mathbf{M}_{N \times R} = \{\boldsymbol{\mu}_1, \ldots, \boldsymbol{\mu}_R\}$ denote the corresponding matrix of expected values. Let $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_r$ denote the $N \times N$ covariance matrix within the response variable $r$ for $r = 1, \ldots, R$. Similarly, let $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_b$ be the $R \times R$ correlation matrix whose components $\rho_{rr^{\prime}}$'s denote the correlation between the response variables $r$ and $r^{\prime}$. The multivariate covariance generalized linear model as proposed by \citet{Bonat:2016} is given by \begin{eqnarray} \label{McGLM} \mathrm{E}(\mathbf{Y}) &=& \mathbf{M} = \{g_1^{-1}(\boldsymbol{X}_1 \boldsymbol{\beta}_1), \ldots, g_R^{-1}(\boldsymbol{X}_R \boldsymbol{\beta}_R)\} \nonumber \\ \mathrm{Var}(\mathbf{Y}) &=& \boldsymbol{C} = \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_R \overset{G} \otimes \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_b \nonumber \end{eqnarray} where $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_R \overset{G} \otimes \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_b = \mathrm{Bdiag}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_1, \ldots, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_R)(\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_b \otimes \boldsymbol{I})\mathrm{Bdiag}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_1^T, \ldots, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_R^T)$ is the generalized Kronecker product \citep{Martinez:2013}. The matrix $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_r$ denotes the lower triangular matrix of the Cholesky decomposition of $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_r$. The operator $\mathrm{Bdiag}$ denotes a block diagonal matrix and $\boldsymbol{I}$ denotes an $R \times R$ identity matrix. The functions $g_r$ are link functions, for which we adopt the orthodox $\log$-link function. Let $\boldsymbol{X}_r$ denote an $N \times k_r $ design matrix and $\boldsymbol{\beta}_r$ a $k_r \times 1$ regression parameter vector. Note that, the model has a specific linear predictor for each response variable. In order to specify the covariance within response variables, we adopt the definition of \citet{Jorgensen:2014} for Poisson-Tweedie random vector, i.e. \begin{equation} \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_r = \mathrm{diag}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_r) + \mathrm{V}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_r;p_r)^{\frac{1}{2}} (\boldsymbol{\Omega}(\boldsymbol{\tau}_r)) \mathrm{V}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_r;p_r)^{\frac{1}{2}} \end{equation} where $\mathrm{V}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_r;p_r) = \mathrm{diag}(\boldsymbol{\mu}_r^{p_r})$, is a diagonal matrix whose main entries are given by the power variance function. This specification is a multivariate representation of the power dispersion function which characterizes the Poisson-Tweedie family, see \citet{Jorgensen:2014} for details. Finally, following the ideas of \citet{Anderson:1973} and \citet{Pourahmadi:2000} we model the dispersion matrix $\boldsymbol{\Omega}(\boldsymbol{\tau}_r)$ as a linear combination of known matrices, i.e. \begin{equation} \label{linearcovariance} h(\boldsymbol{\Omega}(\boldsymbol{\tau}_r)) = \tau_{r0} Z_{r0} + \cdots + \tau_{rD} Z_{rD}. \end{equation} Here $h$ is the covariance link function, $Z_{rd}$ with $d = 0, \ldots, D$ are known matrices reflecting the covariance structure within the response variable $r$, and $\boldsymbol{\tau}_r = (\tau_{r0}, \ldots, \tau_{rD})$ is a $(D+1) \times 1$ parameter vector. This structure is a natural analogue of the linear predictor of the mean structure, and following \citet{Bonat:2016} we call it a matrix linear predictor. In this paper we focus on the identity covariance link function, since many interesting models appear as special cases. \citet{Demidenko:2013} showed that the covariance structure induced by the orthodox Gaussian linear mixed model is a linear covariance matrix, i.e. has the form of (\ref{linearcovariance}). In this sense, the models presented in this paper can been seen as an extension of the Gaussian linear mixed model for handling count data. Furthermore, popular approaches to deal with longitudinal autocorrelated data, as the compound symmetry, moving average and first order autoregressive, are also covariance linear models. In what follows we discuss some of the possibilities for the specification of the matrix linear predictor in the context of longitudinal data. Since the matrix linear predictor is specified for each response variable, suppose without loss of generality that $r=1$. Denote $y_{go}$ an observation $o = 1, \ldots, O_g$ within the group $g = 1, \ldots, G$ and let $\boldsymbol{y}_g$ denote the $O_g$-dimensional vector of measurements from the $g$th group. In particular, for the data set presented in Section~\ref{dataset} the groups are given by the \texttt{Hunters}. Thus, the response variable vector is given by $\boldsymbol{Y} = (\boldsymbol{y}_1, \ldots, \boldsymbol{y}_G)^\top$. Let $A_g$ denote an $O_g \times E$ design matrix composed of the values of $E$ known covariates available to model the covariance structure. Furthermore, let $A_{g,\cdot e}$ denote the $e$th column of the matrix $A_g$. Following \citet{Demidenko:2013} the main effect of the covariate $e$ and the interaction effect between the covariates $e$ and $e^{\prime}$ are included in the covariance model through the symmetric matrices $$A_{g}^{e} = A_{g,\cdot e} A_{g, \cdot e}^{\top} \quad \mbox{and} \quad A_{g}^{e e^{\prime}} = A_{g,\cdot e} A_{g, \cdot e^{\prime}}^T + A_{g,\cdot e^{\prime}} A_{g, \cdot e}^T,$$ respectively. The matrices $A_{g}^{e}$ and $A_{g}^{e e^{\prime}}$ are group specific. To obtain the components of the matrix linear predictor for the entire response variable vector $\boldsymbol{Y}$, we assume independent groups. Thus, the components of the matrix linear predictor that measure the effect of the $e$th covariate and the interaction effect are given by \begin{equation} \label{matlinear} Z_e = \mathrm{Bdiag}(A_{1}^{e}, \ldots, A_{G}^e) \quad \mbox{and} \quad Z_{ee^{\prime}} = \mathrm{Bdiag}(A_{1}^{ee^{\prime}}, \ldots, A_{G}^{ee^{\prime}}), \end{equation} where as before the operator $\mathrm{Bdiag}$ denotes a block diagonal matrix. The matrices $Z_e$ and $Z_{ee^{\prime}}$ can be included as the $Z_{d}$'s components in the matrix linear predictor, see~\ref{linearcovariance}. When the main and interaction effects are included in the model, we have $E(E+1)/2$ components. A simplification is obtained by considering only main effects resulting in $E$ components. In general, we reserve the first component of the matrix linear predictor $Z_0$ to an identity matrix, that represents the intercept of the linear covariance model. \citet{Demidenko:2013} showed that some well known covariance structures used to model longitudinal and repeated measures data are linear covariance models. To describe these structures consider a particular group $g$ with three observations. As before to extend the matrices to the entire response variable vector, we assume independent groups and use the $\mathrm{Bdiag}$ operator. The compound symmetry or exchangeable structure is a linear combination of an identity and a matrix of ones, i.e. for this particular group the matrix linear predictor is given by \begin{equation} \boldsymbol{\Omega}_g(\boldsymbol{\tau}) = \tau_{0} \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix} + \tau_{1} \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1\\ 1 & 1 & 1\\ 1 & 1 & 1 \end{bmatrix} . \end{equation} The Moving Average model of order $p$ MA(p) is also a linear covariance model. The components of the matrix linear predictor associated with the MA(1) and MA(2) structures are given respectively by \begin{equation} \label{compsyme} A_1 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0\\ 1 & 0 & 1\\ 0 & 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \quad \mbox{and} \quad A_2 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1\\ 0 & 0 & 0\\ 1 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}. \end{equation} For longitudinal data analysis, we can use the inverse of Euclidean distance between pairs of observations as a component of the matrix linear predictor, for example \begin{equation} \label{Eucli} A_1 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1/d_{12} & 1/d_{13} \\ 1/d_{12} & 0 & 1/d_{23} \\ 1/d_{13} & 1/d_{23} & 0 \end{bmatrix}, \end{equation} where $d_{ij}$ denotes the Euclidean distances between the observations at time $i$ and $j$. By combining the simple structures described above, we have a flexible set of components to compose the matrix linear predictor for the analysis of longitudinal data. \citet{Demidenko:2013} also showed that the popular first-order autoregression model can be written as a linear covariance model, but using the inverse covariance link function. In this paper, we do not pursue in this covariance link function. The power parameter $p$ plays an important role in the context of multivariate Poisson-Tweedie models, since it is an index which distinguishes between some important discrete distributions. Examples include the Neyman Type A ($p = 1$), P{\'o}lya-Aeppli ($p=1.5$), negative binomial ($p=2$) and Poisson-inverse Gaussian ($p=3$). The algorithm proposed by \citet{Bonat:2016} allows us to estimate the power parameter, which works as an automatic distribution selection. \section{The score information criterion}\label{sic} In this section, we extend the score information criterion (SIC) proposed by \citet{Stoklosa:2014} for the selection of the components of the matrix linear predictor. In order to introduce the SIC, we first present some key components of the estimating function approach used to fit McGLMs. The algorithm and asymptotic theory associated with the estimating function estimators were presented by \citet{Bonat:2016} and implemented in the \texttt{mcglm}~\citep{Bonat:2016a} package for the \texttt{R}~\citep{R:2015} statistical sofware. The second-moment assumptions of McGLMs motivate us to divide the set of parameters into two subsets $\boldsymbol{\theta} = (\boldsymbol{\beta}^{\top},\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\top})^{\top}$. In this notation $\boldsymbol{\beta} = (\boldsymbol{\beta}^{\top}_1, \ldots, \boldsymbol{\beta}^{\top}_R)^{\top}$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda} = (\rho_1, \ldots, \rho_{R(R-1)/2}, p_1, \ldots, p_R, \boldsymbol{\tau}_1^\top, \ldots, \boldsymbol{\tau}_R^\top)^\top$ denote a $K \times 1$ and $Q \times 1$ vector of all regression and dispersion parameters, respectively. Let $\mathcal{Y} = (\boldsymbol{Y}_1^\top, \ldots, \boldsymbol{Y}_R^\top)^\top$ and $\mathcal{M} = (\boldsymbol{\mu}_1^\top, \ldots, \boldsymbol{\mu}_R^\top)^\top$ denote the $NR \times 1$ stacked vector of the response variable matrix $\mathbf{Y}_{N \times R}$ and expected values matrix $\mathbf{M}_{N \times R}$ by columns, respectively. The regression coefficients are estimated by using the orthodox quasi-score function \citep{Bonat:2016,Zeger:1988}. The dispersion parameters are estimated based on the Pearson estimating function, defined by the components \begin{equation} \label{Pearson} \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i}( \boldsymbol{\beta}, \boldsymbol{\lambda}) = \mathrm{tr}(W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i}(\boldsymbol{r}^\top\boldsymbol{r} - \boldsymbol{C})) \quad \text{for} \quad i = 1,\ldots,Q, \end{equation} where $W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i} = -\partial \boldsymbol{C}^{-1} / \partial \boldsymbol{\lambda}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{r} = \mathcal{Y} - \mathcal{M}$. Two key components of an estimating function approach are the sensitivity and variability matrices. The entry $(i,j)$ of the $Q \times Q$ sensitivity matrix of $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is given by, \begin{equation} \label{Slambda} \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{ij}} = \mathrm{E} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial \boldsymbol{\lambda}_i} \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_j} \right ) = -\mathrm{tr} \left (W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i} \boldsymbol{C} W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_j} \boldsymbol{C} \right). \end{equation} Similarly, the entry $(i,j)$ of the $Q \times Q$ variability matrix of $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is given by \begin{equation} \label{Vl} \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{ij}} = \mathrm{Cov}(\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i},\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_j}) = 2\mathrm{tr}(W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i} \boldsymbol{C} W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_j} \boldsymbol{C}) + \sum_{l=1}^{NR} k^{(4)}_l (W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_i})_{ll} (W_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_j})_{ll}, \end{equation} where $k^{(4)}_l$ denotes the fourth cumulant of $\mathcal{Y}_l$. In order to keep the model based on second-moment assumptions only, we following \citet{Bonat:2016} use the empirical fourth cumulant. \citet{Stoklosa:2014} in the context of generalized estimating equations (GEE) proposed the score information criterion (SIC) to be used with forward selection algorithms in the cases where we have a large number of covariates to compose the linear predictor. The SIC is based on the score statistics, what becoming such criterion convenient, since it can be computed for all candidate models without actually fitting them. Suppose without loss of generality that $r = 1$ and fixed power parameter. In that case, the vector of dispersion parameters simplify to $\boldsymbol{\lambda} = \boldsymbol{\tau}$, since we have no correlation neither power parameters. For a given mean structure, suppose that the parameter vector $\boldsymbol{\tau}$ can be partitioned as $\boldsymbol{\tau} = (\boldsymbol{\tau}_{1}^\top, \boldsymbol{\tau}_{2}^\top)^\top$, whose dimension are $(Q - s) \times 1$ and $s \times 1$, respectively. The Pearson estimating function $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ and its sensitivity and variability matrices, can also be partitioned to $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\boldsymbol{\tau}) = (\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_1}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\boldsymbol{\tau}_1)^\top, \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\boldsymbol{\tau}_2)^\top)^\top$, \begin{equation} \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}} = \begin{pmatrix} \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}} & \mathrm{S}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}} \\ \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{21}} & \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{22}} \end{pmatrix}, \end{equation} and \begin{equation} \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}} = \begin{pmatrix} \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}} & \mathrm{V}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}} \\ \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{21}} & \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{22}} \end{pmatrix}, \end{equation} respectively. The null hypothesis $H_0$ is $\boldsymbol{\tau}_{2} = \boldsymbol{0}$. Let $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}} = (\hat{\boldsymbol{\tau}}_{1}^\top, \boldsymbol{0}^\top)^\top$ be the vector of Pearson estimates under $H_0$. Note that, only the base model containing $\hat{\boldsymbol{\tau}}_{1}$ parameters has to be fitted. In practical situations, this model can contain only a simple intercept. The Pearson estimating function takes the form $$\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}(\beta,\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}) = (\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_1}^\top(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}), \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}^\top(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}))^\top = (\boldsymbol{0}^\top, \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}^\top(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}))^\top.$$ The generalized score statistic is given by \begin{equation} \label{TU} T_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}) = \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}^\top(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}) \mathrm{Var}(\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}))^{-1} \psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}) \end{equation} where \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \label{V2} \mathrm{Var}(\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}})) &= \mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{22}} - \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{21}}\mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}}^{-1}\mathrm{V}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}} - \mathrm{V}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}}\mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}}^{-1}\mathrm{S}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}} \\ & + \mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{21}}\mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}}^{-1}\mathrm{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}}\mathrm{S}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{11}}^{-1}\mathrm{S}_{ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{12}} \end{aligned} \end{equation} is the variance of the subvector $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}})$. Under the null hypothesis, $T_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}})$ has a chi-square distribution with $s$ degrees of freedom. In practice, all quantities in (\ref{TU}) are evaluated at the Pearson estimates under the null hypotheses. If $H_0$ were true, then $\psi_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta},\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}})$ that is the Pearson estimating function for $\boldsymbol{\tau}_2$ would be close to zero when evaluated under the null. Large values of $T_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}})$ would argue against $H_0$. The main idea behind SIC is to use (\ref{TU}) as a quadratic approximation to the log-likelihood ratio statistic. The so-call one-step SIC is defined by \begin{equation} SIC^{(1)}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \boldsymbol{\tau}) = - T_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}) + \delta \|\boldsymbol{\tau}\|. \end{equation} Note that this criterion is a function of $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}$ only, thus only the base model needs to be fitted. As point out by \citet{Stoklosa:2014} the approximation of score statistics to likelihood ratio statistics can be poor when there is a significant departure from the null model. Hence an improved approximation might calculate the score statistic in one-parameter increments, i.e. \begin{equation} SIC(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \boldsymbol{\tau}) = - \sum_{s = 1}^{\|\boldsymbol{\tau}_2\|} \underset{\tau_{(s)} \in \boldsymbol{\tau}_2^{\backslash s-1}}{\mathrm{max}} \{ T_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_2(s)}(\boldsymbol{\beta}, \tilde{\boldsymbol{\tau}}_{s-1}) \} + \delta \|\boldsymbol{\tau}\| \end{equation} where $\boldsymbol{\tau}^\top_s = (\boldsymbol{\tau}^\top_{s-1}, \tau_s)$ and $\boldsymbol{\tau}_2^{\backslash s-1} = {\boldsymbol{\tau}_2 \cap \boldsymbol{\tau}^c_{s-1} }$ where $\boldsymbol{\tau}^c_{s-1}$ is the complement set of $\boldsymbol{\tau}_{s-1}$. In summary, we sequentially add new parameters selected from $\boldsymbol{\tau}_2$, these are $\tau_{(s)}$ for $s = 1, \ldots, \|\boldsymbol{\tau}_2\|$, in the order that maximizes the score statistic (\ref{TU}) in each step. In that case no more than $\|\boldsymbol{\tau}_2\|$ models will be fitted to reach the final model. In this paper we consider the penalties $\delta = 2$, as it is analogous to the \textit{Akaike} information criterion. It is also possible to use $\delta = \log N$ to have an analogous to the \textit{Bayesian} information criterion. \section{Results} \label{results} In this section, we apply the McGLM for multivariate count data to analyse the data set presented in Section~\ref{dataset}. The second-moment assumptions of the McGLM require the specification of a linear predictor and a matrix linear predictor for each response variable. In this application, for composing the linear predictor we have three covariates \texttt{sex}, \texttt{method} and \texttt{alt} along with the time trend \texttt{month}. We considered interaction terms up to second order between the four main effects. The time trend was modelled as a polynomial of third and fourth degrees for \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. Such choices were based on exploratory analysis and preliminary fits as we shall explain better in the Section~\ref{discussion}. In all fitted models the number of hunter days (in logarithm scale) was used as an \texttt{offset}. To specify the matrix linear predictor, we have the repeated measures structures represented by the \texttt{Hunter} and \texttt{Hunter-Month} effects. The \texttt{Longitudinal} effect introduced by the observations taken at sequentially months and the three covariates, \texttt{sex}, \texttt{method} and \texttt{alt}. For the repeated measures effects we assumed a compound symmetry (of ones) structure,see~(\ref{compsyme}). The longitudinal effect was modelled using the inverse of Euclidean distances,see~(\ref{Eucli}). Finally, the covariates are included in the covariance model in a linear mixed model fashion, see \ref{matlinear}. In this application for model parsimony and since we have only categorical covariates to compose the matrix linear predictor, we considered only main effects. For clarity, consider a particular \texttt{Hunter} that represents the group structure described in the Section~\ref{model}. Furthermore, consider that we have four observations (two for the first month and two for the second month). Consider also for simplicity that we have the values of a covariate $\boldsymbol{e} = (e_1, e_2, e_3, e_4)$. In that case, the matrix linear predictor has the following form \begin{eqnarray} \boldsymbol{\Omega}(\boldsymbol{\tau}) = \tau_0 \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix} + \tau_1 \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \end{bmatrix} + \tau_2 \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \end{bmatrix} + \\ \tau_3 \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1/d_{12} & 1/d_{12} \\ 0 & 0 & 1/d_{12} & 1/d_{12} \\ 1/d_{12} & 1/d_{12} & 0 & 0 \\ 1/d_{12} & 1/d_{12} & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} + \tau_4 \begin{bmatrix} e_1^2 & e_1 e_2 & e_1 e_3 & e_1 e_4 \\ e_1 e_2 & e_2^2 & e_2 e_3 & e_2 e_4 \\ e_1 e_3 & e_2 e_3 & e_3^2 & e_3 e_4 \\ e_1 e_34& e_2 e_4 & e_3 e_4 & e_4^2 \end{bmatrix}, \end{eqnarray} where $\tau_0$ is the \texttt{intercept} of the covariance linear model. The parameters $\tau_1$, $\tau_2$, $\tau_3$ and $\tau_4$ measure the \texttt{Hunter}, \texttt{Hunter-Month}, \texttt{Longitudinal} and covariate effects, respectively. We employed a stepwise procedure for selecting the components of the linear and matrix linear predictors. The SIC using penalty $\delta = 2$ and the Wald test were used in the forward and backward steps, respectively. We defined as stop criterion SIC $> 0$, since in that case the penalty is larger than the score statistics. Our strategy to select the final model consists of: i) select the components of the linear predictor for each response variable fixing the covariance structure assuming independent observations, i.e. $Z_0 = \mathrm{I}$. ii) select the components of the matrix linear predictor for each response variable fixing the mean structure obtained in step (i). iii) fit the multivariate model and iv) remove non-significant effects in both linear and matrix linear predictors if any. In this application after fit the multivariate model all covariates selected to compose the linear and matrix linear predictors were significant. Supplemenaty Tables S$1$ and S$2$ present the step-by-step procedure. Table \ref{Wald} presents the Wald statistics for the components of the selected linear predictor for each response variable obtained by fitting the final multivariate model. The selected matrix linear predictors were composed of a diagonal matrix (\texttt{Intercept}) combined with the \texttt{Hunter-Month}, \texttt{Method} and \texttt{Longitudinal} effects for \texttt{BD} and only the \texttt{Hunter-Month} effect for \texttt{OT}. \begin{table} \centering \caption{Wald statistics ($\chi^2$), degrees of freedom (Df) and p-values for the components of the selected linear predictor for each response variable.} \label{Wald} \begin{tabular}{lccc\|lccc} \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{\texttt{BD}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\texttt{OT}} \\ \hline Effects & Df & $\chi^2$ & p-value & Effects & Df & $\chi^2$ & p-value \\ \hline \texttt{method} & $1$ & $6.986$ & $0.008$ & \texttt{method} & $1$ & $1.766$ & $0.183$ \\ \texttt{alt} & $4$ & $138.262$ & $0.000$ & \texttt{alt} & $4$ & $128.042$ & $0.000$ \\ \texttt{sex} & $1$ & $247.843$ & $0.000$ & \texttt{sex} & $1$ & $15.927$ & $0.000$ \\ \texttt{month} & $3$ & $25.791$ & $0.000$ & \texttt{month} & $4$ & $10.150$ & $0.038$ \\ \texttt{method:alt}& $4$ & $58.688$ & $0.000$ & \texttt{method:alt} & $4$ & $26.455$ & $0.000$ \\ \texttt{alt:month} & $12$ & $43.898$ & $0.000$ & \texttt{alt:sex} & $4$ & $13.238$ & $0.012$ \\ $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & \texttt{alt:month} & $16$ & $90.365$ & $0.000$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} The results in Table \ref{Wald} show that the \texttt{method} effect for the response variable \texttt{OT} was non-significant, but given its highly significant interaction with \texttt{alt} we opted to keep this effect in the model. Table \ref{covariance} shows the estimates, standard errors (SE) and Z-statistics for the power and dispersion parameters for the final model. \begin{table} \centering \caption{Power and dispersion parameter estimates, standard errors (SE) and Z-statistics for the components of the selected matrix linear predictor for each response variable.} \label{covariance} \begin{tabular}{lccc\|ccc} \hline & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\texttt{BD}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\texttt{OT}} \\ \hline Effects & Estimate & SE & Z-statistics & Estimate & SE & Z-statistics \\ \hline \texttt{power} & $1.165$ & $0.115$ & $10.108$ & $1.453$ & $0.251$ & $5.777$ \\ \texttt{Intercept} & $0.474$ & $0.142$ & $3.345$ & $0.686$ & $0.184$ & $3.737$ \\ \texttt{Hunter-Month} & $0.722$ & $0.151$ & $4.792$ & $0.294$ & $0.093$ & $3.163$ \\ \texttt{Method} & $0.928$ & $0.258$ & $3.603$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ \texttt{Longitudinal} & $-0.155$ & $0.0424$ & $-3.660$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} The estimates of the power parameters suggest that the Neyman Type A ($p=1$), which indicates a zero inflation relative to the Poisson distribution is a suitable choice for both response variables. For the response variable \texttt{OT} the P{\'o}lya-Aeppli ($p=1.5$) can also be suggested. The correlation between response variables was weak $-0.0532$ ($0.0287$) and not significantly different from $0$. It is interesting to highlight that the $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ matrix describes the part of the covariance structure that does not depend on the mean structure. Thus, it is interesting to interpret the parameters that compose this matrix in terms of the correlation introduced by its components. For example, the correlation introduced by the \texttt{Hunter-Month} effect is $0.604 (0.0594)$ and $0.299 (0.102)$ for \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. These numbers are easily obtained by $\hat{\tau}_1/(\hat{\tau}_0 + \hat{\tau}_1)$. Similarly, the correlation between observations taken at the same hunter by the method snare is $0.652 (0.074)$. Note that, since the \texttt{Hunter} effect was not significant the reference level is the \texttt{Intercept} i.e. independence. Thus, we have no evidence of dependence between observations taken at the same hunter by the method firearm. Finally, the correlation introduced by the \texttt{Longitudinal} effect is $-0.487 (0.203)$ for lag equals $1$. The numbers in the brackets denote the standard error computed using the delta method. Figures \ref{fig:bd} and \ref{fig:ot} present the fitted values and $95\%$ confidence intervals for the response variables \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. We plot the observed values divided by the \texttt{offset} and the fitted values were computed fixing the \texttt{offset} equals $1$. Supplementary Tables S$3$ and S$4$ present the estimates and standard errors for the regression coefficients associated with the response variables \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. \setkeys{Gin}{width=0.99\textwidth} \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \includegraphics{FittedBD} \caption{Fitted values and $95\%$ confidence intervals by altitude, method of capture and sex for the response variable \texttt{BD}.} \label{fig:bd} \end{figure} \setkeys{Gin}{width=0.99\textwidth} \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \includegraphics{FittedOT} \caption{Fitted values and $95\%$ confidence intervals by altitude, method of capture and sex for the response variable \texttt{OT}.} \label{fig:ot} \end{figure} Figure \ref{fig:bd} shows that for all altitudes the number of hunted blue duikers increases from the beginning to the middle of the data collection, when a clear decreases start with sensible differences in the threshold point among the levels of the covariate \texttt{alt}. Altitudes $4$ and $5$ present the largest numbers of caught animals while altitudes $1$ and $2$ the smallest ones. Similar we have seen for \texttt{BD} Figure \ref{fig:ot} shows a clear time trend for the response variable \texttt{OT} in the altitudes $1$ and $2$. Altitudes $3$ and $4$ show a different pattern with a slightly increase at the end of the experiment. Altitudes $1$ and $2$ present the largest numbers of other animals hunted by both methods and sexes. The smallest numbers appear in altitudes $3$ and $4$ using firearms. In general the number of females hunted is bigger than males and the most effective method of capture depends on the altitude. It is important to highlight that despite of the differences in terms of altitudes, sexes and methods seem small in its magnitude judging by the results presented in Figures \ref{fig:bd} and \ref{fig:ot}. Such impression is due to the fact that, such results were obtained by fixing the number of hunter days (\texttt{offset}) equals $1$. Thus, the differences tend to be amplified while the number of hunter days increases. Furthermore, the regression coefficients associated with these effects are in general significantly different from $0$ (see Tables \ref{Wald}, S$3$ and S$4$). \section{Discussion} \label{discussion} This section discusses the results presented in Section \ref{results}. The main data analysis goal was to determine if there was evidence of depletion in the population of blue duikers and other small animals based on data of hunted animals. To detect such a depletion effect, we included in the model a special term that represented the time trend for which we allowed a flexible functional form through a polynomial of degree three and four for the response variables \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. To control other effects that were not of main interest, we included in the model the effects of covariates such as sex, method of capture and altitude. The irregular activity of the hunters introduces severely unbalanced repeated measures and longitudinal structures that were modelled through a matrix linear predictor composed of known matrices. Although these effects are not of main interest, they help us to understand the complex dynamics of hunting activity and provide us with insights of the general aspects of the population of the targeted taxa. In what follows we discuss the effect of all covariates. The results presented in Section \ref{results} showed that for both response variables (\texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}), methods (snare and firearm) and all altitudes, the number of females hunted was larger than males. Since hunters do not target any particular animal, this bias in sexes hunted could be a function of a greater hunting susceptibility of females or that there are more females in the population than males. With regards to the method of capture, our results showed that this covariate presents a highly significant interaction with the covariate altitude. For the response variable \texttt{BD} the regression coefficients presented in the Supplementary Table S$3$, show that the method firearm is the most effective in altitude $1$, while the method snare is the most effective in altitude $5$. For altitudes $2$ to $4$ the differences between the methods of capture are not significant. Regarding the response variable \texttt{OT} the method snare is the most effective in altitudes $2$ and $3$, while the method firearm is the most effective in altitude $5$. In the altitudes $1$ and $4$ there is no difference between the methods. The covariate altitude reflected different hunting pressure at variable elevations in the study areas. Blue duikers may be overhunted in lower altitudes ($1$ and $2$) because of the proximity to human settlements, which increases hunting pressure. It may explain why the number of blue duikers is lower in altitudes $1$ and $2$. On the other hand, in altitudes $3$ to $5$ we presume that more animals are hunted because these areas are less exploited areas. The opposite situation appears for other small animals, this result may indicate a depletion effect. Often, when the bigger animals (such as blue duikers in Bioko) are hunted out, which may be happening in altitudes $1$ and $2$, smaller ones tend to increase in numbers. This phenomenon is known as density compensation \citep{Fa:2009}. While modelling the covariance structure we detected a significant effect of the covariate \texttt{Hunter-Month} for \texttt{BD} and \texttt{OT}. This effect is clearly due to the way that the data were collected and the arbitrary monthly aggregation. For the response variable \texttt{BD} in addition to the \texttt{Hunter-Month} effect, the longitudinal structure showed a significant negative effect. This result indicates that hunters may be affecting the prey population. Hence, some time is required for the population to recover and may indicate overexploitation of the hunted blue duikers population. A strong correlation between observations taken by the method snare was detected, but none appeared between observations taken by the method firearm. Such result is expected since the use of firearms to hunt is more effective when killing larger animals, so we would expect that the number of prey to decline with hunting effort with guns. This effect was detected by the longitudinal effect. On the other hand, because the method snare requires a much more continuous effort, the observations are more similar and consequently correlated along the study period. This mix of methods of capture could explain that months with a large number of animals hunted were followed by months with a smaller number of animals taken, explaining the negative longitudinal effect detected. Finally, the time trend showed that for the response variable \texttt{BD} the number of hunted animals increases from the beginning to the middle of the data collection, followed by an intense decline after that. The maximum number of animals hunted appeared around the months $20$ and $14$ for altitudes $1$ to $2$ and $3$ to $5$, respectively. A possible explanation for this result could be that at the start of the study period the blue duiker population in the region were more numerous, but following intensive hunting the population starts to decrease and consequently the number of hunted animals also falls. Another explanation could be that there is interannual variation in numbers which may be related to changes in climate and by consequence productivity of the forest, but we have no additional data to confirm this hypothesis. The significant decline after the middle of the study period provides support for an overhunting effect. The temporal pattern detected for the response variable \texttt{OT} is more volatile mainly in altitudes $1$ and $2$, indicating that the number of \texttt{OT} animals hunted could have been affected by many factors, including the availability of other species as well as economic and climate conditions. This volatile pattern may also explain the weak and non-significant correlation between \texttt{OT} and \texttt{BD}. Modelling the time trend through a polynomial function was a data-driven decision based on exploratory analysis and preliminary fits. The preliminary fits consisted of fitting models using B-splines basis as implemented in the package \texttt{splines} for the \texttt{R} statistical software. To select the number of degrees of freedom required for the B-splines basis, we fitted models using different degrees of freedom and check the significance of their regression coefficients using Wald test. Based on this procedure, we obtained that for the response variables \texttt{BT} and \texttt{OT} three and four degrees of freedom were enough to provide a suitable fit. Furthermore, based on the behaviour of the fitted values and given the low number of degrees of freedom required by the B-spline basis, we detected that a simple polynomial could provide a suitable fit. Thus, we fitted the model changing the B-spline basis by polynomial of three and four degrees of freedom for the response variables \texttt{BT} and \texttt{OT}, respectively. We compared the fitted model with the one obtained by using the B-spline basis in terms of Gaussian pseudo-likelihood (GPL)~\citep{Carey:2011}. GPL is a measure similar to the log-likelihood value in the context of maximum likelihood estimation. Thus, larger values indicate better fit. The value of the GPL for the model presented in the Section~\ref{results} was $-4463.330$. Similarly, the value of the GPL for the model fitted using the B-splines basis was $-4462.270$. The GPL indicated that the fits are quite similar. Furthermore, we also compared the fitted values obtained from both models that were virtually the same. Thus, we opted to present the model fitted using the polynomial. The advantage of the polynomial is that it is more familiar to applied researchers than the B-spline basis. To provide more sources of evidence that the data support the model presented in the Section~\ref{results} we fitted models using linear and quadratic time trends. The value of the GPL for the model fitted by using the linear trend was $-4572.300$. Similarly, the value of the GPL for the model fitted by using the quadratic trend was $-4477.670$. Thus, we have clear evidences that the model presented in the Section~\ref{results} provides the best fit among the polynomial alternatives considered to describe the time trend. Furthermore, the same conclusion is obtained when penalizing the Gaussian pseudo log-likelihood with penalties compatible with the Akaike and Kullback-Leibler information criterion~\citep{Bonat:2016a}. \section{Concluding remarks} \label{conclusion} We presented a flexible class of multivariate models for handling count data. The models were motivated by a data set consisting of the number of blue duikers and other small animals shot or snared by $52$ commercial hunters in Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea. The analysis of the data showed interesting features as overdispersion, excess of zeroes and negatively correlated response variables, which in turn allowed to show the flexibility of our models. In our framework overdispersion and excess of zeroes are taken into account by means of a dispersion function. It is similar to a variance function in the context of generalized linear models. The dispersion function allows to specify models based only on second-moment assumptions and adopts an estimating function approach for parameter estimation and inference. The advantage of the estimating function approach is that the estimation procedure relies on a simple and efficient Newton scoring algorithm. In this paper, we adopted the dispersion function associated with the Poisson-Tweedie distribution, since important discrete distributions as the Neyman Type A, negative binomial and Poisson-inverse Gaussian appear as special cases. The marginal covariance structure within response variables is specified by means of a matrix linear predictor composed of known matrices. This specification easily deals with the combination of unbalanced repeated measures and longitudinal structures as well as the effects of the covariates in a linear mixed model fashion. The flexibility of this structure comes with the issue to select its components. In this paper, we extended the SIC to guide the selection of the matrix linear predictor components. The great advantage of the SIC is its simplicity. Since the SIC is based on the score statistics it can be computed without actually fitting all the candidate models. The strategy employed in this paper for selecting the components of the linear and matrix linear predictors consisted of combining the SIC and Wald statistics in a stepwise procedure applied independently for the mean and covariance structures. In the first step, we selected the components of the linear predictor for each response variable assuming independent observations. In fact, in this step we are purposely ignoring the correlation between and within response variables. It is well known that in the presence of correlation the standard errors associated with the regression parameters are underestimated. In this way, we avoid to remove important covariates of the analysis. In the second step, we fixed the linear predictor as obtained in the first step and selected the components of the matrix linear predictor. As the linear predictor potentially contains all significant covariates, we avoid that missing covariates affect the selection of the matrix linear predictor components. In the last step, we fit the multivariate model and remove any non-significant effect. Finally, the joint covariance matrix is specified by using the generalized Kronecker product. This specification combined with the possibility to estimate the power parameter for each marginal response variable allow our models easily deal with negatively correlated and unequal marginal response variables, overcoming the main limitations of the multivariate Poisson and negative binomial models. The main limitation of the models presented in this paper is the general lack of algorithms for simulation. Recent work of \citet{Baccini:2015} discussed the problems involving the simulation of univariate Poisson-Tweedie distributions. The related topic of simulation of the multivariate Tweedie distributions was addressed recently by \citet{Cuenin:2015}, but the extension to multivariate Poisson-Tweedie distributions specified by general covariance structures in high dimension, as used in this paper, still requires further theoretical and computational developments. \section*{Supplement material} Dataset and R code for the analysis are available at the paper companion page at \texttt{http://www.leg.ufpr.br/doku.php/publications:papercompanions:hunting\\bioko2016}. The authors thank Professors Elias Teixeira Krainski, Walmes Marques Zeviani, Fernando Poul Mayer and Paulo Justianiano Ribeiro Jr for their comments and suggestions that substantially improve the article. The first author is supported by CAPES (Coordena\c{c}\~ao de Aperfei\c{c}oamento de Pessoal de N\'ivel Superior)-Brazil. \bibliographystyle{dcu}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro} A pandemic influenza outbreak has the potential to place a significant burden upon healthcare systems. Therefore, the capacity to monitor and predict the evolution of an epidemic as data progressively accumulate is a key component of preparedness strategies for prompt public health response. Statistical inferential approaches have been used in a real-time monitoring context for a number of infectious diseases. Examples include: prediction of swine fever cases in a classical framework \cite{MeeKJD02}; online estimation of a time-evolving effective reproduction number $R(t)$ for SARS \citep{WalT04, CauBTV06} for generic emerging disease \citep{BetR08}; and Bayesian inference on the transmission dynamics of avian influenza in the UK poultry industry \citep{JewKCR09}. These models rely on the availability of direct data on the number of new cases of an infectious disease over time. In practice, as illustrated by the 2009 outbreak of pandemic A/H1N1pdm influenza in the United Kingdom (UK), direct data are seldom available. More likely, multiple sources of data exist, each indirectly informing the epidemic evolution, each subject to possible sources of bias. These sources of data typically come from routine influenza surveillance systems reporting interactions with healthcare services, which means they are often: only a glimpse of the most severe cases; they are subject to the healthcare-seeking behaviours of the population; contaminated with cases of people experiencing influenza-like illness; and can be heavily influenced by governmental advice. This calls for more complex modelling, requiring the synthesis of information from a range of data sources in real time. In this paper we tackle the problem of online inference and prediction in an influenza pandemic in this more realistic situation. We address this by developing the work of \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11} who retrospectively reconstructed the A/H1N1 pandemic in a Bayesian framework using multiple data streams collected over the course of the pandemic. In \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11} posterior distributions of relevant epidemic parameters and related quantities are derived through Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods which, if used in real-time, pose important computational challenges. MCMC is notoriously inefficient for online inference as it requires repeat browsing of the full history of the data as new data accrue. This motivates a more efficient algorithm. Potential alternatives include refinements of MCMC \citep[e.g.][]{JewKCR09, BanGLRarX} and Bayesian emulation as in \cite{FarBCD14}, where the model is replaced by an easily-evaluated approximation readily prepared in advance of the data assimilation process. Here, we explore Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) methods \citep{DouJ09}. As batches of data arrive at times $t_1, \ldots, t_K$, SMC techniques allow computationally efficient online inference by combining the posterior distribution $\pi_k(\cdot)$ at time $t_k, k = 0, \ldots, K$ with the incoming batch of data to obtain an estimate for $\pi_{k + 1}(\cdot)$. A further advantage of SMC is that it naturally provides all the necessary posterior predictive distributions to make one-step ahead probabilistic forecasts of the incoming data. In an epidemic context, monitoring the appropriateness of the chosen model is vital to avoid making public health decisions on the basis of mis-specified models. Through formal assessment of the quality of these one-step ahead forecasts, continual, timely checks of model adequacy can be made \citep{HelMB_pre}. Use of SMC in the real time monitoring of an emerging epidemic is not new. \cite{DurKB13}, \cite{CamKAWFBPCGSTEF15}, \cite{DukLP12}, \cite{OngCCLLLTG10}, and \cite{SkvR12} are examples of real time estimation and prediction for deterministic and stochastic models describing the dynamics of influenza and Ebola epidemics. These models, again, only include a single source of information that has either been pre-smoothed or is free of any sudden or systematic changes. In what follows we advance existing literature in three ways: we include a number of data streams, realistically mimicking current data availability in the UK; we consider the situation where a public health intervention introduces a shock to the system, critically disrupting the ability to track the posterior distribution over time; and we demonstrate how the use of SMC can facilitate online assessment of model adequacy. The paper is organised as follows: in Section \ref{sec:recon} the model in \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11} is reviewed focusing on the data available and the computational limitations of the MCMC algorithm in a real time context; in Section \ref{sec:SMC} the idea of SMC is introduced and the algorithm of \cite{GilB01} is described; Section \ref{sec:prediction} discusses the types of epidemic predictions required in real-time; in Sections \ref{sec:sim} and \ref{sec:analysis} results are presented from the application of Gilks and Berzuini's SMC algorithm to data simulated to mimic the 2009 outbreak and illustrate the challenges posed by the presence of the informative observations induced by system shocks; in Sections \ref{sec:inf.theory} and \ref{sec:informative} adjusted SMC approaches that address such challenges are assessed; we conclude with Section \ref{sec:discussion} in which the ideas explored in the paper are critically reviewed and outstanding issues discussed. \section{A Model For Pandemic Reconstruction}\label{sec:recon} \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11} describe the transmission of a novel influenza virus among a fixed population stratified into $A$ age groups and the subsequent reporting of infections. This is achieved through using a deterministic age-structured Susceptible (S), Exposed (E), Infectious (I), Recovered (R) transmission model. To remove the memoryless property of the waiting times in the E and I states, these states are split into two sub-states, $E_1$ and $E_2, I_1$ and $I_2$. The dynamics of the system are governed by a system of differential equations: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:determ.dynam} \begin{split} \frac{dS(t,a)}{dt} &= -\lambda(t,a)S(t,a)\\ \frac{dE_1(t,a)}{dt} &= \lambda(t,a)S(t,a) - \frac{2}{d_L}E_1(t,a)\\ \frac{dE_2(t,a)}{dt} &= \frac{2}{d_L}\left(E_1(t, a) - E_2(t, a)\right)\\ \frac{dI_1(t,a)}{dt} &= \frac{2}{d_L}E_2(t, a) - \frac{2}{d_I}I_1(t, a)\\ \frac{dI_2(t,a)}{dt} &= \frac{2}{d_I}\left(I_1(t, a) - I_2(t, a)\right) \end{split} \end{equation} where $d_L$ and $d_I$ are the mean latent and infectious periods respectively. Transmission is driven by the time- and age-varying rate $\lambda(t, a)$ at which susceptible individuals become infected. The system in \eqref{eqn:determ.dynam} is not chaotic and in practice is evaluated using an Euler approximation at times $t_k = k\delta t, k = 0, \ldots, K$. The choice of $\delta t = 0.5$ days is sufficiently small that the probability of more than one jump per period is neglible. Under this discretisation, at time $t_k$ the vector $(S_{t_k, a}, {E_1}_{t_k, a}, {E_2}_{t_k, a}, {I_1}_{t_k, a}, {I_2}_{t_k, a})$ gives the number of individuals in age group $a$ $(a = 1, \ldots, A)$ in each disease state. At this time the expected number of new infections is $S_{t_{k - 1}, a}\lambda_{t_{k - 1}, a}$, where \begin{equation}\label{eqn:foi} \lambda_{t_k, a} = 1 - \prod_{b = 1}^A \left\{\left(1 - \ M_{t_k}^{(a, b)}R_{0}(\psi) / d_I\right)^{{I_1}_{t_k, b} + {I_2}_{t_k, b}}\right\}\delta t. \end{equation} Here, $R_{0}(\psi)$ is the basic reproduction number, the expected number of secondary infections caused by a single primary infection in a fully susceptible population, parameterised in terms of the epidemic growth rate $\psi$. The pattern of transmission between age groups is determined by scaled time-varying mixing matrices $\vec{M}_{t_k}$, with $M_{t_k}^{(a, b)}$ giving relative rates of effective contacts between individuals of each pair of age groups $(a, b)$ at time $t_k$. Quantity $1 - M_{t_k}^{(a, b)}R_{0}(\psi) / d_I$ is the probability of an individual in strata $a$ not being infected by an infectious individual in strata $b$ in the interval $\nextinterval{k}$. When raised to the power of ${I_1}_{t_k, b} + {I_2}_{t_k, b}$, this results in the probability of not being infected by any individual in strata $b$. Taking the product over all strata gives the probabilty of not being infected at all. This is an adaptation of the Reed-Frost epidemic model \citep[e.g.][]{Bal83}. The initial conditions of the system are determined by: parameter $I_0$, the total number of infectious individuals across all age groups at time $t_0$; an assumed equilibrium distribution of infections over the age groups; and an assumption of initial exponential growth that determines the relationship between the numbers in the four disease states. For ease of implementation, a reparameterisation is made from $I_0$ to a parameter denoted $\nu$, the details of which can be found in the Supplementary Information to \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11}. Fixing $d_L$ at two days, denote by $\vec{\xi} = (\psi, \nu, d_I, \boldsymbol{m})$ the vector of transmission dynamics parameters, where $\boldsymbol{m}$ parameterise the mixing matrices $\vec{M}_{t_k}$. The transmission process described by (\ref{eqn:determ.dynam}) is unobserved. However, there are a number of surveillance sources informing aspects of this process, linked to the transmission system through a number of observational models. See Figure A1 in the Web Appendix for a model schematic. The number of new age-specific infections in interval $\ninterval{k}$, expressed as \begin{equation}\label{eqn:nni} \Delta_{t_k, a} \equiv \Delta_{t_k, a}(\vec{\xi}) = S_{t_{k - 1}, a}\lambda_{t_{k - 1}, a}\delta t, \end{equation} are indirectly related to surveillance data on health-care burden. Each new infection will develop symptoms of influenza-like illness (ILI) with probability $\phi$. With a further probability, $\conf{p}_{t_k, a}$, the symptomatic cases will be virologically confirmed through admission to hospital and/or to an intensive care unit (ICU). Alternatively, with probability $\doc{p}_{t_k, a}$, they will choose to contact a primary care practitioner and will be reported as a consultations for ILI alongside individuals attending for non-pandemic ILI. As a result, primary care consultation data are contaminated by a ``background'' component strongly influenced by the public's volatile sensitivity to governmental advice. To identify the consultations attributable to the pandemic strain, complementary data from a sub-sample of swabbed ILI patients provide information on the proportion of consultations with pandemic virus. Let $e \in (\textrm{conf}, \textrm{doc})$ denote counts of confirmed cases or primary care consultations. The expected number of surveillance counts in the interval $\ninterval{k}$ attributable to the pandemic virus \begin{equation}\label{eqn:convolution} \mu^{e}_{t_k, a} = \phi p^{e}_{t_k, a} \sum_{l = 0}^k \Delta_{t_{k - l}, a} f_{(\zeta^{}_{e}, \sigma^2_{e})}(l), \end{equation} results from the process of becoming infected and subsequently experiencing a delay (with discretised probability mass function $f_{\zeta_e, \sigma_e^2}(\cdot)$) that comprises the time from infection to symptoms (the incubation period), the time from symptoms to the healthcare event, and the time from diagnosis to the report of the healthcare event of interest. \subsection{Observational model}\label{sec:intro.inference} The number of susceptibles in age group $a$ at the end of the \myth{k} time-step, $S_{t_k,a} \equiv S_{t_k, a}(\vec{\xi})$, is informed directly by a series of cross-sectional serological survey data $Z_{t_k,a}$ on the presence of immunity-conferring antibodies in the general population. Denote $N_a$ the population size in age group $a$ and $v^{\textrm{sero}}_{t_k, a}$ the number of blood sera samples tested in time interval $\ninterval{k}$, it is assumed that \begin{equation} Z_{t_k, a} \sim \textrm{Bin}\left\{v^{\textrm{sero}}_{t_k, a}, 1 - \frac{S_{t_k, a}}{N_a}\right\}.\label{eqn:sero.bin} \end{equation} Counts of daily numbers of confirmed cases or ILI consultations, $X^e_{t_k, a}$, are assumed to have negative binomial distribution expressed here in mean-dispersion parameterisation, such that if $X\sim \textrm{NegBin}(\mu, \eta)$, then $\mathbb{E}(X) = \mu$, $\var{X} = \mu(\eta + 1)$. For the confirmed cases $\conf{X}_{t_k, a}$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:negbin} \conf{X}_{t_k, a} \sim \textrm{NegBin}\left(\conf{\mu}_{t_k, a}, \eta_{t_k}\right) \end{equation} whereas the primary care consultations $\doc{X}_{t_k, a}$ include contamination by a non-pandemic ILI background component $B_{t_k, a}$: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:negbin.gp} \doc{X}_{t_k, a} \sim \textrm{NegBin}\left(\doc{\mu}_{t_k, a} + B_{t_k, a}, \eta_{t_k}\right). \end{equation} Here the contamination $B_{t_k, a}$ is appropriately parameterised in terms of parameters $\vec{\beta}^B$ (see Web Appendix B). The signal $\doc{\mu}_{t_k, a}$ is identified by virological data from sub-samples of size $v^{\textrm{viro}}_{t_k, a}$ of the primary care consultations. The number of swabs testing positive for the presence of the pandemic strain $W_{t_k, a}$ in each sample is assumed to be distributed: \begin{equation} W_{t_k, a} \sim \textrm{Bin}\left(v^{\textrm{viro}}_{t_k, a}, 1 - \frac{B_{t_k, a}}{\doc{\mu}_{t_k, a} + B_{t_k, a}}\right).\label{eqn:viro.bin} \end{equation} \subsection{Inference} \label{sec:MCMC} Let $\vec{\theta}=\{\vec{\xi}, \phi, p^e_{t_k, a},\eta_{t_k}, \vec{\beta}^B\}$ denote the vector of all free parameters. \cite{BirKGCPHCZWPD11} develop a Bayesian approach and use a Markov Chain-Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm to derive the posterior distribution of $\vec{\theta}$ on the basis of $245$ days of primary care consultation and swab positivity data, confirmed case and cross-sectional serological data. The MCMC algorithm is a naively adaptive random walk Metropolis algorithm, requiring $7\times10^5$ iterations, taking over four hours. MCMC is not easily adapted for parallelised computation, although a small speed up can be achieved by parallelising the likelihood component of the posterior distribution of $\vec{\theta}$ over a small number of CPUs. In total, this required in excess of $6.3\times10^6$ evaluations of the transmission model and/or convolutions of the kind in equation \eqref{eqn:convolution}. Implementation of MCMC in an online fashion, as new data arrive involves the re-analysis of the entire dataset, requiring time for multiple Markov chains to converge. Although, the runtime might not be prohibitive for real-time inference, the current implementation leaves little margin to consider multiple code runs or alternative model formulations. In a future pandemic there will be a greater wealth of data facilitating a greater degree of stratification of the population \citep{SPIM11}. With increasing model complexity comes rapidly increasing MCMC run-times, which can be efficiently addressed through use of SMC methods. \section{An SMC Alternative to MCMC}\label{sec:SMC} The model in Section \ref{sec:recon} is deterministic and designed for use at a time in a pandemic when stochastic effects are uninfluential. In this case epidemic data are imperfect observations distributed around model outputs and the inferential focus is on $\vec{\theta}$. Letting $\vec{Y}_t$ denote the vector of all random quantities in \eqref{eqn:sero.bin}-\eqref{eqn:viro.bin}, and let $\data{t}$ be the observed values of $\vec{Y}_t$, online inference involves the sequential estimation of posterior distributions $\pi_k(\vec{\theta}) = p({\vec\theta}\lvert\data{1:k}) \propto \pi_0(\vec{\theta})p(\data{1:k}\vert \vec{\theta}), \; k = 1, \ldots, K$, where $\pi_0(\vec{\theta})$ indicates the prior for $\vec{\theta}$. Estimation of any epidemic feature, {\it e.g.} the assessment of the current state of the epidemic or prediction of its future course, follows from estimating $\vec{\theta}$ Suppose at time $t_k$ a set of $n_k$ particles $\{\vec{\theta}_k^{(1)},\ldots,\vec{\theta}_k^{(n_k)}\}$, with associated weights $\{\wt{k}{1},\ldots,\allowbreak \wt{k}{n_k}\}$, approximate a sample from the target distribution $\pi_k(\cdot)$. On the arrival of the next batch of data $\data{k+1}$, $\pi_k(\cdot)$ is used as an importance sampling distribution to sample from $\pi_{k + 1}(\cdot)$. In practice, this involves a reweighting of the particle set. The particles are reweighted according to the importance ratio, $\pi_{k+1}(\cdot)/\pi_{k}(\cdot)$, which reduces to the likelihood of the incoming data batch, i.e: \begin{equation} \wt{k + 1}{j} \propto \wt{k}{j} \frac{\pi_{k + 1}\left(\vec{\theta}_k^{(j)}\right)}{\pi_k\left(\vec{\theta}_k^{(j)}\right)} = \wt{k}{j}\lik{k + 1}{\vec{\theta}_{k}^{(j)}}. \end{equation} Eventually, many particles will carry relatively low weight, leading to sample degeneracy as progressively fewer particles contribute meaningfully to the estimation of $\pi_k(\cdot)$. A measure of this degeneracy is the effective sample size (ESS) \citep{LiuC95}, \begin{equation}\label{eqn:ESS} \textrm{ESS}\left(\left\{\wt{k}{\cdot}\right\}\right) = \frac{\left(\sum_{l = 1}^{n_k}\wt{k}{l}\right)^2}{\sum_{j = 1}^{n_k} {\wt{k}{j}}^2}, \end{equation} with values of the ESS that are small in comparison to $n_k$ being indicative of the impoverishment of the current particle set. This degeneracy can be tackled in different ways. \cite{GorSS93} introduced a resampling step, removing low weight particles and jittering the remainder. This jittering step was formalised by \cite{GilB01} using Metropolis-Hastings (MH) steps to rejuvenate the sample. \cite{Fea02} and \cite{Cho02} provide more general treatises of this SMC method, with \cite{Cho02} labelling the algorithm `iterated batch importance sampling'. This was extended by \cite{DelDJ06} who unify the static estimation of $\vec{\theta}$ with the filtering problem (estimation of $\vec{x}_k$). Here we adapt the resample-move algorithm of \cite{GilB01}, investigating its real-time efficiency in comparison to successive use of MCMC. The MH steps rejuvenating the sample constitute the computational bottle-neck in resample-move as they require a browsing of the whole data history to evaluate the full likelihood, not just the most recent batch. For fast inference, the number of such steps should be minimised, without risking Monte Carlo error through sample degeneracy. Their algorithm is laid out in full below. It is presumed that it is straightforward to sample from the prior distribution $\pi_0(\vec{\theta})$. \subsection{The Algorithm}\label{sec:alg} \begin{enumerate} \item {{\bf Set} $k = 0$. Draw a sample $\{\vec{\theta}_0^{(1)},\ldots,\vec{\theta}_0^{(n_0)}\}$ from the prior distribution, $\pi_0(\vec{\theta})$, set the weights $\wt{0}{j} = 1 / n_0, \forall j$.} \item {{\bf Set}\label{pt:init} $k = k + 1$. Observe a new batch of data $\vec{Y}_{k} = \data{k}$. Reweigh the particles so that the \myth{j} particle has weight \begin{equation}\label{eqn:alg.reweight} \tilde\omega_{k}^{(j)} \propto \wt{k - 1}{j} p\left(\data{k} \lvert \vec{\theta}_{k - 1}^{(j)}\right). \end{equation}} \item {{\bf Calculate the effective sample size}. Set $\omega^{(j)}_{k} = \tilde\omega_{k}^{(j)} / \sum_i \tilde\omega_{k}^{(i)}, \forall j$. If $ESS\left(\left\{\omega_{k}^{(\cdot)}\right\}\right) > \epsilon_L n_{k - 1}$ set $\vec{\theta}_k^{(j)} = \vec{\theta}_{k - 1}^{(j)}$, $\wt{k}{j} = \omega^{(j)}_{k}$, $n_k = n_{k - 1}$ and return to point (\ref{pt:init}), else go next}. \item {{\bf Resample}. Choose $n_k$ and sample $\{\tilde\vec{\theta}_{k}^{(j)}\}_{j = 1}^{n_k}$ from the set of particles $\{\vec{\theta}_{k - 1}^{(j)}\}_{j = 1}^{n_{k - 1}}$ with corresponding probabilities $\{\omega_{k}^{(j)}\}_{j = 1}^{n_{k - 1}}$. Here, we have used residual resampling \citep{LiuC98}. Re-set $\omega_{k}^{(j)} = 1 / n_{k}$. \label{pt:Rejuvenation} } \item {{\bf Move}: For each $j$, move from $\tilde{\vec{\theta}}_{k}^{(j)}$ to $\vec{\theta}_{k}^{(j)}$ via a MH kernel $\mathcal{K}_{k}\left(\tilde{\vec{\theta}}_{k}^{(j)}, \vec{\theta}_{k}^{(j)};\gamma\right)$. If $k < K$, return to point (\ref{pt:init}).} \item {{\bf End}.} \end{enumerate} There are a number of algorithmic choices to be made, including tuning the parameters of the MH kernel ($\gamma$ above) or the rejuvenation threshold, $\epsilon_L$. In a real-time setting, it may not be possible to tune an algorithm ``on the fly'', so the system has to work ``out of the box'', either through prior tuning or through being adaptive. In what follows we set $\epsilon_L=0.5$ \citep{JasSDT11} and we focus on the key factor affecting the performance of the algorithm in real-time, {\it i.e.} the MH kernel. \subsubsection{Kernel Choice}\label{sec:ker.choice} \paragraph{Correlated Random Walk} A correlated random walk proposes values in the neighbourhood of the current particle: \begin{equation} \vec{\theta}^* \lvert \tilde\vec{\theta}^{(j)}_k \sim \mathrm{N}\left(\tilde\vec{\theta}^{(j)}_k, \gamma \bar{\vec{\Sigma}}_k\right)\label{eqn:appCorr}, \end{equation} where $\bar{\vec{\Sigma}}_k$ is the sample variance-covariance matrix for the weighted sample $\{\tilde\omega_{k}^{(\cdot)}, \vec{\theta}_{k-1}^{(\cdot)}\}$. The parameter $\gamma$ can be tuned {\it a priori} to guarantee a reasonable acceptance rate, or, alternatively, asymptotic results for the optimal scaling of covariance matrices \citep{RobR01, SheFR10} can be used. Localised moves keep acceptance rates high and will quickly restore the value of the ESS. However, if after re-sampling there are few unique particles then the rejuvenation can result in a highly clustered sample, providing an inaccurate representation of the target distribution. \paragraph{Approximate Gibbs'} An independence sampler that proposes \citep{Cho02}: \begin{equation} \vec{\theta^} \lvert \tilde\vec{\theta}^{(j)}_k \sim \mathrm{N}\left(\bar{\vec{\theta}}_k, \bar{\vec{\Sigma}}_k\right)\label{eqn:appGibbs} \end{equation} where $\bar\vec{\theta}_k$ is the sample mean for the $\{\tilde\omega_{k}^{(\cdot)}, \vec{\theta}_{k-1}^{(\cdot)}\}$. Here, proposals are drawn from a distribution chosen to approximate the target distribution, only weakly-dependent on the current position of the particle. An accept-reject step is still required to correct for this approximatio . The quality of the approximation depends on $\pi_{k - 1}(\cdot)$ being well represented by the current particle set, there being sufficient richness in the particle weights after the reweighting step and the target density being sufficiently near-Gaussian. Assuming that the multivariate normal approximation to the target is adequate (and it should be increasingly so as more data are acquired) this type of proposal allows for more rapid exploration of the sample space. Both the correlated random walk and the approximate Gibbs' methods will be used, both as block updates where a new value for the entire parameter vector is proposed at once, and in component-wise updates where individual or sub-groups of parameter components are proposed in turn, using the appropriate conditional distributions derived from \eqref{eqn:appCorr} and \eqref{eqn:appGibbs}. \section{Epidemic prediction}\label{sec:prediction} Until now we have focused on the development of an algorithm for the sequential estimation of the posterior distribution of the model parameters However, it will also be necessary to examine, in real-time, the ability of the model to make epidemic forecasts. These forecasts will be of two different types: long-range predictions and one-step ahead predictions. Long-range forecasts are based on posterior predictive distributions of the form $\pi(\data{(k):(k+l)}\lvert\data{1:(k-1)})$, and are essential to anticipate the epidemic healthcare burden. On the other hand, probabilistic one-step ahead forecasts allow for timely, online assessment of model adequacy through their comparison with the incoming data. The quality of these predictions can be visually assessed through the plotting of probability integral transform (PIT) histograms \citep{Daw84}, as defined for count data by \cite{CzaGH09}. Denoting the one-step ahead posterior predictive distribution $\pi(y_k\lvert\data{1:(k-1)})$ to have corresponding cumulative distribution function $F_k \equiv F_k(y_k)$, a histogram of the empirical $F_k, k = 1, \ldots, K$ should be close to uniform if the predictions are adequate. A more formal method is based on proper scoring rules \citep{GneR07}, which assign a numerical score to each one-step predictive distribution evaluated at the subsequent data point. The suitability of various scoring rules are discussed in \cite{CzaGH09} while \cite{SeiD93} and \cite{HelMB_pre} show how these scoring rules can be aggregated to test a hypothesis of prediction adequacy. In particular \cite{HelMB_pre} calculate the value \begin{equation} s_{\textrm{rps}}(F, y) = \sum_{k = 0}^{\infty}\left\{F_k - \mathbbm{1}(y\leq k)\right\}^2, \end{equation} the ranked probability score for each one-step ahead prediction. The mean $\bar{s}_{\textrm{rps}}$ of these scores taken over all such predictions is used to form the test statistic \begin{equation}\label{eqn:z.stat} z_{\textrm{rps}} = \frac{\bar{s}_{\textrm{rps}} - \mathbb{E}\left(\bar{s}_{\textrm{rps}}\right)}{\textrm{Var}\left(\bar{s}_{\textrm{rps}}\right)} \end{equation} which has a standard normal distribution under a null hypothesis of prediction adequacy. Overall, if these diagnostics expose a persistent lack of predictive ability, then the epidemic model needs adaptation if it is to be consistent with incoming batches of data. \section{A simulated epidemic }\label{sec:sim} The SMC algorithm's performance is contrasted against the gold-standard MCMC through its application to simulated epidemic data generated to mimic the timing and dynamics of the 2009 A/H1N1 pandemic in England. Anomalously, this epidemic started with an initial burst of infection in Spring, so a \st{1} May start date is chosen. The epidemic occurs in two waves of infection with a first peak induced by an over-summer school holiday and a second peak towards the end of the year. We consider two scenarios: in the first scenario direct information on confirmed cases (e.g. hospitalisation, ICU admissions) is available; in the second scenario we observe ILI consultations in primary care that are noisy and contaminated by non-pandemic infections. Alongside confirmed case and consultation data, serological data (see Section \ref{sec:intro.inference}) are available and, in the second scenario, we also assume the existence of companion virological data taken from a sub-sample of the ILI consultations (see Equation \eqref{eqn:viro.bin}). In both scenarios observations are made on 245 consecutive days on a population divided into $A = 7$ age groups, and the underlying epidemic curve is characterised by the same parameters, so both confirmed case and primary care consultation data are subject to similar trends and shocks. One such shock arises from an assumed sudden change in the way the confirmed cases and GP consultations are observed. This could occur due to some public health intervention designed to alleviate the burden placed on primary care services as happened in 2009 with the launch of the National Pandemic Flu Service. Table \ref{tbl:parameters} presents the model parameters together with the values used for simulation. \begin{table} \setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \caption{\label{tbl:parameters}Parameters used in the simulation of (confirmed case) epidemic data} \centering \fbox{ \begin{tabular}{cp{8.75cm}R{5.4cm}} \em Parameter&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Description}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Value}\\ \hline $\vec{\eta}$&Dispersion parameters, split either side of a public health intervention at $t_k = 83$, denoted $(\eta_1, \eta_2)$. \bf{\footnotesize 2 parameters}&(3.00, 2.15)\\ $\vec{d}_I$&The mean infectious period. \bf{\footnotesize 1 parameter}&3.47\\ $\vec{\phi}$&The proportion of symptomatic infections. \bf{\footnotesize 1 parameter}&0.278\\ $\vec{m}$&Multipliers applied to the contact matrices (e.g. to describe the school-holiday effects). \bf{\footnotesize 5 parameters}&(0.403, 0.495, 0.0588, 0.301, 0.421)\\ $\vec{\psi}$&Exponential growth rate. \bf{\footnotesize 1 parameter}&0.133\\ $\vec{\nu}$&A reparameterisation of the initial number of infectives, a function of $I_0$. \bf{\footnotesize 1 parameter}&-13.9\\ $\vec{\conf{p}} \text{ or } \vec{\doc{p}}$&Parameters governing the population propensity of individuals with ILI symptoms to appear in the data. Split either side of the public health intervention at $t_k = 83$, with different rates for adults and children. \bf{\footnotesize 4 parameters}&\vspace{-30pt}\begin{equation} p^e_{t_k, a} = \begin{cases} p_1 & t_k \leq 83, a < 4\\ p_2 & t_k \leq 83, a \geq 4\\ p_3 p_1 & t_k > 83, a < 4\\ p_4 p_2 & t_k > 83, a \geq 4 \end{cases}\end{equation}\vspace{-15pt}\begin{equation}p = (0.278, 0.162, 0.137, 0.441)\end{equation}\vspace{-15pt}\\ $\vec{\beta}^B$&Parameters of the piecewise log-linear model for the background ILI consultation rates, with changepoints at $t_k = 83, 129, 177$.&See Web Appendix B.\\ \end{tabular}} \end{table} \subsection{Confirmed Case Data} For a given set of parameters $\vec{\theta}$, the number of confirmed cases, $\conf{\mu}_{t_k, a}$, in interval $\ninterval{k}$ is given by Equation \eqref{eqn:convolution} and count data $\conf{X}_{t_k, a}$ are generated from the negative binomial distribution in \eqref{eqn:negbin}. Note that the overdispersion parameter $\eta_{t_k}$ is piecewise constant over time, with a breakpoint at the time of the system shock due to the intervention, chosen to be at $t_k = 83$. \subsection{Primary Care Consultation Data} The number of consultations due to the pandemic strain $\doc{\mu}_{t_k, a}(\vec{\theta})$ is also calculated via the convolution equation \eqref{eqn:convolution}. The contamination component is added by assuming `background' consultation rates, $B_{t_k,a}$, that develop over time according to a log-linear spline with a discontinuity at $t_k = 83$. With additional age effects to generate separate consultation rates for children ($<16$ year-olds) and adults, this spline model is characterised by a 9-dimensional parameter $\vec{\beta}^B$. The precise specification of this spline is detailed in Appendix B and the log-linear spline used in the simulation is plotted, aggregated over age groups, in Figure \ref{fig:gp.data}(D). In both simulated datasets, the number of consulations will drop markedly due to the intervention, introduced through a sudden change in the parameter $\vec{\doc{p}}$, the proportion of symptomatic cases that seek consultation. In reality, $\doc{p}_{t_k, a}$ may exhibit greater temporal variation than $\conf{p}_{t_k, a}$ as it depends on behavioural factors and is not a property of the virus. However, in the examples presented here they are parameterised similarly (see Table \ref{tbl:parameters}). \begin{figure} \centering \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}r@{}} \resizebox{0.5\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{GP_and_sero.eps}}& \resizebox{0.5\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{Viro_and_bg.eps}}\\ \end{tabular} \caption{Top row: (A) Number of GP consultations $\doc{X}_{t_k, a}$; (B) swab positivity data ($W_{t_k, a}$) with numbers representing the size of the weekly denominator. Bottom row: (C) serological data ($Z_{t_k, a}$); (D) pattern of background consultation rates for the primary healthcare data aggregated over ages. The red arrows over figures (A) and (C) highlight the timing of some key, informative observations.}\label{fig:gp.data} \end{figure} The daily consulations are generated from the negative binomial distribution in \eqref{eqn:negbin.gp}, assuming the same degree of overdispersion used in the generation of the confirmed cases. The companion virological dataset consists of samples of the same size and timing as those available from 2009 \subsection{Serological Data} Serological data arise from the testing of blood sera samples assumed to be taken representatively to give a time-evolving picture of the presence of immunity in the population. Again, the sample timings and sizes are the same as those taken in the 2009 pandemic, with the positive counts $\left\{Z_{t_k, a}\right\}$ simulated from Equation \eqref{eqn:sero.bin} All the data for the second scenario are presented in Figure \ref{fig:gp.data}. \section{Results from a resample-move SMC algorithm}\label{sec:analysis} In this section we recreate the process of tracking the evolution of an epidemic, comparing the performance of a number of SMC schemes to the `gold-standard' MCMC algorithm in Section \ref{sec:MCMC}. The focus of a public health response in the early stages of an emerging epidemic will be on the estimation of some key epidemic parameters from a few initial cases in localised outbreaks. Real time monitoring of the epidemic will begin after this initial stage, taken here to be the first $50$ days of the epidemic. An MCMC implementation of the model is carried out at times $t_k = 50, 70, 83, 120, 164$ and 245 days and the SMC algorithm will then be used to propagate the MCMC-obtained posteriors over the intervals defined by these timepoints. For example, the MCMC-obtained estimate $\mcmcdens{50}$ of $\pi_{50}(\vec{\theta})$ will be used as the starting point for the SMC algorithm over the interval 50-70 days. The SMC algorithm will then give an estimate $\smcdens{70\lvert 50}$ for $\tdens{}{70}$, which will then be compared with $\mcmcdens{70}$. The similarity (or divergence) between the two distributions is measured by an approximation to the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence of $\smcdens{t_k\lvert\cdot}$ from $\mcmcdens{t_k}$, obtained by assuming that both distributions are multivariate normal distributions, approximating $\mcmcdens{t_k}$ and $\smcdens{t_k\lvert\cdot}$ by $\mathrm{N}(\mu_0, \Sigma_0)$ and $\mathrm{N}(\mu_1, \Sigma_1)$ respectively: \begin{align} KL\left(\pi^{\textrm{MCMC}}_{t_k}\Vert\pi^{\textrm{SMC}}_{t_k\lvert\cdot}\right) &= \int_{\vec{\Theta}} \mcmcdens{t_k}\log\left\{\frac{\mcmcdens{t_k}}{\smcdens{t_k\lvert\cdot}}\right\}d\vec{\theta}\nonumber\\ &\hspace{-2cm}\approx \frac{1}{2}\left\{\mathrm{tr}\left({\Sigma_1}^{-1}\Sigma_0\right) + \left(\mu_1 - \mu_0\right)^T{\Sigma_1}^{-1}\left(\mu_1 - \mu_0\right) - \textrm{dim}\left(\vec{\theta}\right) + \log\left(\frac{\lvert\Sigma_1\lvert}{\lvert\Sigma_0\lvert}\right) \right\}.\label{eqn:KL.est} \end{align} \subsection{Scenario 1: Using Confirmed cases and Serology Data}\label{sec:res} Table \ref{tbl:KL} reports the KL divergences between the target posterior distributions obtained from SMC (with rejuvenations using only a single MH iteration) and MCMC at $t_k = 50, 70, 83, 120,\allowbreak 164$ and 245 days. The correlated random-walk \eqref{eqn:appCorr} is notably inferior over most of the intervals prior to the interval 84--120 days. Beyond this time, as data accumulate, the divergence between distributions $\pi_k$ and $\pi_{k + 1}$ is small and the conservative random-walk proposals become progressively more adequate at bridging the gap. The component-wise approximate Gibbs scheme \eqref{eqn:appGibbs} performs better, minimising KL divergence over almost all intervals. As the move step here has many accept-reject steps (one for each component grouping of Table \ref{tbl:parameters}), each of low dimension, the overall acceptance rate (the proportion of particles for which at least one component moves) is very high, giving $ESS \approx n_k$. \begin{table} \caption{\label{tbl:KL}Scenario 1: Kullback-Leibler statistics and likelihood evaluations per day (`Run Time') for each resample-move algorithm.} \centering \fbox{% \begin{tabular}{rlrrr} \multicolumn{2}{c}{\em Proposal}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Correlated}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Component-wise}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Block}\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\em Method}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em Random-Walk}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em approx. Gibbs}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\em approx. Gibbs}\\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{\em Intervals}&&&\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{0-50}&KL&2.83&2.58&2.61\\ &Run Time&18200&16800&8000\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{51-70}&KL&2.00&0.908&1.32\\ &Run Time&21000&21000&8000\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{71-83}&KL&4.44&1.06&1.60\\ &Run Time&26923&26923&7692\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{84-120}&KL&16.3&6.58&2.09\\ &Run Time&20811&17027&10000\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{121-164}&KL&0.106&0.113&0.122\\ &Run Time&3182&3182&4773\\ &&&&\\ \multirow{2}{}{165-245}&KL&0.339&0.471&1.15\\ &Run Time&8642&9506&9136\\ &&&&\\ \end{tabular}} \end{table} Figure \ref{fig:ind.chopin.plots} illustrates the performance of the approximate Gibbs component-wise proposal kernel comparing the SMC- and MCMC-obtained scatterplots for the parameter components $\psi$ and $\nu$ at $t_k = 70$ (A), $t_k = 120$ (B) and $t_k = 245$ (C). There is close correspondence between the SMC and MCMC obtained distributions at $t_k = 70$ and $t_k = 245$, but substantial departure at $t_k = 120$. \begin{figure} \centering (A) $t_k = 70$\\ \resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{70.eps}}\\ (B) $t_k = 120$\\ \resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{120.eps}}\\ (C) $t_k = 245$\\ \resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{245.eps}}\\ \caption{\label{fig:ind.chopin.plots}Comparison of SMC-obtained posteriors and MCMC-obtained posteriors at $t_k$ = 70 (A), $t_k$ = 120 (B) and $t_k$ = 245 (C) days, via scatter plots for the parameters $\psi$ and $\nu$. The grey points in both the left and the right panels represent the MCMC-obtained sample at the beginning of the interval, with the overlaid coloured points representing the SMC or MCMC-obtained samples at the end of the interval. In the SMC-obtained samples, the colour of the plotted points represents the weight attached to the particle, with the red particles being those of heaviest weight.} \end{figure} \subsection {Scenario 2: Using Primary Care Consultations and Serology Data}\label{sec:res2} With a parameter space that has expanded from 15 to 24 dimensions, the problems identified in Table \ref{tbl:KL} are magnified (see Table C1 of the Web Appendix). In particular, after $t_k = 83$ the number of new parameters that become active is greater than in Scenario 1 and for the following few days some of these new parameters are not identifiable. Possibly as a consequence, the KL divergences over the interval 83-120, irrespective of the proposal scheme, are arbitrarily high. \subsection{Remarks}\label{sec:1stremarks} It is clear that the basic resample-move SMC algorithm cannot handle the `shock' in the count data occurring at $t_k=83$. In scenario 1, this shock is accommodated by the model through step changes in the parameters $\eta_{t_k}$ and $p^e_{t_k, a}$, with similar step changes in the levels of background consultation in Scenario 2. For these parameter components, the target marginal posterior distributions move rapidly from day 84 as probability density shifts away from uninformative prior distributions. As an example, Figure \ref{fig:densities} shows the change in the marginal posterior for the overdispersion parameter $\eta_{t_k}$ over the interval [84, 90] days. The chosen $\Gamma(0.01, 0.01)$ prior distribution is unbounded and highly non-Gaussian even after transforming to the log-scale. In this case, there is very little prior to posterior overlap and normal proposal distributions represent a poor choice. \begin{figure} \centering \resizebox{0.33\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{eta2_dens_smc.eps}}\resizebox{0.33\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{log_eta2_smc_dens.eps}}\\ \caption{\label{fig:densities}(A) and (B) Evolution of the densities of $\eta_2$ and $\log(\eta_2)$ after $t_k = 83$. The densities for the days 84, 85, 86, 87 and 90 days are solid black, and dashed red, dark blue, light blue and magenta } \end{figure} For Scenario 1, the 84-120 day interval is the only one over which the block-update approximate Gibbs method gives the best performance (see KL divergence in Table \ref{tbl:KL}). This is attributable to the way the proposal mechanisms modify the ESS as discussed in Section \ref{sec:ker.choice}. The inability of the full-block Gibbs updates to restore the ESS, unlike the componentwise algorithms, leads to a rejuvenation step at the arrival of each new data point. This greater number of rejuvenations better enables the tracking of the shifting posterior distributions over time, although it negates any advantages of this algorithm in terms of computation time (see Tables \ref{tbl:KL} and A1). However, even with the block updates, good correspondence between the SMC- and MCMC-obtained posteriors is not achieved in Scenario 1 until $t_k\approx 100$, and not at all in Scenario 2. From these initial results it is clear that a modified algorithmic formulation is needed for computationally efficient inference when target posteriors are highly non-Gaussian and/or are moving fast between successive batches of data as a consequence of highly informative observations. \section{Extending the algorithm - handling informative observations}\label{sec:inf.theory} A key feature of any improved SMC algorithm must be that the ESS \eqref{eqn:ESS} retains its interpretation as the ``required size of an independent sample drawn directly from the target distribution to achieve the same estimating precision attained by the sample contained in the particle set'' \citep{CarCF99}. A single step of the component-wise algorithms of Section \ref{sec:analysis} restored the ESS, $\textit{i.e. } \textrm{ESS} \approx n_k$. In general, as the proposal scaling tends to zero, {\it i.e.} $\gamma \downarrow 0$, acceptance rates will be close to one, resulting in a set of mostly unique particles and a high value for the ESS. However, this would be a highly clustered posterior sample, barely distinguishable from the set of resampled particles. Such a sample is not as informative as an independent sample of size $n_k$, and so the ESS, as calculated from the particle weights, is no longer a reliable guide to the quality of the sample. Conversely, the ESS (see Section \ref{sec:res}) ceases to be an adequate guide for identifying rejuvenation times when considering block-update approximate-Gibbs proposals, as it is unable to recover to the threshold $\epsilon_L n_k$. We look at three possible improvements to the resample-move algorithm of Section \ref{sec:SMC}, to produce an information-adjusted SMC algorithm that ensures that the ESS remains a good measure of the quality of the sample: we address the timing of rejuvenations; we reconsider the choice of kernels used in the rejuvenations; and we question the number of iterations we need to run the MCMC sampler before the sample is fully rejuvenated. \subsection{Timing the rejuvenations: a continuous-time formulation} Here we discuss the idea of rejuvenating at intervening times, including only a fraction of the new batch of data, so that if there is large divergence between consecutive target distributions $\pi_k$ and $\pi_{k + 1}$, the estimation of intermediate distributions will allow the particle set to move gradually between the two targets \citep{DelDJ06}. These intermediate distributions are generated via tempering \citep{Nea96}, by gradually introducing the new batch of data into the likelihood at a range of `temperatures' $\delta \in [0, 1]$. These distributions are $\pi_{k, \delta}(\vec{\theta}) \propto \pi_{k}(\vec{\theta}) \left\{\lik{k + 1}{\vec{\theta}}\right\}^\delta$. Assume that batch of data $\data{k+1}$ arrives uniformly over the ${(k + 1)}^{th}$ interval rather than at the end of the interval. The particle weights will develop according to \begin{equation} \tilde\omega_{k + \delta}^{(j)} = \wt{k}{j} \left\{\lik{k + 1}{\vec{\theta}^{(j)}}\right\}^{\delta},\; j = 1, \ldots n_k. \end{equation} More generally, denote $\wt{k + \delta, \delta_0}{j}$ the weight attached to a particle at an intermediate time $t_{k + \delta}$ when the previous rejuvenation took place at time $t_{k + \delta_0}$, with $\delta_0 = 0$ corresponding to no prior rejuvenation within the interval $(t_k, t_{k + 1}]$. Then, for $\delta \geq \delta_0 \geq 0$ and indicator function $\mathbbm{1}_A$, \begin{equation} \tilde\omega_{k + \delta, \delta_0}^{(j)} = \left(\wt{k}{j} + \left(1 - \wt{k}{j}\right)\mathbbm{1}_{\delta_0 > 0}\right)\lik{k+1}{\vec{\theta}^{(j)}}^{\delta - \delta_0} \end{equation} Therefore, if $ESS(\{\tilde\omega_{k + 1, \delta_0}^{(j)}\}_{j = 1}^{n_k}) < \epsilon_L n_k$ a further rejuvenation would be proposed at time $\delta^$, such that $\delta^* = \arg \min_{\delta \in (\delta_0, 1)} \{ESS(\tilde\omega^{(j)}_{k + \delta, \delta_0}) - \epsilon_L n_k\}^2$. The number of rejuvenations required within the \myth{(k + 1)} interval will be in proportion to the degree of particle impoverishment that would have occurred were no rejuvenation to take place. \subsection{Choosing kernels - hybrid algorithms.} As discussed in Section \ref{sec:1stremarks}, each of the possible MH kernels has its own distinct strengths which can be exploited by using a combination of kernels. Full block approximate-Gibbs updates are efficient at reducing the clustering that forms around resampled particles. Adding a random walk step would allow the proposal of values outside the space spanned by the principal components of $\bar{\vec{\Sigma}}_k$, something of particular necessity if the ESS becomes very small and $\bar{\vec{\Sigma}}_k$ is close to singularity. This motivates a hybridisation of the proposal mechanism, done either by using mixture proposals, {\it e.g.} a mixture between the approximate Gibbs' proposals and full block ordinary random walk Metropolis proposals \citep{KanBJ14}, or, as will be used in the remainder, by augmenting full block approximate Gibbs updates with componentwise random walk proposals. \subsection{How many MH iterations? Multiple proposals and intra-class correlation}\label{sec:ICC} In the MH-step of the algorithm, there are effectively $n_k$ parallel MCMC chains. Making proposals until all chains have attained convergence would be an inefficiency. In theory, the distribution governing the starting states of these MCMC chains forms a biased sample from the stationary distribution of the MCMC chain. It then seems a reasonable and sufficient requirement that we carry out MH steps until the chains have, to some degree, collectively `forgotten' their starting positions. This can be monitored through an estimate of an intra-class correlation coefficient, $\rho$. To get such an estimate, we divide the particle set into $I$ clusters, each of size $d_i, i = 1, \ldots, I$, defined by the parent particle at the resampling stage. For example, if a particular particle is resampled 5 times, it defines a cluster in the new sample with $d_i = 5$. For a univariate summary, $g_{ij} = g(\vec{\theta}_{ij})$, of the epidemic curve described by the \myth{j} particle in the \myth{i} cluster, $\vec{\theta}_{ij}$, $\rho$ is estimated by the analysis of variance intra-class correlation coefficient \citep{DonK80, SokR81}, given by \begin{equation}\label{eq:aov.icc} r_A = \frac{(MS_a - MS_w) / d_0}{(MS_a - MS_w) / d_0 + MS_w}, \end{equation} where $MS_a = \frac{1}{I - 1}\sum_{i = 1}^I d_i (\bar{g}_{i\cdot} - \bar{g}_{\cdot\cdot})^2$, $MS_w = \frac{1}{d - I}\sum_{i = 1}^I\sum_{j = 1}^{d_i} (g_{ij} - \bar{g}_{i\cdot})^2$ and $d_0 = \bar{d} - \frac{1}{d(I - 1)}\sum_{i = 1}^I(d_i - \bar{d})^2$, represent a between-class mean sum-of-squares, a within-class mean sum-of-squares and an average class size respectively, with $d = \sum_{i = 1}^Id_i$, $\bar{g}_{i\cdot} = \frac{1}{d_i}\sum_{j = 1}^{d_i}g_{ij}$ and $\bar{g}_{\cdot\cdot} = \frac{1}{d}\sum_{i = 1}^I\sum_{j = 1}^{d_i}g_{ij}$. Clusters with $d_i \leq 1$ are omitted as they have no within cluster variation \citep{DonK80}. Prior to the MH-phase of the algorithm, $r_A$ will be equal to 1, as there is no within-class variation. However, with each iteration of the chosen MH-sampler, $\rho$ will decrease and, in general, so will its estimate $r_A$. We aim to choose a sufficiently small positive threshold for $r_A$ to be the point beyond which there is no longer any value in carrying out further MH proposals to rejuvenate the sample, as particles spawned from different progenitors become indistinguishable from each other. Ideally we will choose this threshold to be as large as is practicably possible to minimise the number of rejuvenations required. We shall test our algorithms with thresholds $r_A^* = 0.1, 0.2, 0.5$. The `attack rate' of the epidemic, the cumulative number of infections caused by the epidemic, is an obvious choice of summary as it is a key measure of epidemic burden. Recalling \eqref{eqn:nni}, the attack rate is formally defined: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:gfunc} g(\vec{\theta}) = \frac{\sum_{t = 1}^{\infty}\sum_{a = 1}^A\Delta_{t, a}(\vec{\theta})}{\sum_a N_a}. \end{equation} \section{Results from an information-adjusted SMC algorithm}\label{sec:informative} Here we focus mainly on the intervention-spanning day $83-120$ interval. In what follows, a hybrid algorithm is adopted, using combinations of three thresholds for $r_A$ with both the continuous and discrete sequential algorithms. \subsection{Scenario 1: Using confirmed case and serology data}\label{sec:scenario1} \subsubsection{Choosing an algorithm: Kullback-Leibler} \begin{figure} \centering \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{KLoverT2.eps}}\resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{essSawtooth2.eps}}\\ \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{numProposals2.eps}} \caption{\label{fig:KL6.1} (A) Kullback-Leibler divergence over time; (B) ESS for different thresholds using both discrete and continuous time algorithms; (C) Number of proposals required at each rejuvenation time by algorithm. Black and red lines correspond to the use of discrete and continuous algorithms respectively, solid, dashed and dotted lines correspond to the use of the thresholds $r_A^* = 0.1, 0.2$ and $0.5$ respectively.} \end{figure} Further MCMC samples were obtained using data up to and including days 84, 85, 86, 87, 90, 100, 110 and 120, so that KL divergences could be computed at each of these additional time points. In Figure \ref{fig:KL6.1}(A), KL discrepancies are plotted over time for each combination of algorithms and thresholds. The SMC approximation is closer to the MCMC-obtained posterior distributions for lower values of $r_A^$. This is to be expected as a low value of $r_A^$ requires a greater number of iterations of the MCMC chain within each rejuvenation (see Figure \ref{fig:KL6.1}(C)), leading to SMC-derived posteriors more closely resembling the `gold-standard'. \begin{table} \caption{\label{tbl:inf}Performance of the information-adjusted SMC algorithm over the interval 83-120 days by ICC threshold. Traditional filter using daily data (`discrete'); continuous-time filter (`continuous') . Cells shaded in green contain KL divergence that is lower than the reference KL divergence distribution.} \centering \fbox{% \begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr} \multicolumn{1}{l}{\bf \em ICC threshold}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf \em 0.5}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf \em 0.2}&{\bf \em 0.1}&\multicolumn{1}{l}{\bf \em ICC threshold}&{\bf \em 0.5}&{\bf \em 0.2}&{\bf \em 0.1}\\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 84 Days} (KL target = 0.732)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 90 Days} (KL target = 0.159)}\\ Continuous&1.95&3.46&3.48&Continuous&0.805&\cellcolor{green}0.0358&\cellcolor{green}0.113\\ Discrete&1.22&1.31&1.51&Discrete&1.22&1.05&0.970\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 85 Days} (KL target = 0.135)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 100 Days} (KL target = 0.135)}\\ Continuous&0.862&2.03&1.68&Continuous&0.691&\cellcolor{green}0.120&\cellcolor{green}0.0501\\ Discrete&1.50&1.18&1.02&Discrete&1.15&0.942&0.832\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 86 Days} (KL target = 0.365)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 110 Days} (KL target = 0.122)}\\ Continuous&0.780&2.01&2.02&Continuous&0.776&0.167&\cellcolor{green}0.0799\\ Discrete&1.78&1.37&1.24&Discrete&1.01&0.719&0.630\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 87 Days} (KL target = 0.276)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 120 Days} (KL target 0.119)}\\ Continuous&0.282&0.358&\cellcolor{green}0.0427&Continuous&0.666&0.278&\cellcolor{green}0.0842\\ Discrete&1.26&0.887&0.696&Discrete&0.888&0.498&0.552\\ \end{tabular}} \end{table} It is difficult to interpret the KL divergences in their own right. To construct a reference distribution of such divergences, the MCMC analyses were repeated a further 40 times at each of the times in Table \ref{tbl:inf}, using different starting points and random seeds. The KL divergences of each of these 40 posterior distributions from the original MCMC analysis were then calculated. We look for divergences in Table \ref{tbl:inf} that are typical of this sample of KL divergences. The cells in the table highlighted in green indicate where the KL divergence lies among the lower $95\%$ of sampled KL values at that time, a threshold marked in Table \ref{tbl:inf} as the `KL target'. For $t_k = 84, 85, 86$, there is no apparent best performing algorithm as none manage to yield a value for the KL that is typical of an MCMC analysis. From $t_k = 87$ onwards, the continuous-time algorithm is much more efficient as for the given $r_A^$, fewer iterations are required to attain a much lower KL value (see Figures \ref{fig:KL6.1}(A) and \ref{fig:KL6.1}(C)). These results were tested under multiple reruns of the algorithm. For $r_A^ = 0.5$, findings from the continuous-time algorithm were highly volatile. Despite this, Figure \ref{fig:KL6.1}(B) shows that the number and timing of rejuvenations appears independent of the choice of $r_A^$ and the decline in the ESS is independent of the quality of the initial sample. In conclusion, the continuous-time algorithm is to be preferred with a threshold of, at most, 0.2. Note that for $r^_A = 0.1$, the continuous-time algorithm has KL typical of an MCMC analysis for all values of $t_k \geq 87$. \subsubsection{Acceptance rates} Performance of the continuous-time algorithm appears strongly linked to the acceptance rate of the block approximate Gibbs' proposals. This acceptance rate is particularly low prior to $t_k = 87$, before undergoing a sudden step change and increasing from 1-2\% to 15-20\%, although, for $r_A^* = 0.5$, this step change only occurred in about 50\% of runs. In contrast, the acceptance rates for the discrete-time algorithm are consistently around 5\% throughout, as seen from the number of proposals required over time (Figure \ref{fig:KL6.1}(C)). The result of this is that, from day 87 onwards, far fewer proposals are required in total for the continuous-time algorithm, even if the number of rejuvenation times increases. \subsection{Scenario 2: Using primary care consulations and serology data}\label{sec:last.analysis} \subsubsection{Choosing an algorithm} As in Section \ref{sec:res2}, results from SMC applied to contaminated count data display many of the phenomena already discussed. Table \ref{tbl:inf2.alt} gives results comparable to those in Table \ref{tbl:inf} with cells highlighted in green to be interpreted as previously. \begin{table} \caption{\label{tbl:inf2.alt}Performance of the information-adjusted SMC algorithm over the interval 83-120 days, using the continuous filter and the continuous filter alternative with the negative binomial dispersion parameters removed from the block proposals. Here, the parameters describing the background rates of consultation have been removed from the KL calculations.} \centering \fbox{ \begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr} \multicolumn{1}{l}{\bf \em ICC threshold}&{\bf \em 0.5}&{\bf \em 0.2}&{\bf \em 0.1}&\multicolumn{1}{l}{\bf \em ICC threshold}&{\bf \em 0.5}&{\bf \em 0.2}&{\bf \em 0.1}\\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 84 Days} (KL target = 6.06)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 90 Days} (KL target = 0.120)}\\ Continuous&\cellcolor{green}2.92&\cellcolor{green}2.87&\cellcolor{green}2.83&Continuous&1.80&0.353&\cellcolor{green}0.0663\\ Cts. Reduced&\cellcolor{green}2.97&\cellcolor{green}2.85&\cellcolor{green}2.86&Cts. Reduced&2.10&\cellcolor{green}0.0927&1.42\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 85 Days} (KL target = 1.90)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 100 Days} (KL target = 0.182)}\\ Continuous&3.05&3.00&2.98&Continuous&\cellcolor{green}0.157&\cellcolor{green}0.102&\cellcolor{green}0.0890\\ Cts. Reduced&3.06&2.97&2.98&Cts. Reduced&\cellcolor{green}0.107&\cellcolor{green}0.0835&\cellcolor{green}0.0701\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 86 Days} (KL target = 1.94)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 110 Days} (KL target = 0.0936)}\\ Continuous&3.28&3.24&3.25&Continuous&0.159&\cellcolor{green}0.0774&0.111\\ Cts. Reduced&3.27&3.22&3.26&Cts. Reduced&0.197&\cellcolor{green}0.0373&\cellcolor{green}0.0348\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 87 Days} (KL target = 5.44)}&\multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf 120 Days} (KL target = 0.101)}\\ Continuous&\cellcolor{green}2.54&\cellcolor{green}2.45&\cellcolor{green}2.42&Continuous&0.136&\cellcolor{green}0.0435&\cellcolor{green}0.0708\\ Cts. Reduced&\cellcolor{green}2.51&\cellcolor{green}2.48&\cellcolor{green}2.44&Cts. Reduced&\cellcolor{green}0.0999&\cellcolor{green}0.0423&\cellcolor{green}0.0551\\ \hline \end{tabular}} \end{table} Following on from Section \ref{sec:scenario1}, the discrete-time algorithm has been dropped from consideration and results are presented from an algorithm labelled `cts.reduced' in Table \ref{tbl:inf2.alt}. We have seen from Figures \ref{fig:densities} that kernel density estimates for the posterior marginal distributions of dispersion parameter $\eta_2$ and $\log(\eta_2)$ (over days 84-90) show that the distribution of $\eta_2$ is highly non-Gaussian after $t_k = 83$ days, stemming from the unbounded gamma priors placed upon the $\eta$ parameters. This non-normality leads to very poor acceptance rates for the approximate-Gibbs' proposals, which, though initially adequate, fall to 0.3\% on day 89, illustrated by a peak of over 250 proposals per rejuvenation and ovre 400 proposals per day in Figures \ref{fig:eta2}(A) and (B) respectively. To improve acceptance rates the `cts.reduced' algorithm was devised. The dispersion parameters are omitted from the block approximate-Gibbs updates and are proposed separately. In terms of the resulting KL divergences, there is no significant drop in performance in moving from the continuous to the `cts. reduced' algorithm as seen by the amount and position of the green cells in Table \ref{tbl:inf2.alt}. There is an exception on day 90 where there is an unexpectedly high KL value when the threshold is 0.1. This may arise from the instability that can arise from the estimation of $\Sigma_0$ and $\Sigma_1$ in Equation \eqref{eqn:KL.est} on the basis of Monte Carlo samples \citep{SchH15}. This instability was observed in a small number of the `bootstrap' MCMC samples, but not in significant enough quantity to have any influence over the estimated $95\%$ intervals for the KL distributions. The `cts. reduced' proposal scheme requires far fewer iterations of the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm over the interval 84-90 days, maintaining acceptance rates of about 10\% over this period. Note, that over time, as the target distribution converges to a multivariate normal distribution, the number of moves required for both methods equalise (in fact, the plain continuous-time algorithm is marginally faster) and the benefit of using the `cts. reduced' proposal scheme diminishes (Figure \ref{fig:eta2}). \begin{figure} \resizebox{0.3243825\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{numProposals_bg.eps}}\resizebox{0.3243825\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{numProposals_bg_day.eps}} \resizebox{0.3243825\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{run_times.eps}} \caption{\label{fig:eta2}(A) Number of MH-steps required by the continuous-time SMC algorithms per rejuvenation against the timing of the rejuvenation for both the continuous time algorithms (black and red correspond to with and without $\eta$ in the updates) for values of $r_A^$ = 0.1 (solid line), 0.2 (dashed line) and 0.5 (dotted line); (B) Total number of MH-steps required by the continuous-time SMC algorithms per time interval, with $r_A^ = 0.1$ and using the continuous-time algorithm (grey bars) and the same algorithm without $\eta$ (magenta bars); (C) The computation time for daily model runs under MCMC (blue line) and SMC (red line).} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Parameter estimation}\label{sec:par.est} Most of the scatter plots contrasting the posterior distributions obtained under either the `continuous' or `cts. reduced' schemes show a similar level of correspondence to their MCMC-obtained counterparts to that observed in Figure S3 for the `continuous' algorithm. However, for the parameters of the background consultation rates (see Figure \ref{fig:gp.data}(D)) this is not the case. For the first couple of days post $t_k = 83$ days, some of the parameters describing $B_{t_k, a}$ are only weakly identifiable. Figure \ref{fig:Bij.evo} highlights this for two weakly identifiable parameter components $\beta^B_3$ and $\beta^B_9$ showing a clear discrepancy between the MCMC- and the SMC-obtained posterior scatters. The SMC distributions, being based on many short MCMC chains, cover the full posterior distribution adequately. For $t_k = 85, 86$, however, the MCMC has difficulty mixing, and this manifests in a particle scatter that is stuck in a sub-region of the full marginal support. KL discrepancies calculated for days where this weak identifiability exists (and it diminishes over time), will therefore be unreliable. \subsubsection{Run-times} Figure \ref{fig:eta2}(C) contrasts the daily run-times for the MCMC and SMC algorithms. In the MCMC implementation, the likelihood calculations can be speeded up by parallelisation across 4-8 threads and was optimally run on a desktop computer with 8 parallel 3.6GHz Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790 processors. However, the speed up for SMC is close to linear with increasing parallelisation and we parallelise the MH steps by sharing the particles ({\i.e.} the parallel MCMC chains) across 255 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-262 2.0GHz processors on a high-performance computing cluster. Realistically, in a pandemic, even greater parallelisation would be used. Figure \ref{fig:eta2} shows that, not only is SMC more efficient on day 84, the day requiring the most MH-updates to rejuvenate the sample, but the run-times then decrease over time, in contrast to the increasing MCMC run-times as more data have to be analysed. On days where the sample does not have to be rejuvenated at all, the run-time is negligible in comparison. Note that the MCMC algorithms are run for $4.5\times 10^5$ iterations, and as seen in Section \ref{sec:par.est}, this may well be insufficient with the plain-vanilla MH algorithm used here. \begin{figure} \centering \hspace{0.09\linewidth}\textbf{\textsf{SMC}}\hspace{0.18\linewidth}\textbf{\textsf{MCMC}}\hspace{0.205\linewidth}\textbf{\textsf{SMC}}\hspace{0.18\linewidth}\textbf{\textsf{MCMC}}\hspace{0.07\linewidth} \begin{tabular}{c\|c} \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series1.eps}}&\resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series5.eps}}\\ \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series2.eps}}&\resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series6.eps}}\\ \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series3.eps}}&\resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series7.eps}}\\ \resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series4.eps}}&\resizebox{0.499\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{scatter_B_ij_series8.eps}}\\ \end{tabular} \caption{\label{fig:Bij.evo}The evolution over time of the marginal joint posterior for two components of the parameter vector $\beta^B$. Comparison between SMC-obtained and MCMC-obtained posterior distributions. Grey points indicate the distribution at the start of the interval.} \end{figure} \subsection{Epidemic forecasting}\label{sec:forecast} We choose to predict ILI consultations as a measure of the coming healthcare burden. Using a 20-day forecast horizon, the consultation data seem, in the most part, to be well predicted from the landmark times of 90 days and 164 days (Figure 7(A) and 7(B)) using either the MCMC or SMC. However, there is some discrepancy between the MCMC and the SMC in the calculation of the predictive intervals from day 178 onwards (see Figure 7(B)). This may have arisen due to the MCMC not exploring the full support of the parameter space with the introduction of a changepoint in the piecewise background rate model at day 177. Figure \ref{fig:forecasts}(C) shows the PIT histogram for all GP consultation data for all age groups and times from day 84 onwards calculated for the SMC analysis. The PIT histogram is not entirely uniform but shows no consistent under or over-estimation, only a lack of smoothness. If we look at the $z$-statistics testing prediction adequacy \eqref{eqn:z.stat} there is some evidence for miscalibrated forecasts (p=0.036). For the virological and serological data these statistics are -1.27 and 1.19 respectively, showing no clear evidence for miscalibration. \begin{figure} \centering \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{gp_proj_84.eps}}\resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{gp_proj_164.eps}} \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{hPIT_gp.eps} \caption{\label{fig:forecasts}(A) and (B) Comparison of the observed GP data with posterior predictive distributions obtained using the SMC and MCMC algorithms at day 90 and 164 respectively. Solid lines give posterior medians of the distributions and the dotted lines give 95\% credible intervals for the data. Red intervals are obtained via MCMC and blue via SMC. (C) PIT histograms for the one-step ahead predictions of GP ILI consultation data, calculated based on 162 time-points $\times$ seven strata.} \end{figure} \section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion} This paper addresses the substantive problem of online tracking of an emergent epidemic, assimilating multiple sources of information through the development of an information-adjusted SMC algorithm. When incoming data follow a stable pattern, this process can be automated using standard SMC algorithms, confirming current knowledge \citep[\textit{e.g.}][]{DukLP12,OngCCLLLTG10}. However, in the likely presence of interventions or any other event that may provide a system shock, it is necessary to adapt the algorithm appropriately. On observing the impact that a new batch of data has on the ESS of a particle set, tailoring of the MH-kernel and selection of suitable thresholds can ensure efficient performance. However, as we have seen, given that prior distributions may not be well chosen and not all models well conceived this might necessitate some careful tinkering. Having simulated an epidemic where a public health intervention provides a sudden change to the pattern of case reporting, we have constructed a more robust SMC algorithm by tailoring: \begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph)] \item the choice of rejuvenation times through tempering; \item the choice of the MH-kernel by hybridising local random walk and Gibbs proposals; \item a stopping rule for the MH steps based on intra-class correlations to minimise the number of iterations within each rejuvenation. \end{enumerate} The end result is an algorithm that is: a hybrid of particle filter and population MCMC \citep{Gey91, LiaW01, JasSH07}; robust to possible shocks; improves over the plain-vanilla MCMC in terms of run-times needed to derive accurate inference; and can provide all the distributions we need for posterior predictive measures of model adequacy. Throughout we have inevitably made pragmatic choices and alternative strategies could have been adopted. We reflect on these, lessons learned and outstanding questions in what follows. \subsection{Rejuvenation at times of shocks} In the motivating example, a system ``shock'' occurred at $t_k = 83$ leading to a step-change in the values of many parameters, causing the posterior $\pi_k(\vec{\theta})$ to be no longer a good importance distribution for $\pi_{k + 1}(\vec{\theta})$, crucially reducing the usefulness of any proposal kernels based on a reweighted sample from $\pi_k(\vec{\theta})$. This is reflected in a severe drop in the ESS. We have seen how it is essential to rejuvenate particle sets at `in-between' times to ensure the ESS does not collapse totally and ensure that sample rejuvenation is always possible in a timely fashion. \paragraph{Alternative rejuvenation strategies} A hybrid MH-kernel is introduced in Section 6: first, long-range, low-acceptance proposals are made, followed by short-range high-acceptance componentwise proposals. This is very conservative approach. In many instances, this hybrid is replaced by a mixture distribution, composed of similar short and long-range moves. The adaptive proposal distributions of Fearnhead and Taylor (2013) might take this a step further, tuning the mixture probabilities so that the moves that have the largest expected jumps are proposed more often. This would be an attractive extension to the present case. However, we would still suggest moving at least a proportion of the particles according to random walk proposals, to guard against a reweighted sample from $\pi_k(\vec{\theta})$ providing a degenerate approximation for $\pi_{k + 1}(\vec{\theta})$. The alternative to running long MCMC chains for each particle when there are new parameters in the model, such as those introduced by the shock, is to expand the particle set by cloning each of the particles a number of times. Each cloned particle has a fresh draw from the prior for each of the new parameter components, to maximise the chance of finding good parameter combinations. Upon observing the next batch of data, the expanded particle set could then be reduced down to a more manageable size. However, this would not solve the problem in Scenario 2 where some parameters are not immediately identifiable and sample impoverishment recurs over a number of days. \paragraph{Minimising the rejuvenation time} A low value for the ESS is always indicative of depletion, whereas a high value does not guarantee that the sample is adequate. Section \ref{sec:analysis} illustrated how the ESS can be artificially rejuvenated even when the particle set is not. For the ESS to be useful, it is essential that previous rejuvenation steps result in a sufficiently independent set of values for the margins of interest. This motivated the use of the analysis of variance intra-class correlation coefficient, $r_A$, to define a stopping rule for the MH-steps. Currently this rule relies on two algorithmic choices: the choice of a univariate function of interest, $g(\cdot)$ (see Equation \eqref{eqn:gfunc}), and the choice of the threshold $r_A^$, the largest acceptable value for $r_A$ at the end of the rejuvenation process. The function $g(\cdot)$ should depend on model outputs of particular relevance. The predicted attack rate of an epidemic is a quantity of particular interest to public health policymakers throughout an epidemic and depends on all the transmission parameters. However, when the parameter vector is high-dimensional, as in this case, is it reasonable to condense this into a univariate summary to use as a basis for a stopping rule? Convergence of MCMC is typically diagnosed by looking at marginal distributions, so should we be doing something similar here? Does this necessitate the use of multivariate analogs for the intra-class correlation coefficient \citep[for example, see][]{Ahr76, KonKR91}? It is felt here that the univariate $g$ is adequate as the parameters introduced at the `shock' time are largely nuisance parameters not strongly correlated with the transmission parameters that influence $g(\cdot)$. Once $r_A$ has been suitably defined, a suitable stopping threshold, $r_A^$ has to be chosen. Given the antecendent prescription for defining clusters used here, then $r_A$ truly is a measure of how well the particles have collectively `forgotten' their starting points. A value of $r_A^ = 0.1$ is a sufficiently small threshold except for extreme cases of departure between two successive distributions. \subsection{Benefits of SMC} \paragraph{Model Run Times} From a computational efficiency point of view, the SMC algorithm, because of its highly parallel nature, is faster than the full MCMC analysis. However, this may be an unfair comparison as the MCMC algorithm is based on ``plain vanilla'' random-walk Metropolis updates and could benefit from significant tuning itself. More sophisticated MCMC algorithms could be used, as exemplified in an epidemic context by Jewell et al. 2009. The use of differential geometric MCMC (Girolami \& Calderhead, 2011) or advances in the parallelisation of MCMC (Banterle et al, 2015), for example, could assist with improving MCMC run times. On the other hand, as MCMC steps are the main computational overhead of the SMC algorithm, any development of the MCMC algorithm may prove similarly advantageous to the SMC algorithm. As the target posteriors attain asymptotic normality it should be progressively easier for SMC to move between distributions over time, as can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:eta2}(C) where the daily running time decreases as data accumulate. For any MCMC algorithm, the opposite will be generally true. \paragraph{Identifiability} Throughout, we have compared candidate MH-kernels via the KL-like statistics measuring the divergence between SMC posteriors from posteriors generated by the ``gold-standard'' MCMC. We have also constructed a reference distribution for the KL statistic to assess informally the significance of the observed divergences. This, however, assumes the reliability of the MCMC algorithm used. This superiority is called into question by the apparent better performance of the SMC algorithm in the presence of parameter unidentifiability around changepoints. The background ILI rate is modelled using a piecewise log-linear curve, allowing separate value for adults and children, with changepoints at $t_k =$ 84, 128, 176 and 245 days. The value of the curve at these knots is given by \begin{equation} \mu + \alpha_{t_k} + \beta_a, \text{ s.t. } \sum_{t_k\in\{84, 128, 176, 245\}}\alpha_{t_k} = \sum_{a \in\{\text{child, adult}\}}\beta_a = 0, \end{equation} with linear interpolation giving the value of the curve at the intervening points. This results in background consultation rates for days 84, 85, and 86 that include the respective sums (neglecting the age effects) $\mu + \alpha_{84}$, $\mu + 0.98\alpha_{84} + 0.02\alpha_{128}$, $\mu + 0.96\alpha_{84} + 0.04\alpha_{128}$. This gives only weak identifiability of parameters $\mu$ and $\alpha_{84}$. This parameterisation, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:Bij.evo}, can induce convergence problems for MCMC while Figure \ref{fig:forecasts}(C) also exhibits the consequences of this problem at the $t_k = 176$ changepoint. Jasra et al (2011) claim that, for their example, SMC may well be superior to MCMC and this is one case where this is certainly true. The population MCMC carried out in the rejuvenation stage achieves good coverage of the sample space, without the individual chains having to do likewise. To improve the MCMC mixing, a reparameterisation or the use of a geometric sampler may improve sampling efficiency. \paragraph{Predictive Model Assessment} A fundamental goal of real-time modelling is to derive online epidemic forecasts with an appropriate quantification of the associated uncertainty. Being able to assess the predictive adequacy of a model in real-time is therefore crucial. In this case, the ongoing assessment of the quality of one-step ahead forecasts based on posterior predictive distributions $p(\data{k+1}\lvert\data{k})$ \citep{Daw84} is an appealing approach. Although test statistics based on the ranked probability scoring rule have been used in Section \ref{sec:prediction}, there are alternate scoring rules that could be considered. The logarithmic score, for a predictive distribution $p(\cdot)$ and the subsequently realised observation $y$ is defined to be: \begin{equation} s_{\textrm{log}}(P, y) = -\log (p(y)). \end{equation} Under an SMC scheme, this is approximated by \begin{align} s_{\textrm{log}}(P, y) &= -\log (p(\data{k + 1}\lvert\data{1:k}))\\ &= -\log \left(\int_{\Theta}\pi\left(\theta\lvert\data{1:k}\right)p(\data{k+1}\lvert\theta)d\theta\right)\\ &\approx -\log \left(\sum \wt{k}{j}\lik{k + 1}{\vec{\theta}_{k}^{(j)}} / \sum \wt{k}{j}\right)\\ &= \log \left(\frac{\sum_j \wt{k}{j}}{\sum_j \tilde\omega_{k + 1}^{(j)}}\right). \end{align} Where weights $\wt{k}{j}$ and $\tilde\omega_{k + 1}^{(j)}$ are routinely calculated as part of the SMC algorithm in Section \ref{sec:alg} (equation \eqref{eqn:alg.reweight}). This provides an additonal benefit of SMC as this would require additional computation if the posterior is derived using MCMC. This is an illustration of a more general advantage in that the SMC algorithm generates the full sequence of posterior distributions $\pi\left(\theta\lvert\data{1:k}\right)$ making estimation of the predictive distributions a mere matter of simulation. If the MCMC analyses are not carried out daily, then these are not readily available. Further detail on the calculation and interpretation of these posterior predictive methods is included in the Web Appendix. \subsection{Data availability} To this point, the discussion has centred on algorithmic development and the availability of all data sources in a timely manner has been assumed. Particularly crucial to the feasibility of real-time modelling is the role of serological data. Figure \ref{fig:gradeds} shows epidemic projections sequentially made using only noisy primary care consultation data without serological information: a clear and realistic picture of the epidemic is not available until the epidemic has almost entirely been observed. This poses key questions: are serological samples going to be available in a timely manner, in sufficient quantity and quality, and in the right format? In reality, serological data can be slow to come online. A test has to be developed to identify the antibodies of a (probably) novel virus in blood sera; and there needs to be sufficient time to test samples and report results according to a protocol that ensures unbiased data collection and analysis. In a realistic setting, to accommodate `slow' serological data, particles will have to store the full historical values of $S_{t_k,a}$ \eqref{eqn:determ.dynam} in addition to the current state of the epidemic. \begin{figure} \centering \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{Graded_plots1NOsero.eps}} \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{Graded_plots2NOsero.eps}}\\ \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{Graded_plots3NOsero.eps}} \resizebox{0.328\linewidth}{!}{\includegraphics{Graded_plots4NOsero.eps}} \caption{\label{fig:gradeds}Sequential epidemic forecasts based on increasing amounts of data, not including serological data. The dark shaded areas represent a current forecast, with the light shaded areas the forecast at the time of the previous plot. Vertical red dashed lines indicate the current time, the black dashed line indicates the time of the previous prediction} \end{figure} In the event that external information on any of the epidemic parameters becomes available that cannot be formally incorporated into the model, in SMC this information can be accounted for through adjustment of the relevant prior distributions. Particles would be reweighted according to the ratio of the new prior to old prior and, if doing so causes a significant drop in the ESS, the particle set can be rejuvenated in the usual way. This provides a clear advantage of SMC over MCMC where the entire dataset would have to be re-analysed. \subsection{Model Specification} The focus of this work was not to examine in-depth the suitability of the presented epidemic model. However, it has brought to light some features, particularly of the observation model, that can make real-time inference problematic. Changepoints in the values of parameters at key times can limit the performance of both SMC and MCMC algorithms. Often these changepoints represent some landmark time in the epidemic, such as the initiation of a pandemic intervention. However, other changepoints might be necessary simply to maintain an adequate fit to the data and the need for such changepoints has to be identified in real time. \cite{NemFM14} provide a prescription for identifying such changepoints and would represent a natural extension to this work. Alternatively, to improve the robustness of the inferences, the piecewise linear quantities describing population reporting behaviour ($\doc{p}_{t_k, a}, B_{t_k, a}$) could be described by linked stochastic noise processes. This has the potential to limit the sensitivity of estimates to the presence of changepoints that are not, for whatever reason, foreseeable. \subsection{Concluding Remarks} In answer to the question initially posed, we have provided a recipe for online tracking of an emergent epidemic using imperfect data from multiple sources. We have discussed many of the challenges to efficient inference, with particular focus on scenarios where the available information is rapidly evolving and is subject to sudden shocks. We have focused on an epidemic scenario likely to arise in the UK. Nevertheless, our approach addresses modelling concerns common globally \citep[e.g.][]{ShaK12, WuCLIHTCLLLR10, ShuLLA16, TebBWDV15} and can form a flexible basis for real-time modelling strategies elsewhere. Real-time modelling is, however, more than just a computational problem. It does require the timely availability of relevant data, but also needs a sound understanding of any likely biases, and effective interaction with experts. In any country, only interdisciplinary collaboration between statisticians, epidemiologists and database managers can turn cutting edge methodology into a critical support tool for public health policy. \section*{Acknowledgements} This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (HTA Project:11/46/03) (PJB, DDA and GOR) the UK Medical Research Council Unit Programme Numbers U105260566 (DDA) and MC\_UP\_1302/3 (LW and BDMT), and Public Health England (DDA and RGP). \Urlmuskip=0mu plus 1mu\relax \input{revised_arxiv.bbl} \end{document}
\section{Introduction} The Large Underground Xenon (LUX) detector is a 370~kg (250~kg active mass) dual-phase liquid xenon TPC designed to directly detect WIMP dark matter in the local galactic halo. The detector is located at the center of an 8~m diameter, 6~m tall water shield on the 4850$^{\prime}$ level of the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF). The monolithic liquid xenon target is instrumented with 61 photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) in a top array and 61 PMTs in a bottom array. A detailed description of the LUX detector design is available in Ref.~\cite{AkeribBaiBedikianEtAl2013}. Recent WIMP search results from the LUX detector have placed the most stringent direct detection limits on the spin-independent WIMP-nucleon cross-section~\cite{Akerib2014, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015} and the WIMP-neutron spin-dependent cross-section~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016} for a large range of WIMP masses. Establishing the sensitivity of the LUX detector to nuclear recoil events arising from particle interactions requires an accurate calibration of the signal response of liquid xenon over the expected range of energy transfers. Energy depositions in the liquid xenon target produce both scintillation photons and ionization electrons. The prompt scintillation photon signal (S1) is directly detected by the PMTs. The ionization electrons drift at a constant average drift speed to the liquid surface under an average applied electric field of 180~V/cm, where they are extracted into the gas region and produce a signal (S2) in the PMTs via photon emission due to electroluminescence. Ionization electrons can attach to electronegative impurities in the liquid xenon---an effect that exponentially suppresses the observed S2 signal size~\cite{Aprile2010a}. The characteristic time constant associated with this process is referred to as the electron lifetime. The pulse areas associated with the S1 and S2 signals are position-corrected as described in Ref.~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, Akeribothers2016} and are referred to using the variables $S1$ and $S2$ (note the italics when referring to the measured quantity). The signal corrections are described in more detail in Sec.~\ref{sec:lux_dd_detector_operating_parameters}. In the several instances where uncorrected S1 and S2 signal sizes are used, the variables will be labeled as ``raw'' $S1$ and $S2$. The raw and corrected variables $S1$ and $S2$ are given in units of detected photons (phd). The unit ``phd'' differs from the traditional unit of photoelectrons (phe) by accounting for the probability of double photoelectron emission from a single absorbed VUV photon~\cite{FahamGehmanCurrieEtAl2015}, which was measured for each LUX PMT. The nuclear recoil band analysis described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_nr_band} uses an alternative technique to characterize the S1 signal size. When using this technique, the S1 signal size, represented by the variable $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$, is measured by counting the number of single photon ``spikes'' in the per-channel waveforms. This is the same S1 signal size variable used in the recent WIMP search results~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016}. The single quanta gain values for scintillation photons ($g_1$) and ionization electrons ($g_2$) escaping the particle interaction site were calibrated directly in LUX and have units of phd~per~scintillation~photon and phd~per~ionization~electron, respectively~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, Akeribothers2016}. The value $g_1$ is dictated by the product of the fraction of scintillation light collected and the detection efficiency of the PMTs. The value $g_2$ is dictated by the extraction efficiency of electrons from the liquid and the electroluminescent yield in the gas. This analysis uses $g_1$ of 0.115~$\pm$~0.004 and a $g_2$ of 11.5~$\pm$~0.9. These gain values were adjusted from the WIMP search values for the nuclear recoil calibration time period as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:lux_dd_detector_operating_parameters}. They are within 1.7\% and 4.6\% of the WIMP search values, respectively~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. These precisely measured $g_1$ and $g_2$ values allow us to directly report the nuclear recoil signal yields in liquid xenon in terms of the absolute number of quanta produced. This is particularly notable in the case of the light yield result, which is the first direct measurement of nuclear recoil scintillation reported in absolute units. \subsection{Discussion of historical notation for nuclear recoil signal yields} It is fairly straightforward to measure the electron recoil signal yields in units of quanta per unit energy using line sources that fully deposit their known energy in the liquid xenon at a single site~\cite{ManalaysayUndagoitiaAskinEtAl2010, Akeribothers2016}. Absolute calibration of the detector's response to nuclear recoils induced via neutron scattering is more challenging for several reasons: unlike electron recoil calibrations, there are no convenient sealed or injectable sources providing mono-energetic neutrons; due to the variable energy transfer to the nucleus depending upon the scattering angle, even mono-energetic neutrons produce a range of recoil energies; only a small fraction of the incident neutron energy is deposited at each interaction, and the neutron mean free path of $\mathcal{O}$(10~cm) typically results in multiple-site interactions in the detector medium and energy-loss in passive detector materials. To unambiguously identify the source of energy depositions in the liquid xenon, we use the units \kevee{} and \kevnr{} for electron and nuclear recoils, respectively. The $S1$ for liquid xenon TPCs is traditionally related to the nuclear recoil energy deposited at the interaction site, $E_{\textrm{nr}}$ via \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_energy_to_s1_leff} S1 = E_{\textrm{nr}} ~ \mathcal{L}_{\textrm{eff}}(E_{\textrm{nr}}) ~ L_{y,\,^{57}\textrm{Co}}(\mathcal{E}) ~ \frac{S_{\textrm{nr}}(\mathcal{E})}{S_{\textrm{ee}}(\mathcal{E})} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where \leff{}($E_{\textrm{nr}}$) is the scintillation yield for nuclear recoils relative to the scintillation signal produced by the 122~\kevee{} $^{57}$Co gamma ray at 0~V/cm~\cite{Manzur2010}. When operating at non-zero drift electric field $\mathcal{E}$, the scintillation signal from both nuclear and electron recoil interactions is quenched to a fraction of the 0~V/cm value~\cite{Aprile2006a}. The quenching fractions for nuclear and electron recoil signals are represented by $S_{\textrm{nr}}$ and $S_{\textrm{ee}}$, respectively. The measured light yield for electron recoils from the $^{57}$Co gamma ray at the TPC operating drift field is represented by $L_{y,\,^{57}\textrm{Co}}(\mathcal{E})$. The quantity $L_{y,\,^{57}\textrm{Co}}(\mathcal{E})$ is detector-dependent and includes effects such as the photon detection efficiency. The 122~\kevee{} $^{57}$Co gamma ray has an attenuation length of 2~mm in liquid xenon, which is not well suited for calibration in large TPCs such as LUX (0.5~m linear dimension). The $S2$ is related to the recoil energy deposited at the interaction site by \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_energy_to_s2_qy} S2 = E_{\textrm{nr}} ~ Q_{y}(E_{\textrm{nr}}, \mathcal{E}) ~ g_2 \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where \qy{}($E_{\textrm{nr}}$, $\mathcal{E}$) is the ionization yield for nuclear recoils at the applied electric field given in the absolute units of electrons/\kevnr{}. Numerous measurements of both \leff{} and \qy{} at low energies exist in the literature, primarily motivated by the need to understand and calibrate the liquid xenon signal response for WIMP dark matter searches. Various experimental strategies are used to measure these quantities: \begin{enumerate}[i.] \item Nuclear recoil calibrations performed $\textit{in situ}${} in the dark matter detector itself via simulation-based best-fit models optimized to match the observed signal spectrum from neutron sources with a continuous energy spectrum~\cite{Sorensen2010a, Horn2011, AprileAlfonsiArisakaEtAl2013}. \item Mono-energetic neutron $\textit{ex situ}${} calibrations in a small liquid xenon test cell using the neutron scattering angle to kinematically define the recoil energy~\cite{AprileBaudisChoiEtAl2009, Manzur2010, Plante2011}. \item Nuclear recoil spectrum endpoint based calibrations~\cite{JoshiSangiorgioBernsteinEtAl2014}. \end{enumerate} The advantages and disadvantages of the various techniques are discussed in Refs.~\cite{Verbus2016, VerbusRhyneMallingEtAl2016}. \subsection{Discussion of modern notation for nuclear recoil signal yields} Here, high-precision measurement of $g_1$ allows the scintillation yield result to be reported absolutely~\cite{Akeribothers2016}. The energy calibration of the $S1$ detector response is expressed directly in terms of the light yield for nuclear recoils at electric field $\mathcal{E}$ in units of photons/\kevnr{}, \ly{}($E_{\textrm{nr}}$, $\mathcal{E}$), as: \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_energy_to_s1_ly} S1 = E_{\textrm{nr}} ~ L_{y}(E_{\textrm{nr}}, \mathcal{E}) ~ g_1 \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent Reporting the light yield in absolute terms at the operating electric field as described in Eq.~\ref{eq:recoil_energy_to_s1_ly} also has the advantage of avoiding any assumptions about the field quenching factors ($S_{\textrm{nr}}$ and $S_{\textrm{ee}}$). \subsection{Results reported in this article} For the results presented here, a deuterium-deuterium (\dd{}) neutron generator was used as the neutron source. We use event-by-event kinematic reconstruction of neutron double-scatters in the TPC to obtain an absolute measurement of the nuclear recoil energy $E_{\textrm{nr}}$, and combine this with the LUX absolute calibration of the LUX ionization channel (using $g_2$) to obtain a direct calibration of \qy{}~\cite{Gaitskell2015}. Following Eq.~\ref{eq:recoil_energy_to_s2_qy}, this \qy{} measurement provides a precise calibration of $S2$ as a function of recoil energy, which is used to extract \ly{} from the single-scatter event population using $g_1$ to determine the absolute number of S1 photons collected per Eq.~\ref{eq:recoil_energy_to_s1_ly} (further discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_data_analysis}). Additionally, we use the known nuclear recoil energy spectrum endpoint for neutrons produced by our \dd{} source, again combined with the LUX $g_1$ and $g_2$, to absolutely measure \qy{} and \ly{} at 74~\kevnr{}. By determining the yields $\textit{in situ}${} in the dark matter instrument itself, one avoids potential systematic uncertainties intrinsic in the translation of $\textit{ex situ}${} measurements. This new nuclear recoil calibration refines the LUX nuclear recoil signal detection efficiency estimates and also proves the kinematic accessibility of more WIMP-mass parameter space, given the local galactic escape and Earth-halo velocities. Prior to this result, the lowest-energy light and charge yield results determined using a kinematically-defined nuclear recoil energy scale were reported at 3~\kevnr{}~\cite{Plante2011} and 4~\kevnr{}~\cite{Manzur2010}, respectively. Due to the absence of any nuclear recoil calibrations in the literature for kinematically-defined nuclear recoil energies $<$3~\kevnr{}, the first LUX spin-independent WIMP search sensitivity result was conservatively limited by assuming no signal yield $<$3~\kevnr{}, where detector efficiency was nevertheless expected to be significant (and, in retrospect, was)~\cite{Akerib2014}. This new LUX calibration result documents an improvement in the instrument's sensitivity at low WIMP masses using the existing 2013 WIMP search dataset by demonstrating signal yield in both channels for nuclear recoil energies as low as 1.1~\kevnr{}~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. This paper is organized as follows. The experimental setup for the LUX neutron calibration is described in Sec.~\ref{sec:lux_dd_experimental_setup}. A low-energy (0.7--24.2~\kevnr{}) measurement of \qy{} using the measured scattering angle between double-scatter event interaction sites in the TPC is presented in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy}. A low-energy (1.1--12.8~\kevnr{}) measurement of \ly{} using single-scatter events is reported in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly}. The \qy{} and \ly{} at the 74~\kevnr{} recoil energy spectrum endpoint is reported in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_endpoint}. The LUX nuclear recoil band measurement is shown in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_nr_band}. A different set of event selection cuts is appropriate for each of these analyses. The specific cuts used for each analysis are outlined at the beginning of each section. Two new NEST~\cite{LenardoKazkazManalaysayEtAl2015} nuclear recoil models (one based on the Lindhard model~\cite{Lindhard1963a}, one based on the Bezrukov parameterization~\cite{Bezrukov2011}) were created via a simultaneous fit to all \qy{}, \ly{}, and nuclear recoil band results reported in this article. These new NEST models are described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. The results presented in this paper used several simulation frameworks to produce targeted results as appropriate for each section. The Monte Carlo setup used for each section is described in the text. \section{Experimental setup} \label{sec:lux_dd_experimental_setup} The experimental setup at the TPC is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lux_dd_scatter_diagram}. Neutrons produced by the \dd{} source are introduced into the TPC via an air-filled conduit spanning the LUX water tank as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:the_neutron_beam}. A convenient coordinate system used for the subsequent nuclear recoil calibration analysis is defined here. The orientation of the Cartesian coordinates $x^{\prime}$, $y^{\prime}$, $z^{\prime}$ are defined by the neutron beam pipe axis. The neutron beam spans a geometrical chord that is offset from the TPC diameter. The coordinate $y^{\prime}$ is along the beam pipe direction with zero at the point where the beam enters the liquid xenon active region. The coordinate $x^{\prime}$ is transverse to the beam pipe axis in the horizontal plane. The $x^{\prime}$ and $y^{\prime}$ coordinates defined by the beam direction differ from the more traditional $x$ and $y$ coordinates, which are centered in the middle of the TPC, by the translation and rotation defined by \begin{equation} \label{eq:dd_prime_coordinate_rotation} \begin{bmatrix} x^{\prime} \\ y^{\prime} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} \cos{\theta_{\textrm{rot}}} & -\sin{\theta_{\textrm{rot}}} \\ \sin{\theta_{\textrm{rot}}} & \cos{\theta_{\textrm{rot}}} \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} x - 7.1~\textrm{cm} \\ y + 23.0~\textrm{cm} \end{bmatrix} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $\theta_{\textrm{rot}} = -5.1^{\circ}$. The coordinate $z^{\prime}$ is perpendicular to the beam pipe axis in the vertical plane. It is nearly identical to the traditional $z$ (ionization drift) coordinate indicating the distance from the liquid surface. The neutron beam entry point into the liquid xenon volume is 0.9~cm above the exit point. This corresponds to an angle of ${\sim}1^{\circ}$ with respect to the liquid xenon surface.\footnote{The small angle of the neutron conduit with respect to the liquid xenon surface was due to the precision of the neutron conduit leveling process.} A distance of 47.4~cm along $y^{\prime}$ separates the entry and exit points of the neutron beam in the liquid xenon. This notation is further used in this paper such that $S2[y_{1}^{\prime}]$ and $S2[y_{2}^{\prime}]$ represent the S2 signal size from the first and second neutron-xenon scattering sites in the $y^{\prime}$ direction along the beam line, respectively. The $z$~vs.~$y^{\prime}$ distribution of single-scatter events is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:xyz_neutron_distribution_z_vs_yprime_dist_single_scatters_densityplot_with_beam_purity_fiducial}. We use the coordinate $r$, which is the radial coordinate in the cylindrical coordinate system coaxial with the monolithic liquid xenon target. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.480\textwidth]{lux_dd_scatter_diagram.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ Conceptual diagram of the LUX \dd{} calibration experimental setup. The LUX TPC is in the center of the 8~m diameter, 6~m tall water shield. The LUX cryostat boundary is depicted as the thick gray line around the TPC. The TPC active region has a diameter of 47~cm and a height of 48~cm~\cite{Akerib2014}. The mono-energetic 2.45~MeV neutrons are collimated through an air-filled conduit spanning the distance from the water tank wall to the LUX detector cryostat. The $x^{\prime}$ coordinate is coming out of the paper, and the $y^{\prime}$ coordinate is in line with the beam. This figure illustrates a potential event used for the \qy{} analysis: a neutron (red dotted line) enters the active liquid xenon volume, scatters twice, and then leaves the target media. The resulting time-integrated hit pattern is shown on the PMT arrays. The bottom frame shows an event record of this neutron interaction sequence (for illustration only). The PMT hit pattern provides ($x$,\,$y$) information, while the electron drift time to the liquid surface provides precise reconstruction of the $z$ position of each neutron interaction. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:lux_dd_scatter_diagram} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{LUX detector operating parameters} \label{sec:lux_dd_detector_operating_parameters} The nuclear recoil calibration program using a \dd{} neutron generator discussed in this paper was performed at the end of the 2013 LUX WIMP search run using the same detector operational state, including identical DAQ/trigger conditions and frequent $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr-based calibrations for position-dependent S1 and S2 signal corrections~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. As in Ref.~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}, the event window extends $\pm$500~$\mu$s around the trigger signal generated by the hardware trigger. For S2 signals produced by nuclear recoils in the beam line, the mean electron lifetime correction was $1.16 \times S2$ and the average ($x$,\,$y$) correction was $0.96 \times S2$. For S1 signals produced by nuclear recoils in the beam line, the mean ($x$,\,$y$,\,$z$) position correction was $1.06 \times S1$. Data were corrected for any time variation between their direct measurement during the WIMP search period and the later \dd{} calibration period using the variation in $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr $S1$ and $S2$ peak positions. The single electron (SE) distribution was measured to have a mean value of $23.77 \pm 0.01$~phd during the \dd{} measurements with a standard deviation of $5.75 \pm 0.01$~phd. The electron extraction efficiency during the \dd{} calibration period was $0.48 \pm 0.04$. The average electron drift velocity was measured to be $1.51 \pm 0.01$~mm/$\mu$s corresponding to a 324~$\mu$s maximum drift time~\cite{Akerib2014}. The systematic uncertainty in $S1$ and $S2$ due to time variation in the three-dimensional (3D) position-based corrections using $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr was determined to be 0.6\% and 2.5\%, respectively. A small radial drift field component alters the path of drifting electrons in the liquid xenon, with a maximum inward radial deflection of 4.6~cm for electrons originating at the bottom of the TPC~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. The magnitude of this radial component is smaller near the liquid surface where the neutron beam is positioned. The reconstructed event position is corrected to account for this effect. The systematic uncertainty in $S1$ and $S2$ from the $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr-based corrections due to these non-uniformities in the drift field was determined to be a bias of 0.5\% in $S1$ and 2.5\% in $S2$. \subsection{The neutron beam} \label{sec:the_neutron_beam} An Adelphi Technology, Inc. DD108 neutron generator was used as the mono-energetic neutron source. The neutron generator was operated externally to the LUX water tank shield. Neutrons were introduced into the LUX detector via a narrow air-filled pipe, which displaced water producing a collimation path. The sealed, air-filled 4.9~cm inner-diameter (ID), 6.0~cm outer-diameter (OD) polyvinyl chloride (PVC) conduit was suspended by stainless steel wire rope from the top of the 6~m tall LUX water tank. The neutron conduit is 377~cm in length, spanning the horizontal distance from the outer water tank wall to the outer surface of the LUX cryostat. The sum of the water gaps at the two ends of the conduit is 6~cm. During the nuclear recoil calibration campaign, the center of the neutron conduit was raised to be 16.1~cm below the liquid xenon surface in the TPC and leveled to 1$^{\circ}$ with respect to the liquid surface as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:xyz_neutron_distribution_z_vs_yprime_dist_single_scatters_densityplot_with_beam_purity_fiducial}. This $z$ position of the beam was chosen to provide a short distance to the liquid surface in order to increase the fraction of low-multiplicity neutron scatters in the dataset. The observed profile of single-scatter neutron events was used to define the direction of the neutron beam through the TPC. The shape of the observed beam profile is consistent with the expectation from the solid angle presented by the neutron calibration conduit. The source of neutron production inside the neutron generator was positioned $46 \pm 2$~cm outside of the LUX water tank in line with the neutron conduit during the calibration. The neutron conduit was stored out of line with the TPC during the WIMP search campaign. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{xyz_neutron_distribution_z_vs_yprime_dist_single_scatters_densityplot_with_beam_purity_fiducial.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The $z$ (drift time) vs. $y^{\prime}$ distribution of single-scatter events passing all nuclear recoil area selection and data quality cuts. The neutron beam pipe is aligned outside of the plot to the left in line with the beam at a drift time of 107~$\mu$s. A position cut was used to select scatters in a 10~cm wide slide in $x^{\prime}$ around the projection of the neutron beam into the liquid xenon. This plot contains the full 107.2~live-hours of 2013 \dd{} data. The shine due to neutrons scattering in passive detector materials can be seen localized where the beam enters the liquid xenon. The black dashed line shows the approximate location of the neutron beam energy purity cuts. The neutron shine near the beam entry point is asymmetric in this plot due to the event selection criteria; only single-scatter events are accepted for this plot and the 12.6~cm total mean free path for neutrons makes it more probable for a neutron to exit out of the top of the xenon volume than the bottom. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:xyz_neutron_distribution_z_vs_yprime_dist_single_scatters_densityplot_with_beam_purity_fiducial} \end{center} \end{figure} The energy spectrum of the specific DD108 hardware was characterized at Brown University prior to use in the LUX calibration~\cite{VerbusRhyneMallingEtAl2016}.\footnote{The LUX calibration used an identical shielding structure and source configuration defined as ``Target Orientation A'' in Ref.~\cite{VerbusRhyneMallingEtAl2016}.} The mean neutron energy was measured to be $2.40 \pm 0.06$~MeV, consistent with the expected 2.45~MeV. The expected mean neutron energy of 2.45~MeV was used for the LUX nuclear recoil signal yield data analysis with an associated uncertainty of 2\%. For the LUX calibration, the DD108 source was operated at 5\% duty cycle using 100~$\mu$s neutron pulses at a 500~Hz repetition rate. An incident neutron flux of $78 \pm 8$~n\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$ was measured on the exterior of the water tank near the entrance to the calibration conduit using a 9~inch diameter Bonner sphere~\cite{Verbus2016}. Assuming an isotropic source\footnote{Actually, the \dd{} neutron flux varies by approximately a factor of two as a function of angle~\cite{Csikai1987}, but the isotropic assumption provides a convenient normalization.}, this corresponds to $(2.5 \pm 0.3) \times 10^{6}$~n/s into 4$\pi$ solid angle. A total of 107.2~live-hours of \dd{} neutron data was acquired and used for the analysis. \subsection{Beam energy purity cuts} Monte Carlo simulation studies using LUXSim/GEANT4~\cite{AkeribBaiBedikianEtAl2012, AgostinelliAllisonAmakoEtAl2003} indicate that after selecting events using a cylindrical analysis volume in line with the neutron beam in the TPC, 95\% of accepted events are due to neutrons with energies within 6\% of the initial energy at the \dd{} source~\cite{Malling2014}. This position cut requires that the first scatter has a reconstructed location of $y^{\prime} > 15$~cm and is within the 4.9~cm diameter of the neutron beam projection in the detector active region. These position-based analysis cuts are referred to as the ``neutron energy purity cuts'' in the following sections. Any residual electron recoil contamination produced by neutron capture or inelastic scatters in passive materials was identified and removed in the data analysis~\cite{Malling2014, Verbus2016}. There are several xenon metastable states resulting from inelastic neutron scatters that do not produce a prompt electron recoil signal. Contamination due to events arising from this type of inelastic process was calculated to be $<$1\% of the elastic nuclear recoil rate. The systematic uncertainty in the reconstructed energy due to the variation in the atomic mass and cross-section over xenon isotopes with significant natural abundance was estimated to be $<$2\% for all energies---subdominant to other uncertainties in the following analyses. \section{Low-energy ionization yield} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_qy} The ionization yield was measured as a function of nuclear recoil energy from 0.7 to 24.2~\kevnr{} using neutrons that scatter twice in the active liquid xenon volume. \subsection{Absolute measurement of nuclear recoil energy using double-scatter events} \label{sec:abs_energy_from_double_scatter} For double-scatter neutron events, the scattering angle between the first and second interaction sites was calculated based upon the reconstructed ($x$,\,$y$,\,$z$) position of each site. The scattering angle in the center-of-mass frame, $\theta_{\textrm{CM}}$, is related to the recoil energy associated with the first interaction: \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_energy_equation} E_{\textrm{nr}} = E_{n} \frac{4m_{n}m_{\textrm{Xe}}}{\left(m_{n} + m_{\textrm{Xe}}\right)^{2}} \frac{1-\cos{(\theta_{\textrm{CM}})}}{2} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $m_{\textrm{Xe}}$ is the average atomic mass of Xe, $m_{n}$ is the mass of the neutron, and $E_{n}$ is the energy of the incident neutron. The relationship between $\theta_{\textrm{CM}}$ and the scattering angle in the laboratory frame, $\theta_{\textrm{lab}}$, is given by \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_angle_cm_to_lab} \tan{\theta_{\textrm{lab}}} = \frac{\sin{\theta_{\textrm{CM}}}}{m_{n}/m_{\textrm{Xe}} + \cos{\theta_{\textrm{CM}}}} \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent For the measurement presented here, the relationship \begin{equation} \label{eq:recoil_angle_approx_one} \frac{1-\cos{(\theta_{\textrm{lab}})}}{1-\cos{(\theta_{\textrm{CM}})}} \approx 1 \end{equation} \noindent is accurate to better than 2\% for all scattering angles. This absolute determination of the recoil energy combined with the observed $S2$ from the first interaction provides a direct \qy{} calibration. A conceptual schematic of this type of event is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lux_dd_scatter_diagram}. The ($x$,\,$y$) positions were determined using the algorithm described in Ref.~\cite{SolovovBelovAkimovEtAl2012}. The $z$ positions were measured using the ionization electron drift time. The variable $\theta_{\textrm{lab}}$ was reconstructed using the measured 3D positions of the first and second interaction sites. The ionization yield measurement used individual events with a reconstructed nuclear recoil energy between 0.3 and 30~\kevnr{}, which corresponds to a measured neutron scattering angle range of 7$^{\circ}$ to 79$^{\circ}$. For comparison, the recoil energy spectrum endpoint produced by 180$^{\circ}$ neutron scatters corresponds to a nuclear recoil energy of 74~\kevnr{}. \subsection{Recoil energy measurement uncertainties} \label{sec:sec:dd_low_energy_qy_recoil_energy_uncertainties} The statistical uncertainty associated with the ($x$,\,$y$) position reconstruction is dependent upon the size of $S2$. The typical statistical error in the reconstructed $x$ and $y$ coordinates was typically no more than $\sim$1~cm for the signal sizes used for this analysis, with a maximum statistical error of $\sim$2~cm at the 36~phd raw $S2$ threshold. The systematic uncertainties in the reconstructed $x$ and $y$ positions were estimated to be 0.0--0.7~cm, with the best estimate of 0.35~cm~\cite{Akeribothers2016}. The $z$ position of each scatter site has a statistical uncertainty of $\sim$0.1~cm~\cite{Faham2014}. After neutron energy purity cuts, the incident direction of neutrons producing accepted events was parallel within 1$^{\circ}$ of the beam direction based upon the solid angle presented by the collimation conduit. An estimated position uncertainty on the beam entry position into the TPC of 0.6~cm in $x^{\prime}$ and $z^{\prime}$ was included in the per-event energy determination. The error in the measured nuclear recoil energy at the first scattering site in an individual double-scatter event was estimated by propagating the error on the $x$, $y$, and $z$ coordinates through to the reconstructed angle. Events with larger distances between interaction sites and/or large separation between interactions along the $z$ direction have a smaller fractional error in the reconstructed event recoil energy. The per-event uncertainties on the reconstructed recoil energy were used to weight the events to optimize the fractional error on the mean reconstructed energy of a particular recoil energy bin. The weighting scheme is described in detail in Ref.~\cite{Verbus2016}. A detailed study was made of the way in which event reconstruction populates the measured nuclear recoil energy bins. Events with true energy outside a given bin can bleed inside, due to the non-zero resolution of the angle-based measurement. This is an example of Eddington bias~\cite{Eddington1913, Eddington1940} and must be accounted for in the analysis.\footnote{Eddington bias is commonly confused with the more widely known Malmquist bias, which is a related effect~\cite{Teerikorpi2004}.} This effect broadens the width of the measured charge distribution in a given bin. If additionally the underlying spectrum is falling (rising), there is more bleeding into the bin from lower (higher) energies, causing a negative (positive) bias in the mean measured charge per unit recoil energy with respect to the true yield. Due to the S2 threshold, there are more high-energy events that can be reconstructed down into a given low-energy bin than there are lower-energy events that can be reconstructed up into the same bin. A Monte Carlo simulation of multiple scatter neutron events in the LUX detector was used to quantify and generate corrections for these effects due to position reconstruction uncertainty and to verify the angular reconstruction algorithms used for the data analysis. The Monte Carlo also includes $S2$ resolution effects due to fluctuations associated with signal creation and recombination as modeled by NEST~v1.0. The electron lifetime and extraction efficiency effects are binomially applied and also contribute to the simulated $S2$ resolution. The simulation is described in detail in Ref.~\cite{Verbus2016} and the associated systematic uncertainties after this correction is applied are reflected in the results reported in Table~\ref{tab:dd_qy_result}. It is important to note that the Eddington bias correction was only applied to the mean recoil energy of the event population in each bin. As a consequence, for the results reported in this section, the defined recoil energy bin boundaries and per-event reconstructed recoil energies are reported before any Eddington bias correction. \subsection{Double-scatter event selection} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_event_selection} The double scatter event structure was described in Sec.~\ref{sec:abs_energy_from_double_scatter}. Scintillation from both interaction sites was observed as a single combined S1 signal because the maximum time-of-flight of a 2.45~MeV neutron between scattering locations in the LUX active region is $\sim$30~ns, which is similar to the time constant associated with the S1 pulse shape in liquid xenon. Similar to normal single-scatter TPC operation, the S1 pulse was used to provide a start-time $t_{0}$ in the double-scatter analysis allowing the reconstruction of the $z$ position of both scatters with respect to the liquid surface. The analysis threshold for S2 identification is raw $S2 > 36$~phd (1.5~extracted electrons) prior to position-dependent corrections. This is a lower threshold than was used for the WIMP search analysis~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}, which is possible due to the small number of accidental coincidence events that can pass as legitimate double-scatters. More discussion on the accidental coincidence double-scatter events is provided in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_data_analysis}. Multiple neutron interactions at similar $z$ can be misidentified as single interactions if there is significant overlap in the S2 waveforms. The intrinsic S2 pulse width for a single neutron interaction site is due to the length of the detector's luminescent gas gap. There is an additional $z$ dependent contribution to the intrinsic S2 signal width due to the longitudinal diffusion of electrons drifting in the liquid xenon~\cite{Sorensen2011a}. A cut on the root-mean-square of the charge arrival time (RMS width) within S2 pulses was used to preferentially reject overlapping S2 signals. The optimum value of this upper limit on the RMS width was determined to be 775~ns via simulation. This cut accepts 99\% of true single-site interactions, while rejecting 69\% of combined multiple-site interactions. The remaining events containing S2 pulses composed of combined multiple interaction sites contribute to the background of events described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_data_analysis}. The reconstructed ($x^{\prime}$,\,$y^{\prime}$) position of the first scatter satisfied the neutron energy purity cuts discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:lux_dd_experimental_setup}. Forward scatters were defined as events where the identified second scatter had a $y^{\prime}$ position deeper into the liquid xenon along the beam path than the identified first scatter. The Euclidean distance $\rho$ was defined as the separation of scatter sites in physical 3D space. A cut ensuring $\rho>5$~cm removed events with dominant systematic bias in angle reconstruction due to position reconstruction uncertainties. Maximum signal size cuts on $S1$ and $S2$ were used to reject electron recoil events. The thresholds for these cuts were conservatively informed using NEST~v0.98 and NEST~v1.0 for electron recoil and nuclear recoil signal yields, respectively~\cite{SzydagisFyhrieThorngrenEtAl2013, LenardoKazkazManalaysayEtAl2015}. The cut on the coincident S1 signal of $S1 < 300$~phd accepts $>$99\% of \dd{} neutron double-scatter events. The cut $S2 < 5000$~phd, applied to both scatters in each event, accepts $>$99\% of all \dd{} neutron S2 pulses while rejecting all 39.6~\kevee{} gamma rays from inelastic neutron scatters on $^{129}$Xe. The next lowest-energy gamma ray resulting from an inelastic scatter is due to the 80.2~\kevee{} excitation of $^{131}$Xe, which is well outside of the parameter space of interest. A cut on $S2[y_{2}^{\prime}]$ was used to ensure a high efficiency for the detection of the combined S1 signal. A requirement was imposed that $S2[y_{2}^{\prime}]$~$>$~225~phd. This minimum cut on $S2[y_{2}^{\prime}]$ ensured a 90\% efficiency for detecting the combined S1 for double-scatter events due to the S1 contribution from the second scatter alone. This cut accepts $>70\%$ of underlying double-scatter nuclear recoils before other cuts are applied and has a constant efficiency as a function of the energy deposited by the first neutron scatter. For double-scatter events with both interaction sites within the projection of the neutron conduit, there can be ambiguity as to which interaction occurred first. A cut on $S2[y_{2}^\prime] < 1500$~phd was effective in removing events in which a first scatter with $\theta \sim 180$~degrees is followed by a second scatter in the cylinder of the beam at smaller $y^{\prime}$. Monte Carlo studies demonstrated that this cut accepts 89\% of good candidate \dd{} neutron forward-scatter events while rejecting 95\% of potential events where the interactions may have been incorrectly ordered by the analysis. The JENDL-4 nuclear database was used to calculate the efficiencies presented in this section~\cite{ShibataIwamotoNakagawaEtAl2011}. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{ionization_yield_ionization_signal_measured.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The gray points represent the measured ionization signal for each of the 1031 events remaining after all cuts in the double-scatter dataset. The gold crosses illustrate the estimated error associated with the most precisely measured individual events, both in ionization signal ($y$ error) and reconstructed energy ($x$ error). The measured ionization signal for each bin is represented by the blue crosses. As discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:sec:dd_low_energy_qy_recoil_energy_uncertainties}, the mean recoil energy of the event population in each bin, represented by the location of the blue crosses on the horizontal axis, has been corrected for Eddington bias. The red error bars at the bottom of the plot represent the systematic uncertainty associated with this Eddington bias correction. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_measured} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Data analysis} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_data_analysis} The per-event ionization signal is defined as the number of electrons \nel{} escaping recombination with ions at the interaction site. The ionization signal was determined for each event by dividing the position-corrected $S2[y_{1}^\prime]$ by the electron extraction efficiency and by the measured single electron size. The uncertainty on the single electron size is subdominant ($\ll$1\%) to other uncertainties in the \qy{} analysis. The 1031 events remaining after the application of all cuts are shown as gray points in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_measured}. These events were divided into eleven \kevnr{} bins. The two lowest-energy bins span the regions from 0.3--0.65~\kevnr{} and 0.65--1.0~\kevnr{}, respectively. The remaining nine bins are logarithmically spaced from 1--30~\kevnr{}. Histograms of the measured distribution of electrons escaping the interaction site for each bin are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all}. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ Histogram of the measured ionization signal with the best-fit model for each nuclear recoil energy bin. As discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:sec:dd_low_energy_qy_recoil_energy_uncertainties}, the bin boundaries are defined based upon the per-event reconstructed nuclear recoil energy before the Eddington bias correction (the mean energy of events observed in each bin after the Eddington bias correction can be seen in Table~\ref{tab:dd_qy_result}). Data is shown by the blue crosses with Poisson error bars. The red shaded histogram is the best model fit to the data in each bin. The best-fit parameters were determined using an unbinned optimization. The ionization signal bins shown here were used to calculate $\chi^{2}$/dof values for energy bins where dof~$>$~0. The magenta line represents the approximate location of the S2 threshold. The axes limits are the same for each graph. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all} \end{center} \end{figure} In order to determine the energy dependence of the charge yield, the analysis took full account of the statistical fluctuations associated with the ionization signal measurement, and the influence of the S2 threshold. Given an input mean number of ionization electrons that escape recombination, a Monte Carlo based model was used to generate the expected probability distribution of the number of reconstructed electrons at the interaction site. The model is composed of an underlying Poisson distribution convolved with a Gaussian to account for the observed resolution of the ionization distribution. Detector-specific effects including SE size and S2 threshold are included in the model. Liquid xenon purity and electron extraction efficiency effects were applied binomially to the modeled number of ionization electrons to determine the distribution of observed electrons in the xenon gas. The most significant contribution to the resolution of the ionization distribution is Eddington bias. This arises from uncertainty in reconstructed energy due to the position reconstruction effects described in Sec.~\ref{sec:abs_energy_from_double_scatter}. The expected ionization resolution after Eddington bias effects were addressed was confirmed to have an energy dependence ${\propto} 1/\sqrt{E_{\textrm{nr}}}$ via simulation~\cite{Verbus2016}. The resolution in the model, set using the variance of the Gaussian convolution, was determined by fitting the signal model to the seven highest-energy \qy{} bins where S2 threshold effects are minimal as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all}. The $a/\sqrt{E_{\textrm{nr}}}$ dependence was fit to the measured ionization resolution for these seven bins as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:omega_data_measurement_ionization_distribution_resolution_no_sys}. The value of the parameter $a \pm \sigma_{a}$ was measured to be $0.64 \pm 0.06~\sqrt{\mbox{\kevnr{}}}$. The mean of the signal model distribution was an unconstrained nuisance parameter during this maximum-likelihood fit to extract the resolution. The resulting additional uncertainty from this nuisance parameter is reflected in the reported error bars. After determining the nuclear recoil energy dependence of the ionization signal resolution, the final signal model was fit to each bin. The resulting ionization signal distribution and best-fit model for each bin is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all}. The ionization signal model was fit to the observed ionization distribution for each bin using an extended unbinned maximum likelihood optimization, with the modeled resolution implemented as a constrained nuisance parameter~\cite{Barlow1990}. The log-likelihood for the optimization is \begin{multline} \ln{L} = \\ -(N_{s} + N_{b}) - \ln{(N!)} + \ln{\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{R}}e^{- \frac{(R-R_{0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{R}^{2}}}\right]} + \\ \sum\limits_{i=1}^{N}\ln{\left[ N_{s}p_{s}(x_i \vert n_{e}, R) + N_{b}p_{b}(x_i) \right]} \,\text{,} \label{eq:likelihood_qy_fit} \end{multline} \noindent where the parameters $N_{s}$, $N_{b}$, $n_{e}$, and $R$ are varied in the optimization. The index $i$ iterates over each event $x_{i}$ in the particular \kevnr{} bin, and $N$ is the total observed number of events in the bin. The parameter $N_{s}$ is the number of signal events, and $N_{b}$ is the number of background events in the fit. The parameter of primary interest is $n_{e}$, the measured number of ionization electrons escaping recombination with ions at the interaction site. The parameter $R$ is the resolution of the reconstructed electron distribution at the interaction site. The parameters $n_{e}$ and $R$ are inputs to the signal model PDF $p_{s}(x_i \vert n_{e}, R)$, where $R$ functions as a nuisance parameter constrained by the measured resolution best-fit to the seven highest-energy bins shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:omega_data_measurement_ionization_distribution_resolution_no_sys}. This constraint on $R$ is enforced using the parameters $R_{0}$ and $\sigma_{R}$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:likelihood_qy_fit} for each reconstructed energy bin. For each recoil energy bin, these resolution parameters are \begin{equation} R_{0} = a/\sqrt{E_{\textrm{nr}}} \end{equation} \noindent and \begin{equation} \sigma_{R} = \sigma_{a}/\sqrt{E_{\textrm{nr}}} \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent The parameters $a$ and $\sigma_{a}$ were defined earlier based upon the fit in Fig.~\ref{fig:omega_data_measurement_ionization_distribution_resolution_no_sys}. Events outside the main peak were accommodated by a flat continuum background PDF $p_{b}(x_i)$. The classes of events contributing to this background are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_background_and_uncertainties}. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{omega_data_measurement_ionization_distribution_resolution_no_sys.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The measured resolution, $R$, of the ionization distributions in the seven highest-energy bins of the double-scatter dataset is represented by the blue squares. The estimated uncertainty in the resolution due to the extraction efficiency is a constant 4\% for all energies. The error bars are symmeterized for the fit following the procedure in Ref.~\cite{DAgostini2004}. The simulated resolution of the ionization distribution produced by a NEST~v1.0 Monte Carlo with modeled position reconstruction uncertainties is represented by the red circles. The black dashed line represents the best-fit to the blue squares given by $R_{0} = 0.64 /\sqrt{E_{\textrm{nr}} / \mbox{\kevnr{}}}$. The fit has a $\chi^{2}$/dof = 10.6/6, which corresponds to a p-value of 0.12. The one and two sigma contours on the parameter $a$ are shown in green and yellow, respectively. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:omega_data_measurement_ionization_distribution_resolution_no_sys} \end{center} \end{figure} The ionization signal model best-fit for each of the eleven bins is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_measured}. The corresponding measured ionization yield is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield}. The ionization yield was calculated from the mean ionization signal shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_measured} by dividing each point by the reconstructed nuclear recoil energy to obtain electrons per \kevnr{}. The measured ionization yield and associated per-bin uncertainties are shown in Table~\ref{tab:dd_qy_result}. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ Measured ionization yield for nuclear recoils in liquid xenon at 180~V/cm and associated $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainties. The systematic uncertainty in energy due to the correction for Eddington bias is denoted by $\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}}/ E_{\textrm{nr}}$. This uncertainty in energy is represented in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield} by a slanted error bar. } \label{tab:dd_qy_result} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{S @{\extracolsep{\fill}} Sl} \hline \hline {$E_{\textrm{nr}}$} & {\qy{}} & {$\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}}/ E_{\textrm{nr}}$} \\ {(\kevnr{})} & {(e$^{-}$/\kevnr{})} & {(\%)} \\ \hline 0.70~$\pm$~0.13 & 8.2 $^{+2.4}_{-2.1}$ & $^{+8}_{-2}$ \\ 1.10~$\pm$~0.18 & 7.4 $^{+1.9}_{-1.7}$ & $^{+5}_{-1.9}$ \\ 1.47~$\pm$~0.12 & 10.1 $^{+1.5}_{-1.6}$ & $^{+3}_{-1.3}$ \\ 2.00~$\pm$~0.10 & 8.0 $^{+0.9}_{-0.6}$ & $^{+2}_{-1.3}$ \\ 2.77~$\pm$~0.10 & 7.5 $^{+0.5}_{-0.5}$ & $^{+2}_{-0.7}$ \\ 3.86~$\pm$~0.08 & 7.3 $^{+0.3}_{-0.3}$ & $^{+1.3}_{-0.5}$ \\ 5.55~$\pm$~0.09 & 7.2 $^{+0.2}_{-0.2}$ & $^{+0.7}_{-0.2}$ \\ 8.02~$\pm$~0.10 & 6.8 $^{+0.15}_{-0.17}$ & $^{+0.16}_{-0.05}$ \\ 11.52~$\pm$~0.12 & 5.88 $^{+0.12}_{-0.13}$ & $^{+0.13}_{-0.3}$ \\ 16.56~$\pm$~0.16 & 5.28 $^{+0.11}_{-0.13}$ & $^{+0.2}_{-0.7}$ \\ 24.2~$\pm$~0.2 & 4.62 $^{+0.13}_{-0.10}$ & $^{+0.4}_{-1.0}$ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The LUX measured low-energy ionization yield at 180 V/cm is represented by the blue crosses. The red error bars at the bottom left of the plot represent systematic uncertainties with a constant scaling across all points, including the uncertainty in the mean neutron energy from the \dd{} source, $S2$ position-based corrections, and the LUX measured $g_2$. The red error bars at the top of the plot represent the systematic uncertainty associated with the Eddington bias correction for the mean energy of each bin. The red box represents the associated systematic uncertainty on the measured endpoint yield at 74~\kevnr{}. The gray data points represent other angle-based measurements with an absolute energy scale. The gray squares ($\Box$) and circles ($\bigcirc$) correspond to measurements at 1 kV/cm and 4 kV/cm, respectively~\cite{Manzur2010}. The gray triangles were measured at 0.3~kV/cm ($\triangledown$) and 0.1~kV/cm ($\triangle$)~\cite{Aprile2006a}. The hatched bands represent simulated-spectrum-based measurements with a best-fit energy scale. The purple single right-hatched ($///$) band was measured at an average field of 3.6 kV/cm~\cite{Horn2011}. The teal single left-hatched ($\backslash\backslash\backslash$) band corresponds to a measurement at 730~V/cm~\cite{Sorensen2010a}. The green cross-hatched band was measured at 530~V/cm~\cite{AprileAlfonsiArisakaEtAl2013}. The dashed (dot-dashed) black line corresponds to the Lindhard-based (Bezrukov-based) LUX best-fit NEST model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield} \end{center} \end{figure} To verify the consistency of the measured yields with the observed absolute event rate, we performed a LUXSim/GEANT4 based neutron double-scatter simulation using the NEST model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. This simulation used a model of the full calibration conduit geometry with the neutron source external to the water tank. Simulated per-channel waveforms were produced for each Monte Carlo event. The simulated waveform data were reduced using the standard experimental LUX \dd{} data processing and analysis pipeline. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[angle=90,width=0.48\textwidth]{ionization_yield_full_luxsim_double_scatter_num_events_data_and_sim.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The observed rate of double-scatter neutron events in the \qy{} analysis is represented by the blue squares. An identical analysis of simulated waveforms produced by LUXSim/GEANT4 using the LUX measured nuclear recoil signal yields was performed. The results are shown as red circles. The simulation statistical error bars are smaller than the size of the data points unless otherwise depicted. The results are normalized by the number of neutrons produced by the \dd{} source outside the water tank. The $\chi^{2}$/dof value is 14.6/10 based upon statistical uncertainties only, which yields a p-value of 0.15. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:ionization_yield_full_luxsim_double_scatter_num_events_data_and_sim} \end{center} \end{figure} The event rate in each \qy{} analysis bin is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_full_luxsim_double_scatter_num_events_data_and_sim} for both data and simulation. The data and simulation results were normalized by the total number of neutrons produced at the \dd{} source outside the water shield. For consistency with the other yield results, the simulation data points were updated to use the more modern angular scattering cross-sections from the JENDL-4 nuclear databases instead of G4NDL3.14. The absolute value of the correction factor was $\leq$1\% for energy bins up to 5.55~\kevnr{} and was a maximum of 5\% at 24.2~\kevnr{}. The best agreement was achieved assuming an isotropic neutron source rate of $2.6 \times 10^{6}$~n/s for the data normalization, which is in agreement with the independently measured source rate of $(2.5 \pm 0.3) \times 10^{6}$~n/s. This agreement between the data and simulation in both absolute rate and shape confirms the consistency of the LUX \dd{} measured yields and the number of events seen in the double-scatter data at nuclear recoil energies as low as 0.7~\kevnr{}. \subsection{Background and uncertainties} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_background_and_uncertainties} There are six classes of events that contribute to the continuum background observed outside of the signal peaks in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all}. The best-fit number of background events, $N_{b}$, accounts for less than 6\% of the area in the first nine recoil energy bins and less than 20\% in the three highest-energy bins. The common quality of continuum background events is that the measured angle is not directly related to the true recoil energy at the first scattering site. \begin{enumerate}[i.] \item The first class consists of three or more scatter events classified as two scatter events, because the pulse finding algorithm combines two S2 pulses that are close in $z$ position. The S2 pulse width cut preferentially removes events with combined S2 signals, while having an average acceptance of 94\% for legitimate double-scatters after all other cuts are applied. The corresponding acceptance of legitimate double-scatter events with a first interaction nuclear recoil energy of $<$2~\kevnr{} and $<$1~\kevnr{} is 86\% and 80\%, respectively. \item The second class contains events that have $>$2~scatters, but only two of the scatters are above the 36~phd raw S2 threshold. As was also the case for the first class of events, if this was a dominant effect the observed mean path length between scatters would be longer than expected based upon the mean free path of 2.45~MeV neutrons in liquid xenon. The distribution of the measured distance between interactions in double-scatter events was demonstrated to be consistent with simulation using neutron scattering cross-sections from JENDL-4~\cite{Verbus2016}. \item The third class consists of events that scatter once within the neutron beam projection in the TPC, then scatter in passive detector materials, and then finally scatter again in the active liquid xenon volume. This is effectively a 3+ scatter event that is identified as a two scatter event. \item The fourth class of events is the accidental coincidence of delayed electron emission (SE or small S2) classified as the first scatter, with a legitimate single-scatter neutron event classified as the second scatter. (The reverse process is suppressed due to the minimum pulse area requirement for the second scatter, which corresponds to $\sim$9 extracted electrons.) The measured background rate of random small S2 pulses indicates that $<$0.1\% of events in the \qy{} dataset after the analysis volume constraints and pulse area thresholds for $S2[y_{1}^{\prime}]$ and $S2[y_{2}^{\prime}]$ are this type of accidental coincidence. \item The fifth class of events are produced by the small number of incident neutrons that have lost a significant fraction of their energy in passive detector materials but pass the energy purity cuts. The nuclear recoil energy bins are determined by scattering angle, so this is a unidirectional effect that could produce a $\sim$5\% excess of events at lower ionization signal in a given bin. It is possible that some evidence of this effect is seen in the high-energy bins in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_ionization_signal_bins_all}. It is worth noting that due to the angle-based energy scale neutrons that have lost energy in passive materials can only suppress the measured charge yield. \item The sixth class contains events where the order of the first and second neutron interactions was incorrectly defined. The double-scatter event selection criteria described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy_event_selection} ensures that contamination of this type is negligible. \end{enumerate} Table~\ref{tab:dd_qy_result} contains the statistical errors for the reconstructed energy and the measured \qy{} as returned by the maximum-likelihood optimization. The reported errors on the measured \qy{} values were extracted from the log-likelihood contour accounting for variations in all four parameters in the fit. The third column contains the systematic uncertainty in energy due to the Eddington bias correction. Systematic uncertainties common to all bins in the low-energy ionization yield measurement and endpoint \qy{} measurement are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_common_qy_uncertantites}. The systematic uncertainty in \qy{} due to the S2 threshold was confirmed to be subdominant to other quoted uncertainties by varying the modeled threshold by 10\% and repeating the fitting procedure. The low-energy \qy{} analysis was repeated using a smaller fiducial analysis volume ensuring that $r < 21$~cm and $30 < \text{drift time} < 290$~$\mu$s to test potential systematic effects associated with the choice of analysis volume. The results of this check for systematic effects are within the quoted $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainties in Table~\ref{tab:dd_qy_result}. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ Uncertainties common to the \qy{} measurement both at low energies and at the \dd{} recoil spectrum endpoint. The second column lists systematic uncertainties associated with the mean reconstructed ionization signal \nel{}. The third column lists systematic uncertainties associated with the mean reconstructed energy, $E_{\textrm{nr}}$. Quoted uncertainties are symmetric ($\pm$) unless otherwise indicated. } \label{tab:dd_common_qy_uncertantites} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{l @{\extracolsep{\fill}} cc} \hline \hline Source of Uncertainty & $\Delta$\nel{}/\nel{} & $\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}} / E_{\textrm{nr}}$ \\ & (\%) & (\%) \\ \hline SE size & $\ll$1 & - \\ e$^{-}$ extraction efficiency & 8 & - \\ $S2$ correction (3D position) & 2.5 & - \\ $S2$ correction (non-uniform field) & $^{+0}_{-2.5}$ & - \\ Mean neutron energy from source & - & 2 \\ \hline Total & $^{+8}_{-9}$& 2 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \section{Low-energy scintillation yield} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_ly} The \qy{} result provides a precise $\textit{in situ}${} measurement of the charge yield as a function of energy, which defines the $S2$ response as a function of recoil energy between 0.7--74~\kevnr{} (the endpoint yields at 74~\kevnr{} were obtained as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_endpoint}). The single-scatter (one S1 and one S2) event population was then used to calibrate the $S1$ yield using the observed $S2$ as a measure of energy. A single-scatter signal model that simultaneously provides simulated $S1$ and $S2$ distributions was developed as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_signal_model}. The ionization yield in the model was fixed to the measured \qy{} from Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy}, while \ly{} was varied and the output compared to data to extract the best-fit scintillation yield for 1.08--12.8~\kevnr{} nuclear recoils. Because the measurements of the signal yields are performed $\textit{in situ}${}, the uncertainty in $g_2$ does not contribute to the uncertainty in the \ly{} energy scale. The precisely measured $g_1$ value is used to directly report the light yield in the absolute units of photons/\kevnr{}. We use the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_signal_model} to measure the light yield for energies as low as 1.08~\kevnr{}, where only a fraction of the events are above the S1 and S2 detection thresholds. The main challenges in this regime are ensuring that the thresholds and resolution are well modeled for both $S1$ and $S2$. The LUX S1 and S2 threshold behavior is well understood~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, Akeribothers2016} and is included in the simulation used for best-fit parameter estimates. Uncertainty in the measured \ly{} due to uncertainties in the modeled S1 and S2 thresholds are quantified and discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_background_and_uncertainties}. The $S1$ resolution is dominated by Poisson fluctuations in the number of detected photons. The $S2$ resolution due to the Fano factor associated with quanta production, recombination fluctuations, and detector effects (purity, electron extraction) is constrained by the results in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy} and is consistent with the Poisson expectation of the model over the energy range spanned by the reported \ly{} data points. The shape of the $S1$ vs. $S2$ distribution in data and simulation is compared in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots}. \subsection{Single-scatter event selection} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_event_section} The single-scatter pulse pairing requires an identified S1 pulse preceding an identified S2 pulse. The S1 identification threshold requires a coincidence of 2~PMTs each with signal $>$0.25~phd. The S2 analysis threshold required that raw $S2 > 55$~phd to reduce the number of potential accidental coincidence events. This S2 threshold is higher than that used for the low-energy \qy{} analysis described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy} to ensure rejection of accidental coincidences masquerading as single scatters. The LUX WIMP search analysis used a higher raw $S2 > 164$~phd threshold due to the longer exposure and lower signal to accidental coincidence background event ratio. The origin and measured residual number of accidental coincidence events are discussed later in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_background_and_uncertainties}. The same maximum area thresholds used in the low-energy \qy{} analysis are applied to $S1$ and $S2$. The lower S2 threshold compared to that used for the WIMP search analyses provides an increased efficiency for the detection of single-scatter events associated with low-energy nuclear recoils. The efficiencies for detecting 1~\kevnr{} and 2~\kevnr{} nuclear recoils were estimated after all analysis cuts to be 4\% and 25\%, respectively. In addition to this increased detection efficiency due to the lower S2 threshold, the underlying true nuclear recoil spectrum produced by 2.45~MeV neutrons in liquid xenon sharply increases at low energies, which provides an additional enhancement in the relative number of low-energy events. The neutron beam energy purity cuts were applied ensuring that only single-scatters within the 4.9~cm beam pipe projection with $y^{\prime} > 15$~cm were accepted. A radial position cut ensuring $r < 21$~cm was applied. Data quality cuts were applied to remove events due to accidental triggers in the period of delayed electron extraction, photoionization of impurities in the liquid xenon, or other photoelectric feedback effects following large S2 pulses that can span many subsequent event windows. An upper limit on the total raw pulse area in the event record outside of the identified S1 and S2 of 219~phd was applied. A cut ensuring that there are no SE or S2 pulses in the event record before the identified single-scatter S1 pulses was applied to ensure quiet detector conditions in the period preceding the identified single scatter. These requirements are independent of the nuclear recoil energy of the event, and accept 83\% of events after all other cuts are applied. The same upper limit on the width of S2 pulses used in the \qy{} analysis was enforced to reject multi-site events at similar $z$. After all event selection, position, and data quality cuts for the scintillation yield analysis were applied, a population of 1931 events remained in the neutron beam projection analysis volume. The single-scatter event population is exceptionally clean with only a few events ($\ll$1\%) lying outside the main distribution as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots}. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ $S1$ vs. $S2$ single-scatter distribution for the \ly{} measurement. The 1931 events in data after all \ly{} analysis cuts are shown in this plot in blue in the upper frame. The non-uniformity of the distribution is due to the shape of the differential scattering cross-section~\cite{Verbus2016}. For comparison, a randomly selected sample consisting of the same number of simulated events, produced by the Lindhard-based NEST model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}, is shown in red in the lower frame. % The raw $S2 > 55$~phd threshold is represented by the vertical dashed magenta line in corrected $S2$ space ($\sim$64~phd). The modeled S1 threshold requires that two photons contribute signal in the PMTs and that the resulting summed area is above the horizontal dot-dashed magenta line. This cutoff is varied over the range indicated by the magenta arrows, and the analysis is repeated to estimate the systematic uncertainty due to S1 threshold effects. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Signal model used for single-scatter simulation} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_signal_model} A Monte Carlo model of the S1 and S2 signal production was used to generate a simulated single-scatter event population to compare to the observed single-scatter events in data passing the cuts described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_event_section}. The ionization yield in the model was fixed to match the LUX \dd{} measured \qy{}. The modeled scintillation yield can be arbitrarily scaled using the free parameter $\xi$. The model includes anti-correlation between $S1$ and $S2$ as well as fluctuations in exciton and ion creation, recombination, and biexcitonic quenching. The variation of the scintillation yield in the model is achieved by scaling the number of photons produced at the interaction site before these fluctuation effects are applied. The JENDL-4.0 nuclear database was used to generate the underlying single-scatter nuclear recoil energy spectrum. The S1 threshold in data required that two PMTs independently observe a signal greater than 0.25~phd. This 0.25~phd requirement accepts 98\% of single photoelectrons in each channel, which leads to a S1 detection efficiency determined by the two-fold coincidence requirement. The S1 threshold in the signal model required that two individual photons were detected with a summed area above 1.1~phd. This 1.1~phd requirement was varied to estimate the systematic uncertainty associated with the S1 threshold. The single-scatter event distribution after the application of this threshold is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots}. The corresponding $S2$ spectrum is shown by the shaded red histogram in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_ly_s2_spectrum}. Systematic uncertainties associated with this model are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_background_and_uncertainties}. \subsection{Data analysis} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_data_analysis} The selected single-scatter events were collected into bins of $S2$, and the resulting mean photon yield for each bin was extracted by comparing the $S1$ distribution of events in the $S2$ bin to the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_signal_model}. The resulting $S2$ spectrum is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_ly_s2_spectrum} for both data and simulation. The first bin spans the range $50 < S2 < 100$~phd and the subsequent eight bins are 100~phd wide. The simulation was normalized to match the total number of counts observed in data between 900--1500~phd, while the \ly{} measurement was made using the $S2$ range between 50--900~phd. This ensured that the normalization between simulation and data was performed outside of the region used to produce \ly{} data points. The energy normalization range from 900--1500~phd corresponds to roughly 20--30~\kevnr{}, while the \ly{} measurement region from 50--900~phd contains events with a recoil energy of 0--20~\kevnr{}. These $S2$ ranges for the \ly{} measurement and normalization regions were chosen to match the recoil energy range used for the forward-scatter based low-energy \qy{} measurement, which accepts events with a maximum recoil energy of 30~\kevnr{}. The transition between the measurement and normalization regions at an $S2$ of 900~phd was chosen to ensure the measured \ly{} data points fall within the 0.7--24.2~\kevnr{} recoil energy range, where the ionization yield is absolutely defined by the low-energy \qy{} measurement described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy}. As the \ly{} bin boundaries are defined by $S2$ values, the corresponding mean recoil energy for each \ly{} bin is not expected to match the measured nuclear recoil energy of the \qy{} data points. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_ly_s2_spectrum.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The single-scatter $S2$ spectrum from data after all \ly{} analysis cuts are applied is shown in blue. The blue error bars are statistical. The corresponding simulated $S2$ spectrum is represented by the shaded red histogram; the simulation used the JENDL-4.0 nuclear database. The simulated $S2$ spectrum produced using an alternative nuclear database (ENDF/B-VII.1~\cite{ChadwickHermanOblozinskyEtAl2011}) is shown by the gray dotted line. The statistical uncertainty on the simulated spectra is negligible. The black dot-dashed line at 900 phd $S2$ demarcates the measurement region from the normalization region. The simulation is normalized to match the total number of counts observed in data between 900--1500 phd, while the \ly{} points are determined using the events in the region $50 < S2 < 900$. The raw $S2 > 55$~phd threshold is represented by the vertical dashed magenta line in corrected $S2$ space ($\sim$64~phd). } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_ly_s2_spectrum} \end{center} \end{figure} The best-fit light yield for each $S2$ bin was obtained via a maximum-likelihood-based optimization of the simulated $S1$ spectrum. The log-likelihood function is given by \begin{multline} \label{eq:ly_log_likelihood} \ln{L} = \\ -(N_{s} + N_{b}) + \ln{(N!)} + \ln{\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{g_1}}e^{- \frac{(g_1-g_{1,0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{g_1}^{2}}}\right]} \\ +\sum\limits_{i=1}^{N}\ln{\left[N_{s} p_{s}(x_{i} \vert \xi, g_1) + N_{b}p_{b}(x_{i}) \right]} \text{,} \end{multline} \noindent where the parameters are $\xi$, $N_{s}$, $N_{b}$, and $g_1$. The constant $N$ is the total number of events in the $S2$ bin of interest in data. It does not vary during the optimization so the $\ln{(N!)}$ term can be dropped. The parameter $\xi$ is a scaling factor used to vary the light yield in the simulation during the optimization. The parameter $N_{s}$ is the number of signal events expected from simulation based upon the normalization at higher energies. This value of $N_{s}$ is fixed for each iteration of the $\xi$ parameter. The parameter $N_{b}$ is the number of events in a floating flat background PDF component; this is typically $\sim$1\% and no more than $\sim$10\% of total events. The parameter $g_1$ is the S1 photon detection efficiency, which is allowed to float as a nuisance parameter within the constraints set by the measured value of $0.115 \pm 0.004$. This treatment of $g_1$ as a constrained nuisance parameter incorporates the systematic uncertainty due to the photon detection efficiency into the reported uncertainties resulting from the four-dimensional log-likelihood contour. This optimization was performed for each of the nine $S2$ bins used to extract \ly{}. The resulting parameters of interest are the measured mean number of S1 photons leaving the interaction site, \np{}, and the mean underlying recoil energy. After the optimization, these parameters were determined from the model with the best fit to the observed S1 photon distribution. The corresponding \ly{} data point is centered on the mean energy of the underlying Monte Carlo events that populate the $S2$ bin. The resulting measured scintillation yield for each of the nine bins is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final}. The LUX \ly{} measurement is shown in both absolute units of photons/\kevnr{} on the left axis and relative to the 32.1~\kevee{}~$^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr light yield as measured at 0~V/cm on the right axis. It is worth noting that the left axis represents the first direct absolute measurement of the nuclear recoil scintillation yield. All previous measurements of the liquid xenon light yield have reported results in terms of \leff{}, the observed light yield relative to that of 122~\kevee{} gamma rays from a $^{57}$Co calibration source. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.480\textwidth]{scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The LUX \ly{} measured at 180~V/cm is shown by the blue points. The left axis is the absolute yield \ly{} in units of photons/\kevnr{} and the right axis is the \ly{} relative to the LUX $\textit{in situ}${} 32.1~\kevee{}~$^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr yield at 0~V/cm. The red diagonal error bars at the top of the plot correspond to the $1 \sigma$ systematic uncertainties on the determination of the energy scale from our measured \qy{}. Inserted below the data, the top red systematic uncertainty marker on the left side of the plot corresponds to the scaling uncertainty due to $g_1$ and $S1$ signal corrections (shown for reference here as $g_1$ was included as a nuisance parameter). The middle red systematic uncertainty marker is the uncertainty on the $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr light yield as measured at 0~V/cm in LUX. This uncertainty is applicable to the right axis scale only. The bottom red systematic uncertainty marker corresponds to the uncertainty in the mean neutron energy produced by the \dd{} source. The red box indicates the systematic uncertainty in the endpoint \ly{} measurement at 74~\kevnr{}. The gray data points represent other angle-based measurements with a \kevnr{} energy scale. The \leff{} measurements in Refs.~\cite{AprileBaudisChoiEtAl2009} ($\triangleleft$),~\cite{Manzur2010} ($\Box$), and~\cite{Plante2011} ($\Diamond$) were performed at 0~V/cm. The purple band~\cite{Horn2011} and thick green line~\cite{AprileAlfonsiArisakaEtAl2013} represent spectral fit based \leff{} measurements with a \kevnr{} energy scale corrected to 0~V/cm using an assumed value of $S_{\textrm{nr}}$. The dashed (dot-dashed) black line corresponds to the Lindhard-based (Bezrukov-based) LUX best-fit NEST model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final} \end{center} \end{figure} We performed a cross-check of the observed event rate in data and simulation, similar to what was done for the low-energy \qy{} analysis. A single-scatter LUXSim/GEANT4 based simulation of single-scatters was performed using the Lindhard-based NEST model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. The simulation output was used to produce per-channel waveform data that was processed using the LUX \dd{} analysis pipeline. A neutron source rate of $(2.6 \pm 0.8)~\times~10^6$~n/s provides the optimal match between the absolute number of single-scatter events in simulation and data, which is in agreement with the independently measured neutron production rate of $(2.5 \pm 0.3)~\times~10^{6}$~n/s. In addition, this absolute rate is consistent with the corresponding normalization of double scatter data in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy}. This agreement between the observed data and expected absolute event rate using the model in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd} demonstrates the self-consistency of the measured yields with the observed number of events. Additionally, the agreement with the independently measured best-fit neutron rate at the source from the double-scatter \qy{} analysis demonstrates consistency between the single-scatter and double-scatter analyses. The relative scale (right vertical axis) in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final} is set using the measured $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr yield in LUX at 0~V/cm of $64 \pm 3$ photons/\kevee{}. The internal, homogeneous $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr source is a more effective standard candle than the primary gamma ray produced by the external $^{57}$Co source traditionally used for \leff{} measurements due to the self-shielding properties of large liquid xenon TPCs. $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr decays via the emission of a 32.1~\kevee{} conversion electron followed by a 9.4~\kevee{} conversion electron with a characteristic time separation of about 154~ns.\footnote{Unlike the 9.4~\kevee{} component, the light yield of the 32.1~\kevee{} component is constant as a function of the time separation between the emission of conversion electrons and can be used as a standard candle~\cite{Baudis2013a}.} Previous measurements reported in terms of \leff{} were converted to \ly{} assuming a $^{57}$Co absolute yield of 63~photons/\kevee{} at 0~V/cm~\cite{SzydagisFyhrieThorngrenEtAl2013, StephensonHaefnerLinEtAl2015}. Conveniently in LUX, as was found in Ref.~\cite{ManalaysayUndagoitiaAskinEtAl2010}, the $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr yield at 32.1~\kevee{} and the $^{57}$Co yield at 122~\kevee{} are in close agreement allowing easy direct comparison to previous \leff{} measurements using the right axis in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final}. The electron recoil light yield was also measured using $^{131\textrm{m}}$Xe remaining in the liquid xenon from cosmogenic activation before the target media was transported underground. The $^{131\textrm{m}}$Xe nuclei undergoes an isomeric transition depositing 163.9~\kevee{} with a half life of 11.8~days and provides an internal, homogeneous calibration source close in energy to the 122~\kevee{} gamma from $^{57}$Co that has been used to calibrate smaller liquid xenon TPCs in the past. The light yield for 163.9~\kevee{} electron recoils was measured to be $41.3 \pm 1.1$~photons/\kevee{} at 180~V/cm using the $^{131\textrm{m}}$Xe source. We can then extrapolate the light yield from this data point to the commonly used standard candle energy of 122~\kevee{} using NEST~v0.98. The light yield due to a 122~\kevee{} electron recoil at 180~V/cm is 1.12$^{+0.08}_{-0.06}$~times higher than the yield at 164~\kevee{} according to NEST~v0.98. After accounting for this yield translation factor and the expected $S_{\textrm{ee}}$($\mathcal{E} = 180$~V/cm) field quenching factor for electron recoils of 0.74~\cite{Aprile2006a, ManalaysayUndagoitiaAskinEtAl2010}, we measure the electron recoil yield for a 122~\kevee{} gamma ray to be $63^{+5}_{-4}$~photons/\kevee{} at 0~V/cm. This measured light yield for 122~\kevee{} electron recoils in LUX is in agreement with the value of 63~photons/\kevee{} at 0~V/cm used to convert previous \leff{} results to \ly{}. Avoiding any assumptions about $S_{\textrm{nr}}$ and $S_{\textrm{ee}}$, the LUX measured \ly{} in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final} is reported in absolute units at 180~V/cm. Previous results in the figure were measured at 0~V/cm or were corrected to 0~V/cm assuming various values of $S_{\textrm{nr}}$ for the operating field---all of which ranged from 0.92--1.0. The agreement of results from liquid xenon TPCs operating across a broad range of drift fields (0--3.6~kV/cm) in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final} indicates that the nuclear recoil light yield in liquid xenon is a weak function of the drift electric field. \subsection{Backgrounds and uncertainties} \label{sec:dd_low_energy_ly_background_and_uncertainties} Accidental coincidences due to S2 signals produced by delayed extraction of ionization electrons and photoionization of impurities can masquerade as single-scatter events potentially contributing to a background in the lowest-energy \ly{} bin ($50 < S2 < 100$~phd). Overlapping photoelectrons due to the intrinsic PMT dark rate as well as stray photons contribute to the S1 signals in these accidental coincidence single-scatter events. These accidental coincidence events are rejected using a combination of two data quality cuts: the upper limit on the raw pulse area in the event window outside of the S1 and S2 signals, and the requirement that there are no single electrons or S2 signals before the S1 in the event record. The number of accidental coincidence events remaining after the application of the two data quality cuts was quantified using off-beam single-scatter interactions as a sideband. The accidental coincidence events potentially contributing to a low-energy \ly{} analysis background were verified to occur with a flat distribution as a function of $z$. The background analysis volume was offset to $z=33.9$~cm below the liquid surface, away from the true neutron beam center at $z=16.1$~cm. Other than the analysis volume offset, an identical analysis was performed. Any events observed in the first $S2$ bin of the sideband analysis were conservatively assumed to be accidental coincidences. This conservative estimate of the accidental coincidence event contamination in the first \ly{} bin is $3.0 \pm 1.7$ events, which is within the $1\sigma$ uncertainty of the total number of events in this bin during the standard analysis. The \ly{} data and per-bin statistical and systematic uncertainties are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_ly_result}. Uncertainties common across all bins in the low-energy and endpoint \ly{} measurements are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_common_ly_uncertantites}. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ The measured scintillation yield for nuclear recoils in liquid xenon at an electric field of 180~V/cm and associated statistical uncertainties. The first two columns correspond to the blue low-energy \ly{} data points in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final}. The fractional systematic uncertainty in energy due to the data-driven \qy{} based energy scale is denoted by $\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}} / E_{\textrm{nr}}$. This uncertainty in energy is represented by the slanted red error bars at the top of the figure due to the anti-correlation of the location of the \ly{} data points on the vertical axis. The estimated fractional systematic uncertainty in \np{} due to uncertainty in the S1 threshold is represented by $\Delta$\np{}/\np{}. This uncertainty is represented by the red boxes around the low-energy \ly{} data points. Quoted uncertainties are symmetric ($\pm$) unless otherwise indicated. } \label{tab:dd_ly_result} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} SSSS} \hline \hline {$E_{\textrm{nr}}$} & {\ly{}} & {$\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}} / E_{\textrm{nr}}$} & {$\Delta$\np{}/\np{}} \\ {(\kevnr{})} & {(ph/\kevnr{})} & {(\%)} & {(\%)} \\ \hline 1.08~$\pm$~0.13 & 4.9 $^{+1.2}_{-1.0}$ & 19 & 25 \\ 1.92~$\pm$~0.09 & 5.2 $^{+0.6}_{-0.4}$ & 10 & 13 \\ 3.13~$\pm$~0.11 & 4.9 $^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ & 6 & 6 \\ 4.45~$\pm$~0.11 & 6.4 $^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$ & 4 & 3 \\ 5.89~$\pm$~0.13 & 6.1 $^{+0.4}_{-0.3}$ & 3 & {-} \\ 7.44~$\pm$~0.17 & 7.4 $^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$ & 3 & {-} \\ 9.1~$\pm$~0.2 & 7.9 $^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$ & 3 & {-} \\ 10.9~$\pm$~0.3 & 8.1 $^{+0.4}_{-0.5}$ & 2 & {-} \\ 12.8~$\pm$~0.3 & 8.9 $^{+0.6}_{-0.4}$ & 3 & {-} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} The systematic uncertainty in \np{} (and \ly{} as it is proportional to \np{}) due to the S1 threshold model used in simulation is reported in Table~\ref{tab:dd_ly_result}. The contribution from the S1 threshold model to the systematic uncertainty in \ly{} was estimated by re-analyzing the data using the alternative S1 thresholds in the signal model, as indicated by the arrows in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_s1_vs_s2_subplots}. The two alternative S1 thresholds require at least two photons to be detected in simulation with a combined area of 0.5~phd and 2.0~phd, respectively. The systematic uncertainty due to the modeled S1 threshold was conservatively estimated by quoting the maximum variation in \ly{} observed during this exercise. The average systematic uncertainty due to the measurement uncertainty in $g_1$ is quantified in Table~\ref{tab:dd_common_ly_uncertantites}. The dominant effect contributing to the $S1$ resolution is Poisson fluctuation in the number of collected photons. Resolution effects due to variations in the underlying Fano factor and recombination fluctuations were confirmed to be subdominant. Systematic effects due to S2 threshold uncertainty, which only affect the lowest recoil energy bin, were confirmed to be subdominant to the reported uncertainties for 10\% variations in S2 threshold. If the nuclear database used in the signal model overpredicts (underpredicts) the expected number of events at low energies the optimization will favor a lower (higher) \ly{} to compensate. The JENDL-4.0 library used in the model used to extract the \ly{} result is the most modern evaluation for neutron-xenon cross-sections for neutron energies of 2.45~MeV~\cite{Robinson2014}. Seven other nuclear databases were studied to quantify the effect on the predicted number of events at low energies and the effect on the measured \ly{} when using older evaluations. Of the databases studied, ENDF/B-VII.1 and JENDL-4.0 represent the extremes in the angular scattering cross-section over the energy range of interest for this analysis between 0--30~\kevnr{} (roughly $S2 < 1500$~phd). In addition to being the most modern evaluation, the baseline JENDL-4.0 database is the most conservative for use in the light yield measurement as all other databases predict fewer events at low energies after normalization between 900--1500~phd $S2$. The $S2$ spectra produced via the signal model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd} using both the ENDF/B-VII.1 and JENDL-4.0 databases are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:final_single_scatter_sim_ly_plots_final_single_scatters_ly_s2_spectrum}. The \ly{} analysis was repeated using the alternative ENDF/B-VII.1 database, which results in a measured \ly{} 25\% larger at 1.1~\kevnr{}. The difference in measured \ly{} between databases decreases with increasing energy until it is subdominant to statistical uncertainties at 5.9~\kevnr{}. As a cross-check, the \ly{} measurement was repeated using an alternative initial modeled light yield in simulation as the starting point for the optimization. The results of this cross-check were consistent with the baseline measurement within $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainties. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ Uncertainties common to the \ly{} measurement both at low energies and at the \dd{} recoil spectrum endpoint. The second column lists systematic uncertainties associated with the mean reconstructed number of primary scintillation photons, \np{}. The third column lists systematic uncertainties associated with the mean reconstructed energy, $E_{\textrm{nr}}$. Quoted uncertainties are symmetric ($\pm$) unless otherwise indicated. } \label{tab:dd_common_ly_uncertantites} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} lcc} \hline \hline {Source of Uncertainty} & {$\Delta$\np{}/\np{}} & {$\Delta E_{\textrm{nr}} / E_{\textrm{nr}}$} \\ & {(\%)} & {(\%)} \\ \hline $g_1$ & 3.48 & - \\ $S1$ correction (3D position) & 0.6 & - \\ $S1$ correction (non-uniform field) & $^{+0}_{-0.5}$ & - \\ Mean neutron energy from source & - & 2 \\ \hline Total & $^{+4}_{-4}$& 2 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \section{Signal yields at the D-D neutron recoil spectrum endpoint} \label{sec:dd_endpoint} The maximum nuclear recoil energy produced in liquid xenon by the mono-energetic 2.45~MeV neutrons from the \dd{} source is given by Eq.~\ref{eq:recoil_energy_equation}. This provides a known endpoint feature in the $S1$ and $S2$ spectra produced by 180$^{\circ}$ scatters corresponding to the maximum recoil energy of 74~\kevnr{}. The population of single-scatter events was used to extract \ly{} and \qy{} using the nuclear recoil energy spectrum endpoint closely following the analysis procedure used in Ref.~\cite{JoshiSangiorgioBernsteinEtAl2014}. As in the low-energy \ly{} analysis, the neutron beam energy purity cuts and a radial position cut of r~$<$~21~cm were applied. A raw $S2$ analysis threshold of 164~phd was applied, well below the region of interest near the endpoint where the mean $S2$ is 2500~phd. An upper limit on the total digitized area in the event record outside of the identified S1 and S2, identical to the one used for the \ly{} analysis, was applied. As in the previous analyses, an upper limit on the S2 signal RMS width of 775~ns was enforced. As in the low-energy \ly{} measurement, we used the JENDL-4.0 nuclear database to generate the underlying nuclear recoil energy spectrum in the model used for parameter optimization. \subsection{Scintillation yield at the nuclear recoil energy spectrum endpoint} To extract the light yield at 74~\kevnr{}, we fit an $S1$ signal model to the $S1$ spectrum endpoint feature. The observed $S1$ spectrum was modeled using a constant \ly{} across the entire nuclear recoil energy range. Three parameters were varied in a binned maximum-likelihood optimization: the \ly{} value at the endpoint as the target parameter, $F_{1}^{\prime}$ as a resolution term, and the overall normalization of counts in the model. The $S1$ resolution as a function of the mean integer number of photons detected, $n_{\textrm{phd}}$, was set by \begin{equation} \label{eq:dd_endpoint_s1_resolution} \sigma_{S1}(n_{\textrm{phd}}) = \sqrt{n_{\textrm{phd}}(F_{1}^{\prime} + \sigma^{2}_{\textrm{sphe}})} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $\sigma_{\textrm{sphe}} = 0.37$ is the mean single photoelectron resolution of the LUX PMTs~\cite{AkeribBaiBedikianEtAl2012a}. The $F_{1}^{\prime}$ parameter was allowed to float as a nuisance parameter controlling effective $S1$ resolution in the optimization and accommodating fluctuations in the observed signal. The most significant contribution to the $F_{1}^{\prime}$ resolution term is the detector's scintillation photon detection efficiency ($g_1$). The fluctuations associated with scintillation and recombination at the interaction site are subdominant. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{endpoint_yield_ly_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ Result of the \ly{} endpoint optimization. The single-scatter $S1$ spectrum after all cuts is shown in blue. The dip in the spectrum at ${\sim} 50$~phd is due to the differential cross-section for elastic neutron scatters on xenon. The horizontal error bar represents the bin width, and the vertical error bar represents the statistical uncertainty on the number of events in each bin. The best-fit endpoint model is represented by the red shaded histogram. The binned maximum-likelihood optimization was performed between the gray dashed lines. The fit has a $\chi^{2}/\text{dof} = 7.5 / 9$ yielding a p-value of 0.59. The black dashed line is the best-fit endpoint in $S1$ space, with 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ statistical uncertainties represented by the green and yellow regions, respectively.} \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:endpoint_yield_ly_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit} \end{center} \end{figure} The results of the \ly{} measurement using the nuclear recoil spectrum endpoint are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:endpoint_yield_ly_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit}. The \ly{} at 74~\kevnr{} was measured to be $14.0^{+0.3 \text{(stat)} + 1.1 \text{(sys)}}_{-0.5 \text{(stat)} -2.7 \text{(sys)}}$ photons/\kevnr{} at 180~V/cm. The systematic uncertainties specific to the \ly{} measurement at the \dd{} recoil spectrum endpoint are listed in the right column of Table~\ref{tab:dd_endpoint_ly_uncertantites} and are represented by the red box around the blue endpoint in Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final}. Additional sources of systematic uncertainty that are common to both the endpoint and low-energy \ly{} measurement are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_common_ly_uncertantites}. The \ly{} endpoint specific systematic uncertainties were determined by varying the associated model or analysis parameters and re-running the optimization. The systematic uncertainty due to the \dd{} neutron recoil energy spectrum used in the model was conservatively estimated by repeating the analysis assuming a completely flat recoil spectrum extending to 74~\kevnr{}. The systematic uncertainty due to the assumption of a constant \ly{} was determined by repeating the analysis while modeling the \ly{} as a straight line. In this case, the slope of the modeled \ly{} was allowed to float as an additional nuisance parameter. The systematic uncertainties due to the choice of optimization region and bin size were estimated by separately repeating the analysis with a 20\% larger optimization region and $\times2$ the number of bins, respectively. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ Uncertainties specific to the \ly{} measurement using the \dd{} nuclear recoil spectrum endpoint. Quoted uncertainties are symmetric ($\pm$) unless otherwise indicated. } \label{tab:dd_endpoint_ly_uncertantites} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} lcc} \hline \hline {Source of Uncertainty} & {Statistical} & {Systematic} \\ & {(\%)} & {(\%)} \\ \hline Binned likelihood optimization & $^{+2}_{-3}$ & - \\ Input recoil energy spectrum & - & 6 \\ Slope of \ly{} in model & - & $^{+5}_{-18}$ \\ Choice of optimization region & - & 1.8 \\ Choice of bin size & - & 0.4 \\ \hline Total & $^{+2}_{-3}$ & $^{+8}_{-19}$ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \subsection{Ionization yield at the nuclear recoil energy spectrum endpoint} An identical procedure to that used for the \ly{} endpoint was used to extract \qy{} using the same population of single-scatter events. The observed $S2$ spectrum was modeled using a flat \qy{} across the entire \dd{} recoil energy range. Three parameters were varied in a binned maximum-likelihood optimization: the \qy{} value at the endpoint as the target parameter, $F_{2}^{\prime}$ as a resolution term, and the overall normalization of counts in the model. The $S2$ resolution as a function of mean integer number of electrons extracted, $n_{e_{S2}}$, was determined by \begin{equation} \label{eq:dd_endpoint_s2_resolution} \sigma_{\textrm{S2}}(n_{e_{\textrm{S2}}}) = \sqrt{n_{e_{\textrm{S2}}}(\mu^{2}_{\textrm{SE}}F_{2}^{\prime} + \sigma^{2}_{\textrm{SE}})} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $\mu_{\textrm{SE}}$ and $\sigma_{\textrm{SE}}$ are the mean and standard deviation, respectively, of the observed SE distribution in the \dd{} dataset. The $F_{2}^{\prime}$ parameter was allowed to float as a nuisance parameter controlling effective $S2$ resolution in the optimization and accommodating fluctuations in the observed signal. The most significant contributions to the $F_{2}^{\prime}$ resolution term are the fluctuations associated with ionization and recombination at the interaction site, as well as binomial detector effects due to the free electron lifetime and electron extraction efficiency. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{endpoint_yield_qy_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ Result of the \qy{} endpoint optimization. The single-scatter $S2$ spectrum after all cuts is shown in blue. The dip in the spectrum at ${\sim} 1750$~phd is due to the differential cross-section for elastic neutron scatters on xenon. The horizontal error bar represents the bin width, and the vertical error bar represents the statistical uncertainty on the number of events in each bin. The best-fit endpoint model is represented by the red shaded histogram. The binned maximum-likelihood optimization was performed between the gray dashed lines. The magenta dashed line depicts the location of the S2 threshold. The $\chi^{2}/\text{dof}$ is 14.7/9 dof yielding a p-value of 0.10. The black dashed line is the best-fit endpoint in S2 space, with 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ statistical uncertainties represented by the green and yellow regions, respectively. The six events observed outside of the fit range ($3500 < S2 < 5000$) could be due to multiple simultaneous S2 signals at the same $z$ position combined in the event record, residual $^{83\textrm{m}}$Kr from the frequent injections for standard detector corrections, or contamination consisting of 39.6~\kevee{} gamma rays from $^{129}$Xe inelastic neutron scatters. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:endpoint_yield_qy_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit} \end{center} \end{figure} The results of the \qy{} measurement using the \dd{} recoil spectrum endpoint are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:endpoint_yield_qy_endpoint_spectrum_with_reconstructed_endpoint_and_fit}. The \qy{} value at 74~\kevnr{} was measured to be $3.06^{+0.05\text{(stat)} + 0.2 \text{(sys)}}_{-0.06 \text{(stat)} -0.4 \text{(sys)}}$ electrons/\kevnr{} at 180~V/cm. The systematic uncertainties specific to the \qy{} measurement at the nuclear recoil spectrum endpoint are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_endpoint_qy_uncertantites} and are represented by the red box around the blue endpoint in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield}. Identically to the procedure used for \ly{}, the endpoint-specific systematic uncertainties for \qy{} were determined by varying the associated model or analysis parameters and re-running the optimization. Additional sources of systematic uncertainty that are common to both the endpoint and low-energy \qy{} measurement are listed in Table~\ref{tab:dd_common_qy_uncertantites}. \begin{table}[!htbp] \centering \caption{ Uncertainties specific to the \qy{} measurement using the \dd{} recoil spectrum endpoint. Quoted uncertainties are symmetric ($\pm$) unless otherwise indicated. } \label{tab:dd_endpoint_qy_uncertantites} \setlength{\extrarowheight}{.5em} \begin{tabular}{\columnwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} lcc} \hline \hline {Source of Uncertainty} & {Statistical} & {Systematic} \\ & {(\%)} & {(\%)} \\ \hline Binned likelihood optimization & $^{+1.6}_{-2}$ & - \\ Input recoil energy spectrum & - & 5 \\ Slope of \qy{} in model & - & $^{+0.16}_{-11}$ \\ Choice of optimization region & - & 6 \\ Choice of bin size & - & 1.6 \\ \hline Total & $^{+1.6}_{-2}$ & $^{+7}_{-13}$ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \section{Nuclear recoil band} \label{sec:dd_nr_band} The ratio of the ionization to scintillation signal is used to discriminate between nuclear and electron recoils in liquid xenon TPCs. The band created by nuclear recoil events in $\log_{10}{(S2/S1)}$ vs. $S1$ space is commonly referred to as the ``nuclear recoil band.'' In this section, we use neutrons from the \dd{} source to define the nuclear recoil band over the $S1$ range used for the WIMP search analysis. Subsequently, a simulated nuclear recoil band is compared to data to demonstrate consistency of the nuclear recoil signal model used to generate $S1$ and $S2$ PDFs for the WIMP search profile likelihood ratio analysis~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016}. The nuclear recoil band was measured using the single-scatter event population in the \dd{} calibration dataset. An S2 threshold at 164~phd was applied on the raw $S2$ area before position-correction for consistency with the LUX WIMP search~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. An upper limit ensuring $S2 < 5000$~phd was applied. The nuclear recoil band analysis applied an upper limit on the raw digitized area outside of the identified S1 and S2 signals in the event record of 219~phd. This cut ensures quiet detector conditions as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly}. In contrast to the signal yield measurements presented earlier, the kinetic energy of each incident neutron does not need to be precisely known for the nuclear recoil band measurement. The neutron beam energy purity cuts (beam line analysis volume) were not applied in order to increase the useful number of neutron events. Instead, a $z$ cut of $80 < \text{drift time} < 130$~$\mu$s was applied to select events in the plane of the neutron beam projection in the TPC active region. A radial cut of $r < 21$~cm was used. After all cuts, the remaining events with $S1_{\textrm{spike}} < 50$~phd are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_nr_band_ws_s1_range_data_sim_comparison}. This is the same $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ range used for the improved LUX WIMP search result~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. The non-zero width of the vertical bands of events at low $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ is due to corrections for spike overlap in the per-channel waveforms as well as 3D position-based detector corrections. The mean $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ value is offset slightly from integer values due to the same corrections. A Gaussian was fit to the $\log_{10}{(S2/S1_{\textrm{spike}})}$ distribution in each 1.1~phd-wide bin along the $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ axis. The Gaussian centroid and 90\% one-sided limit for each bin, depicted in black in Fig.~\ref{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_nr_band_ws_s1_range_data_sim_comparison}, were determined based upon the fit parameters. The bins were positioned to ensure the observed vertical bands of events at low $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ were centered in their corresponding bin. It is worth noting the significant improvement in the single detected photon resolution at low $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ compared to traditional $S1$ area-based techniques, which are subject to the intrinsic single photoelectron resolution ($\sigma_{\textrm{sphe}} = 0.37$ in the case of LUX). \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_nr_band_ws_s1_range_data_sim_comparison.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ The measured events defining the nuclear recoil band are shown in the scatter plot. There are 9864 events remaining after all cuts with $S1_{\textrm{spike}} < 50$. The black data points are the Gaussian fit centroid values for each $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ bin. The red data points are corresponding Gaussian fit mean value for the simulated nuclear recoil band produced using the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. The black and red dot-dashed lines indicate the 90\% one-sided limits from data and simulation, respectively. The magenta dashed lines indicate the lower S2 threshold at $\sim$164~phd raw $S2$ and the upper $S2$ limit at 5000~phd. Error bars are statistical only. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_nr_band_ws_s1_range_data_sim_comparison} \end{center} \end{figure} In dual-phase liquid xenon TPCs, multiple-scatter events misidentified as single-scatters due to interactions in the reverse field region below the cathode produce events at artificially low $\log_{10}{(S2/S1_{\textrm{spike}})}$~\cite{Angle2008, LebedenkoAraujoBarnesEtAl2009}. Compared to more traditional nuclear recoil band calibrations using $^{252}$Cf or $^{241}$Am/Be, there is a relative absence of these pathological events at low $\log_{10}{(S2/S1_{\textrm{spike}})}$ due to the well-defined neutron beam position near the liquid xenon surface away from the sub-cathode ionization signal dead region. A LUXSim/GEANT4-based simulation using a Lindhard-based NEST model fit to the LUX \dd{} results (described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}) was used to produce single-scatter event waveforms for comparison with the measured nuclear recoil band. These waveforms were passed through the data processing pipeline used for the \dd{} calibration data. The same cuts and analysis procedures used for nuclear recoil band data were applied to the resulting reduced simulation waveforms. The average (maximum) deviation of the band fit centroid between simulation and data is 0.010 (0.029) in $\log_{10}{(S2/S1_{\textrm{spike}})}$ space over the 0--50~phd $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ range. The average standard deviation of the band agrees with a mean (maximum) absolute deviation of 0.009 (0.039) in $\log_{10}{(S2/S1_{\textrm{spike}})}$ space over the 0--50~phd $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ range. The simulated nuclear recoil band is consistent with \dd{} calibration data within the systematic uncertainty intrinsic to the simulation process. This simultaneous agreement of the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd} with the measured \qy{}, \ly{}, and nuclear recoil band demonstrates the consistency of the signal model used to generate the WIMP search limit with data~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016}. As an additional check, we verified the LUX WIMP search limit is unchanged for all reported WIMP masses by the small variation in the nuclear recoil band between data and simulation. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_representative_bin_sim_comparison.pdf} \vskip -0.1cm \caption{ Comparison of representative bins used for nuclear recoil band comparison between data and simulation. The lowest, middle, and highest bins in $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_nr_band_ws_s1_range_data_sim_comparison} are shown. The blue crosses show the distribution of events in data with associated statistical uncertainties. The black dotted line shows a Gaussian fit to the blue data points. The red shaded histogram represents simulated nuclear recoil band profile. The simulation histograms were generated using 9324~events, 3067~events, and 1924~events, respectively, in the three graphs, and the amplitude of each was independently scaled to match the number of events in data. This corresponds to a statistical uncertainty on the maximum value in the red histogram in each graph of 3\%, 4\%, and 5\%, respectively. As expected, non-Gaussian behavior is observed in the first $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ bin. The magenta dashed line indicates the approximate location of the S2 threshold. The single bin with three counts in the bottom frame is not statistically unreasonable; the $\chi^{2}$/dof for the Gaussian fit in that bin is 9.9/5, which gives a p-value of 0.08. } \vskip -0.5cm \label{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_representative_bin_sim_comparison} \end{center} \end{figure} Representative individual Gaussian fits to data for the lowest, middle, and highest $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$ bins are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_representative_bin_sim_comparison}. The middle and high-energy bins are well fit using a Gaussian, but non-Gaussian behavior is observed at low $S1_{\textrm{spike}}$. This non-Gaussian behavior is expected due to the low number of signal carriers produced at the interaction site as well as the effect of the 164~phd $S2$ threshold. The simulated distribution of events in each nuclear recoil band bin is represented by the red shaded histogram in Fig.~\ref{fig:nr_band_luxsim_spike_count_phd_representative_bin_sim_comparison}. The LUXSim simulation captures the non-Gaussian behavior at low-$S1$ and provides an accurate model of the nuclear recoil band in the profile likelihood ratio analysis used for the WIMP search results~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016}. \section{NEST model fit to D-D data} \label{sec:nest_post_dd} To directly use the \qy{} and \ly{} measurements in LUX simulation and analysis, we performed a fit of the NEST model to the data presented in this paper. We used a Metropolis-Hastings algorithm to sample a global likelihood function, in which the model was simultaneously constrained by the measurements of the nuclear recoil band mean (Section~\ref{sec:dd_nr_band}), light yield (Sections~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly}~\&~\ref{sec:dd_endpoint}), and charge yield (Section~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy}~\&~\ref{sec:dd_endpoint}). The procedure followed the methodology described in Ref.~\cite{LenardoKazkazManalaysayEtAl2015}. The model parameterization and optimization are described in detail in Ref.~\cite{Akeribothers2016}, and the resultant NEST model is used in the analyses presented in Refs.~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016}. Below we discuss the implications for the physics of liquid xenon response at low energies. In contrast to electronic recoils, recoiling nuclei lose a fraction of their energy to nuclear collisions, dissipating energy as heat rather than in processes leading to a detectable electronic signal. Reconstruction of nuclear recoil event energy, therefore, requires an understanding of these processes as a function of recoil energy. The formula for energy reconstruction can be written as \begin{equation} E_{\textrm{nr}} = \frac{ W (N_{e} + N_{\textrm{ph}}) }{L} \,\text{,} \label{eq:EnergyScale} \end{equation} \noindent where $L$ is the fraction of energy that goes into detectable electronic channels~\cite{Sorensen2011}. Here, $W = 13.7~\text{eV}$ is the average energy needed to create an exciton or electron-ion pair, $N_{e}${} is the absolute number of ionization electrons, and $N_{\textrm{ph}}${} is the absolute number of scintillation photons. Both $N_{e}${} and $N_{\textrm{ph}}${} represent the number of signal carriers after recombination but before biexcitonic quenching effects, in contrast to \nel{} and \np{} defined earlier in Secs.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy} and~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly}, which are the measured number of signal carriers that escape the interaction site. A detailed description of the recombination and biexcitonic quenching components of the model is reported in Ref.~\cite{Akeribothers2016}. The factor $L$ is traditionally given by the Lindhard model~\cite{Lindhard1963a, Sorensen2011}. It is described by the formula \begin{equation} L = \frac{k \, g(\epsilon)}{1 + k\, g(\epsilon)} \,\text{.} \label{eq:Lindhard} \end{equation} \noindent The parameter $k$ is a proportionality constant between the electronic stopping power and the velocity of the recoiling nucleus. The quantity $g(\epsilon)$ is proportional to the ratio of electronic stopping power to nuclear stopping power, calculated using the Thomas-Fermi screening function. It is a function of the energy deposited, converted to the dimensionless quantity $\epsilon$ using \begin{equation} \epsilon = 11.5 (E_{\textrm{nr}} / \textrm{keV}_{\textrm{nr}}) Z^{-7/3} \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent In these terms, $g(\epsilon)$ is given in Ref.~\cite{Lewin1996} by \noindent \begin{equation} g(\epsilon) = 3 \epsilon^{0.15} + 0.7 \epsilon^{0.6} + \epsilon \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent A commonly accepted value for the proportionality constant is $k = 0.166$, but this may range from 0.1 to 0.2~\cite{Sorensen2011}. We utilize the Lindhard model in our nuclear recoil response model, allowing $k$ to float in the fit to these data. The best-fit value from the global optimization is $k = 0.1735 \pm 0.0060$. In addition to Lindhard's model, we explored an alternative model proposed in Ref.~\cite{Bezrukov2011} with a larger ionization and scintillation yield at recoil energies below 2~\kevnr{}. To do so, we begin with the generic form of $L$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:EnergyScale}: \begin{equation} L = \alpha \frac{s_{e}}{s_{e} + s_{n}} \,\text{.} \end{equation} \noindent Here, $s_{e}${} and $s_{n}${} are the electronic and nuclear stopping powers, respectively, and $\alpha$ is a scaling parameter used to model the cascade of collisions in a nuclear recoil event (best-fit is $\alpha = 2.31$ in the global optimization). The ratio $s_{e}${}/$s_{n}${} is analogous to $g$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:Lindhard}. While the Lindhard model uses the Thomas-Fermi approximation to calculate $s_{n}${}, we replace this with the empirical form from Ziegler et al.~\cite{ZieglerLittmarkBiersack1985}: \begin{equation} s_n(\epsilon_\text{Z}) = \frac{\text{ln}(1 + 1.1383\,\epsilon_\text{Z})}{2(\epsilon_\text{Z} + 0.01321\,\epsilon_\text{Z}^{0.21226} + 0.19593\,\epsilon_\text{Z}^{0.5})} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $\epsilon_\text{Z} = 1.068\epsilon$. The slight difference in energy scales is due to different assumed screening lengths in the calculation of the dimensionless energy. To directly compare to data, we sum the measured light and charge to get a measured total quanta, $n_{q}${}~$=$~\nel{}~$+$~\np{}. This is accomplished by interpolating the measured light yield using an empirical power law fit, and adding the result to the charge yield at the measured energies. To avoid extrapolation of the light yield, we ignore the 0.70~\kevnr{} charge yield bin and consider only points above 1.08~\kevnr{}. The fractional statistical uncertainties in light yield are also empirically interpolated and added in quadrature to the statistical uncertainties in \qy{} to estimate uncertainties in \nel{}. The result is plotted against the total quanta predicted by our best-fit nuclear recoil models and the standard Lindhard model in Fig.~\ref{fig:nq_plot_for_dd_paper_draft}. We find excellent agreement with the unmodified Lindhard model in the low energy regime down to 1.1~\kevnr{}. The disagreement with the Lindhard model at high energies ($>$10~\kevnr{}) is attributed to biexcitonic effects, in which two excitons can interact to produce only one photon, or one photon and one electron (Penning ionization). Evidence for such effects in other experiments has been described in Refs.~\cite{Manzur2010, CaoAlexanderAprahamianEtAl2015}. We incorporate this into our model via the quenching factor \begin{equation} f_l = \frac{1}{1 + \eta \, s_{e}} \,\text{,} \end{equation} \noindent where $s_{e} = 0.166 \, \epsilon ^{1/2}$ is the theoretical electronic stopping power for liquid xenon~\cite{Bezrukov2011} and $\eta$ is a free parameter allowed to float in the fit. This factor multiplies the total number of predicted photons, and a fraction of this is added to the total number of predicted ionization electrons to model Penning ionization. The optimal value obtained is $\eta = 13.2 \pm 2.3$. The fraction of biexcitonic collisions resulting in ionization is modeled as an additional free parameter. The inclusion of these effects allows our models to describe the data across the energy range spanned by \dd{} neutron induced recoils. A more detailed discussion of both models, including a table of all best-fit parameters, is reported in Ref.~\cite{Akeribothers2016}. The model using the Ziegler stopping power is found to be a better description of our data below 2~\kevnr{}; however, it provides a slightly worse fit over the entire energy range (1--74~\kevnr{}). Therefore, we employ the Lindhard-based (with $k = 0.1735$) NEST model in LUX data analysis and simulation. As it is fit directly to the $\textit{in situ}${} calibration data, this model produces a robust description of liquid xenon response for the simulation and reconstruction of nuclear recoil events within the LUX detector. \begin{figure}[ht] \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{nq_plot_for_dd_paper_draft.pdf} \caption{ Total quanta, calculated by summing the measured light and charge yields. Predicted number of quanta using the two LUX nuclear recoil models described in this work and the standard Lindhard model are shown. The disagreement between the LUX models and the standard Lindhard model at high energies is due to our inclusion of biexcitonic interactions and Penning ionization. The net effect of these processes reduces the number of total quanta as the exciton density increases and better describes the data above 10~\kevnr{}. } \label{fig:nq_plot_for_dd_paper_draft} \end{figure} \section{Summary} \label{sec:lux_dd_summary} A \dd{} source was used to produce a collimated beam of mono-energetic 2.45~MeV neutrons incident on the LUX detector. This neutron source was used to characterize the nuclear recoil response of LUX $\textit{in situ}${} in the dark matter detector itself. The low-energy ionization yield result described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_qy} was obtained using a new technique to directly measure the nuclear recoil energy using the reconstructed angle between interactions in double-scatter events in the LUX TPC. The reported ionization yield has been measured a factor of $\times$5 lower in energy than any other previous calibration with a kinematically-defined energy scale. The low-energy scintillation yield was measured using the single-scatter event population as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_low_energy_ly}. The reported scintillation yield has been measured a factor of $\times$3 lower in energy than has been achieved previously, and is the first liquid xenon \ly{} result reported in the absolute units of photons/\kevnr{}. The resulting light and charge yields are consistent with other recent measurements in the literature, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ionization_yield_qy_endpoint_ionization_yield} and Fig.~\ref{fig:scintillation_yield_alternate_alpha_scaling_s1_only_light_yield_final}. In addition, the kinematically fixed 74~\kevnr{} endpoint of the nuclear recoil energy spectrum in liquid xenon was used to extract the charge and light yields as reported in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_endpoint}. The measured signal yields at the recoil spectrum endpoint are also consistent with previously reported results in the literature at similar recoil energy. The ratio of ionization to scintillation, commonly used in liquid xenon TPCs to discriminate between nuclear and electron recoils, was measured for nuclear recoils in Sec.~\ref{sec:dd_nr_band}. The collimated beam of neutrons from the \dd{} source provides a nuclear recoil band calibration with minimal contamination from multiple scintillation, single ionization events. All nuclear recoil measurements were performed at an electric field of 180~V/cm. After the measurements, two new versions of the NEST model were created using the simultaneous constraints provided by the measured \qy{}, \ly{}, and nuclear recoil band results as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:nest_post_dd}. The first, more conservative, parameterization used for the recent LUX WIMP search results~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015, AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2016} was based upon the Lindhard model. An alternative parameterization was based upon the Bezrukov model using the Ziegler stopping power. Both the Lindhard and Bezrukov based models agree with the measured signal yields within experimental uncertainties over the entire two order of magnitude recoil energy range for which results are reported. These results define the nuclear recoil signal response in both channels (charge and light) from 1.1 to 74~\kevnr{}, which covers the entire recoil energy range used for the LUX WIMP search. The demonstration of signal yield in liquid xenon at recoil energies as low as 1.1~\kevnr{} provides an improved calibration of LUX sensitivity to low mass WIMPs---a factor of $\times$7 improvement in sensitivity for WIMPs of mass 7~GeV\,c$^{-2}$. As a direct result of this calibration, the lowest kinematically accessible WIMP mass has been reduced from 5.2~to~3.3~GeV\,c$^{-2}$~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. This newly demonstrated nuclear recoil signal response below 3~\kevnr{} also enables improved estimates of expected coherent neutrino-nucleus scattering event rates in liquid xenon TPCs. The recent LUX WIMP search results had the expectation of observing 0.10 such events due to $^{8}$B solar neutrinos under the LUX Lindhard model, while the Bezrukov model provides an expectation of 0.16 observed events~\cite{AkeribAraujoBaiEtAl2015}. \begin{acknowledgments} This work was partially supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under award numbers DE-FG02-08ER41549, DE-FG02-91ER40688, DE-FG02-95ER40917, DE-FG02-91ER40674, DE-NA0000979, DE-FG02-11ER41738, DE-SC0006605, DE-AC02-05CH11231, DE-AC52-07NA27344, DE-FG01-91ER40618, and DE-SC0010010; the U.S. National Science Foundation under award numbers PHYS-0750671, PHY-0801536, PHY-1004661, PHY-1102470, PHY-1003660, PHY-1312561, PHY-1347449, PHY-1505868, PHY-1636738, and PHY-0919261; the Research Corporation grant RA0350; the Center for Ultra-low Background Experiments in the Dakotas (CUBED); and the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (SDSMT). LIP-Coimbra acknowledges funding from Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}ncia e Tecnologia (FCT) through the project-grant PTDC/FIS-NUC/1525/2014. Imperial College and Brown University thank the UK Royal Society for travel funds under the International Exchange Scheme (IE120804). The UK groups acknowledge institutional support from Imperial College London, University College London and Edinburgh University, and from the Science \& Technology Facilities Council for PhD studentships ST/K502042/1 (AB), ST/K502406/1 (SS) and ST/M503538/1 (KY). The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. This research was conducted using computational resources and services at the Center for Computation and Visualization, Brown University. We thank Alan Robinson for providing useful feedback on a preprint of this manuscript. We gratefully acknowledge the logistical and technical support and the access to laboratory infrastructure provided to us by the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) and its personnel at Lead, South Dakota. SURF was developed by the South Dakota Science and Technology Authority, with an important philanthropic donation from T. Denny Sanford, and is operated by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for the Department of Energy, Office of High Energy Physics. \end{acknowledgments} \bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\section{Introduction} \setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{thm}{0} \setcounter{lma}{0} Recently there has been an enormous interest in equations with the $p$-Laplace operator in $R^n$ (with $p>1$, $u=u(x)$, $ x \in R^n$) \[ \mbox{div} \left( \|\nabla u\|^{p-2} \nabla u \right) +f(u)=0 \,, \] see e.g., a review by P. Drabek \cite{D}, and the important paper of B. Franchi et al \cite{FLS}. Radial solutions of this equation, with the initial data at $r=0$, satisfy \beq \lbl{1} \p (u')'+\frac{n-1}{r} \, \p (u') +f(u)=0, \s u(0)=\al >0, \; u'(0)=0 \,, \eeq where $\p (v)=v \|v\|^{p-2}$, $p>1$. To guess the form of the solution, let us drop the higher order term and consider \beq \lbl{2} \frac{n-1}{r} \, \p (u') +f(u)=0, \s u(0)=\al \,. \eeq This is a completely different equation, however, in case $p=2$, it is easy to check that the {\em form} of solutions is the same: in both cases, it is a series $\sum _{n=0}^{\infty} a_n r^{2n}$ (with different coefficients), see P. Korman \cite{K4} or \cite{K1}. It is natural to guess that the form of solutions will be same for (\ref{1}) and (\ref{2}), in case $p \ne 2$ too. With that in mind, let us solve (\ref{2}) in case $f(u)=e^u$. Since $\al >0$, we see from (\ref{2}) that $u'(r)<0$ for all $r$. Then $\p (u')=-(-u')^{p-1}$, and we have \[ u'=-\left[\frac{r}{n-1} e^u \right]^{\frac{1}{p-1}}=- \frac{r^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}{(n-1)^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}e^{\frac{1}{p-1}u} \,. \] Integrating, we get \[ u(r)=\al-(p-1) \ln \left(1+\frac{e^{\frac{1}{p-1} \al}}{p (n-1)^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}\, r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}\right) \,. \] We see that $u(r)$ is a function of $r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}$, and, for $r $ small, we can expand it as a series $u(r)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} b_n r^{n \frac{p}{p-1}}$, with some coefficients $b_n$. Motivated by this example, we make a change of variables $r \ra z$ in (\ref{1}), by letting $z^2=r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}$. We expect solutions of (\ref{1}) to be of the form $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} c_n z^{2n}$, which is a real analytic function of $z$, if this series converges. \medskip The following lemma provides the crucial change of variables. \begin{lma}\lbl{lma:1} Denote \beq \lbl{2a} \s\s \bar \al =\frac{p}{2(p-1)}, \s \beta=\frac{1}{\bar \al} (\bar \al -1)=\frac{-p+2}{p}, \s \gamma=\beta(p-1)=3-p-\frac{2}{p} \,, \eeq \[ a=\bar \al ^p, \s A=\bar \al ^p \gamma +(n-1)\bar \al ^{p-1} \,. \] Then, for $p>2$, the change of variables $z^2=r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}$ transforms (\ref{1}) into \beq \lbl{3} au''(z)+\frac{A}{(p-1)z}u'(z)+\frac{z^{p-2}}{\p '(u'(z))} f(u)=0, \s u(0)=\al, \; u'(0)=0 \,. \eeq Conversely, if the solution of (\ref{3}) is of the form $u=v(z^2)$, with $v(t) \in C^1(\bar R_+)$, then the same change of variables transforms (\ref{3}) into (\ref{1}), for any $p>1$. \end{lma} \pf We have $\ds z=r^{\al}$, $\ds \frac{du}{dr}=\al \frac{du}{dz}r^{\al -1} =\al z^{\beta} \frac{du}{dz} $. By the homogeneity of $\p$, we have ($\p (cv)=c^{p-1} \p (v)$, for any $c>0$) \[ \p (u'(r)) =\p \left( \al z^{\beta} u_z \right)=\al ^{p-1} z^{\beta (p-1)} \p (u_z)=\al ^{p-1} z^{\gamma} \p (u_z) \,. \] Then (\ref{1}) becomes \[ \al z^{\beta} \frac{d}{dz} \left[\al ^{p-1} z^{\gamma} \p (u_z) \right]+(n-1)z^{-2+2/p} \al ^{p-1} z^{\gamma} \p (u_z)+f(u)=0 \,, \] which simplifies to \[ az \p'(u'(z)) u''(z)+A \p(u'(z))+z^{1/\al -\gamma} f(u)=0 \,. \] This implies (\ref{3}), keeping in mind that $\p'(v)=(p-1)\|v\|^{p-2}$, $\p(v)=\frac{1}{p-1}v \p'(v)$, and that $1/\al -\gamma-1=p-2$. Also, $\ds \frac{du}{dz}=\frac{2(p-1)}{p}\frac{du}{dr} \, z^{\frac{p-2}{p}}$, so that $\frac{du}{dz}(0)=0$. (It is only on the last step that we need $p>2$.) \medskip Conversely, our change of variables transforms the equation in (\ref{3}) into the one in (\ref{1}). Under our assumption, $u(r)=v(r^{\frac{p}{p-1}})$, so that $u'(0)=0$ for any $p>1$. \epf The change of variables $z^2=r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}$ in effect removes the singularity at zero for $p$-Laplace equations. Indeed, \[ \lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{z^{p-2}}{\p '(u'(z))}=\frac{1}{(p-1) \|u''(0)\|^{p-2}} \,, \] which lets us compute $u''(0)$ from the equation (\ref{3}) (the existence of $u''(0)$ is proved later). Indeed, assuming that $f(\al)>0$, we have \beq \lbl{3.1} u''(0)=-\left[ \frac{f(\al)}{a(p-1)+A} \right]^{\frac{1}{p-1}} \,. \eeq (In case $f(\al)<0$, we have $u''(0)=\left[ \frac{-f(\al)}{a(p-1)+A} \right]^{\frac{1}{p-1}}$.) We prove that $u(z)$ is smooth, provided that $f(u)$ is smooth. It follows that the solution of $p$-Laplace problem (\ref{1}) has the form $u(r^{\frac{p}{2(p-1)}})$, with smooth $u(z)$. We believe that our reduction of the $p$-Laplace equation (\ref{2}) to the form (\ref{3}) is likely to find other applications. \medskip We express the solution of (\ref{1}) in the form $u(r)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} a_k r^{k \frac{p}{p-1}}$, and present {\em explicit } formulas to compute the coefficients $a_k$. Interestingly, the coefficient $a_1$ turned out to be special, as it enters in two ways the formula for other $a_k$. Our formulas are easy to implement in {\em Mathematica}, and very accurate series approximations can be computed reasonably quickly. We utilize {\em Mathematica}'s ability to perform the ``exact computations", as we explain in Section $3$. \section{Regularity of solutions in case $p>2$} \setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{thm}{0} \setcounter{lma}{0} It is well known that solutions of $p$-Laplace equations are not of class $C^2$, in general. In fact, rewriting the equation in (\ref{1}) in the form \beq \lbl{+} (p-1)u''+\frac{n-1}{r}u'+\|u'\|^{2-p}f(u) =0\,, \eeq we see that in case $p>2$, $u''(0)$ does not exist. We show that in this case the solution of (\ref{1}) is a $C^2$ function of $r^{\frac{p}{2(p-1)}}$. We rewrite the equation in (\ref{1}) as \beq \lbl{} r^{n-1} \p (u'(r))=-\int_0^r t^{n-1} f(u(t)) \, dt \,. \eeq Observe that $ \p^{-1}(t)=-(-t)^{^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}$, for $t<0$. If we assume that $f(\al)>0$, then for small $r>0$, we may express from (\ref{}) \beq \lbl{*} -u'(r)=\frac{1}{r^{\frac{n-1}{p-1}}} \left[ \int _0^r t^{n-1} f(u(t)) \, dt \right]^{^{\frac{1}{p-1}}} \,. \eeq Integrating \beq \lbl{} u(r)=\al - \int _0^r \frac{1}{t^{\frac{n-1}{p-1}}} \left[ \int _0^t s^{n-1} f(u(s)) \, ds \right]^{^{\frac{1}{p-1}}} \, dt\,. \eeq We recall the following lemma from J.A. Iaia \cite{I}. \begin{lma}\lbl{lma:0} Assume that $f(u)$ is Lipschitz continuous. Then one can find an $\epsilon >0$, so that the problem (\ref{1}) has a unique solution $u(r) \in C^1[0,\epsilon)$. In case $1<p \leq 2$, $u(r) \in C^2[0,\epsilon)$. \end{lma} In the space $C[0,\epsilon)$ we denote $B_R^{\ep}=\{u \in C[0,\epsilon)$, such that $\|\|u-\al\|\| \leq R \}$, where $\|\|\cdot\|\|$ denotes the norm in $C[0,\epsilon)$. The proof of Lemma \ref{lma:0} involved showing that the map $T(u)$, defined by the right hand side of (\ref{}), is a contraction, taking $B_R^{\ep}$ into itself, for any $R>0$, and $\ep$ sufficiently small (see \cite{I}, and also \cite{PS1} for a similar argument). This argument provided a continuous solution of (\ref{}), which by (\ref{*}) is in $C^1[0,\epsilon)$, and in case $1<p \leq 2$, $u(r) \in C^2[0,\epsilon)$, by (\ref{+}) (from (\ref{}) it follows that the limit $\lim _{r \ra 0} \frac{u'(r)}{r}=u''(0)=0$ exists). \epf In case $p>2$, we have the following regularity result. \begin{thm}\lbl{thm:2} Assume that $p>2$, $f(u)$ is Lipschitz continuous and $f(\al)>0$. For $\ep >0$ sufficiently small, the problem (\ref{1}) has a solution of the form $u \left( r^{\frac{p}{2(p-1)}} \right)$, where $u(z) \in C^2[0,\epsilon)$, and $u'(z)<0$ on $(0,\ep)$. This solution is unique among all continuous functions satisfying (\ref{*}). If, moreover, $f(u) \in C^k$, then $u(z) \in C^{k+2}[0,\epsilon)$. \end{thm} \pf By Lemma \ref{lma:0} we have a unique solution of the problem (\ref{1}), $u(r) \in C^1[0,\epsilon _1)$, for some $\epsilon _1>0$ small. By Lemma \ref{lma:1}, this translates to a solution of the problem (\ref{3}), $u(z) \in C^1[0,\epsilon _1)$. With $m=\frac{A}{a(p-1)}$, we multiply the equation in (\ref{3}) by $z^m$, and rewrite it as \[ -\frac{u'(z)}{z}=\frac{1}{a(p-1)} \frac{\int _0^z \frac{t^{m+p-2}}{\|u'(t)\|^{p-2}} f(u(t)) \,dt}{z^{m+1}} \,. \] Taking the limit as $z \ra 0$, and denoting $L=\lim _{ z \ra 0} \frac{u'(z)}{z}$, we get \[ -L=\frac{f(\al)}{a(p-1)(m+1)\|L\|^{p-2}} \,. \] It follows that this limit $L$ exists, proving the existence of $u''(0)$, as given by (\ref{3.1}). Observe that $u''(0)<0$. It follows that $u'(z)<0$ for small $z$, so that $\p ' (u'(z))<0$, and then $u(z) \in C^2[0,\epsilon)$, from the equation (\ref{3}). \medskip Assume that $f(u) \in C^1$. Differentiate the equation (\ref{3}) \[ au'''+\frac{A}{p-1}\frac{u'' z-u'}{z^2}+\frac{p-2}{p-1} \left(-\frac{z}{u'} \right)^{p-3} \frac{zu''-u'}{{u'}^2} f(u)+\frac{1}{p-1} \left(-\frac{z}{u'} \right)^{p-2}f' u'=0 \,. \] From here, $u(z) \in C^3(0,\epsilon)$. Letting $z \ra 0$, and using that $\lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{u'' z-u'}{z^2}=\frac12 u'''(0)$, and $\lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{zu''-u'}{{u'}^2}=\frac{u'''(0)}{2{u''(0)}^2}$, we conclude that $u'''(0)=0$ (the existence of $u'''(0)$ is proved as before). It follows that $u(z) \in C^3[0,\epsilon)$. Higher regularity is proved by taking further derivatives of the equation. \epf \section{Representation of solutions using infinite series} \setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{thm}{0} \setcounter{lma}{0} We shall consider an auxiliary problem \beq \lbl{5} au''(z)+\frac{A}{(p-1)z}u'(z)+\frac{\|z\|^{p-2}}{\p '(u'(z))} f(u)=0, \s u(0)=\al, \; u'(0)=0 \,. \eeq \begin{lma}\lbl{lma:3} Any solution of the problem (\ref{5}) is an even function. \end{lma} \pf Observe that the change of variables $z \ra -z$ leaves (\ref{5}) invariant. If solution $u(z)$ were not even, then $u(-z)$ would be another solution of (\ref{5}). By Lemma \ref{lma:1}, $u(z)$ and $u(-z)$ translate into two different solutions of the problem (\ref{1}), contradicting the uniqueness part of Lemma \ref{lma:0}. \epf It follows from the last lemma that any series solution of (\ref{5}) must be of the form $\sum _{n=0}^{\infty} a_n z^{2n}$. The same must be true for the problem (\ref{3}), since for $z>0$ it agrees with (\ref{5}). Numerically, we shall be computing the partial sums $\sum _{n=0}^{k} a_n z^{2n}$, which will provide us with the solution, up to the terms of order $O(z^{2k+2})$. Write the partial sum in the form \beq \lbl{6} u(z)=\bar u(z)+a _{k} z^{2k} \,, \eeq where $\bar u(z)=\sum _{n=0}^{k-1} a_n z^{2n}$. We regard $\bar u(z)$ as already computed, and the question is how to compute $a_k$. Using the constants defined in (\ref{2a}), we let \[ B_k= 2k(2k-1)a+\frac{2kA}{p-1} \,. \] \begin{thm}\lbl{thm:1} Assume that $\al >0$, $f(u) \in C^{\infty}(R)$, and $f(\al)>0$. The solution of the problem (\ref{3}) in terms of a series of the form $\sum _{k=0}^{\infty} a_k z^{2k}$ is obtained by taking $a_0=\al$, then \beq \lbl{9} a_1=- \left[ \frac{1}{(p-1)2^{p-2}B_1} f(\al) \right]^{\frac{1}{p-1}} <0 \,, \eeq and for $k \geq 2$, we have (the following limits exist) \beq \lbl{10} a_k=-\frac{1}{B_k C_k} \lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{\frac{z^{p-2}}{\p '(\bar u'(z))} f(\bar u)+a \bar u''(z)+\frac{A}{(p-1)z}\bar u'(z)}{z^{2k-2}} \,, \eeq where $\bar u=\sum _{n=0}^{k-1} a_n z^{2n}$ is the previously computed approximation, and \[ C_k=1+\frac{ k(p-2) f(\al )}{(p-1)2^{p-2} B_k (-a_1)^{p-1}} \,. \] \end{thm} \pf Plugging $u=\al+a_1 z^2$ into the equation (\ref{3}), gives \[ a_1B_1=-\frac{z^{p-2}}{(p-1) \|2a_1z\|^{p-2}} f(\al+a_1 z^2) \,. \] Letting $z \ra 0$, \[ a_1 B_1 =-\frac{1}{(p-1) \|2a_1\|^{p-2}} f(\al) \,, \] which implies that $a_1<0$, leading to (\ref{9}). Of course, $u=\al+a_1 z^2$ is not a solution of (\ref{3}). But the other terms of the solution $u(z)=\sum _{k=0}^{\infty} a_k z^{2k}$ produce a correction, which disappears in the limit. Indeed, plugging $u(z)=\al+a_1z^2+\sum _{k=2}^{\infty} a_k z^{2k}$ into (\ref{3}), gives \[ a_1B_1+\sum _{k=2}^{\infty} a_k B_k z^{2k-2} \] \[ =-\frac{z^{p-2}}{(p-1) \|2a_1z+\sum _{k=2}^{\infty} 2ka_k z^{2k-1}\|^{p-2}} f ( \al+a_1 z^2+\sum _{k=2}^{\infty} a_k z^{2k} ) \,, \] and going to the limit, with $z \ra 0$, gives the same value of $a_1$. \medskip Plugging $u(z)=\bar u(z)+a _{k} z^{2k}$ into the equation (\ref{3}), gives \beq \lbl{12} -a_k B_k =\frac{\frac{z^{p-2}}{\p'(\bar u'+2ka_kz^{2k-1})}f( \bar u(z)+a _{k} z^{2k}) +a \bar u''(z)+\frac{A}{(p-1)z} \, \bar u'(z)}{z^{2k-2}} \,. \eeq We now expand the quotient in the first term in the numerator. In this expansion we do not need to show the terms that are of order $O(z^{2k-1})$ and higher, since $\lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{O(z^{2k-1})}{z^{2k-2}}=0$. For $z>0$ and small, we have (observe that $u'(z)<0$, and $u'(z) \sim 2a_1 z$, for $z$ small) \[ (p-1)\frac{z^{p-2}}{\p'(\bar u'+2ka_kz^{2k-1})} =\frac{z^{p-2}}{\left(-\bar u'-2ka_kz^{2k-1}\right)^{p-2}}= \] \[ \frac{z^{p-2}}{\left(-\bar u' \right)^{p-2} \left(1+2ka_k \frac{z^{2k-1}}{\bar u'(z)}\right)^{p-2}}=\frac{z^{p-2}}{\left(-\bar u' \right)^{p-2}} \left(1-2ka_k(p-2) \frac{z^{2k-1}}{\bar u'(z)} \right)+O(z^{2k-1}) \] \[ =\frac{z^{p-2}}{\left(-\bar u' \right)^{p-2}} \left(1+2ka_k(p-2) \frac{z^{2k-2}}{(-2a_1)} \right)+O(z^{2k-1}) \, \] \[ =\frac{(p-1)z^{p-2}}{\p'(\bar u' )}+2ka_k(p-2) \frac{z^{2k-2}}{(-2a_1)(-2a_1)^{p-2}}+O(z^{2k-1}) \,. \] (Observe that $\ds \frac{z}{- \bar u'}=\frac{1}{-2 a_1}+o(z)$, and $\ds \frac{z^{p-2}}{(- \bar u')^{p-2}}=\frac{1}{(-2a_1)^{p-2}}+o(z)$.) Also \[ f(\bar u(z)+a_k z^{2k})=f(\bar u(z))+O(z^{2k}) \,. \] Using these expressions in (\ref{12}), and taking the limit, we get \[ a_k=-\frac{1}{B_k } \lim _{z \ra 0} \frac{\frac{z^{p-2}}{\p '(\bar u'(z))} f(\bar u)+a \bar u''(z)+\frac{A}{(p-1)z}\bar u'(z)}{z^{2k-2}} -\frac{k(p-2) f(\al)}{(p-1)B_k2^{p-2} (-a_1)^{p-1}} \, a_k\,. \] (By Theorem \ref{thm:2}, $u(z) \in C^{\infty}[0,\ep)$. Hence, the limit representing $a_k=\frac{u^{2k}(0)}{(2k)!}$ exists.) Solving this equation for $a_k$, we conclude (\ref{10}). Plugging $u(z)=\bar u(z)+a_k z^{2k}+\sum _{n=k+1}^{\infty} a_nz^{2n}$ into (\ref{3}), produces the same formula for $a_k$. \epf With $a_k$'s computed as in this theorem, the series $\sum _{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k} r^{\frac{kp}{p-1}}$ gives the solution to the original problem (\ref{1}). In case $p=2$, we proved in \cite{K4} that when $f(u)$ is real analytic, the series $\sum _{k=0}^{\infty} a_{k} z^{2k}$ converges for small $z$, giving us a real analytic solution. It is natural to expect convergence for $p \ne 2$ too, so that the solution of (\ref{1}) is a real analytic function of $r^{\frac{p}{p-1}}$. \section{Numerical computations} \setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{thm}{0} \setcounter{lma}{0} It is easy to implement our formulas for computing the solution in {\em Mathematica}. It is crucial that {\em Mathematica} can perform exact computations for fractions. If one tries floating point computations, the limits in (\ref{10}) become infinite. All numbers must be entered as fractions. For example, one cannot enter $p=4.1$, it should be $p=\frac{41}{10}$ instead. ({\em Mathematica} switches to floating point computations, once it sees a number entered as a floating point.) \medskip \noindent {\bf Example} We solved \beq \lbl{14} \p (u')'+\frac{n-1}{r} \, \p (u') +e^u=0, \s u(0)=1, \; u'(0)=0 \,, \eeq with $\p (v)=v \|v\|^{p-2}$, and $p=\frac{41}{10}$. {\em Mathematica} calculated that the corresponding equation (\ref{3}) is \beq \lbl{15} \s\s\s a(p-1) u''(z)+\frac{A}{z}u'(z)+\frac{z^{p-2}}{(-u'(z))^{p-2}} e^{u(z)}=0, \s u(0)=1, \; u'(0)=0 \,, \eeq with $a(p-1)=\frac{2825761 \sqrt[10]{\frac{41}{62}}}{476 6560}$, $A=\frac{1309499 \sqrt[10]{\frac{41}{62}}}{476 6560}$. When we computed the series solution of (\ref{15}) up to $a_5$, {\em Mathematica} returned (instantaneously) \[ u(z)=1-\frac{31}{41} \left(\frac{e}{3}\right)^{10/ 31} z^2+\frac{4805 \, 3^{11/31} \, e^{20/31} }{225254}\, z^4-\frac{326241241 \left(\frac{e}{3}\right)^{30/ 31} }{43314091660}z^6 \] \[ +\frac{513127652305 79\, e^{40/31} }{154203017487865920 \, 3^{9/31}}\, z^8-\frac{13334484822273130589\, e^{50/31} }{283500239799651287332 500 \, 3^{19/31}} \, z^{10} \,. \] \medskip \noindent The same solution using floating point numbers is \[ u(z)=1-0.732424 z^2+0.0600499 z^4-0.00684643 z^6 \] \[ +0.000879009 z^8-0.000120356 z^{10} \,. \] For the original equation (\ref{14}), this implies (we have $\frac{p}{p-1}=\frac{41}{31} $, and $z^2=r^{\frac{41}{31}}$) \[ u(r)=1-0.732424 r^{\frac{41}{31}}+0.0600499 r^{\frac{82}{31}}-0.00684643 r^{\frac{123}{31}} \] \[ +0.000879009 r^{\frac{164}{31}}-0.000120356 r^{\frac{205}{31}}+ \cdots \,. \] To check the accuracy of this computation, we denoted by $q(z)$ the left hand side of (\ref{15}) (with $u(z)$ being the above polynomial of tenth degree), and asked {\em Mathematica} to expand $q(z)$ into series about $z=0$. {\em Mathematica} returned: $q(z)=O(z^{\frac{121}{10}})$. We have performed similar computations, with similar results, for other values of $u(0)=\al$. For larger values of $\al$, e.g., for $\al=2$, the computations take longer, but no more than several minutes. \medskip We have obtained similar results for all other $f(u)$ and $p$ that we tried (including the case $1<p<2$). We wish to stress that in all computations, when the solution of (\ref{3}) was computed up to the order $z^{2n}$, the defect function $q(z)$ was at least of order $O(z^{2n+2})$ near $z=0$. This heuristic result is consistent with the Theorem \ref{thm:1}, but does not seem to follow from it.
\section{Introduction} Networks are used throughout the sciences for representing the complex relations that exist between the objects of a dataset \cite{newman2003structure,kleinberg-book}. Network data arises from applications in social science \cite{kumar2010structure,kleinberg-book}, commerce and economy \cite{elliott2014financial,kleinberg-book,acemoglu2015systemic}, neuroscience \cite{sporns2011networks,sporns2012discovering,sporns2004motifs,rubinov2010complex, pessoa2014understanding}, biology \cite{barabasi2004network,huson2010phylogenetic}, and defence \cite{masys2014networks}, to name a few sources. Networks are often directed, in the sense that weights attached to edges do not satisfy any symmetry property, and this asymmetry often precludes the applicability of many standard methods for data analysis. Network analysis problems come in a wide range of flavors. One problem is in \emph{exploratory data analysis}: given a network representing a dataset of societal, economic, or scientific value, the goal is to obtain insights that are meaningful to the interested party and can help uncover interesting phenomena. Another problem is \emph{network classification}: given a ``bag" of networks representing multiple instances of different phenomena, one wants to obtain a clustering which groups the networks together according to the different phenomena they represent. Because networks are often too complex to deal with directly, one typically extracts certain invariants of networks, and infers structural properties of the networks from properties of these invariants. While there are numerous such network invariants in the existing literature, there is growing interest in adopting a particular invariant arising from \emph{persistent homology} \cite{frosini1992measuring,robins1999towards,edelsbrunner2002topological,zomorodian2005computing}, known as a \emph{persistence diagram}, to the setting of networks. Persistence diagrams are used in the context of finite metric space or point cloud data to pick out \emph{features of significance} while rejecting random noise \cite{edelsbrunner2002topological,carlsson2009topology}. Since a network on $n$ nodes is regarded, in the most general setting, as an $n\times n$ matrix of real numbers, i.e. as a generalized metric space, it is conceivable that one should be able to describe persistence diagrams for networks as well. The motivation for computing persistence diagrams of networks is at least two-fold: (1) comparing persistence diagrams has been shown to be a viable method for \emph{shape matching} applications \cite{frosini1992measuring,frosini1999size, collins2004barcode,bot-stab,carlsson2005persistence,dgh-pers}, analogous to the network classification problem described above, and (2) persistence diagrams have been successfully applied to feature detection, e.g. in detecting the structure of protein molecules (see \cite{krishnamoorthy2007topological,xia2014persistent} and \cite[\S 6]{edelsbrunner2002topological}) and solid materials (see \cite{hiraoka2016hierarchical}) and might thus be a useful tool for exploratory analysis of network datasets. We point the reader to \cite{ghrist2008barcodes, edelsbrunner2008persistent, carlsson2009topology,zigzag,weinberger2011persistent,burghelea2013topological,dey2014computing} for surveys of persistent homology and its applications, and some recent extensions. Some extant approaches that obtain persistence diagrams from networks assume that the underlying network data actually satisfies metric properties \cite{lee2011computing, khalid2014tracing}. A more general approach for obtaining persistence diagrams from networks is followed in \cite{horak2009persistent, carstens2013persistent, giusti2015clique, petri2013topological}, albeit with the restriction that the input data sets are required to be symmetric matrices. Our chief goal is to devise notions of persistent homology that are directly applicable to asymmetric networks in the most general sense, and are furthermore capable of absorbing structural information contained in the asymmetry. \subsection{Contributions and an overview of our approach} \begin{figure} \begin{tikzpicture} \node (N) at (0,0){$\Ncal$}; \node (F) at (3,0){$\mathcal{F}$}; \node (D) at (6,0){$\operatorname{Dgm}$}; \draw (N) edge[loop above, out=150, in=90, looseness=8, ->] node[left]{$\mathfrak{s}$} (N); \draw (N) edge[loop above, out=210, in=270, looseness=8, ->] node[left]{$\mathfrak{t}$} (N); \draw (N) edge[->, bend left, looseness =1.5] node[above]{$\mathfrak{R}$} (F); \draw (N) edge[->] node[above]{$\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}$} (F); \draw (N) edge[->, bend right, looseness=1.5] node[above]{$\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}$} (F); \draw (F) edge[->] node[above]{$H_k$} (D); \end{tikzpicture} \captionsetup{width=.9\linewidth} \caption{A schematic of some of the objects studied in this paper. $\Ncal$ is the collection of all weighted, directed networks (i.e. digraphs with possibly asymmetric real weights). $\mathcal{F}$ is the collection of filtered simplicial complexes. $\operatorname{Dgm}$ is the collection of persistence diagrams. We study the Rips ($\mathfrak{R}$) and Dowker ($\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}},\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}$) filtrations, each of which takes a network as input and produces a filtered simplicial complex. $\mathfrak{s}$ and $\mathfrak{t}$ denote the network transformations of symmetrization (replacing a pair of weights between two nodes by the maximum weight) and transposition (swapping the weights between pairs of nodes). $\mathfrak{R}$ is insensitive to both $\mathfrak{s}$ and $\mathfrak{t}$. But $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}\circ \mathfrak{t} = \mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}$, $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}\circ \mathfrak{t} = \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}$, and in general, $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}$ and $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}$ are \emph{not} invariant under $\mathfrak{t}$ (Theorem \ref{thm:sym-trans-summary}).} \label{fig:overview} \end{figure} In this paper, we study two types of persistence diagrams: the \emph{Rips} and \emph{Dowker} diagrams. We define both invariants in the setting of asymmetric networks with real-valued weights, without assuming any metric properties at all (not symmetry and not even that the matrix representing the networks weights vanishes on the diagonal). As a key step in defining the Dowker persistence diagram, we first define two dual constructions, each of which can be referred to as a Dowker persistence diagram, and then prove a \emph{functorial Dowker theorem} which implies that these two possible diagrams are equivalent. Following the line of work in \cite{dgh-pers}, where stability of Rips persistence diagrams arising from finite metric spaces was first established, we formulate similar stability results for the Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams of a network. Through various examples, in particular a family of \emph{cycle networks}, we espouse the idea that Dowker persistence diagrams are more appropriate than Rips persistence diagrams for studying asymmetric networks. We test our methods by solving a network classification problem on a database of simulated hippocampal networks. The first step in constructing a persistence diagram from a network is to construct a nested sequence of simplicial complexes, i.e. a simplicial filtration, which, in our work, will be the \emph{Rips} or \emph{Dowker} filtrations associated to a network. Rips and Dowker simplicial complexes and their associated filtrations are classically defined for metric spaces \cite{de2004topological, ghrist-eat}, and the generalization to networks that we use is a natural extension of the metric versions. After producing the simplicial filtrations, the standard framework of \emph{persistent homology} takes over, and we obtain the Rips or Dowker persistence diagrams. Practitioners of persistent homology might recall that there are \emph{two} Dowker complexes \cite[p. 73]{ghrist-eat}, which we describe as the \emph{source} and \emph{sink} Dowker complexes. A subtle point to note here is that each of these Dowker complexes can be used to construct a persistence diagram. A folklore result in the literature about persistent homology of metric spaces, known as \emph{Dowker duality}, is that the two persistence diagrams arising this way are equal \cite[Remark 4.8]{chazal2014persistence}. In this paper we prove a stronger result---a functorial Dowker theorem---from which the duality follows easily. Furthermore, the context of this result is strictly more general than that of metric spaces (see below for a more thorough description of the functorial version of Dowker's theorem). Providing a construction of Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams is not enough: in order for these invariants to be useful in practice, one must verify that the diagrams are \emph{stable}. In this context, stability means the following: the dissimilarity between two Rips (resp. Dowker) persistence diagrams obtained from two networks should be bounded above by a function of the dissimilarity between the two networks. To our knowledge, stability is not addressed in the existing literature on producing persistence diagrams from networks. In our work, we provide stability results for both the Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams (Propositions \ref{prop:rips-stab} and \ref{prop:dowker-stab}). One key ingredient in our proof of this result is a notion of \emph{network distance} that follows previous work in \cite{clust-net, nets-allerton, nets-icassp}. This network distance is analogous to the Gromov-Hausdorff distance between metric spaces, which has previously been used to prove stability results for hierarchical clustering \cite{carlsson2008persistent,clust-um} and Rips persistence diagrams obtained from finite metric spaces \cite[Theorem 3.1]{dgh-pers}. The Gromov-Hausdorff distance was later used in conjunction with the Algebraic Stability Theorem of \cite{chazal2009proximity} to provide alternative proofs of stability results for Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams arising from metric spaces \cite{chazal2014persistence}. Our proofs also involve this Algebraic Stability Theorem, but the novelty of our approach lies in a reformulation of the network distance (Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko}) that yields direct maps between two networks, thus passing naturally into the machinery of the Algebraic Stability Theorem (without having to define auxiliary constructions such as multivalued maps, as in \cite{chazal2014persistence}). A crucial issue that we point out in this paper is that even though we can construct both Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams out of asymmetric networks, Rips persistence diagrams appear to be \emph{blind} to asymmetry, whereas Dowker persistence diagrams do exhibit sensitivity to asymmetry. In the case of Rips complexes, this purported insensitivity to asymmetry can be immediately seen from its definition. In the case of Dowker complexes, we argue about its sensitivity to asymmetry in two different ways. Firstly, we do so by explicitly computing Dowker persistence diagrams of multiple examples of asymmetric networks. In particular, we consider a family of highly asymmetric networks, the \emph{cycle networks}, and by bulding upon results from \cite{adamaszek2015vietoris,adamaszek2016nerve} we prove a complete characterization result for the Dowker persistence diagrams---across all dimensions---of any network belonging to this family. These networks constitute directed analogues of circles and may be \emph{motifs} of interest in different applications related to network data analysis. More specifically, appearance of nontrivial 1-dimensional persistence in the Dowker persistence diagram of asymmetric network data may suggest the presence of directed cycles in the data. Some of our experimental results suggest that the Rips persistence diagrams of this family of networks are pathological, in the sense that they do not represent the signatures one would expect from the underlying dataset, which is a directed circle. Dowker persistence diagrams, on the other hand, are well-behaved in this respect in that they succeed at capturing relevant features. Secondly, we study the degree to which Dowker persistence diagrams are insensitive to changes (such as edge flips, or transposition) in the network structure. An overview of this thread of work is provided in Figure \ref{fig:overview}.\\ \paragraph{Dowker's theorem and a functorial generalization} Let $X,Y$ be two totally ordered sets, and let $R\subseteq X\times Y$ be a nonempty relation. Then one can define two simplicial complexes $E_R$ and $F_R$ as follows. A finite subset $\sigma \subseteq X$ belongs to $E_R$ whenever there exists $y \in Y$ such that $(x,y) \in R$ for each $x\in \sigma$. Similarly a finite subset $\t \subseteq Y$ belongs to $F_R$ whenever there exists $x\in X$ such that $(x,y) \in R$ for each $y\in \t$. These constructions can be traced back to \cite{dowker1952homology}, who proved the following result that we refer to as \emph{Dowker's theorem}: \begin{theorem}[Dowker's theorem; Theorem 1a, \cite{dowker1952homology}]\label{thm:dowker} Let $X,Y$ be two totally ordered sets, let $R\subseteq X\times Y$ be a nonempty relation, and let $E_R, F_R$ be as above. Then for each $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$, \[H_k(E_R) \cong H_k(F_R).\] \end{theorem} There is also a strong form of Dowker's theorem that Bj\"{o}rner proves via the classical \emph{nerve theorem} \cite[Theorems 10.6, 10.9]{bjorner-book}: \begin{theorem}[The strong form of Dowker's theorem; Theorem 10.9, \cite{bjorner-book}] \label{thm:dowker-strong} Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker}, we in fact have $\|E_R\| \simeq \|F_R\|$. \end{theorem} The Functorial Dowker Theorem is the following generalization of the strong form of Dowker's theorem: instead of a single nonempty relation $R \subseteq X\times Y$, consider any pair of nested, nonempty relations $R\subseteq R' \subseteq X\times Y$. Then there exist homotopy equivalences between the geometric realizations of the corresponding complexes that commute with the canonical inclusions, up to homotopy. We formalize this statement below. \begin{theorem}[The Functorial Dowker Theorem (FDT)] \label{thm:dowker-functorial} Let $X,Y$ be two totally ordered sets, let $R\subseteq R' \subseteq X\times Y$ be two nonempty relations, and let $E_R, F_R, E_{R'}, F_{R'}$ be their associated simplicial complexes. Then there exist homotopy equivalences $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}:\|F_R\| \r \|E_R\|$ and $\Gamma_{\|E_{R'}\|}: \|F_{R'}\| \r \|E_{R'}\|$ such that the following diagram commutes up to homotopy: \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \node (1) at (0,0){$\|F_R\|$}; \node (2) at (3,0){$\|F_{R'}\|$}; \node (3) at (0,-2){$\|E_{R}\|$}; \node (4) at (3,-2){$\|E_{R'}\|$}; \draw (1) edge[->] node[above]{$\|\iota_E\|$} (2); \draw (3) edge[->] node[above]{$\|\iota_F\|$}(4); \draw (1) edge[->] node[left]{$\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}$} node[right] {$\simeq$}(3); \draw (2) edge[->] node[right]{$\Gamma_{\|E_{R'}\|}$} node[left] {$\simeq$} (4); \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} In other words, we have $\|\iota_F\|\circ \Gamma_{\|E_R\|} \simeq \Gamma_{\|E_{R'}\|} \circ \|\iota_E\|$, where $\iota_E,\iota_F$ are the canonical inclusions. \end{theorem} From Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial} we automatically obtain Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-strong} (the strong form of Dowker's theorem) as an immediate corollary. The strong form does not appear in Dowker's original paper \cite{dowker1952homology}, but Bj\"{o}rner has given a proof using the nerve theorem \cite[Theorems 10.6, 10.9]{bjorner-book}. Moreover, Bj\"{o}rner writes in a remark following \cite[Theorem 10.9]{bjorner-book} that the nerve theorem and the strong form of Dowker's theorem are equivalent, in the sense that one implies the other. We were not able to find an elementary proof of the strong form of Dowker's theorem in the existing literature. However, such an elementary proof is provided by our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial} (given in Section \ref{sec:dowker-dual}), which we obtained by extending ideas in Dowker's original proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker}.\footnote{A thread with ideas towards the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-strong} was discussed in \cite[last accessed 4.24.2017]{Nlab-dowker}, but the proposed strategy was incomplete. We have inserted an addendum in \cite{Nlab-dowker} proposing a complete proof with a slightly different construction.} Whereas the Functorial Dowker Theorem and our elementary proof are of independent interest, it has been suggested in \cite[Remark 4.8]{chazal2014persistence} that such a functorial version of Dowker's theorem could also be proved using a functorial nerve theorem \cite[Lemma 3.4]{chazal2008towards}. Despite being an interesting possibility, we were not able to find a detailed proof of this claim in the literature. In addition, Bj\"{o}rner's remark regarding the equivalence between the nerve theorem and the strong form of Dowker's theorem suggests the following question: \begin{question} \label{q:f-nerve-f-dowker} Are the Functorial Nerve Theorem (FNT) of \cite{chazal2008towards} and the Functorial Dowker Theorem (FDT, Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}) equivalent? \end{question} This question is of fundamental importance because the Nerve Theorem is a crucial tool in the applied topology literature and its functorial generalizations are equally important in persistent homology. In general, the answer is \emph{no}, and moreover, one (of the FNT and FDT) is not stronger than the other. The FNT of \cite{chazal2008towards} is stated for paracompact spaces, which are more general than the simplicial complexes of the FDT. However, the FNT of \cite{chazal2008towards} is stated for spaces with \emph{finitely-indexed} covers, so the associated nerve complexes are necessarily finite. All the complexes involved in the statement of the FDT are allowed to be infinite, so the FDT is more general than the FNT in this sense. To clarify these connections, we formulate a simplicial Functorial Nerve Theorem (Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}) and prove it via a finite formulation of the FDT (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite}). In turn, we show that the simplicial FNT implies the finite FDT, thus proving the equivalence of these formulations (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-nerve-eq}). \begin{remark} Dowker complexes are also known to researchers who use Q-analysis to study social networks \cite{johnson2013hypernetworks, atkin1975mathematical, atkin1972cohomology}. We perceive that viewing Dowker complexes through the modern lens of persistence will enrich the classical framework of Q-analysis by incorporating additional information about the \emph{meaningfulness} of features, thus potentially opening new avenues in the social sciences. \end{remark} An announcement of part of our work has appeared in \cite{dowker-asilo}. \subsection{Implementations} Following work in \cite{curto2008cell, dabaghian2012topological}, we implement our methods in the setting of classifying simulated hippocampal networks. We simulate the activity pattern of hippocampal cells in an animal as it moves around arenas with a number of obstacles, and compile this data into a network which can be interpreted as the transition matrix for the time-reversal of a Markov process. The motivating idea is to ascertain whether, by just observing hippocampal activity and not using any higher reasoning ability, one might be able to determine the number of obstacles in the arena that the animal has just finished traversing. The results of computing Dowker persistence diagrams suggest that the hippocampal activity is indeed sufficient to accurately count the number of obstacles in each arena. Our datasets and software are available on \url{https://research.math.osu.edu/networks/Datasets.html} as part of the \texttt{PersNet} software package. \subsection{Organization of the paper} Notation used globally is defined directly below. \S\ref{sec:background} contains the necessary background on persistent homology. \S\ref{sec:nets} contains our formulations for networks, as well as some key ingredients of our stability results. \S\ref{sec:rips} contains details about the Rips persistence diagram. The first part of \S\ref{sec:dowker} contains details about the Dowker persistence diagram. \S\ref{sec:dowker-dual} contains the Functorial Dowker Theorem. The connection between the simplicial Functorial Nerve Theorem and the finite Functorial Dowker Theorem is detailed in \S\ref{sec:dowker-nerve-equiv}. In \S\ref{sec:symmetry} we show that Dowker complexes are sensitive to asymmetry. \S\ref{sec:cycle} contains a family of asymmetric networks, the \emph{cycle networks}, and a full characterization of their Dowker persistence diagrams. In \S\ref{sec:exp} we provide details on an implementation of our methods. Finally, proofs of statements not contained in the main body of the paper are relegated to Appendix \ref{app:proofs}, whereas details about the characterization results for Dowker persistence diagrams of cycle networks are given in Appendix \ref{sec:cycle-addendum}. \subsection{Notation} We will write $\mathbb{K}$ to denote a field, which we will fix and use throughout the paper. We will write $\mathbb{Z}_+$ and $\mathbb{R}_+$ to denote the nonnegative integers and reals, respectively. The extended real numbers $\mathbb{R}\cup \set{\infty, -\infty}$ will be denoted $\overline{\mathbb{R}}$. The cardinality of a set $X$ will be denoted $\operatorname{card}(X)$. The collection of nonempty subsets of a set $X$ will be denoted $\operatorname{pow}(X)$. The natural numbers $\set{1,2,3,\ldots}$ will be denoted by $\mathbb{N}$. The dimension of a vector space $V$ will be denoted $\dim(V)$. The rank of a linear transformation $f$ will be denoted $\operatorname{rank}(f)$. An isomorphism between vector spaces $V$ and $W$ will be denoted $V\cong W$. A homotopy relation for two maps $f,g:X\r Y$ between topological spaces will be denoted $f\simeq g$. Occasionally we will need to take about multisets, i.e. sets where elements can have multiplicity greater than 1. We will use square bracket notation $[\ldots]$ to denote multisets. Identity maps will be denoted by the notation $\operatorname{id}_\bullet$. Given a simplicial complex $\Sigma$, we will often write $V(\Sigma)$ to denote the vertex set of $\Sigma$. We will write $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$ to denote the boundary of a simplex $\sigma$. \section{Background on persistent homology}\label{sec:background} We assume that the reader is familiar with terms and concepts related to simplicial homology, and refer to \cite{munkres-book} for details. Here we describe our choices of notation. Whenever we have a simplicial complex over a set $X$ and a $k$-simplex $\set{x_0,x_1,\ldots, x_k}$, $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, we will assume that the simplex is \emph{oriented} by the ordering $x_0< x_1 < \ldots < x_k$. We will write $[x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_k]$ to denote the equivalence class of the even permutations of this chosen ordering, and $-[x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_k]$ to denote the equivalence class of the odd permutations of this ordering. Given a simplicial complex $\Sigma$, we will denote its geometric realization by $\|\Sigma\|$. The \emph{weak topology} on $\|\Sigma\|$ is defined by requiring that a subset $A \subseteq \|\Sigma\|$ is closed if and only if $A \cap \|\sigma\|$ is closed in $\|\sigma\|$ for each $\sigma \in \Sigma$. A simplicial map $f: \Sigma \r \Xi$ between two simplicial complexes induces a map $\|f\|: \|\Sigma\| \r \|\Xi\|$ between the geometric realizations, defined as $\|f\|(\sum_{v\in \Sigma}a_v v):= \sum_{v\in \Sigma}a_v f(v)$. These induced maps satisfy the usual composition identity: given simpicial maps $f:\Sigma \r \Xi$ and $g:\Xi \r \Upsilon$, we have $\|g\circ f\| = \|g\| \circ \|f\|$. To see this, observe the following: \begin{equation}\label{eq:htpy-func} \|g\circ f\|(\sum_{v\in \Sigma}a_v v) = \sum_{v\in \Sigma} a_vg(f(v)) = \|g\|(\sum_{v\in \Sigma}a_v f(v)) = \|g\|\circ\|f\|(\sum_{v\in \Sigma}a_v v). \end{equation} A \emph{filtration} of a simplicial complex $\Sigma$ (also called a \emph{filtered simplicial complex}) is defined to be a nested sequence $\{\Sigma^{\d}\subseteq \Sigma^{\d'}\}_{\d\leq \d' \in \mathbb{R}}$ of simplicial complexes satisfying the condition that there exist $\d_I,\, \d_F \in \mathbb{R}$ such that $\Sigma^{\d} = \emptyset $ for all $\d \leq \d_I$, and $\Sigma^{\d} = \Sigma \text{ for all }\d \geq \d_F$. Fix a field $\mathbb{K}$. Given a finite simplicial complex $\Sigma$ and a dimension $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$, we will denote a \emph{$k$-chain} in $\Sigma$ as $\sum_ia_i\sigma_i$, where each $a_i \in \mathbb{K}$ and $\sigma_i \in \Sigma$. We write $C_k(\Sigma)$ or just $C_k$ to denote the $\mathbb{K}$-vector space of all $k$-chains. We will write $\partial_k$ to denote the associated \emph{boundary map} $\partial_k : C_k \r C_{k-1}$: \[\partial_k[x_0,\ldots,x_k]:=\sum_i(-1)^i[x_0,\ldots,\hat{x}_i,\ldots, x_k], \text{ where $\hat{x}_i$ denotes omission of $x_i$ from the sequence.} \] We will write $\mathcal{C}=(C_k,\partial_k)_{k\in \mathbb{Z}_+}$ to denote a \emph{chain complex}, i.e. a sequence of vector spaces with boundary maps such that $\partial_{k-1}\circ \partial_k =0$. Given a chain complex $\mathcal{C}$ and any $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, the \emph{$k$-th homology of the chain complex $\mathcal{C}$} is denoted $H_k(\mathcal{C}) :=\ker(\partial_k)/\operatorname{im}(\partial_{k+1})$. The \emph{$k$-th Betti number} of $\mathcal{C}$ is denoted $\b_k(\mathcal{C})$. Given a simplicial map $f$ between simplicial complexes, we write $f_$ to denote the induced chain map between the corresponding chain complexes \cite[\S 1.12]{munkres-book}, and $(f_k)_{\#}$ to denote the linear map on $k$th homology vector spaces induced for each $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$. The operations of passing from simplicial complexes and simplicial maps to chain complexes and induced chain maps, and then to homology vector spaces with induced linear maps, will be referred to as \emph{passing to homology}. Recall the following useful fact, often referred to as \emph{functoriality of homology} \cite[Theorem 12.2]{munkres-book}: given a composition $g\circ f$ of simplicial maps, we have \begin{equation} (g_k\circ f_k)_\# = (g_k)_\#\circ (f_k)_\# \qquad\text{ for each } k\in \mathbb{Z}_+. \label{eq:functoriality} \end{equation} A \emph{persistence vector space} is defined to be a family of vector spaces $\{U^\d\xrightarrow{\mu_{\d,\d'}} U^{\d'}\}_{\d\leq \d'\in \mathbb{R}}$ such that: (1) $\mu_{\d,\d}$ is the identity for each $\d \in \mathbb{R}$, and (2) $\mu_{\d,\d''} = \mu_{\d',\d''}\circ \mu_{\d,\d'}$ for each $\d \leq \d' \leq \d'' \in \mathbb{R}$. The persistence vector spaces that we consider in this work also satisfy the following conditions: (1) $\dim(U^\d) <\infty$ at each $\d\in \mathbb{R}$, (2) there exist $\d_I,\, \d_F \in \mathbb{R}$ such that all maps $\mu_{\d,\d'}$ are isomorphisms for $\d,\d' \geq \d_F$ and for $\d,\d' \leq \d_I$, and (3) there are only finitely many values of $\d \in \mathbb{R}$ such that $U^{\d-\varepsilon} \not\cong U^{\d}$ for each $\varepsilon>0$. Here $\d$ is referred to as a \emph{resolution} parameter, and such a persistence vector space is described as being \emph{$\mathbb{R}$-indexed}. The collection of all such persistence vector spaces is denoted ${\operatorname{\mathbf{PVec}}}(\mathbb{R})$. Observe that by fixing $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$ and passing to the $k$th homology vector space at each step $\Sigma^{\d}$ of a filtered simplicial complex $(\Sigma^{\d})_{\d \in \mathbb{R}}$, the functoriality of homology gives us the $k$th persistence vector space associated to $(\Sigma^{\d})_{\d \in \mathbb{R}}$, denoted \[\H_k(\Sigma) := \{H_k(\mathcal{C}^{\d})\xrightarrow{(\iota_{\d,\d'})_\#} H_k(\mathcal{C}^{\d'})\}_{\d \leq \d' \in \mathbb{R}}.\] The elements of ${\operatorname{\mathbf{PVec}}}(\mathbb{R})$ contain only a finite number of vector spaces, up to isomorphism. By the classification results in \cite[\S5.2]{carlsson2005persistence}, it is possible to associate a full invariant, called a \emph{persistence barcode} or \emph{persistence diagram}, to each element of ${\operatorname{\mathbf{PVec}}}(\mathbb{R})$. This barcode is a multiset of \emph{persistence intervals}, and is represented as a set of lines over a single axis. The barcode of a persistence vector space $\mathcal{V}$ is denoted ${\operatorname{\mathbf{Pers}}}(\mathcal{V})$. The intervals in ${\operatorname{\mathbf{Pers}}}(\mathcal{V})$ can be represented as the \emph{persistence diagram of $\mathcal{V}$}, which is as a multiset of points lying on or above the diagonal in $\overline{\mathbb{R}}^2$, counted with multiplicity. More specifically, \[\operatorname{Dgm}(\mathcal{V}):=\big[(\d_i,\d_{j+1}) \in \overline{\mathbb{R}}^2 : [\d_i,\d_{j+1}) \in {\operatorname{\mathbf{Pers}}}(\mathcal{V}) \big],\] where the multiplicity of $(\d_i,\d_{j+1})\in \overline{\mathbb{R}}^2$ is given by the multiplicity of $[\d_i,\d_{j+1}) \in {\operatorname{\mathbf{Pers}}}(\mathcal{V})$. Persistence diagrams can be compared using the \emph{bottleneck distance}, which we denote by $d_{\operatorname{B}}$. Details about this distance, as well as the other material related to persistent homology, can be found in \cite{chazal2012structure}. Numerous other formulations of the material presented above can be found in \cite{edelsbrunner2002topological, zomorodian2005computing, zigzag, edelsbrunner2010computational, edelsbrunner2014persistent, bauer-isom, ph-self}. \begin{remark}\label{rem:trivial-diag} Whenever we describe a persistence diagram as being \emph{trivial}, we mean that either it is empty, or it does not have any off-diagonal points. \end{remark} \subsection{Interleaving distance and stability of persistence vector spaces.} \label{sec:background-int} In what follows, we will consider $\mathbb{R}$-indexed persistence vector spaces ${\operatorname{\mathbf{PVec}}}(\mathbb{R})$. Given $\varepsilon \geq 0$, two $\mathbb{R}$-indexed persistence vector spaces $\mathcal{V}=\{V^\d\xrightarrow{\nu_{\d,\d'}} V^{\d'}\}_{\d\leq \d'}$ and $\mathcal{U}=\{U^\d\xrightarrow{\mu_{\d,\d'}} U^{\d'}\}_{\d\leq \d'}$ are said to be \emph{$\varepsilon$-interleaved} \cite{chazal2009proximity,bauer-isom} if there exist two families of linear maps \begin{align} \{\varphi_{\d,\d+\varepsilon}&:V^\d \r V^{\d + \varepsilon}\}_{\d \in \mathbb{R}},\\ \{\psi_{\d,\d+\varepsilon}&:U^\d \r U^{\d + \varepsilon}\}_{\d \in \mathbb{R}} \end{align} such that the following diagrams commute for all $\d' \geq \d\in \mathbb{R}$: \[ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large] V^\d \arrow{r}{\nu_{\d,\d'}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & V^{\d'}\arrow{dr}{\varphi_{\d'}} & {} & {} & V^{\d+\varepsilon} \arrow{r}{\nu_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}} & V^{\d'+\varepsilon} \\ {} & U^{\d+\varepsilon} \arrow{r}{\mu_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}} & U^{\d'+\varepsilon} & U^{\d} \arrow{ur}{\psi_\d} \arrow{r}{\mu_{\d,\d'}} & U^{\d'} \arrow[swap]{ur}{\psi_{\d'}} & {} \end{tikzcd} \] \[ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large] V^\d \arrow{rr}{\nu_{\d,\d+2\varepsilon}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & {} & V^{\d+2\varepsilon} & {}& V^{\d+\varepsilon} \arrow{dr}{\psi_{\d+\varepsilon}}\\ {} & U^{\d+\varepsilon} \arrow[swap]{ur}{\varphi_{\d+\varepsilon}} & {}& U^{\d} \arrow{ur}{\psi_{\d}} \arrow{rr}{\mu_{\d,\d+2\varepsilon}} & {} & U^{\d+2\eta} \end{tikzcd} \] The purpose of introducing $\varepsilon$-interleavings is to define a pseudometric on the collection of persistence vector spaces. The \emph{interleaving distance} between two $\mathbb{R}$-indexed persistence vector spaces $\mathcal{V},\mathcal{U}$ is given by: \[d_{\operatorname{I}}(\mathcal{U},\mathcal{V}) := \inf \{\varepsilon \geq 0 : \text{$\mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{V}$ are $\varepsilon$-interleaved}\}.\] One can verify that this definition induces a pseudometric on the collection of persistence vector spaces \cite{chazal2009proximity, bauer-isom}. The interleaving distance can then be related to the bottleneck distance as follows: \begin{theorem}[Algebraic Stability Theorem, \cite{chazal2009proximity}] Let $\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{V}$ be two $\mathbb{R}$-indexed persistence vector spaces. Then, \[d_{\operatorname{B}}(\operatorname{Dgm}(\mathcal{U}),\operatorname{Dgm}(\mathcal{V}))\leq d_{\operatorname{I}}(\mathcal{U},\mathcal{V}).\] \end{theorem} Stability results are at the core of persistent homology, beginning with the classical bottleneck stability result in \cite{bot-stab}. One of our key contributions is to use the Algebraic Stability Theorem stated above, along with Lemma \S\ref{sec:nets} stated below, to prove stability results for methods of computing persistent homology of a network. Before stating the following lemma, recall that two simplicial maps $f,g: \Sigma \r \Xi$ are \emph{contiguous} if for any simplex $\sigma \in \Sigma$, $f(\sigma) \cup g(\sigma)$ is a simplex of $\Xi$. Contiguous maps satisfy the following useful properties: \begin{proposition}[Properties of contiguous maps] \label{prop:contigo-props} Let $f,g: \Sigma \r \Xi$ be two contiguous simplicial maps. Then, \begin{enumerate} \item $\|f\|,\|g\|:\|\Sigma\| \r \|\Xi\|$ are homotopic \cite[\S 3.5]{spanier-book}, and \item The chain maps induced by $f$ and $g$ are chain homotopic, and as a result, the induced maps $f_\#$ and $g_\#$ for homology are equal \cite[Theorem 12.5]{munkres-book}. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{lemma}[Stability Lemma] \label{lem:stab} Let $\mathfrak{F}, \mathfrak{G}$ be two filtered simplicial complexes written as \[\{\mathfrak{F}^\d \xrightarrow{s_{\d,\d'}} \mathfrak{F}^{\d'}\}_{\d'\geq \d\in \mathbb{R}} \text{ and } \{\mathfrak{G}^\d \xrightarrow{t_{\d,\d'}} \mathfrak{G}^{\d'}\}_{\d'\geq \d\in \mathbb{R}},\] where $s_{\d,\d'}$ and $t_{\d,\d'}$ denote the natural inclusion maps. Suppose $\eta\geq 0$ is such that there exist families of simplicial maps $\set{\varphi_\d:\mathfrak{F}^\d \r \mathfrak{G}^{\d+\eta}}_{\d\in \mathbb{R}}$ and $\set{\psi_\d:\mathfrak{G}^\d \r \mathfrak{F}^{\d+\eta}}_{\d\in \mathbb{R}}$ such that the following are satisfied for any $\d' \geq \d$: \begin{enumerate} \item $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}\circ \varphi_\d$ and $\varphi_{\d'}\circ s_{\d,\d'}$ are contiguous \item $s_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}\circ \psi_\d$ and $\psi_{\d'}\circ t_{\d,\d'}$ are contiguous \item $\psi_{\d+\eta}\circ \varphi_\d$ and $s_{\d,\d+2\eta}$ are contiguous \item $\varphi_{\d+\eta}\circ \psi_\d$ and $t_{\d,\d+2\eta}$ are contiguous. \end{enumerate} All the diagrams are as below: \[ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large] \mathfrak{F}^\d \arrow{r}{s_{\d,\d'}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & \mathfrak{F}^{\d'}\arrow{dr}{\varphi_{\d'}} & {} & {} & \mathfrak{F}^{\d+\eta} \arrow{r}{s_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}} & \mathfrak{F}^{\d'+\eta} \\ {} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d+\eta} \arrow{r}{t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d'+\eta} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d} \arrow{ur}{\psi_\d} \arrow{r}{t_{\d,\d'}} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d'} \arrow[swap]{ur}{\psi_{\d'}} & {} \end{tikzcd} \] \[ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large] \mathfrak{F}^\d \arrow{rr}{s_{\d,\d+2\eta}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & {} & \mathfrak{F}^{\d+2\eta} & {} & {}& \mathfrak{F}^{\d+\eta} \arrow{dr}{\varphi_{\d+\eta}}\\ {} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d+\eta} \arrow[swap]{ur}{\psi_{\d+\eta}} & {} & {}& \mathfrak{G}^{\d} \arrow{ur}{\psi_\d} \arrow{rr}{t_{\d,\d+2\eta}} & {} & \mathfrak{G}^{\d+2\eta} \end{tikzcd} \] For each $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, let $\H_k(\mathfrak{F}), \H_k(\mathfrak{G})$ denote the $k$-dimensional persistence vector spaces associated to $\mathfrak{F}$ and $\mathfrak{G}$. Then for each $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, \[d_{\operatorname{B}}(\operatorname{Dgm}_k(\H_k(\mathfrak{F})),\operatorname{Dgm}_k(\H_k(\mathfrak{G}))) \leq d_{\operatorname{I}}(\H_k(\mathfrak{F}),\H_k(\mathfrak{G})) \leq \eta.\] \end{lemma} \section{Background on networks and our network distance} \label{sec:nets} A \emph{network} is a pair $(X,\omega_X)$ where $X$ is a finite set and $\omega_X: X\times X \r \mathbb{R}$ is a \emph{weight function}. Note that $\omega_X$ need not satisfy the triangle inequality, any symmetry condition, or even the requirement that $\omega_X(x,x) = 0$ for all $x\in X$. The weights are even allowed to be negative. The collection of all such networks is denoted $\Ncal$. When comparing networks, one needs a way to correlate points in one network with points in the other. To see how this can be done, let $(X,\omega_X), (Y,\omega_Y) \in \Ncal$. Let $R$ be any nonempty relation between $X$ and $Y$, i.e. a nonempty subset of $X \times Y$. The \emph{distortion} of the relation $R$ is given by: \[\operatorname{dis}(R):=\max_{(x,y),(x',y')\in R}\|\omega_X(x,x')-\omega_Y(y,y')\|.\] A \emph{correspondence between $X$ and $Y$} is a relation $R$ between $X$ and $Y$ such that $\pi_X(R)=X$ and $\pi_Y(R)=Y$, where $\pi_X:X\times Y \r X$ and $\pi_Y:X\times Y \r Y$ denote the natural projections. The collection of all correspondences between $X$ and $Y$ will be denoted $\Rsc(X,Y)$. Following previous work in \cite{clust-net, nets-allerton, nets-icassp} the \emph{network distance} $\dn:\Ncal \times \Ncal \r \mathbb{R}_+$ is then defined as: \[\dn(X,Y):=\frac{1}{2}\min_{R\in\Rsc}\operatorname{dis}(R).\] It can be verified that $\dn$ as defined above is a pseudometric, and that the networks at 0-distance can be completely characterized \cite{nets-allerton}. Next we wish to prove the reformulation in Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko}. First we define the distortion of a map between two networks. Given any $(X,\omega_X),(Y,\omega_Y)\in \Ncal$ and a map $\varphi:(X,\omega_X) \r (Y,\omega_Y)$, the \emph{distortion} of $\varphi$ is defined as: \[\operatorname{dis}(\varphi):= \max_{x,x'\in X}\|\omega_X(x,x')-\omega_Y(\varphi(x),\varphi(x'))\|.\] Next, given maps $\varphi:(X,\omega_X)\r (Y,\omega_Y)$ and $\psi:(Y,\omega_Y)\r (X,\omega_X)$, we define two \emph{co-distortion} terms: \begin{align}C_{X,Y}(\varphi,\psi) &:= \max_{(x,y)\in X\times Y}\|\omega_X(x,\psi(y)) - \omega_Y(\varphi(x),y)\|,\\ C_{Y,X}(\psi,\varphi) &:= \max_{(y,x)\in Y\times X}\|\omega_Y(y,\varphi(x)) - \omega_X(\psi(y),x)\|. \end{align} \begin{proposition} \label{prop:dn-ko} Let $(X,\omega_X), (Y,\omega_Y)\in \Ncal$. Then, \[ \dn(X,Y) = \tfrac{1}{2}\min\{\max(\operatorname{dis}(\varphi),\operatorname{dis}(\psi),C_{X,Y}(\varphi,\psi), C_{Y,X}(\psi,\varphi)) : \varphi:X \r Y, \psi:Y \r X \text{ any maps}\}.\] \end{proposition} \begin{remark} Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko} is analogous to a result of Kalton and Ostrovskii \cite[Theorem 2.1]{kalton1997distances} where---instead of $\dn$---one has the Gromov-Hausdorff distance between metric spaces. We remark that when restricted to the special case of networks that are also metric spaces, the network distance $\dn$ agrees with the Gromov-Hausdorff distance. Details on the Gromov-Hausdorff distance can be found in \cite{burago}. An important remark is that in the Kalton-Ostrovskii formulation, there is only one co-distortion term. When Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko} is applied to metric spaces, the two co-distortion terms become equal by symmetry, and thus the Kalton-Ostrovskii formulation is recovered. But \emph{a priori}, the lack of symmetry in the network setting requires us to consider both terms. \end{remark} \begin{remark} In the following sections, we propose methods for computing persistent homology of networks, and prove that they are stable via Lemma \ref{lem:stab}. Note that similar results, valid in the setting of metric spaces, have appeared in \cite{dgh-pers,chazal2014persistence}. Whereas the proofs in \cite{chazal2014persistence} invoke an auxiliary construction of multivalued maps arising from correspondences, our proofs simply use the maps $\varphi, \psi$ arising directly from the reformulation of $\dn$ (Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko}), thus streamlining the treatment. \end{remark} When studying the effect of asymmetry on persistent homology, it will be useful to consider the network transformations that we define next. \begin{definition}[Symmetrization and Transposition] \label{defn:sym-trans} Define the \emph{max-symmetrization} map $\mathfrak{s}:\Ncal \r \Ncal$ by $(X,\omega_X)\mapsto (X,\widehat{\omega_X})$, where for any network $(X,\omega_X)$, we define $\widehat{\omega_X}:X\times X \r \mathbb{R}$ as follows: \[\widehat{\omega_X}(x,x'):= \max(\omega_X(x,x'),\omega_X(x',x)), \text{ for } x,x'\in X.\] Also define the \emph{transposition} map $\mathfrak{t}:\Ncal \r \Ncal$ by $(X,\omega_X) \mapsto (X,\omega_X^\top)$, where for any $(X,\omega_X) \in \Ncal$, we define $\omega_X^\top(x,x'):= \omega_X(x',x)$ for $x,x'\in X$. For convenience, we denote $X^\top:=\mathfrak{t}(X)$ for any network $X$. \end{definition} We are now ready to formulate our two methods for computing persistent homology of networks. The Rips filtration is the ``workhorse'' of persistent homology of metric spaces so it is natural to consider its generalization to general asymmetric networks. \section{The Rips filtration of a network} \label{sec:rips} Recall that for a metric space $(X,d_X)$, the \emph{Rips complex} is defined for each $\d \geq 0$ as follows: \[\mathfrak{R}^\d_X := \set{\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(X): \operatorname{diam}(\sigma) \leq \d}, \text{ where } \operatorname{diam}(\sigma) := \max_{x,x'\in \sigma}d_X(x,x').\] Following this definition, we can define the Rips complex for a network $(X,\omega_X)$ as follows: \[\mathfrak{R}^\d_X:=\{\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(X) : \max_{x,x'\in \sigma}\omega_X(x,x') \leq \d\}.\] To any network $(X,\omega_X)$, we may associate the \emph{Rips filtration} $\{\mathfrak{R}^\d_X\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{R}^{\d'}_X\}_{\d\leq \d'}$. We denote the $k$-dimensional persistence vector space associated to this filtration by $\H_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X)$, and the corresponding persistence diagram by $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X)$. The Rips filtration is stable to small perturbations of the input data:9 \begin{proposition} \label{prop:rips-stab} Let $(X,\omega_X), (Y,\omega_Y) \in \Ncal$. Then $d_{\operatorname{B}}(\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X),\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(Y)) \leq 2\dn(X,Y).$ \end{proposition} We omit the proof because it is similar to that of Proposition \ref{prop:dowker-stab}, which we will prove in detail. \begin{remark} \label{rem:rips-benefits} The preceding proposition serves a dual purpose: (1) it shows that the Rips persistence diagram is robust to noise in input data, and (2) it shows that instead of computing the network distance between two networks, one can compute the bottleneck distance between their Rips persistence diagrams as a suitable proxy. The advantage to computing bottleneck distance is that it can be done in polynomial time (see \cite{efrat2001geometry}), whereas computing $\dn$ is NP-hard in general. This follows from the fact that the problem of computing $\dn$ includes the problem of computing the Gromov-Hausdorff distance between finite metric spaces, which is an NP-hard problem \cite{schmiedl}. We remark that the idea of computing Rips persistence diagrams to compare finite metric spaces first appeared in \cite{dgh-pers}, and moreover, that Proposition \ref{prop:rips-stab} is an extension of Theorem 3.1 in \cite{dgh-pers}. \end{remark} The Rips filtration in the setting of symmetric networks has been used in \cite{horak2009persistent, carstens2013persistent, giusti2015clique, petri2013topological}, albeit without addressing stability results. To our knowledge, Proposition \ref{prop:rips-stab} is the first quantitative result justifying the constructions in these prior works. \begin{remark}[Rips is insensitive to asymmetry] \label{rem:rips-symm} A critical weakness of the Rips complex construction is that it is not sensitive to asymmetry. To see this, recall the symmetrization map defined in Definition \ref{defn:sym-trans}, and let $(X,\omega_X) \in \Ncal$. Now for any $\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(X)$, we have $\max_{x,x' \in \sigma}\omega_X(x,x') = \max_{x,x'\in \sigma}\widehat{\omega_X}(x,x').$ It follows that for each $\d \geq 0$, the Rips complexes of $(X,\omega_X)$ and $(X,\widehat{\omega_X})=\mathfrak{s}(X,\omega_X)$ are equal, i.e. $\mathfrak{R} = \mathfrak{R} \circ \mathfrak{s}$. Thus the Rips persistence diagrams of the original and max-symmetrized networks are equal. \end{remark} \section{The Dowker filtration of a network}\label{sec:dowker} Given $(X,\omega_X)\in \mathcal{N}$, and for any $\d \in \mathbb{R}$, consider the following relation on $X$: \begin{equation} R_{\d,X}:=\set{(x,x') : \omega_X(x,x') \leq \d}. \label{eq:relation} \end{equation} Then $R_{\d,X} \subseteq X \times X$, and $R_{\d_F,X} = X \times X$ for some sufficiently large $\d_F$. Furthermore, for any $\d' \geq \d$, we have $R_{\d,X} \subseteq R_{\d',X}$. Using $R_{\d,X}$, we build a simplicial complex $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ as follows: \begin{equation}\label{eq:d-sink} \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}:=\set{\sigma=[x_0,\ldots, x_n] : \text{ there exists } x'\in X \text{ such that } (x_i,x')\in R_{\d,X} \text{ for each } x_i}. \end{equation} If $\sigma \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$, it is clear that any face of $\sigma$ also belongs to $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$. We call $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ the \emph{Dowker $\d$-sink simplicial complex} associated to $X$, and refer to $x'$ as a \emph{$\d$-sink} for $\sigma$ (where $\sigma$ and $x'$ should be clear from context). Since $R_{\d,X}$ is an increasing sequence of sets, it follows that $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ is an increasing sequence of simplicial complexes. In particular, for $\d'\geq \d$, there is a natural inclusion map $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X} \hookrightarrow \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d',X}$. We write $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_X$ to denote the filtration $\{\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X} \hookrightarrow \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d',X}\}_{ \d \leq \d'}$ associated to $X$. We call this the \emph{Dowker sink filtration on $X$}. We will denote the $k$-dimensional persistence diagram arising from this filtration by $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{si}}(X)$. \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[every node/.style={font=\footnotesize}] \tikzset{>=latex} \begin{scope}[draw,purple] \node[circle,draw](2) at (2,0){$a$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (3,2){$b$}; \node[circle,draw](4) at (4,0){$c$}; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[draw,xshift=6cm,yshift=1cm] \node[](5) at (5,1){ $ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}= \begin{cases} \emptyset &: \d<-1 \\ \{[a]\} &:-1\leq \d<0\\ \{[a],[b],[c]\} &: 0\leq \d < 1\\ \{[a],[b],[c],[ab],[bc],[ac],[abc]\} &: \d \geq 1 \end{cases} $ }; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[draw,xshift=6cm,yshift=-1.2cm] \node[](50) at (5,1){ $ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}= \begin{cases} \emptyset &: \d<-1 \\ \{[a]\} &:-1\leq \d<0\\ \{[a],[b],[c]\} &: 0\leq \d < 1\\ \{[a],[b],[c],[ab],[ac]\} &: 1\leq \d < 2\\ \{[a],[b],[c],[ab],[bc],[ac],[abc]\} &: \d \geq 2 \end{cases} $ }; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[xshift=1cm,yshift=1cm] \node (0) at (4,0){}; \node (1) at (6,0){}; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[draw=NavyBlue] \path[->] (2) edge [loop left] node[left]{$-1$}(2); \path[->] (3) edge [loop right] node[right]{$0$}(3); \path[->] (4) edge [loop right] node[right]{$0$}(4); \path[->] (2) edge [bend left] node[above]{$1$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge [] node[below]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge [] node[above]{$2$} (4); \path[->] (3) edge [] node[below]{$2$} (4); \path[->] (4) edge [bend left] node[below]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (4) edge [bend right] node[below]{$2$} (3); \end{scope} \end{tikzpicture} \caption{Computing the Dowker sink and source complexes of a network $(X,\omega_X)$. Observe that the sink and source complexes are different in the range $1\leq \d < 2$.} \label{fig:dowker-three-node} \end{center} \end{figure} Note that we can define a dual construction as follows: \begin{equation}\label{eq:d-src} \mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}:=\set{\sigma=[x_0,\ldots, x_n] : \text{ there exists } x'\in X \text{ such that } (x',x_i)\in R_{\d,X} \text{ for each } x_i}. \end{equation} We call $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}$ the \emph{Dowker $\d$-source simplicial complex} associated to $X$. The filtration $\{\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X} \hookrightarrow \mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d',X}\}_{ \d \leq \d'}$ associated to $X$ is called the \emph{Dowker source filtration}, denoted $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_X$. We denote the $k$-dimensional persistence diagram arising from this filtration by $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{so}}(X)$. Notice that any construction using $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ can also be repeated using $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}$, so we focus on the case of the sink complexes and restate results in terms of source complexes where necessary. In particular, we will prove in \S\ref{sec:dowker-dual} that \[\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{si}}(X) = \operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{so}}(X) \text{ for any } k\in \mathbb{Z}_+,\] so it makes sense to talk about ``the" Dowker diagram associated to $X$. The sink and source filtrations are not equal in general; this is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:dowker-three-node}. As in the case of the Rips filtration, both the Dowker sink and source filtrations are stable. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:dowker-stab} Let $(X,\omega_X), (Y,\omega_Y) \in \Ncal$. Then $d_{\operatorname{B}}(\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\bullet}{(X)},\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\bullet}(Y)) \leq 2\dn(X,Y).$ Here $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\bullet}$ refers to either of $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\operatorname{si}}$ and $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\operatorname{so}}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:dowker-stab}] Both cases are similar, so we just prove the result for $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\operatorname{si}}$. Let $\eta=2\dn(X,Y)$. Then by Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko}, there exist maps $\varphi:X \r Y, \psi: Y \r X$ such that \[\max(\operatorname{dis}(\varphi),\operatorname{dis}(\psi), C_{X,Y}(\varphi,\psi),C_{Y,X}(\psi,\varphi))\leq \eta.\] First we check that $\varphi,\psi$ induce simplicial maps $\varphi_\d:\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X} \r \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+\eta,Y}$ and $\psi_\d:\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,Y} \r \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+\eta,Y}$ for each $\d\in \mathbb{R}$. Let $\d' \geq \d \in \mathbb{R}$. Let $\sigma=[x_0,\ldots, x_n] \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$. Then there exists $x' \in X$ such that $\omega_X(x_i,x') \leq \d$ for each $0\leq i \leq n$. Fix such an $x'$. Since $\operatorname{dis}(\varphi) \leq \eta$, we have the following for each $i$: \[\vert \omega_X(x_i,x') - \omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),\varphi(x'))\vert \leq \eta.\] So $\omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),\varphi(x')) \leq \omega_X(x_i,x') + \eta \leq \d + \eta$ for each $0\leq i\leq n$. Thus $\varphi_{\d}(\sigma):=\set{\varphi(x_0),\ldots, \varphi(x_n)}$ is a simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d + \eta,Y}$. Thus the map on simplices $\varphi_\d$ induced by $\varphi$ is simplicial for each $\d\in \mathbb{R}$. Similarly we can check that the map $\psi_\d$ on simplices induced by $\psi$ is simplicial. Now to prove the result, it will suffice to check the contiguity conditions in the statement of Lemma \ref{lem:stab}. Consider the following diagram: \[ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large] \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X} \arrow{r}{s_{\d,\d'}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d',X}\arrow{dr}{\varphi_{\d'}} & \\ &\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+\eta,Y} \arrow{r}{t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}} & \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d'+\eta,Y} \end{tikzcd} \] Here $s_{\d,\d'}$ and $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}$ are the inclusion maps. We claim that $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta} \circ \varphi_\d$ and $\varphi_{\d'} \circ s_{\d,\d'}$ are contiguous simplicial maps. To see this, let $\sigma \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$. Since $s_{\d,\d'}$ is just the inclusion, it follows that $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}(\varphi_\d(\sigma)) \cup \varphi_{\d'}(s_{\d,\d'}(\sigma))=\varphi_\d(\sigma),$ which is a simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+\eta,Y}$ because $\varphi_\d$ is simplicial, and hence a simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d'+\eta,Y}$ because the inclusion $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}$ is simplicial. Thus $t_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta} \circ \varphi_\d$ and $\varphi_{\d'} \circ s_{\d,\d'}$ are contiguous, and their induced linear maps for homology are equal. By a similar argument, one can show that $s_{\d+\eta,\d'+\eta}\circ \psi_\d$ and $\psi_{\d'}\circ t_{\d,\d'}$ are contiguous simplicial maps as well. Next we check that the maps $\psi_{\d+\eta}\circ \varphi_\d$ and $s_{\d,\d+2\eta}$ in the figure below are contiguous. \[ \begin{tikzcd} \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X} \arrow{rr}{s_{\d,\d+2\eta}} \arrow[swap]{dr}{\varphi_\d} & {} & \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+2\eta,X}\\ {} & \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+\eta,Y} \arrow[swap]{ur}{\psi_{\d+\eta}} & {} \end{tikzcd} \] Let $x_i\in \sigma$. Note that for our fixed $\sigma = [x_0,\ldots, x_n]\in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ and $x'$, we have: \begin{align} \|\omega_X(x_i,x')-\omega_X(\psi(\varphi(x_i)),\psi(\varphi(x')))\|&\leq \|\omega_X(x_i,x') - \omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),\varphi(x'))\|\\ &+ \|\omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),\varphi(x')) - \omega_X(\psi(\varphi(x_i)),\psi(\varphi(x')))\| \\ &\leq 2\eta.\\ \text{Thus we obtain }\hfill \omega_X(\psi(\varphi(x_i)),\psi(\varphi(x')))&\leq \omega_X(x_i,x')+ 2\eta \leq \d+2\eta. \end{align} Since this holds for any $x_i \in \sigma$, it follows that $\psi_{\d+\eta}(\varphi_\d(\sigma)) \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+2\eta,X}$. We further claim that \[\t:=\sigma \cup \psi_{\d+\eta}(\varphi_\d(\sigma)) = \set{x_0,x_1,\ldots, x_n, \psi(\varphi(x_0)),\ldots, \psi(\varphi(x_n))}\] is a simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+2\eta,X}$. Let $0\leq i\leq n$. It suffices to show that $\omega_X(x_i,\psi(\varphi(x')) \leq \d + 2\eta$. Notice that from the reformulation of $\dn$ (Proposition \ref{prop:dn-ko}), we have \[C_{X,Y}(\varphi,\psi) = \max_{(x,y)\in X\times Y}\|\omega_X(x,\psi(y)) - \omega_Y(\varphi(x),y)\| \leq \eta .\] Let $y = \varphi(x')$. Then $\|\omega_X(x_i,\psi(y)) - \omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),y)\| \leq \eta$. In particular, \[\omega_X(x_i,\psi(\varphi(x'))) \leq \omega_Y(\varphi(x_i),\varphi(x')) + \eta \leq \omega_X(x_i,x') + 2\eta \leq \d+2\eta.\] Since $0\leq i\leq n$ were arbitrary, it follows that $\t \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d+2\eta,X}$. Thus $\psi_{\d+\eta}\circ \varphi_\d$ and $s_{\d,\d+2\eta}$ are contiguous. Similarly, one can use the $\operatorname{dis}(\psi)$ and $C_{Y,X}(\psi,\varphi)$ terms to show that $t_{\d,\d+2\eta}$ and $\varphi_{\d+\eta}\circ \psi_\d$ are contiguous. The result now follows by an application of Lemma \ref{lem:stab}. \end{proof} \begin{remark} \label{rem:dowker-benefits} The preceding proposition shows that the Dowker persistence diagram is robust to noise in input data, and that the bottleneck distance between Dowker persistence diagrams arising from two networks can be used as a proxy for computing the actual network distance. Note the analogy with Remark \ref{rem:rips-benefits}. \end{remark} Both the Dowker and Rips filtrations are valid methods for computing persistent homology of networks, by virtue of their stability results (Propositions \ref{prop:rips-stab} and \ref{prop:dowker-stab}). However, we present the Dowker filtration as an appropriate method for capturing directionality information in directed networks. In \S\ref{sec:symmetry} we discuss this particular feature of the Dowker filtration in full detail. \begin{remark}[Symmetric networks] In the setting of symmetric networks, the Dowker sink and source simplicial filtrations coincide, and so we automatically obtain $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{so}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{si}}(X)$ for any $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$ and any $(X,\omega_X)\in \Ncal$. \end{remark} \begin{remark}[The metric space setting and relation to witness complexes] When restricted to the setting of metric spaces, the Dowker complex resembles a construction called the witness complex \cite{de2004topological}. In particular, a version of the Dowker complex for metric spaces, constructed in terms of \emph{landmarks} and \emph{witnesses}, was discussed in \cite{chazal2014persistence}, along with stability results. When restricted to the special networks that are pseudo-metric spaces, our definitions and results agree with those presented in \cite{chazal2014persistence}. \end{remark} \subsection{The Functorial Dowker Theorem and equivalence of diagrams}\label{sec:dowker-dual} Let $(X,\omega_X)\in \Ncal$, and let $\d \in \mathbb{R}$ be such that $R_{\d,X}$ is nonempty. By applying Dowker's theorem (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker}) to the setting $Y=X$, we have $H_k(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}) \cong H_k(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X})$, for any $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$. We still have this equality in the case where $R_{\d,X}$ is empty, because then $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ and $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}$ are both empty. Thus we obtain: \begin{corollary}\label{cor:dowker} Let $(X,\omega_X)\in\Ncal$, $\d \in \mathbb{R}$, and $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$. Then, \[H_k(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}) \cong H_k(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}).\] \end{corollary} In the persistent setting, Theorem \ref{thm:dowker} and Corollary \ref{cor:dowker} suggest the following question: \begin{quote} \textit{Given a network $(X,\omega_X)$ and a fixed dimension $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, are the persistence diagrams of the Dowker sink and source filtrations of $(X,\omega_X)$ necessarily equal?} \end{quote} In what follows, we provide a positive answer to the question above. Our strategy is to use the Functorial Dowker Theorem (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}), for which we will provide a complete proof below. The Functorial Dowker Theorem implies equality between sink and source persistence diagrams. \begin{corollary}[Dowker duality] \label{cor:dowker-dual} Let $(X,\omega_X)\in \Ncal$, and let $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$. Then, \[\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{si}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{so}}(X).\] Thus we may call either of the diagrams above the \emph{$k$-dimensional Dowker diagram of $X$}, denoted $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{D}}(X)$. \end{corollary} Before proving the corollary, we state an $\mathbb{R}$-indexed variant of the Persistence Equivalence Theorem \cite{edelsbrunner2010computational}. This particular version follows from the \emph{isometry theorem} \cite{bauer-isom}, and we refer the reader to \cite[Chapter 5]{chazal2012structure} for an expanded presentation of this material. \begin{theorem}[Persistence Equivalence Theorem] \label{thm:pet} Consider two persistence vector spaces $\mathcal{U}=\{U^{\d} \xrightarrow{\mu_{\d,\d'}} U^{\d'}\}_{\d\leq\d' \in \mathbb{R} }$ and $\mathcal{V}=\{V^{\d} \xrightarrow{\nu_{\d,\d'}} V^{\d'}\}_{\d \leq \d'\in \mathbb{R}}$ with connecting maps $f_{\d}:U^{\d}\r V^{\d'}$. \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \node (00) at (-3,0){$\cdots$}; \node (1) at (0,0){$V^{\d}$}; \node (2) at (3,0){$V^{\d'}$}; \node (3) at (6,0){$V^{\d''}$}; \node (01) at (9,0){$\cdots$}; \node (02) at (-3,2){$\cdots$}; \node (4) at (0,2){$U^{\d}$}; \node (5) at (3,2){$U^{\d'}$}; \node (6) at (6,2){$U^{\d''}$}; \node (03) at (9,2){$\cdots$}; \draw (00) edge[->] (1); \draw (3) edge[->] (01); \draw (02) edge[->] (4); \draw (6) edge[->] (03); \draw (1) edge[->] (2); \draw (2) edge[->] (3); \draw (4) edge[->] (5); \draw (5) edge[->] (6); \draw (1) edge[<-] node[right]{$f_{\d}$} (4); \draw (2) edge[<-] node[right]{$f_{\d'}$} (5); \draw (3) edge[<-] node[right]{$f_{\d''}$} (6); \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} If the $f_{\d}$ are all isomorphisms and each square in the diagram above commutes, then: \[\operatorname{Dgm}(\mathcal{U}) = \operatorname{Dgm}(\mathcal{V}).\] \end{theorem} \begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor:dowker-dual}] Let $\d \leq \d' \in \mathbb{R}$, and consider the relations $R_{\d,X} \subseteq R_{\d',X} \subseteq X\times X$. Suppose first that $R_{\d,X}$ and $R_{\d',X}$ are both nonempty. By applying Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}, we obtain homotopy equivalences between the source and sink complexes that commute with the canonical inclusions up to homotopy. Passing to the $k$-th homology level, we obtain persistence vector spaces that satisfy the commutativity properties of Theorem \ref{thm:pet}. The result follows from Theorem \ref{thm:pet}. In the case where $R_{\d,X}$ and $R_{\d',X}$ are both empty, there is nothing to show because all the associated complexes are empty. Suppose $R_{\d,X}$ is empty, and $R_{\d',X}$ is nonempty. Then $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}$ and $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d,X}$ are empty, so their inclusions into $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d',X}$ and $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{so}}_{\d',X}$ induce zero maps upon passing to homology. Thus the commutativity of Theorem \ref{thm:pet} is satisfied, and the result follows by Theorem \ref{thm:pet}.\end{proof} \paragraph{The proof of the Functorial Dowker Theorem} It remains to prove Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}. Because the proof involves numerous maps, we will adopt the notational convention of adding a subscript to a function to denote its codomain---e.g. we will write $f_B$ to denote a function with codomain $B$. First we recall the construction of a combinatorial barycentric subdivision (see \cite[\S 2]{dowker1952homology}, \cite[\S 4.7]{lefschetz1942algebraic}, \cite[Appendix A]{barmak2011algebraic}). \begin{definition}[Barycentric subdivisions]\label{def:subdivision} For any simplicial complex $\Sigma$, one may construct a new simplicial complex $\Sigma^{(1)}$, called the \emph{first barycentric subdivision}, as follows: \[\Sigma^{(1)}:=\set{[\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\ldots, \sigma_p] : \sigma_1 \subseteq \sigma_2 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \sigma_p, \text{ each } \sigma_i \in \Sigma}.\] Note that the vertices of $\Sigma^{(1)}$ are the simplices of $\Sigma$, and the simplices of $\Sigma^{(1)}$ are nested sequences of simplices of $\Sigma$. Furthermore, note that given any two simplicial complexes $\Sigma, \Xi$ and a simplicial map $f:\Sigma \r \Xi$, there is a natural simplicial map $f\1:\Sigma\1\r \Xi\1$ defined as: \[f\1([\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_p]):=[f(\sigma_1),\ldots,f(\sigma_p)], \qquad \sigma_1\subseteq \sigma_2\subseteq \ldots, \sigma_p, \text{ each } \sigma_i\in \Sigma.\] To see that this is simplicial, note that $f(\sigma_i) \subseteq f(\sigma_j)$ whenever $\sigma_i\subseteq \sigma_j$. As a special case, observe that any inclusion map $\iota:\Sigma \hookrightarrow \Xi$ induces an inclusion map $\iota\1:\Sigma\1 \hookrightarrow \Xi\1$. Given a simplex $\sigma=[x_0,\ldots, x_k]$ in a simplicial complex $\Sigma$, one defines the \emph{barycenter} to be the point $\mathcal{B}(\sigma):= \sum_{i=0}^k \tfrac{1}{k+1}x_i \in \|\Sigma\|$. Then the spaces $\|\Sigma\1\|$ and $\|\Sigma\|$ can be identified via a homeomorphism $\mathcal{E}_{\|\Sigma\|}:\|\Sigma\1\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ defined on vertices by $\mathcal{E}_{\|\Sigma\|}(\sigma):= \mathcal{B}(\sigma)$ and extended linearly. \end{definition} Details on the preceding list of definitions can be found in \cite[\S 2.14-15, 2.19]{munkres-book}, \cite[\S 3.3-4]{spanier-book}, and also \cite[Appendix A]{barmak2011algebraic}. The next proposition follows from the discussions in these references, and is a simple restatement of \cite[Proposition A.1.5]{barmak2011algebraic}. We provide a proof in the appendix for completeness. \begin{proposition}[Simplicial approximation to $\mathcal{E}_\bullet$]\label{prop:subdiv-identity} Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex, and let $\Phi: \Sigma\1 \r \Sigma$ be a simplicial map such that $\Phi(\sigma) \in \sigma$ for each $\sigma \in \Sigma$. Then $\|\Phi\| \simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|\Sigma\|}$. \end{proposition} We now introduce some auxiliary constructions dating back to \cite{dowker1952homology} that use the setup stated in Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}. For any nonempty relation $R\subseteq X\times Y$, one may define \cite[\S 2]{dowker1952homology} an associated map $\Phi_{E_R} : E_R\1 \r E_R$ as follows: first define $\Phi_{E_R}$ on vertices of $E_R\1$ by $\Phi_{E_R}(\sigma)=s_{\sigma}$, where $s_{\sigma}$ is the least vertex of $\sigma$ with respect to the total order. Next, for any simplex $[\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_k]$ of $E_R\1$, where $\sigma_1\subseteq \ldots \subseteq \sigma_k$, we have $\Phi_{E_R}(\sigma_i)=s_{\sigma_i} \in \sigma_k$ for all $1\leq i\leq k$. Thus $[\Phi_{E_R}(\sigma_1),\ldots,\Phi_{E_R}(\sigma_k)]=[s_{\sigma_1},s_{\sigma_2},\ldots,s_{\sigma_k}]$ is a face of $\sigma_k$, hence a simplex of $\Sigma$. This defines $\Phi_{E_R}$ as a simplicial map $E_R\1 \r E_R$. This argument also shows that $\Phi_{E_R}$ is order-reversing: if $\sigma \subseteq \sigma'$, then $\Phi_{E_R}(\sigma) \geq \Phi_{E_{R}}(\sigma')$. \begin{remark}\label{rem:subdiv-id} Applying Proposition \ref{prop:subdiv-identity} to the setup above, one sees that $\|\Phi_{E_R}\| \simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\|}$. After passing to a second barycentric subdivision $E_R^{(2)}$ (obtained by taking a barycentric subdivision of $E_R\1$) and obtaining a map $\Phi_{E_R\1}:E_R^{(2)} \r E_R\1$, one also has $\|\Phi_{E_R\1}\| \simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\1\|}$. \end{remark} One can also define \cite[\S 3]{dowker1952homology} a simplicial map $\Psi_{F_R}: E_R\1 \r F_R$ as follows. Given a vertex $\sigma=[x_0,\ldots, x_k] \in E_R\1$, one defines $\Psi_{F_R}(\sigma)=y_\sigma$, for some $y_\sigma \in Y$ such that $(x_i,y_\sigma) \in R$ for each $i$. To see why this vertex map is simplicial, let $\sigma\1 = [\sigma_0,\ldots, \sigma_k]$ be a simplex in $E_R\1$. Let $x \in \sigma_0$. Then, because $\sigma_0 \subseteq \sigma_1 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \sigma_k$, we automatically have that $(x,\Psi_{F_R}(\sigma_i)) \in R$, for each $i=0,\ldots, k$. Thus $\Psi_{F_R}(\sigma\1)$ is a simplex in $F_R$. This definition involves a choice of $y_\sigma$ when writing $\Psi_{F_R}(\sigma) = y_\sigma$, but all the maps resulting from such choices are contiguous \cite[\S 3]{dowker1952homology}. The preceding map induces a simplicial map $\Psi_{F_R\1}:E_R^{(2)} \r F_R\1$ as follows. Given a vertex $\t\1 = [\t_0,\ldots, \t_k] \in E_R^{(2)}$, i.e. a simplex in $E_R\1$, we define $\Psi_{F_R\1}(\t\1) := [\Psi_{F_R}(\t_0),\ldots, \Psi_{F_R}(\t_k)]$. Since $\Psi_{F_R}$ is simplicial, this is a simplex in $F_R$, i.e. a vertex in $F_R\1$. Thus we have a vertex map $\Psi_{F_R\1}:E_R^{(2)} \r F_R\1$. To check that this map is simplicial, let $\t^{(2)} = [\t\1_0,\ldots, \t\1_p]$ be a simplex in $E_R^{(2)}$. Then $\t\1_0 \subseteq \t\1_1 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \t\1_p$, and because $\Psi_{F_R}$ is simplicial, we automatically have \[\Psi_{F_R}(\t\1_0) \subseteq \Psi_{F_R}(\t\1_1) \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \Psi_{F_R}(\t\1_p).\] Thus $\Psi_{F_R\1}(\t^{(2)})$ is a simplex in $F_R\1$. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}] We write $F_R^{(2)}$ to denote the barycentric subdivision of $F_R\1$, and obtain simplicial maps $\Phi_{F_R\1}:F_R^{(2)} \r F_R\1$, $\Phi_{F_R}:F_R^{(1)} \r F_R$, $\Psi_{E_R\1}:F_R^{(2)} \r E_R\1$, and $\Psi_{F_R}:E_R^{(1)} \r F_R$ as above. Consider the following diagram: \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture} \node (1) at (0,0){$F_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (3,-1){$F_R^{(1)}$}; \node (3) at (6,-2){$F_R$}; \node (4) at (8,0){$F_{R'}^{(2)}$}; \node (5) at (11,-1){$F_{R'}^{(1)}$}; \node (6) at (14,-2){$F_{R'}$}; \node (7) at (-1,-3){$E_R^{(2)}$}; \node (8) at (2,-4){$E_R\1$}; \node (9) at (5,-5){$E_R$}; \node (10) at (7,-3){$E_{R'}^{(2)}$}; \node (11) at (10,-4){$E_{R'}\1$}; \node (12) at (13,-5){$E_{R'}$}; \draw (1) edge[->,violet!80,thick] node[right]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,violet!80,thick] node[above]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->] node[left]{} (4); \draw (4) edge[->] node[above right]{$\Phi_{F_{R'}\1}$} (5); \draw (5) edge[->] node[above right]{$\Phi_{F_{R'}}$} (6); \draw (3) edge[->] node[above]{} (6); \draw (7) edge[->,teal!80,thick] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R\1}$}} (8); \draw (8) edge[->,teal!80,thick] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (9); \draw (7) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (10); \draw (10) edge[->,dashed] node[above right]{} (11); \draw (11) edge[->,dashed] node[above]{} (12); \draw (9) edge[->] node[above]{} (12); \draw (1) edge[->,orange,thick] node[left,pos=0.2]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R\1}$}} (8); \draw (8) edge[->,orange,thick] node[below right,pos=0.2]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (4) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (11); \draw (11) edge[->,dashed] node[below right]{\small{}} (6); \begin{scope}[on background layer] \draw (7) edge[->,NavyBlue!80,thick] node[above left,pos=0.2]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,NavyBlue!80,thick] node[left,pos=0.2]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R}$}} (9); \draw (10) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (5); \draw (5) edge[->,dashed] node[below right]{\small{}} (12); \end{scope} \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \iffalse \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \begin{scope} \node (1) at (0,0){$E_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (2,-1){$E_R^{(1)}$}; \node (3) at (4,-2){$E_R$}; \node (4) at (6,0){$E_{R'}^{(2)}$}; \node (5) at (8,-1){$E_{R'}^{(1)}$}; \node (6) at (10,-2){$E_{R'}$}; \node (7) at (3,1){$F_R\1$}; \node (8) at (9,1){$F_{R'}\1$}; \draw (1) edge[->] node[below left]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->] node[below left]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (4); \draw (4) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (5); \draw (5) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (6); \draw (3) edge[->] node[above]{$\iota_E$} (6); \draw (1) edge[->] node[above]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->] node[right]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R}$}} (3); \draw (4) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (8); \draw (8) edge[->] node[right]{\small{$\Psi_{E_{R'}}$}} (6); \draw (7) edge[->] node[above]{$\iota_F$} (8); \end{scope} \begin{scope}[yshift = -1.5in] \node (1) at (0,0){$F_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (2,-1){$F_R^{(1)}$}; \node (3) at (4,-2){$F_R$}; \node (4) at (6,0){$F_{R'}^{(2)}$}; \node (5) at (8,-1){$F_{R'}^{(1)}$}; \node (6) at (10,-2){$F_{R'}$}; \node (7) at (1,-3){$E_R\1$}; \node (8) at (7,-3){$E_{R'}\1$}; \draw (1) edge[->] node[right]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->] node[above]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->] node[left]{} (4); \draw (4) edge[->] node[above right]{$\Phi_{F_{R'}\1}$} (5); \draw (5) edge[->] node[above]{$\Phi_{F_{R'}}$} (6); \draw (3) edge[->] node[above]{} (6); \draw (1) edge[->] node[left]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->] node[above left]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (4) edge[->,dashed] node[left]{} (8); \draw (8) edge[->] node[below right]{\small{$\Psi_{F_{R'}}$}} (6); \draw (7) edge[->] node[above]{} (8); \end{scope} \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \fi We proceed by claiming contiguity of the following. \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \begin{scope} \node (1) at (0,0){$E_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (2,0){$E_R^{(1)}$}; \node (3) at (4,0){$E_R$}; \node (7) at (2,2){$F_R\1$}; \draw (1) edge[->,teal] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,teal] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->,NavyBlue] node[left]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->,NavyBlue] node[right]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R}$}} (3); \end{scope} \begin{scope}[xshift=3in] \node (1) at (0,2){$F_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (2,2){$F_R^{(1)}$}; \node (3) at (4,2){$F_R$}; \node (7) at (2,0){$E_R\1$}; \draw (1) edge[->,violet] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,violet] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->,orange] node[below left]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->,orange] node[below right]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R}$}} (3); \end{scope} \begin{scope}[yshift=-1.5in] \node (1) at (0,2){$F_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (3,2){$F_R^{(1)}$}; \node (7) at (3,0){$E_R\1$}; \node (3) at (6,0){$E_R$}; \draw (1) edge[->,violet] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,NavyBlue] node[left]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->,orange] node[below left]{\small{$\Psi_{E_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->,teal] node[above]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R}$}} (3); \end{scope} \begin{scope}[yshift=-1.5in,xshift=3in] \node (1) at (0,0){$E_R^{(2)}$}; \node (2) at (3,0){$E_R^{(1)}$}; \node (7) at (3,2){$F_R\1$}; \node (3) at (6,2){$F_R$}; \draw (1) edge[->,teal] node[above]{\small{$\Phi_{E_R\1}$}} (2); \draw (2) edge[->,orange] node[below right]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (1) edge[->,NavyBlue] node[above left]{\small{$\Psi_{F_R\1}$}} (7); \draw (7) edge[->,violet] node[below]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (3); \end{scope} \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \begin{claim}\label{cl:dowker-contigo-items} More specifically: \begin{enumerate} \item $\Phi_{E_R}\circ \Phi_{E_R\1}$ and $\Psi_{E_R}\circ \Psi_{F_R\1}$ are contiguous. \label{item:dowker-contigo-1} \item $\Phi_{F_R}\circ \Phi_{F_R\1}$ and $\Psi_{F_R}\circ \Psi_{E_R\1}$ are contiguous. \label{item:dowker-contigo-2} \item $\Psi_{E_R}\circ \Phi_{F_R\1}$ and $\Phi_{E_R}\circ \Psi_{E_R\1}$ are contiguous. \label{item:dowker-contigo-3} \item $\Psi_{F_R}\circ \Phi_{E_R\1}$ and $\Phi_{F_R}\circ \Psi_{F_R\1}$ are contiguous. \label{item:dowker-contigo-4} \end{enumerate} \end{claim} Items (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-1}) and (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-3}) appear in the proof of Dowker's theorem \cite[Lemmas 5, 6]{dowker1952homology}, and it is easy to see that a symmetric argument shows Items (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-2}) and (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-4}). For completeness, we will verify these items in this paper, but defer this verification to the end of the proof. By passing to the geometric realization and applying Proposition \ref{prop:contigo-props} and Remark \ref{rem:subdiv-id}, we obtain the following from Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-3}) of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}: \begin{align} \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \|\Phi_{F_R\1}\| &\simeq \|\Phi_{E_R}\|\circ\|\Psi_{E_R\1}\|,\\ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\1\|} &\simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\|}\circ\|\Psi_{E_R\1}\|, &&\text{(Remark \ref{rem:subdiv-id})}\\ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|E_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\1\|} &\simeq \|\Psi_{E_R\1}\|. &&\text{($\mathcal{E}$ is a homeomorphism, hence invertible)} \end{align} Replacing this term in the expression for Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-2}) of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}, we obtain: \begin{align} \|\Psi_{F_R}\| \circ \|\Psi_{E_R\1}\| &\simeq \|\Phi_{F_R}\|\circ \|\Phi_{F_R\1}\| \simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\|}\circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\1\|},\\ \|\Psi_{F_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|E_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\1\|} &\simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\|}\circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\1\|},\\ \|\Psi_{F_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|E_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|} &\simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|F_R\|}. \end{align} Similarly, we obtain the following from Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-4}) of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}: \[\|\Psi_{F_R}\|\circ \|\Phi_{E_R\1}\| \simeq \|\Phi_{F_R}\| \circ \|\Psi_{F_R\1}\|, \text{ so } \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{F_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\1}\| \simeq \|\Psi_{F_R\1}\|.\] Replacing this term in the expression for Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-1}) of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}, we obtain: \begin{align} \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \|\Psi_{F_R\1}\| & \simeq\|\Phi_{E_R}\|\circ \|\Phi_{E_R\1}\| \simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\|}\circ \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\1\|}, \\ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{F_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\1}\| &\simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\|}\circ \mathcal{E}_{\|E_R\1\|}\\ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|} \circ \|\Psi_{F_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|E_R\|} &\simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|E_R\|} \end{align} Define $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}: \|F_R\| \r \|E_R\|$ by $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|} := \|\Psi_{E_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|}$. Then $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}$ is a homotopy equivalence, with inverse given by $\|\Psi_{F_R}\|\circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|E_R\|}$. This shows that $\|F_R\|\simeq \|E_R\|$, for any nonempty relation $R\subseteq X\times Y$. Next we need to show that $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}$ commutes with the canonical inclusion. Consider the following diagram, where the $\iota_\bullet$ maps denote the respective canonical inclusions (cf. Definition \ref{def:subdivision}): \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture} \node (1) at (0,0){$F_R\1$}; \node (2) at (3,0){$F_{R'}\1$}; \node (3) at (0,-1.5){$F_R$}; \node (4) at (3,-1.5){$F_{R'}$}; \node (5) at (-2,-3){$E_R$}; \node (6) at (5,-3){$E_{R'}$}; \draw (1) edge[->] node[above]{\small{$\iota_{F\1}$}} (2); \draw (3) edge[->] node[above]{\small{$\iota_F$}} (4); \draw (5) edge[->] node[above]{\small{$\iota_E$}} (6); \draw (1) edge[->] node[right]{\small{$\Phi_{F_R}$}} (3); \draw (2) edge[->] node[left]{\small{$\Phi_{F_{R'}}$}} (4); \draw (1) edge[->] node[left]{\small{$\Psi_{E_{R}}$}} (5); \draw (2) edge[->] node[right]{\small{$\Psi_{E_{R'}}$}} (6); \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \begin{claim}\label{cl:dowker-func-1} $\iota_E\circ \Psi_{E_R}$ and $\Psi_{E_{R'}}\circ \iota_{F\1}$ are contiguous. \end{claim} \begin{claim}\label{cl:dowker-func-2} $\iota_F\circ \Phi_{F_R}$ and $\Phi_{F_{R'}}\circ \iota_{F\1}$ are contiguous. \end{claim} Suppose Claim \ref{cl:dowker-func-2} is true. Then, upon passing to geometric realizations, we have: \begin{align} \|\iota_F\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\|} \simeq \|\iota_F\|\circ \|\Phi_{F_R}\| \simeq \|\Phi_{F_{R'}}\|\circ \|\iota_{F\1}\| &\simeq \mathcal{E}_{\|F_{R'}\|}\circ \|\iota_{F\1}\|,\\ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_{R'}\|}\circ \|\iota_F\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\|} &\simeq \|\iota_{F\1}\|. \end{align} Suppose also that Claim \ref{cl:dowker-func-1} is true. Then we have: \begin{align} \|\Psi_{E_{R'}}\| \circ \|\iota_{F\1}\| &\simeq \|\iota_E\|\circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|,\\ \|\Psi_{E_{R'}}\| \circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_{R'}\|}\circ \|\iota_F\| \circ \mathcal{E}_{\|F_R\|} &\simeq \|\iota_E\|\circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\|,\\ \|\Psi_{E_{R'}}\| \circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_{R'}\|}\circ \|\iota_F\| &\simeq \|\iota_E\|\circ \|\Psi_{E_R}\| \circ \mathcal{E}^{-1}_{\|F_R\|}, \text{ i.e. }\\ \Gamma_{\|E_{R'}\|}\circ \|\iota_F\| &\simeq \|\iota_E\| \circ \Gamma_{\|E_R\|}. \end{align} This proves the theorem. It only remains to prove the various claims. \begin{subproof}[Proof of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}] In proving Claim \ref{cl:dowker-contigo-items}, we supply the proofs of Items (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-2}) and (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-4}). These arguments are adapted from \cite[Lemmas 1, 5, and 6]{dowker1952homology}, where the proofs of Items (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-1}) and (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-3}) appeared. For Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-2}), let $\t^{(2)}=[\t_0\1,\ldots,\t_k\1]$ be a simplex in $F_R^{(2)}$, where $\t_0\1 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \t_k\1$ is a chain of simplices in $F_R\1$. By the order-reversing property of the map $\Phi_{F_R\1}$, we have that $\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_0\1) \supseteq \Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_i\1)$ for each $i=0,\ldots, k$. Define $x:= \Psi_{E_R}(\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_0\1))$. Then $(x,y) \in R$ for each $y \in \Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_0\1)$. But we also have $(x,\Phi_{F_R}(\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_i\1))) \in R$ for each $i=0,\ldots, k$, because $\Phi_{F_R}(\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_i\1)) \in \Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_i\1) \subseteq \Phi_{F_R}(\t_0\1)$ for each $i=0,\ldots, k$. Next let $0\leq i \leq k$. For each $\t \in \t\1_i$, we have $\Psi_{E_R}(\t) \in \Psi_{E_R\1}(\t\1_i)$ (by the definition of $\Psi_{E_R\1}$). Because $\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_0\1) \in \t_0\1 \subseteq \t_i\1$, we then have $x = \Psi_{E_R}(\Phi_{F_R\1}(\t_0\1)) \in \Psi_{E_R\1}(\t\1_i)$, which is a vertex of $E_R\1$ or alternatively a simplex of $E_R$. But then, by definition of $\Psi_{F_R}$, we have that $(x,\Psi_{F_R}(\Psi_{E_R\1}(\t_i\1))) \in R$. This holds for each $0\leq i \leq k$. Since $\t^{(2)}$ was arbitrary, this shows that $\Phi_{F_R}\circ \Phi_{F_R\1}$ and $\Psi_{F_R}\circ \Psi_{E_R\1}$ are contiguous. For Item (\ref{item:dowker-contigo-4}), let $\sigma^{(2)} = [\sigma\1_0,\ldots,\sigma\1_k]$ be a simplex in $E_R^{(2)}$. Let $0\leq i \leq k$. Then $\sigma\1_0 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \sigma\1_k$, and $\Phi_{E_R\1}(\sigma\1_i) \in \sigma\1_i \subseteq \sigma\1_k$. So $\Psi_{F_R}(\Phi_{E_R\1}(\sigma_i\1)) \in \Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_k\1)$. On the other hand, we have $\Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_i\1) \subseteq \Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_k\1)$. Then $\Phi_{F_R}(\Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_i\1)) \in \Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_i\1) \subseteq \Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_k\1)$. Since $i$ was arbitrary, this shows that $\Psi_{F_R}\circ \Phi_{E_R\1}$ and $\Phi_{F_R}\circ \Psi_{F_R\1}$ both map the vertices of $\sigma^{(2)}$ to the simplex $\Psi_{F_R\1}(\sigma_k\1)$, hence are contiguous. This concludes the proof of the claim. \end{subproof} \begin{subproof}[Proof of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-func-1}] Let $\t\1=[\t_0,\t_1,\ldots, \t_k] \in F_R\1$, where $\t_0 \subseteq \t_1\subseteq \ldots \subseteq \t_k$ is a chain of simplices in $F_R$. Then $\iota_{F\1}(\t\1) = \t\1$, and $\Psi_{E_{R'}}(\t\1)=[x_{\t_0},\ldots, x_{\t_k}]$, for some choice of $x_{\t_i}$ terms. Also we have $\iota_E\circ \Psi_{E_{R}}(\t\1) = [x'_{\t_0},\ldots, x'_{\t_k}]$ for some other choice of $x'_{\t_i}$ terms. For contiguity, we need to show that \[ [x_{\t_0},\ldots, x_{\t_k}, x'_{\t_0},\ldots, x'_{\t_k}] \in E_{R'}.\] But this is easy to see: letting $y \in \t_0$, we have $\set{(x_{\t_0},y),\ldots,(x_{\t_k},y),(x'_{\t_0},y),\ldots,(x'_{\t_k},y)} \subseteq R$. Since $\t\1$ was arbitrary, it follows that we have contiguity. \end{subproof} \begin{subproof}[Proof of Claim \ref{cl:dowker-func-2}] Let $\t\1=[\t_0,\t_1,\ldots, \t_k] \in F_R\1$, where $\t_0 \subseteq \t_1\subseteq \ldots \subseteq \t_k$ is a chain of simplices in $F_R$. Then $\Phi_{F_R}(\t_i) \in \t_k$ for each $0\leq i \leq k$. Thus $\iota_F\circ \Phi_{F_R}(\t\1)$ is a face of $\t_k$. Similarly, $\Phi_{F_{R'}}\circ \iota_{F\1}(\t\1)$ is also a face of $\t_k$. Since $\t\1$ was an arbitrary simplex of $F_R\1$, it follows that $\iota_F\circ \Phi_{F_R}$ and $\Phi_{F_{R'}}\circ \iota_{F\1}$ are contiguous.\end{subproof} \end{proof} \subsection{The equivalence between the finite FDT and the simplicial FNTs} \label{sec:dowker-nerve-equiv} In this section, we present our answer to Question \ref{q:f-nerve-f-dowker}. We begin with a weaker formulation of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial} and some simplicial Functorial Nerve Theorems. \begin{theorem}[The finite FDT] \label{thm:dowker-functorial-finite} Let $X,Y$ be two totally ordered sets, and without loss of generality, suppose $X$ is finite. Let $R\subseteq R' \subseteq X\times Y$ be two nonempty relations, and let $E_R, F_R, E_{R'}, F_{R'}$ be their associated simplicial complexes (as in Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}). Then there exist homotopy equivalences $\Gamma_{\|E_R\|}:\|F_R\| \r \|E_R\|$ and $\Gamma_{\|E_{R'}\|}: \|F_{R'}\| \r \|E_{R'}\|$ that commute up to homotopy with the canonical inclusions. \end{theorem} The finite FDT (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite}) is an immediate consequence of the general FDT (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}). \begin{definition} Let $\mathcal{A} = \set{A_i}_{i\in I}$ be a family of nonempty sets indexed by $I$. The \emph{nerve} of $\mathcal{A}$ is the simplicial complex $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}):= \{\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(I) : \sigma \text{ is finite, nonempty, and } \cap_{i \in \sigma}A_i \neq \emptyset\}$. \end{definition} \begin{definition}[Covers of simplices and subcomplexes] Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex. Then a collection of subcomplexes $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma = \{\Sigma_i\}_{i\in I}$ is said to be a \emph{cover of subcomplexes} for $\Sigma$ if $\Sigma = \cup_{i\in I}\Sigma_i$. Furthermore, $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma$ is said to be a \emph{cover of simplices} if each $\Sigma_i \in \mathcal{A}_\Sigma$ has the property that $\Sigma_i = \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_i))$. In this case, each $\Sigma_i$ has precisely one top-dimensional simplex, consisting of the vertex set $V(\Sigma_i)$. \end{definition} We present two \emph{simplicial} formulations of the Functorial Nerve Theorem that turn out to be equivalent; the statements differ in that one is about covers of simplices and the other is about covers of subcomplexes. \begin{theorem}[Functorial Nerve I] \label{thm:nerve-functorial-I} Let $\Sigma \subseteq \Sigma'$ be two simplicial complexes, and let $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma=\{\Sigma_i\}_{i\in I}$, $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}=\{\Sigma'_i\}_{i\in I'}$ be finite covers of simplices for $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ such that $I\subseteq I'$ and $\Sigma_i \subseteq \Sigma'_i$ for each $i \in I$. In particular, $\operatorname{card}(I') < \infty$. Suppose that for each finite subset $\sigma \subseteq I'$, the intersection $\cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma'_i$ is either empty or contractible (and likewise for $\cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma_i$). Then $\|\Sigma\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)\|$ and $\|\Sigma'\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})\|$, via maps that commute up to homotopy with the canonical inclusions. \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}[Functorial Nerve II] \label{thm:nerve-functorial-II} The statement of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I} holds even if $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma$ and $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}$ are covers of subcomplexes. Explicitly, the statement is as follows. Let $\Sigma \subseteq \Sigma'$ be two simplicial complexes, and let $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma=\{\Sigma_i\}_{i\in I}$, $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}=\{\Sigma'_i\}_{i\in I'}$ be finite covers of subcomplexes for $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ such that $I\subseteq I'$ and $\Sigma_i \subseteq \Sigma'_i$ for each $i \in I$. In particular, $\operatorname{card}(I') < \infty$. Suppose that for each finite subset $\sigma \subseteq I'$, the intersection $\cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma'_i$ is either empty or contractible (and likewise for $\cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma_i$). Then $\|\Sigma\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)\|$ and $\|\Sigma'\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})\|$, via maps that commute up to homotopy with the canonical inclusions. \end{theorem} The following result summarizes our answer to Question \ref{q:f-nerve-f-dowker}. \begin{theorem}[Equivalence]\label{thm:dowker-nerve-eq} The finite FDT, the FNT I, and the FNT II are all equivalent. Moreover, all of these results are implied by the FDT, as below: \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture} \node (fdt) at (-2,0){Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}}; \node (ffdt) at (1,0){Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite}}; \node (sfnt1) at (3,1){Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}}; \node (sfnt2) at (5,0){Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}}; \draw[-implies,double equal sign distance] (fdt) -- (ffdt); \draw[-implies,double equal sign distance] (ffdt) -- (sfnt1); \draw[-implies,double equal sign distance] (sfnt1) -- (sfnt2); \draw[-implies,double equal sign distance] (sfnt2) -- (ffdt); \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \end{theorem} We present the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-nerve-eq} over the course of the next few subsections. \begin{remark} By virtue of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-nerve-eq}, we will write \emph{simplicial FNT} to mean either of the FNT I or FNT II. \end{remark} \subsection{Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite} implies Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}] Let $V, V'$ denote the vertex sets of $\Sigma,\Sigma'$, respectively. We define the relations $R\subseteq V\times I$ and $R' \subseteq V'\times I'$ as follows: $(v,i) \in R \iff v \in \Sigma_i$ and $(v',i') \in R' \iff v' \in \Sigma_i'.$ Then $R \subseteq R'$, the set $I'$ is finite by assumption, and so we are in the setting of the finite FDT (Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite}) (perhaps invoking the Axiom of Choice to obtain the total order on $V'$). It suffices to show that $E_R = \Sigma$, $E_{R'} = \Sigma'$, $F_R = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)$, and $F_{R'} = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})$, where $E_R, E_{R'}, F_R, F_{R'}$ are as defined in Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}. First we claim the $E_R = \Sigma$. By the definitions of $R$ and $E_R$, we have $E_R = \{\sigma \subseteq V : \; \exists i \in I, \; (v,i) \in R \; \forall \; v\in \sigma\} = \{\sigma \subseteq V : \;\exists i \in I, \; v\in \Sigma_i \; \forall \; v\in \sigma\}.$ Let $\sigma \in E_R$, and let $i \in I$ be such that $v \in \Sigma_i$ for all $v \in \sigma$. Then $\sigma \subseteq V(\Sigma_i)$, and since $\Sigma_i = \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_i))$ by the assumption about covers of simplices, we have $\sigma \in \Sigma_i \subseteq \Sigma$. Thus $E_R \subseteq \Sigma$. Conversely, let $\sigma \in \Sigma$. Then $\sigma \in \Sigma_i$ for some $i$. Thus for all $v \in \sigma$, we have $(v,i) \in R$. It follows that $\sigma \in E_R$. This shows $E_R = \Sigma$. The proof that $E_{R'} = \Sigma'$ is analogous. Next we claim that $F_R = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)$. By the definition of $F_R$, we have $F_R = \{\t \subseteq I : \; \exists v \in V, \; (v,i) \in R \; \forall \; i\in \t\}.$ Let $\t \in F_R$, and let $v \in V$ be such that $(v,i) \in R$ for each $i \in \t$. Then $\cap_{i \in \t}\Sigma_i \neq \emptyset$, and so $\t \in \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)$. Conversely, let $\t \in \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)$. Then $\cap_{i \in \t}\Sigma_i \neq \emptyset$, so there exists $v \in V$ such that $v \in \Sigma_i$ for each $i \in \t$. Thus $\sigma \in F_R$. This shows $F_R = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)$. The case for $R'$ is analogous. An application of Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite} now completes the proof. \end{proof} \subsection{Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II} implies Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial-finite}} \begin{proof} Let $X$ and $Y$ be two sets, and suppose $X$ is finite. Let $R\subseteq R' \subseteq X \times Y$ be two relations. Consider the simplicial complexes $E_R, F_R, E_{R'}, F_{R'}$ as defined in Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}. Let $V_R:=V(E_R)$. For each $x \in V_R$, define $A_x:=\{\t \in F_R : (x,y) \in R \text{ for all } y \in \t\}$. Then $A_x$ is a subcomplex of $F_R$. Furthermore, $\cup_{x\in V_R}A_x = F_R$. To see this, let $\t\in F_R$. Then there exists $x\in X$ such that $(x,y) \in R$ for all $y\in \t$, and so $\t \in A_x$. Let $\mathcal{A}:= \{A_x : x \in V_R\}$. We have seen that $\mathcal{A}$ is a cover of subcomplexes for $F_R$. It is finite because the indexing set $V_R$ is a subset of $X$, which is finite by assumption. Next we claim that $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}) = E_R$. Let $\sigma \in E_R$. Then there exists $y \in Y$ such that $(x,y) \in R$ for all $x\in \sigma$. Thus $\cap_{x\in \sigma}A_x \neq \emptyset$, and so $\sigma \in \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A})$. Conversely, let $\sigma \in \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A})$. Then $\cap_{x \in \sigma}A_x \neq \emptyset$, and so there exists $y \in Y$ such that $(x,y) \in R$ for all $x \in \sigma$. Thus $\sigma \in E_R$. Next we check that nonempty finite intersections of elements in $\mathcal{A}$ are contractible. Let $\sigma \in \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}) = E_R$. Let $V_\sigma:= \cap_{x \in \sigma}V(A_x) \subseteq V(F_R)$. We claim that $\cap_{x \in \sigma}A_x = \operatorname{pow}(V_\sigma)$, i.e. that the intersection is a full simplex in $F_R$, hence contractible. The inclusion $\cap_{x \in \sigma}A_x \subseteq \operatorname{pow}(V_\sigma)$ is clear, so we show the reverse inclusion. Let $\t \in \operatorname{pow}(V_\sigma)$, and let $y \in \t$. Then $y \in \cap_{x \in \sigma}A_x$, so $(x,y) \in R$ for each $x \in \sigma$. This holds for each $y \in \t$, so it follows that $\t \in \cap_{x\in \sigma}A_x$. Thus $\cap_{x \in \sigma}A_x = \operatorname{pow}(V_\sigma)$. We remark that this also shows that $\mathcal{A}$ is a cover of simplices for $F_R$. Now for each $x \in V(E_{R'})$, define $A'_x:= \{\t \in F_{R'} : (x,y) \in R' \text{ for all } y \in \t\}$. Also define $\mathcal{A}':= \{A'_x : x \in V(E_{R'})\}$. The same argument shows that $\mathcal{A}'$ is a finite cover of subcomplexes (in particular, a cover of simplices) for $F_{R'}$ with all finite intersections either empty or contractible, and that $E_{R'} = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}')$. An application of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II} now shows that $\|E_R\| \simeq \|F_R\|$ and $\|E_{R'}\| \simeq \|F_{R'}\|$, via maps that commute up to homotopy with the inclusions $\|E_R\| \hookrightarrow \|E_{R'}\|$ and $\|F_R\| \hookrightarrow \|F_{R'}\|$. \end{proof} \subsection{Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I} implies Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}} We lead with some remarks about the ideas involved in this proof. Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II} is a functorial statement in the sense that it is about an arbitrary inclusion $\Sigma \subseteq \Sigma'$. Restricting the statement to just $\Sigma$ would lead to a non-functorial statement. A proof of this non-functorial statement, via a non-functorial analogue of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}, can be obtained using techniques presented in \cite{bjorner1985homotopy} (see also \cite[Theorem 15.24]{kozlov2007combinatorial}). We strengthen these techniques to our functorial setting and thus obtain a proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II} via Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}. We first present a lemma related to barycentric subdivisions and several lemmas about gluings and homotopy equivalences. These will be used in proving Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}. \begin{definition}[Induced subcomplex] Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex, and let $\Delta$ be a subcomplex. Then $\Delta$ is an \emph{induced subcomplex} if $\Delta = \Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta))$. \end{definition} \begin{lemma} \label{lem:induced-cplx} Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex, and let $\Delta$ be a subcomplex. Then $\Delta\1$ is an \emph{induced subcomplex} of $\Sigma\1$, i.e. $\Delta\1 = \Sigma\1 \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta\1))$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\sigma$ be a simplex of $\Delta\1$. Then $\sigma$ belongs to $\Sigma\1$, and also to the full simplex $\operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta\1))$. Thus $\Delta\1 \subseteq \Sigma\1 \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta\1))$. Conversely, let $\sigma \in \Sigma\1 \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta\1))$. Since $\sigma \in \Sigma\1$, we can write $\sigma = [\t_0,\ldots, \t_k]$, where $\t_0 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \t_k$. Since $\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(V(\Delta\1))$ and the vertices of $\Delta\1$ are simplices of $\Delta$, we also know that each $\t_i$ is a simplex of $\Delta$. Thus $\sigma \in \Delta\1$. The equality follows.\end{proof} \begin{lemma}[Carrier Lemma, \cite{bjorner1985homotopy} \S4] \label{lem:carrier} Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex. Also let $f,g:X \r \|\Sigma\|$ be any two continuous maps such that $f(x), g(x)$ belong to the same simplex of $\|\Sigma\|$, for any $x \in X$. Then $f \simeq g$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}[Gluing Lemma, see Lemmas 4.2, 4.7, 4.9, \cite{bjorner1985homotopy}] \label{lem:glue} Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial complex, and let $U \subseteq V(\Sigma)$. Suppose $\|\Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$ is contractible. Then there exists a homotopy equivalence $\varphi: \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \r \|\Sigma\|$. \end{lemma} The Gluing and Carrier Lemmas presented above are classical. We provide full details for the Gluing lemma inside the proof of the following functorial generalization of Lemma \ref{lem:glue}. \begin{lemma}[Functorial Gluing Lemma] \label{lem:glue-func} Let $\Sigma \subseteq \Sigma'$ be two simplicial complexes. Also let $U \subseteq V(\Sigma)$ and $U' \subseteq V(\Sigma')$ be such that $U \subseteq U'$. Suppose $\|\Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$ and $\|\Sigma' \cap \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$ are contractible. Then, \begin{enumerate} \item There exists a homotopy equivalence $\varphi: \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ such that $\varphi(x)$ and $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|}(x)$ belong to the same simplex of $\|\Sigma\cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$ for each $x \in \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. Furthermore, the homotopy inverse is given by the inclusion $\iota: \|\Sigma\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. \item Given a homotopy equivalence $\varphi: \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ as above, there exists a homotopy equivalence $\varphi': \|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\| \r \|\Sigma'\|$ such that $\varphi'\|_{\|\Sigma\cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|} = \varphi$, and $\varphi'(x)$ and $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|}(x)$ belong to the same simplex of $\|\Sigma'\cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$ for each $x \in \|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. Furthermore, the homotopy inverse is given by the inclusion $\iota': \|\Sigma'\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} \begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:glue-func}] The proof uses this fact: any continuous map of an $n$-sphere $\us^n$ into a contractible space $Y$ can be continuously extended to a mapping of the $(n+1)$-disk $\mathbb{D}^{n+1}$ into $Y$, where $\mathbb{D}^{n+1}$ has $\us^n$ as its boundary \cite[p. 27]{spanier-book}. First we define $\varphi$. On $\|\Sigma\|$, define $\varphi$ to be the identity. Next let $\sigma$ be a minimal simplex in $\|\operatorname{pow}(U) \setminus \Sigma\|$. By minimality, the boundary of $\sigma$ (denoted $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$) belongs to $\|\Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$, and $\|\Sigma\|$ in particular. Thus $\varphi$ is defined on $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$, which is an $n$-sphere for some $n \geq 0$. Furthermore, $\varphi$ maps $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$ into the contractible space $\|\Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. Then we use the aforementioned fact to extend $\varphi$ continuously to all of $\sigma$ so that $\varphi$ maps $\sigma$ into $\|\Sigma \cap \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. Furthermore, both $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|}(\sigma) = \sigma$ and $\varphi(\sigma)$ belong to the simplex $\|\operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. By iterating this procedure, we obtain a retraction $\varphi: \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ such that $\varphi(x)$ and $x$ belong to the same simplex in $\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$, for each $x \in \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. Thus $\varphi$ is homotopic to $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|}$ by Lemma \ref{lem:carrier}. Thus we have a homotopy equivalence: \[\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma\|}= \varphi\circ \iota, \; \iota \circ \varphi \simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|} \tag{here $\iota:= \iota_{\|\Sigma\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|}$} .\] For the second part of the proof, suppose that a homotopy equivalence $\varphi: \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ as above is provided. We need to extend $\varphi$ to obtain $\varphi'$. Define $\varphi'$ to be equal to $\varphi$ on $\|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$, and equal to the identity on $G:= \|\Sigma'\|\setminus \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$. Let $\sigma$ be a minimal simplex in $\|\operatorname{pow}(U')\| \setminus G$. Then by minimality, $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$ belongs to $\|\Sigma' \cap \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. As before, we have $\varphi'$ mapping $\operatorname{Bd}(\sigma)$ into the contractible space $\|\Sigma' \cap \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$, and we extend $\varphi'$ continuously to a map of $\sigma$ into $\|\Sigma' \cap \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. Once again, $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|}(x)$ and $\varphi'(x)$ belong to the same simplex $\|\operatorname{pow}(U')\|$, for all $x \in \sigma$. Iterating this procedure gives a continuous map $\varphi':\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\| \r \|\Sigma'\|$. This map is not necessarily a retraction, because there may be a simplex $\sigma \in \|\Sigma\cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\| \cap \|\Sigma'\|$ on which $\varphi'$ is not the identity. However, it still holds that $\varphi'$ is continuous, and that $x, \varphi'(x)$ get mapped to the same simplex for each $x \in \|\Sigma'\cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. Thus Lemma \ref{lem:carrier} still applies to show that $\varphi'$ is homotopic to $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|}$. We write $\iota'$ to denote the inclusion $\iota': \|\Sigma'\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. By the preceding work, we have $\iota'\circ \varphi' \simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|}$. Next let $x \in \|\Sigma'\|$. Then either $x \in \|\Sigma'\| \cap \|\Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$, or $x \in G$. In the first case, we know that $\varphi'(x) = \varphi(x)$ and $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma'\|}(x) = \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma\cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|}(x)$ belong to the same simplex of $\|\Sigma\cup \operatorname{pow}(U)\|$ by the assumption on $\varphi$. In the second case, we know that $\varphi'(x) = x = \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma'\|}(x)$. Thus for any $x \in \|\Sigma'\|$, we know that $\varphi'(x)$ and $\operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma'\|}(x)$ belong to the same simplex in $\|\Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(U')\|$. By Lemma \ref{lem:carrier}, we then have $\varphi'\|_{\|\Sigma'\|} \simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma'\|}$. Thus $\varphi'\circ \iota' \simeq \operatorname{id}_{\|\Sigma'\|}$. This shows that $\varphi'$ is the necessary homotopy equivalence. \end{proof} Now we present the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}. \noindent \textbf{Notation.} Let $I$ be an ordered set. For any subset $J\subseteq I$, we write $(J)$ to denote the sequence $(j_1,j_2,j_3,\ldots)$, where the ordering is inherited from the ordering on $I$. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-II}] The first step is to functorially deform $\mathcal{A}_\Sigma$ and $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}$ into covers of simplices while still preserving all associated homotopy types. Then we will be able to apply Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I}. We can assume by Lemma \ref{lem:induced-cplx} that each subcomplex $\Sigma_i$ is induced, and likewise for each $\Sigma'_i$. We start by fixing an enumeration $I' = \{l_1,l_2,\ldots\}$. Thus $I'$ becomes an ordered set. \paragraph{Passing to covers of simplices.} We now define some inductive constructions. In what follows, we will define complexes denoted $\Sigma^\bullet, \Sigma'^\bullet$ obtained by ``filling in" $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ while preserving homotopy equivalence, as well as covers of these larger complexes denoted $\Sigma_{\star,\bullet}, \Sigma'_{\star,\bullet}$. First define: \begin{align} \Sigma^{(l_1)} &:= {\begin{cases} \Sigma \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l_1})) &: \text{ if }l_1 \in I\\ \Sigma &: \text{ otherwise}. \end{cases}}\\ \Sigma'^{(l_1)} &:= \Sigma' \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma'_{l_1})). \end{align} Next, for all $i\in I$, define \begin{align} \Sigma_{i,(l_1)} &:= {\begin{cases} \Sigma_i \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_i) \cap V(\Sigma_{l_1}))&: \text{ if }l_1 \in I\\ \Sigma_i &: \text{ otherwise}. \end{cases}} \end{align} And for all $i \in I'$, define \begin{align} \Sigma'_{i,(l_1)} &:= \Sigma'_i \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma'_i) \cap V(\Sigma'_{l_1})). \end{align} Now by induction, suppose $\Sigma^{(l_1,\ldots, l_n)}$ and $\Sigma_{i,(l_1,\ldots, l_n)}$ are defined for all $i \in I$. Also suppose $\Sigma'^{(l_1,\ldots, l_n)}$ and $\Sigma'_{i,(l_1,\ldots, l_n)}$ are defined for all $i \in I'$. Then we define: \begin{align} \Sigma^{(l_1,\ldots, l_n,l_{n+1})} &:= {\begin{cases} \Sigma^{(l_1,\ldots,l_n)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l_{n+1},(l_1,\ldots,l_n)})) &: \text{ if }l_{n+1} \in I\\ \Sigma^{(l_1,\ldots,l_n)} &: \text{ otherwise}. \end{cases}}\\ \Sigma'^{(l_1,\ldots, l_n,l_{n+1})} &:= \Sigma'^{(l_1,\ldots,l_n)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma'_{l_{n+1},(l_1,\ldots,l_n)})). \end{align} For all $i \in I$, we have \begin{align} \Sigma_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_{n+1})} &:= {\begin{cases} \Sigma_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l_{n+1},(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}))&: \text{ if }l_{n+1} \in I\\ \Sigma_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)} &: \text{ otherwise}. \end{cases}} \end{align} And for all $i \in I'$, we have \begin{align} \Sigma'_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_{n+1})} &:= \Sigma'_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma'_{i,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}) \cap V(\Sigma'_{l_{n+1},(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)})). \end{align} Finally, for any $n \leq \operatorname{card}(I')$, we define $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(l_1,\ldots, l_n)} :=\{\Sigma_{i,(l_1,\ldots, l_{n})} : i \in I\}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(l_1,\ldots, l_n)} :=\{\Sigma'_{i,(l_1,\ldots, l_{n})} : i \in I'\}$. We will show that these are covers of $\Sigma^{(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}$ and $\Sigma'^{(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}$, respectively. The next step is to prove by induction that for any $n \leq \operatorname{card}(I')$, we have $\|\Sigma\|\simeq \|\Sigma^{(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}\|$ and $\|\Sigma'\|\simeq \|\Sigma'^{(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}\|$, that $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)})$ and $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)})$, and that nonempty finite intersections of the new covers $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}, \mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(l_1,l_2,\ldots, l_n)}$ remain contractible. For the base case $n=0$, we have $\Sigma = \Sigma^{()}$, $\Sigma' = \Sigma'^{()}$. Thus the base case is true by assumption. We present the inductive step next. \begin{claim} \label{cl:nerve-cover-of-simplices} For this claim, let $\bullet$ denote $l_1,\ldots, l_n$, where $0 < n < \operatorname{card}(I')$. Define $l:= l_{n+1}$. Suppose the following is true: \begin{enumerate} \item The collections $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(\bullet)}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(\bullet)}$ are covers of $\Sigma^{(\bullet)}$ and $\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}$. \item The nerves of the coverings are unchanged: $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(\bullet)})$ and $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(\bullet)})$. \item Each of the subcomplexes $\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}$, $i\in I$, and $\Sigma'_{j,(\bullet)}$, $j\in I'$ is induced in $\Sigma^{(\bullet)}$ and $\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}$, respectively. \item Let $\sigma \subseteq I$. If $\cap_{i\in \sigma}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}$ is nonempty, then it is contractible. Similarly, let $\t \subseteq I'$. If $\cap_{i\in \t}\Sigma'_{i,(\bullet)}$ is nonempty, then it is contractible. \item We have homotopy equivalences $\|\Sigma\|\simeq \|\Sigma^{(\bullet)}\|$ and $\|\Sigma'\|\simeq \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}\|$ via maps that commute with the canonical inclusions. \end{enumerate} Then the preceding statements are true for $\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}$, $\Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}$, $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(\bullet,l)}$, and $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(\bullet,l)}$ as well. \end{claim} \begin{subproof} For the first claim, we have $\Sigma^{(\bullet, l)} = \Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})) \subseteq \cup_{i \in I}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet, l)}$. For the inclusion, we used the inductive assumption that $\Sigma^{(\bullet)} = \cup_{i \in I}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}$. Similarly, $\Sigma'^{(\bullet, l)} \subseteq \cup_{i \in I'} \Sigma'_{i,(\bullet,l)}$. For the second claim, let $i \in I$. Then $V(\Sigma_{i,(l_1)}) = V(\Sigma_i)$, and in particular, we have $V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)}) = V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) = V(\Sigma_i)$. Next observe that for any $\sigma \subseteq I$, the intersection \[\cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma_i \neq \emptyset \iff \cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_i) \neq \emptyset \iff \cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)}) \neq \emptyset \iff \cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)} \neq \emptyset.\] Thus $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(\bullet)}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(\bullet,l)})$, and similarly $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(\bullet)}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(\bullet,l)})$. For the third claim, again let $i \in I$. If $l \not\in I$, then $\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)} = \Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}$, so we are done by the inductive assumption. Suppose $l \in I$. Since $\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}$ is induced by the inductive assumption, we have: \begin{align} \Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)} &= \Sigma_{i,(\bullet)} \cup (\operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)})\cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})))\\ &= (\Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))) \cup (\operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)})) \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})))\\ & = (\Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}))) \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))\\ &= \Sigma^{(\bullet, l)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)})) = \Sigma^{(l)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)})). \end{align} Thus $\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)}$ is induced. The same argument holds for the $I'$ case. For the fourth claim, let $\sigma \subseteq I$, and suppose $\cap_{i \in \sigma} \Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)}$ is nonempty. By the previous claim, each $\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)}$ is induced. Thus we write: \begin{align} \cap_{i\in \sigma}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)} &= \Sigma^{(\bullet,l)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet,l)})) \\ &= \Sigma^{(\bullet,l)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))\\ &= (\Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cup \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}))) \cap \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))\\ &= (\cap_{i \in \sigma} (\Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))) ) \cup \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}))\\ &= (\cap_{i \in \sigma} \Sigma_{i,(\bullet)} ) \cup \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})). \end{align} For convenience, define $A:=(\cap_{i \in \sigma} \Sigma_{i,(\bullet)} )$ and $B:= \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}))$. Then $\|A\|$ is contractible by inductive assumption, and $\|B\|$ is a full simplex, hence contractible. Also, $A\cap B$ has the form \begin{align} &(\cap_{i \in \sigma} (\Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}))) ) \cap \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})) \\ =& \Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(\cap_{i \in \sigma}V(\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)}) \cap V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)})) \\ =& \cap_{i \in \sigma}\Sigma_{i,(\bullet)} \cap \Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}, \end{align} and the latter is contractible by inductive assumption. Thus by Lemma \ref{lem:glue}, we have $\|A\cup B\|$ contractible. This proves the claim for the case $\sigma \subseteq I$. The case $\t \subseteq I'$ is similar. Now we proceed to the final claim. Since $\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}$ is induced, we have $\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)} = \Sigma^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}))$. By the contractibility assumption, we know that $\|\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}\|$ is contractible. Also we know that $\|\Sigma'_{l,(\bullet)}\| = \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)} \cap \operatorname{pow}(V(\Sigma'_{l,(\bullet)}))\|$ is contractible. By assumption we also have $V(\Sigma_{l,(\bullet)}) \subseteq V(\Sigma'_{l,(\bullet)})$. Thus by Lemma \ref{lem:glue-func}, we obtain homotopy equivalences $\Phi_l : \|\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}\| \r \|\Sigma^{(\bullet)}\|$ and $\Phi'_l : \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}\| \r \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}\|$ such that $\Phi'_l$ extends $\Phi_l$. Furthermore, the homotopy inverses of $\Phi_l$ and $\Phi'_l$ are just the inclusions $\|\Sigma^{(\bullet)}\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}\|$ and $\|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}\| \hookrightarrow \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}\|$. Now let $\iota: \|\Sigma^{(\bullet)}\| \r \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}\|$ and $\iota_l: \|\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}\| \r \|\Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}\|$ denote the canonical inclusions. We wish to show the equality $\Phi'_l\circ \iota_l = \iota\circ \Phi_l$. Let $x \in\|\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}\|$. Because $\Phi'_l$ extends $\Phi_l$ (this is why we needed the \emph{functorial} gluing lemma), we have \[\Phi'_l(\iota_l(x))) = \Phi'_l(x) = \Phi_l(x) = \iota(\Phi_l(x)).\] Since $x \in\|\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}\|$ was arbitrary, the equality follows immediately. By the inductive assumption, we already have homotopy equivalences $\|\Sigma^{(\bullet)}\| \r \|\Sigma\|$ and $\|\Sigma'^{(\bullet)}\| \r \|\Sigma'\|$ that commute with the canonical inclusions. Composing these maps with $\Phi_l$ and $\Phi'_l$ completes the proof of the claim.\end{subproof} By the preceding work, we replace the subcomplexes $\Sigma_l, \Sigma'_l$ by full simplices of the form $\Sigma_{l,(\bullet,l)},\Sigma_{l,(\bullet,l)}'$. In this process, the nerves remain unchanged and the complexes $\Sigma, \Sigma'$ are replaced by homotopy equivalent complexes $\Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}, \Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}$. Furthermore, this process is functorial---the homotopy equivalences commute with the canonical inclusions $\Sigma \hookrightarrow \Sigma^{(\bullet,l)}$ and $\Sigma' \hookrightarrow \Sigma'^{(\bullet,l)}$. Repeating the inductive process in Claim \ref{cl:nerve-cover-of-simplices} for all the finitely many $l \in I$ yields a simplicial complex $\Sigma^{(I)}$ along with a cover of simplices $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(I)}$. We also perform the same procedure for all $l \in I' \setminus I$ (this does not affect $\Sigma^{(I)}$) to obtain a simplicial complex $\Sigma'^{(I')}$ along with a cover of simplices $\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(I')}$. Furthermore, $\Sigma^{(I)}$ and $\Sigma'^{(I)}$ are related to $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ by a finite sequence of homotopy equivalences that commute with the canonical inclusions. Also, we have $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(I)})$ and $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'}) = \mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(I')})$. Thus we obtain the following picture: \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \node (SI') at (3,0){$\|\Sigma'^{(I')}\|$}; \node (00) at (0,0){$\cdots$}; \node (1) at (-3,0){$\|\Sigma'^{(l_1)}\|$}; \node (2) at (-6,0){$\|\Sigma'\|$}; \node (3) at (9,0){$\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})\|$}; \node (01) at (6,0){$\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',(I')})\|$}; \node (SI) at (3,2){$\|\Sigma^{(I)}\|$}; \node (02) at (0,2){$\cdots$}; \node (4) at (-3,2){$\|\Sigma^{(l_1)}\|$}; \node (5) at (-6,2){$\|\Sigma\|$}; \node (6) at (9,2){$\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma})\|$}; \node (03) at (6,2){$\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,(I)})\|$}; \draw (SI) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (02); \draw (SI') edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (00); \draw (00) edge[->] (1); \draw (3) edge[double distance=2pt] (01); \draw (02) edge[->] (4); \draw (6) edge[double distance=2pt] (03); \draw (1) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (2); \draw (00) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (1); \draw (4) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (5); \draw (02) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (4); \draw (1) edge[<-] node[right]{$\iota_{(l_1)}$} (4); \draw (2) edge[<-] node[right]{$\iota$} (5); \draw (3) edge[<-] node[right]{$\iota_{\mathcal{N}}$} (6); \draw (01) edge[<-] node[right]{$\iota_{\mathcal{N},(I)}$} (03); \draw (SI) edge[->]node[right]{$\iota_{(I)}$} (SI'); \draw (SI) edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (03); \draw (SI') edge[->]node[above]{$\simeq$} (01); \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} By applying Theorem \ref{thm:nerve-functorial-I} to the block consisting of $\|\Sigma^{(I)}\|$, $\|\Sigma'^{(I')}\|$, $\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma,I})\|$ and $\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma',I'})\|$, we obtain a square that commutes up to homotopy. Then by composing the homotopy equivalences constructed above, we obtain a square consisting of $\|\Sigma\|$, $\|\Sigma'\|$, $\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma})\|$, and $\|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})\|$ that commutes up to homotopy. Thus we obtain homotopy equivalences $\|\Sigma\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_\Sigma)\|$ and $\|\Sigma'\| \simeq \|\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{A}_{\Sigma'})\|$ via maps that commute up to homotopy with the canonical inclusions. \end{proof} \section{Dowker persistence diagrams and asymmetry}\label{sec:symmetry} From the very definition of the Rips complex at any given resolution, one can see that the Rips complex is blind to asymmetry in the input data (Remark \ref{rem:rips-symm}). In this section, we argue that either of the Dowker source and sink complexes is sensitive to asymmetry. Thus when analyzing datasets containing asymmetric information, one may wish to use the Dowker filtration instead of the Rips filtration. In particular, this property suggests that the Dowker persistence diagram is a stronger invariant for directed networks than the Rips persistence diagram. In this section, we consider a family of examples, called \emph{cycle networks}, for which the Dowker persistence diagrams capture meaningful structure, whereas the Rips persistence diagrams do not. We then probe the question ``What happens to the Dowker or Rips persistence diagram of a network upon reversal of one (or more) edges?" Intuitively, if either of these persistence diagrams captures asymmetry, we would see a change in the diagram after applying this reversal operation to an edge. \subsection{Cycle networks}\label{sec:cycle} For each $n\in \mathbb{N}$, let $(X_n,E_n,W_{E_n})$ denote the weighted graph with vertex set $X_n:=\set{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n}$, edge set $E_n:=\set{(x_1,x_2),(x_2,x_3),\ldots,(x_{n-1},x_n),(x_n,x_1)}$, and edge weights $W_{E_n}:E_n \r \mathbb{R}$ given by writing $W_{E_n}(e)=1$ for each $e\in E_n$. Next let $\omega_{G_n}:X_n\times X_n \r \mathbb{R}$ denote the shortest path distance induced on $X_n\times X_n$ by $W_{E_n}$. Then we write $G_n:=(X_n,\omega_{G_n})$ to denote the network with node set $X_n$ and weights given by $\omega_{G_n}$. Note that $\omega_{G_n}(x,x)=0$ for each $x\in X_n$. See Figure \ref{fig:cycle} for some examples. We say that $G_n$ is the \emph{cycle network of length n}. One can interpret cycle networks as being highly asymmetric, because for every consecutive pair of nodes $(x_i,x_{i+1})$ in a graph $G_n$, where $1\leq i\mod(n)\leq n$, we have $\omega_{G_n}(x_i,x_{i+1})=1$, whereas $\omega_{G_n}(x_{i+1},x_i)=\operatorname{diam}(G_n) = n-1$, which is much larger than 1 when $n$ is large. To provide further evidence that Dowker persistence is sensitive to asymmetry, we computed both the Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams, in dimensions 0 and 1, of cycle networks $G_n$, for values of $n$ between 3 and 6. Computations were carried out using \texttt{Javaplex} in Matlab with $\mathbb{Z}_2$ coefficients. The results are presented in Figure \ref{fig:cycle}. Based on our computations, we were able to conjecture and prove the result in Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1}, which gives a precise characterization of the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagram of a cycle network $G_n$, for any $n$. Furthermore, the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence barcode for any $G_n$ contains only one persistent interval, which agrees with our intuition that there is only one nontrivial loop in $G_n$. On the other hand, for large $n$, the 1-dimensional Rips persistence barcodes contain more than one persistent interval. This can be seen in the Rips persistence barcode of $G_6$, presented in Figure \ref{fig:cycle}. Moreover, for $n=3,4$, the 1-dimensional Rips persistence barcode does not contain any persistent interval at all. This suggests that Dowker persistence diagrams/barcodes are an appropriate method for analyzing cycle networks, and perhaps asymmetric networks in general. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture} \tikzset{>=latex} \node[circle,draw](1) at (0,1.5){$x_1$}; \node[circle,draw](2) at (-1,0){$x_2$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (1,0){$x_3$}; \node (4) at (0,-1){}; \path[->] (1) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (1); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The cycle network $G_3$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{dowker-G3.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{rips-G3.png} \end{subfigure} \hfill \bigskip \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture} \tikzset{>=latex} \node[circle,draw](1) at (0,1.5){$x_1$}; \node[circle,draw](2) at (-1.5,0){$x_2$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (0,-1.5,0){$x_3$}; \node[circle,draw](4) at (1.5,0){$x_4$}; \node (5) at (0,-2){}; \path[->] (1) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (4); \path[->] (4) edge [bend right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (1); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The cycle network $G_4$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{dowker-G4.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{rips-G4.png} \end{subfigure}\hfill \bigskip \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture} \tikzset{>=latex} \node[circle,draw](1) at (0,1.5){$x_1$}; \node[circle,draw](2) at (1.5,0){$x_2$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (1,-1.75){$x_3$}; \node[circle,draw](4) at (-1,-1.75){$x_4$}; \node[circle,draw](5) at (-1.5,0){$x_5$}; \node (6) at (0,-2){}; \path[->] (1) edge node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge node[left,pos=0.5]{$1$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (4); \path[->] (4) edge node[right,pos=0.5]{$1$} (5); \path[->] (5) edge node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (1); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The cycle network $G_5$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{dowker-G5.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{rips-G5.png} \end{subfigure}\hfill \bigskip \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture} \tikzset{>=latex} \node[circle,draw](1) at (-1,1.5){$x_1$}; \node[circle,draw](2) at (1,1.5){$x_2$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (1.5,0){$x_3$}; \node[circle,draw](4) at (1,-1.5){$x_4$}; \node[circle,draw](5) at (-1,-1.5){$x_5$}; \node[circle,draw](6) at (-1.5,0){$x_6$}; \node (7) at (0,-2){}; \path[->] (1) edge node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge node[left,pos=0.5]{$1$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge node[left,pos=0.5]{$1$} (4); \path[->] (4) edge node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (5); \path[->] (5) edge node[right,pos=0.5]{$1$} (6); \path[->] (6) edge node[right,pos=0.5]{$1$} (1); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The cycle network $G_6$} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{dowker-G6.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.33\linewidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{rips-G6.png} \end{subfigure}\hfill \caption{The first column contains illustrations of cycle networks $G_3,G_4,G_5$ and $G_6$. The second column contains the corresponding Dowker persistence barcodes, in dimensions 0 and 1. Note that the persistent intervals in the 1-dimensional barcodes agree with the result in Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1}. The third column contains the Rips persistence barcodes of each of the cycle networks. Note that for $n=3,4$, there are no persistent intervals in dimension 1. On the other hand, for $n=6$, there are two persistent intervals in dimension 1. } \label{fig:cycle} \end{figure} \medskip \noindent \textbf{Notation.} In the remainder of this section, we will prove results involving Dowker sink complexes of the cycle networks $G_n$ and associated vector spaces at a range of resolutions $\d$. For convenience, we will write $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d := \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,G_n}$ (where $n$ will be fixed) and $C_k^\d := C_k(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d)$, the $k$-chain vector space associated to $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ for each $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$. For each $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$, the boundary map from $C_k^\d$ to $C_{k-1}^\d$ will be denoted $\partial_k^\d$. Whenever we write $x_i$ to denote a vertex of $G_n$, the subscript $i$ should be understood as $i\Mod{n}$. We write $e_i$ to denote the 1-simplex $[x_i,x_{i+1}]$ for each $1\leq i \leq n$, where $x_{n+1}$ is understood to be $x_1$. Given an element $\gamma \in \ker(\partial_k^\d)\subseteq C_1^\d$, we will write $\langle \gamma \rangle_\d$ to denote its equivalence class in the quotient vector space $\ker(\partial_k^\d)/\operatorname{im}(\partial^\d_k)$. We will refer to the operation of taking this quotient as \emph{passing to homology}. The following theorem contains the characterization result for 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams of cycle networks. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:cycleH1} Let $G_n=(X_n,\omega_{G_n})$ be a cycle network for some $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n\geq 3$. Then we obtain: \[\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_1(G_n)=\set{(1,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2})\in \mathbb{R}^2}.\] Thus $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_1(G_n)$ consists of precisely the point $(1,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2})\in \mathbb{R}^2$ with multiplicity 1. \end{theorem} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1}] The proof occurs in three stages: first we show that a 1-cycle appears at $\d=1$, next we show that this 1-cycle does not become a boundary until $\d=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$, and finally that any other 1-cycle belongs to the same equivalence class upon passing to homology (this shows that the single point in the persistence diagram has multiplicity 1). Note that for $\d<1$, there are no 1-simplices in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, and so $H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d)$ is trivial. Suppose $1\leq \d < 2$. \begin{claim}\label{cl:cycle-2simp} There are no 2-simplices in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ for $1\leq \d < 2$. \end{claim} \begin{subproof} To see this, let $x_i,x_j,x_k$ be any three distinct vertices in $X_n$. Assume towards a contradiction that there exists $x\in X_n$ such that $(x_i,x),(x_j,x),(x_k,x)\in R_{\d,X_n},$ where $R_{\d,X_n}$ is as given by Equation \ref{eq:relation}. Thus $\omega_{G_n}(x_i,x)\in \{0,1\}$, so either $x=x_i$ or $x=x_{i+1}$. Similarly we get that $x=x_j$ or $x=x_{j+1}$, and that $x=x_k$ or $x=x_{k+1}$. But this is a contradiction, since $x_i,x_j,x_k$ are all distinct. \end{subproof} By the claim, there are no 2-simplices in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, so $\operatorname{im}(\partial^\d_2)$ is trivial and the only 1-chains are linear combinations of $e_i$ terms. Next, we define: \[v_n:=e_1 + e_2 + \ldots + e_n=[x_1,x_2]+[x_2,x_3]+ \ldots + [x_n,x_1].\] Note that $v_n\in C_1^\d$ for all $\d \geq 1$. One can further verify that $\partial^\d_1(v_n) = 0$, for any $\d \geq 1$. In other words, $v_n$ is a 1-cycle for any $\d \geq 1$. \begin{claim}\label{cl:cycle-v} Let $1\leq \d < 2$. Then $v_n$ generates $\ker(\partial^\d_1)\subseteq C_1^\d$. \end{claim} \begin{subproof} The only 1-simplices in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ are of the form $e_i$, for $1\leq i \leq n$. So it suffices to show that any linear combination of the $e_i$ terms is a multiple of $v_n$. Let $u = \sum_{i=1}^na_ie_i \in \ker(\partial^\d_1)$, for some $a_1,\ldots, a_n \in \mathbb{K}$. Then, \begin{align} 0=\partial^\d_1(u)=\sum_{i=1}^na_i\partial^\d_1(e_i) &= \sum_{i=1}^na_i([x_{i+1}]-[x_i])\\ &=\sum_{i=1}^n(a_{i-1}-a_i)[x_i], &&\text{where $x_0$ is understood to be $x_n$.} \end{align} Since all the $[x_i]$ are linearly independent, it follows that $a_1=a_2=\ldots=a_n$. Thus it follows that $u$ is a constant multiple of $v_n$. This proves the claim. \end{subproof} By the two preceding claims, it follows that $\set{\langle v_n \rangle_\d}$ is a basis for $H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d)$, for $\d \in [1,2)$. More specifically, $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ is a cycle that appears at $\d=1$ and does not become a boundary until at least $\d=2$, and any other cycle in $C_1^\d$, for $\d \in [1,2)$, is in the linear span of $v_n$. Next, suppose $\d \geq 2$. Note that this allows the appearance of cycles that are not in the span of $v_n$. In the next claim, we show that upon passing to homology, the equivalence class of any such cycle coincides with that of $v_n$. This will show that there can be at most one nontrivial element in $\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\operatorname{si}}(G_n)$. \begin{claim}\label{cl:cycle-decomp} Let $\d\geq 2$, and let $y = \sum_{i=1}^pa_i\sigma_i \in \ker(\partial^\d_1)$ for some $p\in \mathbb{N}$, some $a_1,\ldots,a_p \in \mathbb{K}$, and some $\sigma_1,\ldots, \sigma_p\in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$. Then there exists a choice of coefficients $(b_i)_{i=1}^n \in \mathbb{K}^n$ such that $z=\sum_{i=1}^nb_ie_i \in \ker(\partial^\d_1)$ and $y-z \in \operatorname{im} (\partial^\d_2)$. Moreover, we obtain $\langle y \rangle_\d = \langle z \rangle_\d = \langle v_n \rangle_\d$ upon passing to homology. \end{claim} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{dowker-cycle-prop.jpg} \caption{Given two points $x_j,x_k \in X_n$, we have either $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)\leq n/2$, or $\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x_j)< n/2$. To see this, note that $\omega_{G_n}(x,x')+\omega_{G_n}(x',x)=n$ for any $x\neq x'\in X_n$.} \label{fig:dowker-cycle-prop} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{dowker-cycle-prop-sink.png} \caption{Three possible locations for a $\d$-sink $x$ of a simplex $[x_j,x_k]$, assuming that $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)\leq n/2$. For the figure on the left, note that $\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x)\geq n/2 \geq \omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)$. For the figure in the middle, note that $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x)\geq \omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)$. Finally, for the figure on the right, where $x=x_k$, note that $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x)=\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)$ and $\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x)=0$.} \label{fig:dowker-cycle-prop-sink} \end{figure} \begin{subproof} To see this, fix $\sigma_i \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, and write $\sigma_i= [x_j,x_k]$ for some $1\leq j,k \leq n$. If $k=j+1$ (resp. $k=j-1$), then we already have $\sigma_i=e_j$ (resp. $\sigma_i=e_k$), so there is nothing more to show. Assume $k\not\in \{j+1,j-1\}$. Since $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k) + \omega_{G_n}(x_k,x_j) = n$, we have two cases: (1) $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k)\leq n/2$, or (2) $\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x_j)< n/2$. In the first case, we have $k=j+l $ for some integer $l\in [2,n/2]$ (all numbers are taken modulo $n$). In the second case, $j = k+l$ for some integer $l\in [2,n/2)$ (also modulo $n$). The situation is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:dowker-cycle-prop}. Both cases are similar, so we only prove the case $\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k) \leq n/2$. Recall that any $\d$-sink $x\in X_n$ for $[x_j, x_k]$ satisfies $\max(\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x), \omega_{G_n}(x_k,x)) \leq \d$, by the $\d$-sink condition (Equation \ref{eq:d-sink}). Also note that such a $\d$-sink $x$ satisfies \[\max(\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x),\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x)) \geq \omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k),\] as can be seen from Figure \ref{fig:dowker-cycle-prop-sink}. So whenever some $x\in X_n$ is a $\d$-sink for $[x_j,x_k]$, we have $x_k$ as a valid $\d$-sink for $[x_j,x_k]$. Since $[x_j,x_k] \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, it must have a $\d$-sink $x\in X_n$. Thus $x_k$ is a valid $\d$-sink for $[x_j,x_k]$. Next let $l\in [2,n/2]$ be an integer such that $k=j+l$ (modulo $n$). Notice that: \[0=\omega_{G_n}(x_k,x_k)=\omega_{G_n}(x_{j+l},x_k)< \omega_{G_n}(x_{j+l-1},x_k)< \ldots < \omega_{G_n}(x_{j+1},x_k)<\omega_{G_n}(x_j,x_k) \leq \d.\] Then observe that: \[[x_j,x_{j+1},x_k],[x_{j+1},x_{j+2},x_k],\ldots, [x_{k-2},x_{k-1},x_k] \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d,\] since $x_k$ is a $\d$-sink for all these 2-simplices. One can then verify the following: \begin{align} &\partial^\d_2\left([x_j,x_{j+1},x_k]+[x_{j+1},x_{j+2},x_k]+\ldots+[x_{k-2},x_{k-1},x_k]\right)\\ &=\partial_2^\d\left(\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q},x_{j+q+1},x_k]\right)\\ &=\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q+1},x_k]-\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q},x_k]+\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q},x_{j+q+1}]\\ &=\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q+1},x_k] - [x_j,x_k] - \sum_{q=0}^{k-j-3}[x_{j+q+1},x_k] +\sum_{q=0}^{k-j-2}[x_{j+q},x_{j+q+1}]\\ &=[x_j,x_{j+1}]+[x_{j+1},x_{j+2}]+\ldots+[x_{k-1},x_k]-[x_j,x_k]\\ &=e_j+e_{j+1} + \ldots + e_{k-1} -\sigma_i. \end{align} Thus $a_i(e_j+e_{j+1}+\ldots+e_{k-1})-a_i\sigma_i \in\operatorname{im} (\partial^\d_2)$. Repeating this process for all $\sigma_i$, $i\in \{1,\ldots,p\}$, we may obtain the coefficients $(b_i)_{i=1}^n$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^pa_i\sigma_i - \sum_{i=1}^nb_ie_i \in \operatorname{im}(\partial^\d_2).$ Let $z=\sum_{i=1}^nb_ie_i$. Then $y-z \in \operatorname{im}(\partial^\d_2)$. Moreover, since $\partial^\d_1\circ\partial^\d_2 = 0$, it follows that $\partial^\d_1(y)-\partial^\d_1(z)=0$, so $z\in \ker(\partial^\d_1)$. Finally, note that an argument analogous to that of Claim \ref{cl:cycle-v} shows that $b_1=b_2=\ldots=b_n$. Hence it follows that $z$ is a multiple of $v_n$. Thus $\langle z \rangle_\d = \langle v_n \rangle_\d$. This proves the claim. \end{subproof} By Claims \ref{cl:cycle-v} and \ref{cl:cycle-decomp}, it follows that $H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d)$ is generated by $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ for all $\d \geq 1$, so $\dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d))\leq 1$ for all $\d \geq 1$. It remains to show that $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ does not become trivial until $\d=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$. The cases $n=3,4$ can now be completed quickly, so we focus on these simpler situations first. For either of $n=3,4$, we have $\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}=2.$ Suppose $\d=2$ and $n=3$. Then we have $[x_1,x_2,x_3]\in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ because $\operatorname{diam}(G_n)=2$ and any of $x_1,x_2,x_3$ can be a $2$-sink for $[x_1,x_2,x_3]$. Then, \[\partial_2^\d([x_1,x_2,x_3])=[x_2,x_3]-[x_1,x_3]+[x_1,x_2]=e_1+e_2+e_3 = v_3.\] Recall that by Claim \ref{cl:cycle-2simp}, $v_3\not\in \operatorname{im}(\partial_2^\d)$ for any $\d<2$. Thus by Claim \ref{cl:cycle-v} and the preceding equation, $v_3$ generates $\ker(\partial_1^\d)$ for $1\leq \d <2$, and becomes a boundary for precisely $\d\geq 2$. Thus $\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\operatorname{si}}(G_3)=\set{(1,2)}.$ Next, suppose $\d=2$ and $n=4$. Then we have $[x_1,x_2,x_3],[x_1,x_3,x_4]\in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$ with $x_3, x_1$ as $2$-sinks, respectively. By a direct computation, we then have: \[\partial_2^\d([x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_1,x_3,x_4])=e_1+e_2+e_3+e_4 = v_4.\] By following the same argument as for the case $n=3$, we see that $\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\operatorname{si}}(G_4)=\set{(1,2)}.$ In the sequel, we assume that $n > 4$. Recall that it remains to show that $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ does not become trivial until $\d=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$, and that $\langle v_n \rangle_\d = 0$ for all $\d\geq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$. We have already shown that $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ is not trivial for $\d \in [1,2)$. We proceed by defining the following: \[\gamma_n:=[x_1,x_2,x_3] + [x_1,x_3,x_4] + \ldots + [x_1,x_{n-1},x_n] = \sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+1},x_{i+2}].\] \begin{claim} For each $\d \geq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$, we have $\gamma_n \in C_2^\d$ and $\partial_2^\d(\gamma_n)=v_n$. In particular, $\langle v_n \rangle_\d = 0$ for all such $\d$. \end{claim} \begin{subproof} Let $\d \geq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$. Notice that \[\omega_{G_n}(x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1},x_1) = n - \omega_{G_n}(x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}) = n- \operatorname{ceil}{n/2} \leq n/2 \leq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2} \leq \d,\] so $\omega_{G_n}(x_i,x_1) \leq \d$ for each $i \in \{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+2,\ldots, n\}$. Then for each $i\in \{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+2,\ldots, n-1\}$, we have $[x_i,x_{i+1},x_1] \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, with $x_1$ as a $\d$-sink. Also notice that for each $i\in \{1,\ldots,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}\}$, \[\omega_{G_n}(x_i,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1})\leq\omega_{G_n}(x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1})=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2} \leq \d,\] so $\omega_{G_n}(x_i,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}) \leq \d$. Thus for any $i\in \{2,\ldots,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}\},$ we have $[x_1,x_i,x_{i+1}] \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, with $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}$ as a $\d$-sink. Combining the two preceding observations, we see that for any $i\in \{2,\ldots, n-2\}$, we have $[x_1,x_{i+1},x_{i+2}]\in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$. It follows that $\gamma_n \in C_2^\d$. Next we observe the following: \begin{align} \partial_2^\d(\gamma_n)&=\partial_2^\d\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+1},x_{i+2}]\right)\\ &=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_{i+1},x_{i+2}] - \sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+2}]+ \sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+1}]\\ &=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_{i+1},x_{i+2}] - \sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+2}]+[x_1,x_2]+ \sum_{i=2}^{n-2}[x_1,x_{i+1}]\\ &=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}[x_{i+1},x_{i+2}] + [x_1,x_2] - [x_1,x_n] = v_n. \end{align} It follows that for any $\d \geq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$, we have $v_n \in \operatorname{im}(\partial_2^\d)$, and so $\langle v_n \rangle_\d =0$ for each such $\d$. \end{subproof} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{dowker-cycle-prop2.jpg} \caption{Placement of $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}}$ and $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}-1}$, depending on whether $n$ is even or not.} \label{fig:dowker-cycle-prop2} \end{figure} \begin{claim} There does not exist $\d \in [2,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2})$ such that $\langle v_n \rangle_\d$ is trivial. \end{claim} \begin{subproof} Let $2\leq \d< \operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$. As a first step, we wish to show that $\gamma_n \not\in C_2^\d$. For this step, it suffices to show that the 2-simplex $\sigma:= [x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}},x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}]$ does not belong to $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$. The placement of $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}}$ and $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}$ is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:dowker-cycle-prop2}. By an argument similar to that used in Figure \ref{fig:dowker-cycle-prop-sink}, one can verify that there exists a $\d$-sink for $\sigma$ if and only if at least one of $x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}}, x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}$ is a $\d$-sink for $\sigma$. But note the following: \begin{align} \omega_{G_n}(x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}},x_1)= n-(\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}-1) &= \begin{cases} n/2 + 1 &: n \text{ even}\\ \operatorname{ceil}{n/2} &: n\text{ odd} \end{cases}\\ &\geq \operatorname{ceil}{n/2} > \d, \end{align} so $x_1$ cannot be a $\d$-sink for $\sigma$. Similarly we note that $\omega_{G_n}(x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1},x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}}) = n > \d$ and $\omega_{G_n}(x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1})=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2} > \d,$ so neither $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}}$ nor $x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}$ can be $\d$-sinks for $\sigma$. Thus $\sigma \not \in \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, and so $\gamma_n \not\in C_2^\d$. Suppose there exists $\gamma' \in C_2^\d$ such that $\partial_2^\d(\gamma') = v_n$. Since $[x_1,x_2]$ is a summand of $v_n$, we must have $a_j[x_1,x_2,x_j]$ as a summand of $\gamma'$, for some coefficient $a_j$ and some $3\leq j \leq n$. First suppose that $x_j$ is a sink for $[x_1,x_2,x_j]$. We claim that $\gamma'$ is homologous to a chain containing $[x_1,x_2,x_3]$ as a summand. If $j=3$, then we are done, so suppose $j > 3$. Then we also know that $[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_j]$ is a 3-simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d}$. Let $\gamma''$ be the chain obtained from $\gamma'$ by replacing $[x_1,x_2,x_j]$ with $[x_1,x_2,x_3] - [x_2,x_3,x_j] + [x_1,x_3,x_j]$. Since $\partial_3^\d([x_1,x_2,x_3,x_j]) = [x_2,x_3,x_j] - [x_1,x_3,x_j] + [x_1,x_2,x_j] -[x_1,x_2,x_3]$ and $\partial_2^\d\circ \partial_3^\d = 0$, we know that $\partial_2^\d(\gamma'') = \partial_2^\d(\gamma') = v_n$. Now $\partial_2^\d([x_1,x_2,x_3])$ contributes an $[x_1,x_3]$ summand which does not appear in $v_n$, so it must be cancelled by some other terms in $\gamma'$ (resp. $\gamma''$). Thus there must exist another 2-simplex $[x_1,x_3,x_k]$ in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$, where $k\neq 2$. But we can repeat the preceding argument to obtain a chain homologous to $\gamma'$ containing both $[x_1,x_2,x_3]$ and $[x_1,x_3,x_4]$ as summands. Proceeding in this way, we obtain a chain homologous to $\gamma'$ that contains $[x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}},x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}]$ as a summand. But this is a contradiction to what we have shown previously, i.e. that $[x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}},x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}]$ is not a simplex in $\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_\d$. In the case where $x_j$ is not a sink for $[x_1,x_2,x_j]$, we must have $x_2$ as a sink instead. Using similar reasoning as above, we can replace $\gamma'$ in this instance by a homologous chain containing $[x_n,x_1,x_2]$ as a summand. Since $[x_n,x_2]$ is not a summand of $v_n$, we can obtain another homologous chain containing $[x_{n-1},x_n,x_1]$ as a summand, then a homologous chain containing $[x_{n-1},x_n,x_1],[x_{n-2},x_{n-1},x_1]$ as summands, and so on until we again obtain a homologous chain containing $[x_1,x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}},x_{\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}+1}]$ as a summand. Once again, this is a contradiction. This proves the claim. \end{subproof} Thus we have shown that $v_n$ is a nontrivial cycle that appears at $\d=1$, and becomes a boundary at exactly $\d=\operatorname{ceil}{n/2}$. Furthermore, we have shown that upon passing to homology, the equivalence classes of all cycles coincide with that of $v_n$. Thus there is only one off-diagonal point $(1,\operatorname{ceil}{n/2})$ on the 1-dimensional persistence diagram, which appears with multiplicity one. This concludes the proof.\end{proof} \begin{remark} From our experimental results (see Figure \ref{fig:cycle}), it appears that the 1-dimensional Rips persistence diagram of a cycle network does not admit a characterization as simple as that given by Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} for the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagram. Moreover, the Rips complexes $\mathfrak{R}^\d_{G_n}, \d \in \mathbb{R}, n\in \mathbb{N}$ correspond to certain types of \emph{independence complexes} that appear independently in the literature, and whose homotopy types remain open \cite[Question 5.3]{engstrom2009complexes}. On a related note, we point the reader to \cite{adamaszek2015vietoris} for a complete characterization of the homotopy types of Rips complexes of points on the circle (equipped with the restriction of the arc length metric). To elaborate on the connection to \cite{engstrom2009complexes}, we write $H^k_n$ to denote the undirected graph with vertex set $\set{1,\ldots, n}$, and edges given by pairs $(i,j)$ where $1\leq i < j \leq n$ and either $j-i < k$ or $(n+i) - j < k$. Next we write $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n)$ to denote the \emph{independence complex} of $H^k_n$, which is the simplicial complex consisting of subsets $\sigma \subseteq \set{1,2,\ldots, n}$ such that no two elements of $\sigma$ are connected by an edge in $H^k_n$. Then we have $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n) = \mathfrak{R}^{n-k}_{G_n}$ for each $k, n\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $k < n$. To gain intuition for this equality, fix a basepoint $1$, and consider the values of $j\in \mathbb{N}$ for which the simplex $[1,j]$ belongs to $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n)$ and to $\mathfrak{R}^{n-k}_{G_n}$, respectively. In either case, we have $k+1 \leq j \leq n-k+1$. Using the rotational symmetry of the points, one can then obtain the remaining 1-simplices. Rips complexes are determined by their 1-skeleton, so this suffices to construct $\mathfrak{R}^{n-k}_{G_n}$. Analogously, $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n)$ is determined by the edges in $H^k_n$, and hence also by its 1-skeleton. In \cite[Question 5.3]{engstrom2009complexes}, the author writes that the homotopy type of $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n)$ is still unsolved. Characterizing the persistence diagrams $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(G_n)$ thus seems to be a useful future step, both in providing a computational suggestion for the homotopy type of $\operatorname{Ind}(H^k_n)$, and also in providing a valuable example in the study of persistence of directed networks. \end{remark} \begin{remark} Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} has the following implication for data analysis: nontrivial 1-dimensional homology in the Dowker persistence diagram of an asymmetric network suggests the presence of directed cycles in the underlying data. Of course, it is not necessarily true that nontrivial 1-dimensional persistence can occur \emph{only} in the presence of a directed circle. \end{remark} \begin{remark} Our motivation for studying cycle networks is that they constitute directed analogues of circles, and we were interested in seeing if the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagram would be able to capture this analogy. Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} shows that this is indeed the case: we get a single nontrivial 1-dimensional persistence interval, which is what we would expect when computing the persistent homology of a circle in the metric space setting. We further studied the 2-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams of cycle networks. Our computational examples, some of which are illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:cycle-2dim}, enabled us to conjecture: \begin{conjecture}\label{conj:dowker-dgm-2} Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n \geq 3$, and let $G_n$ be a cycle network. If $n$ is odd, then $\operatorname{Dgm}_2^{\mathfrak{D}}(G_n)$ is trivial. If $n$ is even, then $\operatorname{Dgm}_2^{\mathfrak{D}}(G_n) = [(\frac{n}{2},\frac{n}{2}+1)\in \mathbb{R}^2],$ and the multiplicity of this point is $\frac{n}{2}-1$. \end{conjecture} This computationally motivated conjecture is in fact true; moreover, we have a full characterization of the persistence diagram of a cycle network across all dimensions $k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$. This characterization relies on results in \cite{adamaszek2015vietoris} and \cite{adamaszek2016nerve}, and is stated for even and odd dimensions below: \begin{restatable}[Even dimension]{theorem}{thmdowkercyceven} \label{thm:dowker-cyc-even} Fix $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n \geq 3$. If $l\in \mathbb{N}$ is such that $n$ is divisible by $(l+1)$, and $k:=\tfrac{nl}{l+1}$ is such that $0\leq k \leq n-2$, then $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_{2l}(G_n)$ consists of precisely the point $(\tfrac{nl}{l+1},\tfrac{nl}{l+1} + 1)$ with multiplicity $\tfrac{n}{l+1} -1$. If $l$ or $k$ do not satisfy the conditions above, then $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_{2l}(G_n)$ is trivial. \end{restatable} As a special case, Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-even} proves Conjecture \ref{conj:dowker-dgm-2} by setting $l=1$. If $n$ is odd, then it is not divisible by $(l+1) = 2$, and so $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_2(G_n)$ is trivial. If $n$ is even, then it is divisible by $(l+1)=2$, and $\tfrac{nl}{l+1} = \tfrac{n}{2} \leq n-2$ because $n$ is at least 4. Thus $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_2(G_n)$ consists of the point $(\tfrac{n}{2},\tfrac{n}{2} + 1)$ with multiplicity $\tfrac{n}{2} - 1$. \begin{restatable}[Odd dimension]{theorem}{thmdowkercycodd}\label{thm:dowker-cyc-odd} Fix $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n\geq 3$. Then for $l\in \mathbb{N}$, define $M_l:=\set{m \in \mathbb{N} : \tfrac{nl}{l+1} < m < \tfrac{n(l+1)}{l+2}}$. If $M_l$ is empty, then $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_{2l+1}(G_n)$ is trivial. Otherwise, we have: \[\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_{2l+1}(G_n) = \set{\left(a_l,\operatorname{ceil}{\tfrac{n(l+1)}{l+2}}\right)},\] where $a_l:=\min\set{m \in M_l}.$ We use set notation (instead of multisets) to mean that the multiplicity is 1. \end{restatable} In particular, for $l=0$, we have $\tfrac{nl}{l+1} = 0$ and $\tfrac{n(l+1)}{l+2} = \tfrac{n}{2} \geq 3/2$, so $1 \in M_l$. Thus we have $\operatorname{Dgm}^{\mathfrak{D}}_1(G_n) = \set{\left(1,\operatorname{ceil}{\tfrac{n}{2}}\right)},$ and so Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-odd} recovers Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} as a special case. However, whereas the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} is elementary and pedagogical (it relies on intuitive observations about the structure of a cycle network), the proofs of Theorems \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-even} and \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-odd} use sophisticated machinery developed across \cite{adamaszek2015vietoris} and \cite{adamaszek2016nerve}. We provide details for Theorem \ref{thm:cycleH1} in the body of the paper, and relegate full details of Theorems \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-even} and \ref{thm:dowker-cyc-odd} to Appendix \ref{sec:cycle-addendum}. \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}{0.48\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{dowker-G4-dim2.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.48\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{dowker-G6-dim2.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.48\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{dowker-G8-dim2.png} \end{subfigure} \caption{Sample 2-dimensional Dowker persistence barcodes for cycle networks $G_4,G_6,G_8$. In our experiments, 2-dimensional Dowker persistence barcodes for $G_n$ were always empty for $n$ odd.} \label{fig:cycle-2dim} \end{figure} \end{remark} \subsection{Sensitivity to network transformations} We first make the following: \begin{definition}[Pair swaps] Let $(X,\omega_X) \in \Ncal$ be a network. For any $z,z'\in X$, define the \emph{$(z,z')$-swap} of $(X,\omega_X)$ to be the network $S_X(z,z'):=(X^{z,z'},\omega_X^{z,z'})$ defined as follows: \begin{align} X^{z,z'}&:= X,\\ \text{For any $x,x'\in X^{z,z'}$,}\qquad \omega_X^{z,z'}(x,x')&:=\begin{cases} \omega_X(x',x) &: x=z,x'=z'\\ \omega_X(x',x) &: x'=z,x=z'\\ \omega_X(x,x') &: \text{otherwise.} \end{cases} \end{align} \end{definition} We then pose the following question: \begin{quote} \emph{Given a network $(X,\omega_X)$ and an $(x,x')$-swap $S_X(x,x')$ for some $x,x'\in X$, how do the Rips or Dowker persistence diagrams of $S_X(x,x')$ differ from those of $(X,\omega_X)$?} \end{quote} This situation is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:3-node-networks}. Example \ref{ex:3-node} shows an example where the Dowker persistence diagram captures the variation in a network that occurs after a pair swap, whereas the Rips persistence diagram fails to capture this difference. Furthermore, Remark \ref{rem:swap-rips} shows that Rips persistence diagrams always fail to do so. We also consider the extreme situation where all the directions of the edges of a network are reversed, i.e. the network obtained by applying the pair swap operation to each pair of nodes. We would intuitively expect that the persistence diagrams would not change. The following discussion shows that the Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams are invariant under taking the transpose of a network. \begin{proposition}\label{prop:si-so} Recall the transposition map $\mathfrak{t}$ and the shorthand notation $X^{\top}=\mathfrak{t}(X)$ from Definition \ref{defn:sym-trans}. Let $k\in \mathbb{Z}_+$. Then $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{si}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\operatorname{so}}(X^\top),$ and therefore $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{D}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{D}}(X^\top)$ by Theorem \ref{thm:dowker-functorial}. \end{proposition} \begin{remark}[Pair swaps and their effect]\label{rem:swap-rips} Let $(X,\omega_X)\in \Ncal$, let $z,z'\in X$, and let $\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(X)$. Then we have: \[\max_{x,x'\in \sigma}\omega_X(x,x') = \max_{x,x'\in \sigma}\omega_X^{z,z'}(x,x').\] Using this observation, one can then repeat the arguments used in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:si-so} to show that: \[\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(S_X(z,z')),\text{ for each } k \in \mathbb{Z}_+.\] This encodes the intuitive fact that Rips persistence diagrams are blind to pair swaps. Moreover, succesively applying the pair swap operation over all pairs produces the transpose of the original network, and so it follows that $\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_k^{\mathfrak{R}}(X^\top)$. On the other hand, $k$-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams are not necessarily invariant to pair swaps when $k\geq 1$. Indeed, Example \ref{ex:3-node} below constructs a space $X$ for which there exist points $z,z'\in X$ such that \[\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\mathfrak{D}}(X)\neq\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\mathfrak{D}}(S_X(z,z')).\] However, 0-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams are still invariant to pair swaps: \begin{proposition} \label{prop:dowker0pair} Let $(X,\omega_X)\in \Ncal$, let $z,z'$ be any two points in $Z$, and let $\sigma \in \operatorname{pow}(X)$. Then we have: \[\operatorname{Dgm}_0^{\mathfrak{D}}(X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_0^{\mathfrak{D}}(S_X(z,z')).\] \end{proposition} \end{remark} \begin{example} \label{ex:3-node} Consider the three node dissimilarity networks $(X,\omega_X)$ and $(Y,\omega_Y)$ in Figure \ref{fig:3-node-networks}. Note that $(Y,\omega_Y)$ coincides with $S_X(a,c)$. We present both the Dowker and Rips persistence barcodes obtained from these networks. Note that the Dowker persistence barcode is sensitive to the difference between $(X,\omega_X)$ and $(Y,\omega_Y)$, whereas the Rips barcode is blind to this difference. We refer the reader to \S\ref{sec:exp} for details on how we compute these barcodes. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture} \tikzset{>=latex} \begin{scope}[draw,red] \node[circle,draw](1) at (0,2.5){$a$}; \node[circle,draw](2) at (-1.5,0){$b$}; \node[circle,draw](3) at (1.5,0){$c$}; \node[black] at (0,-1){$(X,\omega_X)$}; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[xshift=0cm,draw,purple] \node[circle,draw](4) at (6.5,2.5){$a$}; \node[circle,draw](5) at (5,0){$b$}; \node[circle,draw](6) at (8,0){$c$}; \node[black] at (6.5,-1){$(Y,\omega_Y)$}; \end{scope} \begin{scope}[draw=NavyBlue] \path[->] (1) edge [loop above] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (1); \path[->] (2) edge [loop left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (2); \path[->] (3) edge [loop right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (3); \path[->] (4) edge [loop above] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (4); \path[->] (5) edge [loop left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (5); \path[->] (6) edge [loop right] node[above,pos=0.5]{$0$} (6); \path[->] (1) edge [bend left,in=180,out=0] node[above,pos=0.5]{$6$} (2); \path[->] (2) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (1); \path[->] (1) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$4$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge [bend left,out=0,in=180] node[above,pos=0.5]{$2$} (1); \path[->] (2) edge [ bend left] node[below,pos=0.5]{$5$} (3); \path[->] (3) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$3$} (2); \path[->] (4) edge [bend left,in=180,out=0] node[above,pos=0.5]{$6$} (5); \path[->] (5) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$1$} (4); \path[->] (4) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$2$} (6); \path[->] (6) edge [bend left,in=180,out=0] node[above,pos=0.5]{$4$} (4); \path[->] (5) edge [ bend left] node[below,pos=0.5]{$5$} (6); \path[->] (6) edge [bend left] node[above,pos=0.5]{$3$} (5); \end{scope} \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \caption{$(Y,\omega_Y)$ is the $(a,c)$-swap of $(X,\omega_X)$.} \label{fig:3-node-networks} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio] {pers-net-X-ink.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth] {pers-net-Y-ink.png} \end{subfigure} \caption{Dowker persistence barcodes of networks $(X,\omega_X)$ and $(Y,\omega_Y)$ from Figure \ref{fig:3-node-networks}.} \label{fig:pers-nets} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio] {rips-pers-net-X-ink.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth] {rips-pers-net-Y-ink.png} \end{subfigure} \caption{Rips persistence barcodes of networks $(X,\omega_X)$ and $(Y,\omega_Y)$ from Figure \ref{fig:3-node-networks}. Note that the Rips diagrams indicate no persistent homology in dimensions higher than 0, in contrast with the Dowker diagrams in Figure \ref{fig:pers-nets}.} \label{fig:rips-pers-nets} \end{figure} To show how the Dowker complex is constructed, we also list the Dowker sink complexes of the networks in Figure \ref{fig:3-node-networks}, and also the corresponding homology dimensions across a range of resolutions. Note that when we write $[a,b](a)$, we mean that $a$ is a sink corresponding to the simplex $[a,b]$. \begin{align} \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{0,X} = \set{[a],[b],[c]} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{0,X})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{1,X} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{1,X})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{2,X} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a),[a,c](a),[b,c](a),[a,b,c](a)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{2,X})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{3,X} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a),[a,c](a),[b,c](a),[a,b,c](a)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{3,X})) = 0 \end{align} \begin{align} \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{0,Y} = \set{[a],[b],[c]} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{0,Y})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{1,Y} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{1,Y})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{2,Y} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a),[a,c](c)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{2,Y})) = 0\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{3,Y} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a),[a,c](c),[b,c](b)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{3,Y})) = 1\\ \mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{4,Y} = \set{[a],[b],[c],[a,b](a),[a,c](a),[b,c](a),[a,b,c](a)} && \dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{4,Y})) = 0\\ \end{align} Note that for $\d \in [3,4)$, $\dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,Y})) = 1$, whereas $\dim(H_1(\mf{D}^{\operatorname{si}}_{\d,X}))=0$ for each $\d\in \mathbb{R}$. \end{example} Based on the discussion in Remark \ref{rem:swap-rips}, Proposition \ref{prop:dowker0pair}, and Example \ref{ex:3-node}, we conclude the following: \begin{center} \textbf{Moral: }\textit{Unlike Rips persistence diagrams, Dowker persistence diagrams are truly sensitive to asymmetry.} \end{center} We summarize some of these results: \begin{theorem} \label{thm:sym-trans-summary} Recall the symmetrization and transposition maps $\mathfrak{s}$ and $\mathfrak{t}$ from Definition \ref{defn:sym-trans}. Then: \begin{enumerate} \item $\mathfrak{R}\circ \mathfrak{s} = \mathfrak{R}$, \item $\mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{so}}\circ \mathfrak{t} = \mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{si}}$, and \item $\mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{si}}\circ \mathfrak{t} = \mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{so}}$. \end{enumerate} Also, there exist $(X,\omega_X), (Y,\omega_Y) \in \Ncal$ such that $(\mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{si}}\circ \mathfrak{s})(X) \neq \mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{si}}(X)$, and $(\mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{so}}\circ \mathfrak{s})(Y) \neq \mathfrak{D}^{\operatorname{so}}(Y)$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} These follow from Example \ref{ex:3-node}, Remark \ref{rem:rips-symm}, and Proposition \ref{prop:si-so}.\end{proof} \section{Implementation and an experiment on network classification}\label{sec:exp} In this section, we present the results of an experiment where we applied our methods to perform a classification task on a database of networks. All persistent homology computations were carried out using the \texttt{Javaplex} package for Matlab. A full description of Javaplex can be found in \cite{tausz2011javaplex}. We used $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{Z}_2$ as the field of coefficients for all our persistence computations. The dataset and software used for our computations are available as part of the \texttt{PersNet} software package on \url{https://research.math.osu.edu/networks/Datasets.html}. A version of our simulated hippocampal networks experiment has appeared in \cite{dowker-asilo}. All networks in the following experiment were normalized to have weights in the range $[0,1]$. For each network, we computed Dowker sink complexes at resolutions $\d = 0.01,0.02,0.03,\ldots,1.00$. This filtration was then passed into Javaplex, which produced 0 and 1-dimensional Dowker persistence barcodes. \subsection{Simulated hippocampal networks} \label{sec:exp-arenas} In the neuroscience literature, it has been shown that as an animal explores a given \emph{environment} or \emph{arena}, specific ``place cells" in the hippocampus show increased activity at specific spatial regions, called ``place fields" \cite{o1971hippocampus}. Each place cell shows a \emph{spike} in activity when the animal enters the place field linked to this place cell, accompanied by a drop in activity as the animal moves far away from this place field. To understand how the brain processes this data, a natural question to ask is the following: Is the time series data of the place cell activity, referred to as ``spike trains", enough to detect the structure of the arena? Approaches based on homology \cite{curto2008cell} and persistent homology \cite{dabaghian2012topological} have shown positive results in this direction. In \cite{dabaghian2012topological}, the authors simulated the trajectory of a rat in an arena containing ``holes." A simplicial complex was then built as follows: whenever $n+1$ place cells with overlapping place fields fired together, an $n$-simplex was added. This yield a filtered simplicial complexed indexed by a time parameter. By computing persistence, it was then shown that the number of persistent bars in the 1-dimensional barcode of this filtered simplicial complex would accurately represent the number of holes in the arena. We repeated this experiment with the following change in methodology: we simulated the movement of an animal, and corresponding hippocampal activity, in arenas with a variety of obstacles. We then induced a directed network from each set of hippocampal activity data, and computed the associated 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams. We were interested in seeing if the bottleneck distances between diagrams arising from similar arenas would differ significantly from the bottleneck distance between diagrams arising from different arenas. To further exemplify our methods, we repeated our analysis after computing the 1-dimensional Rips persistence diagrams from the hippocampal activity networks. In our experiment, there were five arenas. The first was a square of side length $L=10$, with four circular ``holes" or ``forbidden zones" of radius $0.2L$ that the trajectory could not intersect. The other four arenas were those obtained by removing the forbidden zones one at a time. In what follows, we refer to the arenas of each type as \emph{4-hole, 3-hole, 2-hole, 1-hole,} and \emph{0-hole arenas}. For each arena, a random-walk trajectory of 5000 steps was generated, where the animal could move along a square grid with 20 points in each direction. The grid was obtained as a discretization of the box $[0,L]\times [0,L]$, and each step had length $0.05L$. The animal could move in each direction with equal probability. If one or more of these moves took the animal outside the arena (a disallowed move), then the probabilities were redistributed uniformly among the allowed moves. Each trajectory was tested to ensure that it covered the entire arena, excluding the forbidden zones. Formally, we write the time steps as a set $T:=\set{1,2,\ldots, 5000}$, and denote the trajectory as a map $\operatorname{traj}:T \r [0,L]^2$. For each of the five arenas, 20 trials were conducted, producing a total of 100 trials. For each trial $l_k$, an integer $n_k$ was chosen uniformly at random from the interval $[150,200]$. Then $n_k$ place fields of radius $0.05L$ were scattered uniformly at random inside the corresponding arena for each $l_k$. An illustration of the place field distribution is provided in Figure \ref{fig:arenas-rasters}. A spike on a place field was recorded whenever the trajectory would intersect it. So for each $1\leq i\leq n_k$, the spiking pattern of cell $x_i$, corresponding to place field PF$_i$, was recorded via a function $r_i:T\r \set{0,1}$ given by: \[r_i(t)=\begin{cases} 1 &:\text{if } \operatorname{traj}(t)\text{ intersects } \text{PF}_i,\\ 0 &: \text{otherwise}\end{cases} \qquad\qquad t\in T.\] The matrix corresponding to $r_i$ is called the \emph{raster} of cell $x_i$. A sample raster is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:arenas-rasters}. For each trial $l_k$, the corresponding network $(X_k,\omega_{X_k})$ was constructed as follows: $X_k$ consisted of $n_k$ nodes representing place fields, and for each $1\leq i,j\leq n_k$, the weight $\omega_{X_k}(x_i,x_j)$ was given by: \begin{align} \omega_{X_k}(x_i,x_j) &:=1-\frac{N_{i,j}(5)}{\sum_{i=1}^{n_k}N_{i,j}(5)},\\ \text{ where } N_{i,j}(5)&=\operatorname{card}\left(\set{(s,t)\in T^2:t\in [2,5000], t-s\in [1,5], r_j(t)=1,r_i(s)=1}\right). \end{align*} In words, $N_{i,j}(5)$ counts the pairs of times $(s,t), s < t,$ such that cell $x_j$ spikes (at a time $t$) after cell $x_i$ spikes (at a time $s$), and the delay between the two spikes is fewer than 5 time steps. The idea is that if cell $x_j$ frequently fires within a short span of time after cell $x_i$ fires, then place fields PF$_i$ and PF$_j$ are likely to be in close proximity to each other. The column sum of the matrix corresponding to $\omega_{X_k}$ is normalized to 1, and so $\omega_{X_k}^\top$ can be interpreted as the transition matrix of a Markov process. \begin{figure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{0hole.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{1hole.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{2hole.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{3hole.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{4hole.png} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}{0.3\linewidth} \includegraphics[width = \textwidth,keepaspectratio]{raster.png} \end{subfigure} \caption{\textbf{Bottom right:} Sample place cell spiking pattern matrix. The $x$-axis corresponds to the number of time steps, and the $y$-axis corresponds to the number of place cells. Black dots represent spikes. \textbf{Clockwise from bottom middle:} Sample distribution of place field centers in 4, 3, 0, 1, and 2-hole arenas. } \label{fig:arenas-rasters} \end{figure} Next, we computed the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams of each of the 100 networks. Note that $\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\mathfrak{D}}(\omega_X)=\operatorname{Dgm}_1^{\mathfrak{D}}(\omega_X^\top)$ by Proposition \ref{prop:si-so}, so we are actually obtaining the 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams of transition matrices of Markov processes. We then computed a $100\times 100$ matrix consisting of the bottleneck distances between all the 1-dimensional persistence diagrams. The single linkage dendrogram generated from this bottleneck distance matrix is shown in Figure \ref{fig:dendro-dowker-arenas}. The labels are in the format \texttt{env-<nh>-<nn>}, where \texttt{nh} is the number of holes in the arena/environment, and \texttt{nn} is the number of place fields. Note that with some exceptions, networks corresponding to the same arena are clustered together. We conclude that the Dowker persistence diagram succeeded in capturing the intrinsic differences between the five classes of networks arising from the five different arenas, even when the networks had different sizes. We then computed the Rips persistence diagrams of each network, and computed the $100\times 100$ bottleneck distance matrix associated to the collection of 1-dimensional diagrams. The single linkage dendrogram generated from this matrix is given in Figure \ref{fig:dendro-rips-arenas}. Notice that the Rips dendrogram does not do a satisfactory job of classifying arenas correctly. \begin{remark} We note that an alternative method of comparing the networks obtained from our simulations would have been to compute the pairwise network distances, and plot the results in a dendrogram. But $\dn$ is NP-hard to compute---this follows from the fact that computing $\dn$ includes the problem of computing Gromov-Hausdorff distance between finite metric spaces, which is NP-hard \cite{schmiedl}. So instead, we are computing the bottleneck distances between 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams, as suggested by Remark \ref{rem:dowker-benefits}. \end{remark} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.95\textwidth]{dendro-dowker-arenas.pdf} \end{center} \caption{Single linkage dendrogram corresponding to the distance matrix obtained by computing bottleneck distances between 1-dimensional Dowker persistence diagrams of our database of hippocampal networks (\S\ref{sec:exp-arenas}). Note that the 4, 3, and 2-hole arenas are well separated into clusters at threshold 0.1.} \label{fig:dendro-dowker-arenas} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width = 0.95\textwidth]{dendro-rips-arenas.pdf} \end{center} \caption{Single linkage dendrogram corresponding to the distance matrix obtained by computing bottleneck distances between 1-dimensional Rips persistence diagrams of our database of hippocampal networks (\S\ref{sec:exp-arenas}). Notice that the hierarchical clustering fails to capture the correct arena types.} \label{fig:dendro-rips-arenas} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} We provided a complete description of the Rips and Dowker persistence diagrams of general networks. The stability results we have provided give quantitative guarantees on the robustness of these persistence diagrams. As a building block, we proved a functorial generalization of Dowker's theorem, which also yields an independent proof of a folklore strengthening of Dowker's theorem. We have provided numerous examples suggesting that Dowker persistence diagrams are an appropriate method for analyzing general asymmetric networks. For a particular class of such examples, the family of cycle networks, we have fully characterized their Dowker persistence diagrams in all dimensions. Finally, we have implemented our methods for a classification task on a database of networks, and provided interpretations for our results. We believe that the story of ``persistent homology of asymmetric networks" has more aspects to be uncovered. Of particular interest to us is the analysis of alternative methods of producing simplicial complexes from asymmetric networks, for example, the \emph{directed flag complex} construction of \cite{dlotko2016topological}. Yet another interesting extension to the non-metric framework has appeared in \cite{edelsbrunner2016topological}, in the context of computing generalized \v{C}ech and Rips complexes for Bregman divergences. We remark that a persistent homology framework for the directed flag complex has been proposed by \cite{turner}, but the computational aspects of this construction have not been addressed in the current literature. Another approach for computing persistence diagrams from asymmetric networks, which bypasses the construction of any simplicial complex and operates directly at the chain level is given in \cite{pph}. Some other interesting questions relate to cycle networks: for example, we would like to obtain a characterization of the Rips persistence diagrams of cycle networks for any dimension $k\geq 1$. Finally, it is important to devise more efficient implementations for the Dowker complexes we present here. It is likely that ideas from the literature on efficient construction of \v{C}ech complexes \cite{dantchev2012efficient, edelsbrunner2016topological} will be helpful in this regard. \medskip \paragraph{\textbf{Acknowledgments.}} This work was supported by NSF grants IIS-1422400 and CCF-1526513. We thank Pascal Wild and Zhengchao Wan for pointing out errors on an early preprint, and also Osman Okutan and Tim Porter for useful discussions. We are especially thankful to Henry Adams for numerous helpful observations and suggestions, especially regarding the material in Appendix \ref{sec:cycle-addendum}, and for suggesting the proof strategy for Theorem \ref{thm:cyc-cech-main}. \bibliographystyle{alpha}
\section{Introduction} Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) is a procedure in which an ambiguous term or concept is assigned a single sense appropriate for that context, and is an important step in the creation of a semantic representation of a document \cite{ide1998introduction}. While performing WSD will benefit most natural language processing applications, disambiguation of concepts is a critical component of applications operating on clinical and biomedical text, in which the same word can denote differing concepts, and may thus elicit radically different responses. Compounding this problem of ambiguity is the fact that clinical text, in general, is noisier than other domains, and contains a large variety of abbreviations, some of which may be specific to a single hospital or physician. Additionally, there is a marked absence of large volumes of annotated clinical text, even for English, which presents a problem for supervised approaches to Word Sense Disambiguation. For other languages, such as Dutch, there exist no freely available annotated corpora of clinical text. A first step towards solving this problem could be the use of distributed representations. Where a more traditional word representation, such as a TF-IDF bag-of-words (BoW) representation, carries frequency information, distributed representations encode semantic information. A big advantage to using these representations is that they can be generated from large corpora of unlabeled text, and can be trained on very large corpora in a reasonable amount of time. These representations, especially when trained using neural architectures such as \texttt{word2vec} \cite{mikolov2013}, have been shown to improve performance on a variety of tasks when compared to more traditional BoW representations. We hypothesize that these kinds of distributional representations are well-suited for WSD in the clinical and biomedical domain because of the lack of training data, and the large terminological variety. We present a knowledge-based approach to Word Sense Disambiguation which creates concept representations by combining definitions from the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) with distributed representations. We test our hypothesis on the MSH-WSD, which is a well-known dataset for WSD in the biomedical domain. \section{Related Research}\label{sec:rr} All knowledge-based methods we review use the Unified Medical Language System\textsuperscript{\textregistered} (UMLS) Metathesaurus\textsuperscript{\textregistered} \cite{umls} as a knowledge base, possibly augmented with external sources, such as MeSH\textsuperscript{\textregistered}-indexed abstracts. Generally speaking, the UMLS contains two separate information sources that are suitable for use in disambiguation: the concept unique identifier (CUI), which is a unique label for each concept, and the semantic type (ST), which is a set of 135 broad labels such as ``Animal'' or ``Chemical''. In general, a word is only considered disambiguated if the correct CUI can be selected; hence, as \newcite{mcinnes2013} note, approaches based on semantic types are not able to disambiguate between approximately 12\% of concepts, as some concepts with the same surface form have an identical ST, but a different CUI. In terms of approaches using ST, \newcite{humphreys2005} create one vector for each semantic type by creating a BoW representation of all words that denote that semantic type. For each ambiguous term, a target word vector is created by taking a window of words from the right and left of the term. The concept which is associated with the ST with the lowest cosine distance is then taken to be the correct sense of the term. Similarly, \newcite{alexopoulou} create a method which finds the closest concept based on a combination of co-occurrence with other semantic types and ontological similarity through \emph{is-a} relationships. Closest to our approach is the machine readable dictionary (MRD) approach \cite{mcinnes2008,jimenoyepes2011}, which uses definitions from the UMLS to create concept vectors by creating BoW representations of concepts using all definitions of the concept and those of related concepts. This BoW representation contains TF-IDF values where D is the number of concepts in which a word appears, thereby reducing the influence of general words which occur in many concepts. These representations are then compared to the vectorized contexts of the ambiguous terms using cosine distance. A refinement of MRD, called second-order co-occurrence MRD (2-MRD) \cite{mcinnes2008}, replaces each word in a definition by a vector which contains TF-IDF values of co-occurrence counts, thereby associating each word with a context. \newcite{mcinnes2013} introduce UMLS::SenseRelate, an approach which is based on \newcite{pedersen2004}'s WordNet::SenseRelate. In this system, each possible sense for an ambiguous term is assigned a distance-weighted score based on the \emph{concepts} of the terms surrounding it, where the concepts of the surrounding terms are determined using UMLS::Similarity \cite{mcinnes2009}. \newcite{jimenoyepes2014} present so-called step models, which calculate the probability of a word occurring with a certain concept by considering the number of times a word occurs in the definitions of that concept and its related concepts. It then steps through the UMLS-defined ontology of concepts, and refines the probabilities for each word and each concept based on the relations within the ontology. Finally, \newcite{chen2014unified} present an approach for general WSD which uses word embeddings coupled with WordNet \cite{fellbaum1998wordnet} as a resource to perform sense disambiguation, and which creates sense-specific word embeddings from these sense-disambiguated word representations. \section{Materials}\label{sec:materials} \subsection{Test Corpus}\label{sec:corpus} We use the MSH-WSD corpus \cite{jimenoyepes2011}, which consists of a set of 203 ambiguous terms, each associated with multiple concepts, to evaluate our approach. Of the 203 terms in the corpus, 106 are regular terms, 88 are acronyms, and 9 can be acronyms and regular terms. For each of these concepts, up to 100 MeSH abstracts were retrieved, resulting in a set of 37,888 abstracts. In our approach, all abstracts were pre-processed using the tokenizer from the Pattern package \cite{patternref}, and all stop words were removed using the English stop word list from \texttt{scikit-learn} \cite{sklearn}. \begin{table}[t!] \centering \begin{tabular}{p{1.9cm}\| p{1.1cm} p{1.7cm} p{1.2cm}} \hline & \textbf{Medline} & \textbf{Mimic-III} & \textbf{Bioasq} \\ \hline \textbf{Corpus size} & 920,081 & 13,097,844 & -\\ \textbf{Vocabulary} & 196,960 & 71,663 & 1,701,632 \\ \textbf{Dimension} & 320 & 320 & 200 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{The number of words in the corpus, the resulting vocabulary size, and the dimension of the resulting vectors.} \label{corpora} \end{table} \subsection{Word vectors}\label{sec:vectors} We evaluate our approach using three sets of vectors: The first set was trained on a small set of Medline abstracts\footnote{The specific IDs of these abstracts are available in the online appendix.}, and a second set of vectors created on the entirety of the MIMIC-III corpus of clinical notes \cite{mimicref}. For both sets, we used the \texttt{word2vec} implementation from \texttt{gensim} \cite{gensim}, using skipgram with negative sampling, a frequency cutoff of 5 and a negative sampling of 15. Additionally, we used a third set of vectors, available from the BioASQ organisers\footnote{Available on the BioASQ website.}, which was trained on a much larger set of Medline abstracts.\footnote{While we concede that the BioASQ corpora might contain abstracts from the MSH dataset, it does not contain any explicit labeled information that might be used in disambiguation.} The model statistics are visualized in Table \ref{corpora}. \section{Approach}\label{sec:approach} Similar to the 2-MRD approach detailed above, our approach creates \emph{concept vectors} by replacing each word in every definition by the vector representation of that word. This creates an $M \times n$ matrix for each definition, where $M$ is the dimensionality of the word vectors, and $n$ the number of words contained in that definition. Following this, for each definition, we then obtain a single vector of dimensionality $M$ by applying a compositional function to the matrix, thereby obtaining so-called \emph{definition vectors}, which represent the entire meaning of the definition in one vector. Each concept can then be represented by a $M \times d$ matrix, where $d$ is the number of definitions that a concept has in the UMLS. Finally, we apply a second composition function to this matrix, thereby obtaining a single vector of dimensionality $M$ which represents the combined meaning of all definitions for that concept, i.e. a \emph{concept vector}. For each abstract in the test corpus, we first locate each ambiguous term through a simple lookup. For each located term in the abstract we create a vector representation by retrieving all words in a window of size $w$ surrounding the ambiguous term, and replacing the words by their vectors. Note that this window does not include the ambiguous term itself. These collections of vectors are then combined into $M$-dimensional vectors using the same composition function as above. This is done separately for each term occurrence within a single document, creating a $M \times x$ matrix, where $x$ is the number of times the ambiguous term occurs in a single document. These are then combined in an $M$-dimensional \emph{term vector} using the same composition we used for the concepts, above. A schematic representation of our model is given in Figure \ref{fig}. Because all concept and term vectors are created using the same distributed vectors and compositional functions, the vector space in which they are placed is also comparable. Hence, for each ambiguous word we encounter, we can use the cosine distance between the abstract vector of the ambiguous utterance and each possible sense of that word to determine the correct sense. This makes our approach very similar to the \emph{Lesk} family of approaches \cite{lesk}. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{model} \caption{Our model represents a concept by replacing all words $W$ in a definition $D$ by their vectors, and then composing these into a definition vector with a function $f(x)$. For each concept, all definition vectors $D$ are then composed into a concept vector $C$ using a second composition function $g(x)$.} \label{fig} \end{figure} In terms of composition function we experimented with elementwise multiplication, averaging and summation, all of which are unordered compositional functions \cite{mitchell2008}. In addition, it is worth noting that there's still a lively debate whether ordered composition actually leads to better results for estimating document-, or sentence-level meaning, when compared to unordered composition \cite{iyyer2015,socher2013}. \section{Results}\label{sec:results} \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \begin{tabular}{l\|p{0.6cm}p{0.6cm}p{0.6cm}p{0.6cm}p{1.3cm}p{1cm}p{1cm}p{1cm}l} \hline & \textbf{med} & \textbf{mim} & \textbf{bio} & \textbf{MRD} & \textbf{2-MRD} & \textbf{0-step} & \textbf{2-step} & \textbf{r-step} & \textbf{UMLS::SenseRelate} \\ \hline \textbf{Accuracy C} & 0.80 & 0.69 & 0.84 & 0.81 & 0.78 & 0.82 & 0.86 & 0.89 & 0.75 \\ \textbf{Accuracy U} & 0.72 & 0.63 & 0.75 & - & - & - & - & - & - \end{tabular} \caption{Results using constrained (C) and unconstrained (U) terms.} \label{tab:results} \end{table} \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \begin{tabular}{r\|l} \hline \textbf{Term} & \textbf{Accuracy} \\ \hline \textbf{DE} & 0.31 \\ \textbf{Hemlock} & 0.4 \\ \textbf{Brucella Abortus} & 0.46 \\ \textbf{WT1} & 0.46 \\ \textbf{Murine Sarcoma Virus} & 0.47 \end{tabular} \caption{The 5 lowest-performing terms.} \label{table:discuss} \end{table} The accuracy scores obtained by our models using the different word vectors are displayed in Table \ref{tab:results}. $med$, $mim$ and $bio$ denote the vectors created on the small Medline corpus, the Mimic-III corpus and the BioASQ vectors, respectively. We consider both a constrained and an unconstrained version of the task. For each word, the constrained version of the task only considers the senses present in the MSH-WSD dataset as possible targets. The unconstrained version considers all concepts which are denoted by the ambiguous term in the 2015AB version of the UMLS as possible targets. The term \texttt{cortex}, for example, only has 2 concepts associated with it in the MSH-WSD dataset, while in the 2015AB UMLS release it can denote 5 separate concepts. Because the unconstrained version of the task considers all words, it therefore gives a better indication of real-life performance. Accuracy C and U denote that the scores were obtained in the constrained settings and unconstrained setting, respectively. All reported scores use a window size of 6, which was optimized on a randomly selected set of 20 terms from the MSH-WSD set. Varying the window size had negligible results: all window sizes over 6 had comparable results, and increasing the window size over 30 causes a (small) decline in results. This is in line with \newcite{mcinnes2013}, who report a positive effect of window size that quickly tapers off for window sizes $> 10$. Concerning the composition functions, summation and averaging as first and second order composition function worked best, while using element-wise multiplication did not work well in any case. Where possible, we display the self-reported scores from the relevant papers on the same dataset. A first thing to note is the large difference in accuracy when changing the set of word representations, especially the difference between the Medline vectors and the vectors derived from the Mimic-III corpus. It is currently unclear what causes these performance differences, although it is likely that the small vocabulary, caused by the noisiness of the clinical data in the MIMIC-III corpus, reduces performance. Compared to previous approaches, our approach outperforms the MRD, 2-MRD, and UMLS::SenseRelate approaches, but does not manage to improve on the scores of the step models. Recall, however, that the step models largely rely on relationships in the UMLS ontology to estimate concept relatedness. To compare how our models improved when including relation information, we also experimented with adding definitions of related concepts, i.e. concepts which had a sibling, parent or child relationship to each concept. In contrast to patterns observed in earlier work, this did not have a significant, and often a detrimental, effect on performance. Note that this makes our model entirely independent of the actual UMLS hierarchy, and more flexible as a result, as we only use the mappings from definition to CUI for disambiguation, and no other information, such as relations or semantic type. In addition, our system is also fast: on a consumer-grade laptop, our approach takes 10 seconds to vectorize and disambiguate all abstracts in the MSH dataset, not taking into account the time it takes to load the embeddings into memory. Our approach obtains an accuracy of $> 90\%$ on 103 terms, showing that it is able to disambiguate a large variety of terms. For some terms, however, the performance was below random guessing. These are shown in Table \ref{table:discuss}. The pattern of errors is quite clear: Our approach has trouble with disambiguation if the definitions of the concepts themselves are lexically very similar. As an example, on the term \texttt{Hemlock} our approach performs below chance level because one of the concepts denotes a family of poisonous plants, while the other reports a tree, also called hemlock, the description of which mentions that it is explicitly \emph{not} poisonous. We expect these kinds of problems to be alleviated with the addition of more data. \section{Conclusion and future work}\label{sec:discussion} In this paper we presented a novel approach to WSD in the biomedical domain which achieves comparable performance to existing methods without incorporating relational information from an ontology. This makes the approach easily transferable to other languages, for which such ontologies might not exist, and to other domains. The large variation in accuracy when changing sets of word embeddings also raises interesting prospects for improvement; better word representations will lead to an improvement in our approach without modifying the approach itself. Additionally, we would like to experiment with different composition functions for composing the definition and concept vectors. \section*{Acknowledgments} Part of this research was carried out in the framework of the Accumulate IWT SBO project, funded by the government agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT). We would also like to thank Elyne Scheurwegs for making the small set of Medline abstract available to us.
\section{Introduction} Recently, the sequence to sequence(Seq2Seq) architecture has gained great development as a general neural network method to model the potential relationship between two sequences. For the basic Seq2Seq model, each sequence is usually modeled by RNN, and the two RNNs for the source sequence and target sequence are called encoder and decoder respectively. The encoder reads from the source sentence and do some summarize. The decoder is actually a language model that produce words according to previously predicted words conditioned with the encoder's output(usually called the context vector). This indicates that when the decoder try to predict a word, the context vector and the word predicted at previous time are two necessary inputs that requires. So here comes the initialization question: when producing the first word by the decoder, there is no previous predicted word to be referenced to. Typically, previous work use a start symbol ``$<$/s$>$'' to generation the first word \cite{Sutskever2014Sequence}. While it is not suitable to introduce a start symbol as the first word varies from different sentences. Concretely, there is not a learnable conditional probability of words given start symbol. Meanwhile, the process of producing the first word and generating the rest words of a sentence are different so that they should be handled respectively. To address this issue, we proposed a novel approach to learning to generate the first word. In detail, we find two factors that impact the encoding and decoding process: one is the source sequence which can be expressed using the encoder's states. The other is the representation of candidate words, of which information are all contained in the embedding matrix. We thus introduce these variables to map the representation of the source sentence into a probability distribution over the word table, pick up the maximal dimension as the final result. The contribution of this paper is as follows: \begin{itemize} \item To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to proposed a novel approach to learning to generate the first word in Seq2Seq architecture. \item The proposed approach outperforms the state-of-the-art on the response generation of the short text conversation. \item Besides the short text conversation task, the proposed approach is a general framework which can also adapt to other Seq2Seq learning applications. \end{itemize} \section{Background} From the perspective of probability, the Seq2Seq model maximize the probability of the target sequence conditioned with the source sequence during the training process, and search for a sequence that have a maximal conditioned probability given the source sequence during the predicting process. Due to that highly abstract attribute, lots of tasks such as Response Generation,Machine Translation and Question Answering can all be modeled using that architecture. \subsection{RNN encoder-decoder} Typically, a sequence to sequence model consists of two parts: encoder and decoder, both of which are often implemented using a family of RNN, such as GRU \cite{Cho2014On,Chung2014Empirical} and LSTM \cite{hochreiter1997long,gers2000learning,graves2012neural}, so a seq2seq model is also called RNN encoder-decoder architecture. The encoder is a normal RNN, which reads from a sequence of words and outputs their hidden states.These states are also called annotations denoted by $H$, and for each hidden state $h_i$ at time $i$, it is computed by its previous hidden state $h_{i-1}$ and the word at time $t$: \begin{equation}\label{encoder hidden state} h_t = f(h_{t-1}, x_t); \quad H = \{h_1, h2, h3, ..., h_T\} \end{equation} Here, $T$ is the length of the source sequence, $f$ is a non-linear function. After that, the encoder computes a distributed representation using these hidden states as a summary(context vector) of the input sequence. The most simplest way is directly fetching the last one: \begin{equation}\label{encoder context vector} c = q(\{h_1, h2, h3, ..., h_T\}) \end{equation} For the decoder, the hidden state's calculation is quite similar, the only difference is that the sequence input $x_t$ is replaced by the word predicted at last time: \begin{equation}\label{decoder hidden state} s_t = f(s_{t-1}, y_{t-1}) \end{equation} It should be noted that, the context vector $c$ is used to initialize the hidden state of decoder to make sure that the decoder was conditioned with the encoder. Based on that, \cite{Cho2014Learning} add the vector $c$ as an extra input into the computation of the hidden state in decoder to make sure that every time step of the decoder can get full information of the context. In that way, the formula \ref{decoder hidden state} should be updated to: \begin{equation}\label{dec state} s_t = f(s_{t-1}, y_{t-1}, c) \end{equation} Then, the word at time t can be predicted by mapping the $s_t$ to a probability over the word table using the maxout activation\cite{goodfellow2013maxout}. \subsection{Attention Mechanism in Seq2Seq} In the basic architecture of the sequence to sequence, source sequence sent to the encoder is encoded into a dense, fixed-length vector. Considering that vector may not be able to contain all the useful information of the source sequence, thus becoming a bottleneck of the model,\newcite{bahdanau2014neural} add the attention mechanism to improve the Seq2Seq's performance.Compared with the basic architecture, which use the last hidden state as the context vector $c$, attention mechanism gives a weight to all the annotations, then use them to calculate a weighted sum as a new context vector. It should be noted that, in that way, the vector $c$ is distinct for every time step in the decoder, because a time-related variable was involved during the computing, so here we denote the result as vector $c_j$. \begin{equation} c_j = \sum_{i=1}^T \alpha_{ij} h_i \end{equation} Here, $c_j$ is the context vector when we decode the $j$-th word in the decoder, and the weight $\alpha_{ij}$ for the $i$-th annotation of encoder is computed by: \begin{equation}\label{alpha} \alpha_{ij} = a(s_{j-1}, h_i) \end{equation} where $a$ is a forward neural network. Intuitively, the vector $s_{j-1}$ contains the context information of the response, so Formula \ref{alpha} can be understanded as to calculate the similarity between that context and these encoder annotations, which can be also regarded as a weight. \subsection{Initialization in Seq2Seq Learning} Initialization is such a small detail that can be ignored easily,sometimes. However, it is an important part of the model. In the encoder RNN, a state will be used to compute the state at next time(see Eq.\ref{encoder hidden state}), and by this way, the initial state will have an indirectly influence on all the states next. The decoder RNN share the same situation. In addition, the decoder has an extra variable that should be initialized: predicted word at last time step, because we don't have that input for the first process of generation. Typically, we set the initial hidden state of encoder to an all zero vector, and people usually use the last hidden state of the encoder to initialize the decoder's first hidden states: \begin{equation} s_0 = \sigma(W_s h_T) \end{equation} where $\sigma$ is a non-linear function, $W_s$ is a trainable parameter. That is intuitively plausible because it describes the relation between the two sequences that the decoder is conditioned with the encoder. As to the previous generated word for first generation in the decoder, we manually set a start symbol to act as that role. \section{Learning to start} In this section, we propose a new model to accomplish Seq2Seq's the initial prediction. We think that the method using a start symbol to predict the first word is not very suitable. First, the decoder RNN is essentially a language model \cite{mikolov2010recurrent}, which use the previous predicted words to predict a new word, from the perspective of probability, it learns a conditional probability of word that given last predicted words. While the start symbol and the first predicted word do not have such association, because most words can be put at the first position of a sequence, there is not a learnable conditional probability, so the result of taking a start symbol may cause the model prefer to predict some high frequency words, which is also observed during other conversation models using this architecture \cite{sordoni2015neural,serban2015hierarchical,vinyals2015neural}. We think the reason may lie in training samples started with these words takes a higher proportion, making the decoder learn a conditional probability that given the start symbol, these words' probabilities should be higher than others. Second, we suppose the process of predicting the first word and predicting a word according to its previous word should not be treated identically, using a same method to do the two works may not be a good choice. Third, the start symbol is involved in the calculation of decoder's hidden state(see Eq. \ref{dec state}), so introducing a start symbol that irrelevant of a sequence and no difference between all the source sequences may indirectly influence the prediction of the rest time steps. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth,natwidth=610,natheight=642]{att.pdf}\\ \caption{The LTS model architecture.} \label{LTS} \end{figure} So we propose a new method to relive the decoder from both predicting the first word and predicting word according to the last predicted word. In our model, the first word is predicted independently from the decoder. Inspired by the initialization of the hidden state of the decoder, we use the hidden state of encoder to calculate the probability of the first word using the formula below: \begin{equation} y_0 = \sigma((\sigma(W_i c)+b_i)E + b_e) \end{equation} In this formula, vector $c$ is the context vector, here we directly use the last hidden state of the encoder, $W_i$ is a matrix that can be trained in the model, $E$ is the embedding matrix of the decoder, and $b_i, b_e$ are bias vectors, $\sigma$ is a no-linear activation function, so in form, the formula is equal to below if we ignore all the bias: \begin{equation} y_0 = g(c, E) \end{equation} Intuitively, this formula build a tie between the context vector and the embedding matrix of the decoder. The former contains information of the source sequence, and the latter contains information of all the candidate words to be predicted in the decoder. So the $W_i$ matrix can be regarded as a similarity matrix used to compute the probability that how similar a word is to the source sequence, which indicates whether it is suitable to be predicted as the first word. Besides, by doing like this, the generation of the first word is decided only by the encoder's state. And without a start symbol's influence, the encoder's state can also be transferred to the decoder without any loss. And the rest process of prediction remains the same to the basic structure. \section{Experiment Settings} To verify the effectiveness, our proposed model were tested in the task of response generation of short text conversation. As a kind of neural machine architecture, a big-data is always required to get a good performance. To achieve that, a dialogue set was crawled as the training set. And to be compared with, a basic kind of Seq2Seq architecture for response generation called hybrid model proposed by \newcite{Shang2015Neural} was implemented. \subsection{Data} For the training process, Some one-round dialogue pairs was crawled from the Internet. For convenience, first sentence and the second sentence of one dialogue pair are denoted as post and response\cite{Shang2015Neural}respectively. The data set contains one million pairs, and about 35 thousands words. It should be noted that compared with the data used by \newcite{Shang2015Neural}, this crawled data is a one-to-one data set, one post is corresponding to exact one response. While in the \newcite{Shang2015Neural} paper, they crawled some one-to-many data from microblog, then distributed all the responses to the its post. This is a creative way to build a big data set, while during our experiments, we found that the one-to-one data has a more rapid rate of convergence, so we created our own data set and trained models on it.Table \ref{trainingdata} is an example of our data. \begin{table}[h]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|l\|l\|} \hline post & response \\ \hline \tabincell{l}{今天天气好差呀\\The weather is so bad today} & \tabincell{l}{雨太大了\\The rain is too heavy} \\ \hline \tabincell{l}{每天六点多出去打篮球锻炼身体\\ Go out for exercise playing basketball at six every day}& \tabincell{l}{我在打网球 \\I am playing tennis}\\ \hline \tabincell{l}{白色搭配什么颜色好\\What color matches white well} & \tabincell{l}{白色百搭呀 \\White all-match} \\\hline \tabincell{l}{明晚我又要通宵\\I will stay night again tomorrow night} & \tabincell{l}{我陪你啦 \\I will be with you} \\ \hline \tabincell{l}{等我有空了去超市买\\I'll go to the supermarket to buy when I was free} & \tabincell{l}{超市太远了\\The supermarket is too far away}\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{trainingdata} Training data examples. } \end{table} As for the test set, considering that one of our evaluation method--Bleu, which will be introduced in detail in next section, should has more than one reference for every candidate, our one-to-one data is not very suitable, so we select 100 posts and their corresponding responses in \newcite{Shang2015Neural}'s data-set to build our test set. Table \ref{data set information} shows some statics of our the whole data set. \begin{table}[htbp]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Data & Data type & posts & responses \\ \hline Training Data & one-to-one & 1000,000 & 1000,000 \\ \hline Test Data & one-to-many & 1000 & 42422 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{data set information}Data statistics} \end{table} \vspace{-1em} \subsection{Models} We trained two models. The first one is a basic Seq2Seq model for dialogue called Hybird Model(denoted as HYP)\cite{Shang2015Neural} , the other is what we have proposed(denoted as LTS). The encoder and decoder were both implemented using the GRU \cite{Cho2014On,Chung2014Empirical}. and we set our model's parameters reference to \newcite{Shang2015Neural}. The hidden size in the encoder was set to 1024. And the embedding size was set to 500, all the embedding vectors were pre-trained using the training data \cite{mikolov2013efficient,mikolov2013distributed}. Besides, during the processing of training, we sent the data to the model using the mini-batch with a batch size of 100, and the RMSprop algorithm was used to update model's parameters. And we trained both models about 5 days. After that, we used the beam search algorithm to search for the N-best result of response for one paritular sentence \cite{graves2012sequence,boulanger2013audio}. \section{Result} Until now, there is still not a uniform evaluation for response generation \cite{galley2015deltableu,pietquin2013survey,schatzmann2005quantitative}.First, we tested our model's performance using the some statistics of the the first predicted word. Second, we evaluate the complete response to see if our model can bring the Seq2Seq architecture improvement. to achieve that goal, we use two metrics: for one hand, we employed the wildly used automatic evaluation method--blue \cite{papineni2002bleu} in the area of machine translation, for the other hand, we employed the human annotation method. \subsection{First Generated Word Evaluation} To evaluate the generation of the first word, two aspects are taken into consideration: the accuracy rate and the diversity. The dialogue pairs in the test set are denoted as test sample and reference respectively, and the sequence generated by the model is still denoted as response. As mentioned before, the test set is a one-to-many data set so each test sample corresponding to serval references. We define a set called R-set for every sample, each sample's R-set is composed by all the first words of that sample's references, during the test process, if the first word of sample's response fall into its R-set, then it will be marked as hit. And the accuracy is the ratio of hit samples over the whole test set. Furthermore, we considered such situation: some high-frequency words(derived from the training data) are so common that nearly all the R-sets consists at least one, so a sample will easily hit its R-set as well as its first generated word is such words, for example:'I'. So we further defined the accuracy without high-frequency words, denoted by $accw$-$i$,which takes such situation into consideration: if a hit word is one of top $i$ high-frequency words, then this hit will be ignored. Particularly, $accw$-$0$ equals the basic accuracy that do not filter any high-frequency words. \begin{figure}[!htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,natwidth=610,natheight=642]{acc.pdf}\\ \caption{The accw-i metric} \label{acc} \end{figure} \vspace{-1cm} From the Figure \ref{acc}, we can see that the LTS outperformed the HYP from the $accw$-$2$.We analyzed the results and find the most frequent word is a auxiliary word: "了", which seldom appear in the beginning of a sentence, so there is no change from the $accw$-$0$ to $accw$-$1$.When we ignored the second frequent word "我(I)", the performance of the HYP descends rapidly,which can be observed from the $accw$-$1$ to $accw$-$2$. while the LTS has a more stable accuracy that do not depend the easily hit high-frequency words. Also, we evaluate the initial prediction from the perspective of diversity. In fact the Table \ref{acc} has already reflected the diversity to some degree, which our model's stable $accw$-$i$ shows that the generation of the first word is distributed fairly balance. While we still give another metric to evaluate it, we define the div-i which means the ratio of test samples whose response's first word fall into the top $i$ frequent words.According to the definition we describe, we can see that the diversity declines with increasing div-i score. \begin{figure}[!htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,natwidth=610,natheight=642]{div.pdf}\\ \caption{The div-i metric.} \label{div} \end{figure} The Figure \ref{div} show us that rather than concentrate on some high-frequency words, our model prefer to predict more diversity ones. Noted that in HYP there is a sharp increasement from the $div$-$1$ to $div$-$2$, which indicates that lots of the samples's first generated word is the second frequent word, which also agrees the results of $acc$-$i$. \subsection{Bleu Metric} We use this metric to evaluate the a model's complete response rather than the first word. which is proved to agree well with human judgement on response generation task \cite{sordoni2015neural,li2015diversity}. And the result is given in the Table \ref{bleu}. \begin{table}[!htb]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline & BLEU-1 & BLEU-2 & BLEU-3 \\ \hline HYP & 0.5283 & 0.0553 & 0.0013 \\ \hline LTS & \textbf{0.5303} & \textbf{0.0816}& \textbf{0.0063} \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{bleu} Bleu score. } \end{table} From the Table \ref{bleu}, we can see that the LTS performs well than the HYP in Bleu-1 to Bleu-3. Through that table, we can also see that improvement on the Bleu-1 is not as significant as other two. We analyzed this situation and got an opinion, it may because the Bleu metric calculate overlap of n-grams between response and references, compared with other n-grams, the unigram is more easily to be matched making the Bleu-1 not distinguished enough.Table \ref{bleu example} shows some results of the bleu evaluation, two models got similar Bleu-1 scores, while the Bleu-2 and Bleu-3 are much more strict metrics that can reflect the improvement more significantly, which also proves our analyzed mentioned before. \begin{table}[!htb]\small \begin{center} \renewcommand{\multirowsetup}{\centering} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|l\|l\|l\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline No. &model& post& responds & Bleu-1 & Bleu-2 &Bleu-3 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{}{1} & HYP & \multirow{2}{}{\tabincell{l}{拍照中，这个造型像个娃娃一样！\\ Taking pictures, this pose looks\\ like a little doll!}} & \tabincell{l}{不像男的\\ Doesn't like a man} & 0.750 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-7} &LTS & & \tabincell{l}{都是小娃娃\\ All are little dolls} & 1.000 & 0.500 & 0.167 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{}{2} & HYP & \multirow{2}{}{\tabincell{l}{低调的境界\\ The state of low-key}} & \tabincell{l}{我也很低呀\\ I'm very low,too} & 0.250 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-7} &LTS & & \tabincell{l}{我很低调的\\ I am very low-key} & 0.800 & 0.400 & 0.133 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{\label{bleu example} Bleu evaluation examples. } \end{center} \end{table} \subsection{Manual Evaluation} At the same time, we also tested our model adopting human annotation method. The evaluation metric is made reference to Shang~\shortcite{Shang2015Neural}. We generated responses with HYP model and LTS respectively, then these responses together with their original questions are mixed up into a new file to make sure that labers can judge the result fairly. Three labers were involved to assigned a score to these responses in range of 0 to 2, and the score metric is as follows: 0:This indicates a bad response. if a response has grammar,fluency mistakes, not logic consist or relevant with the original post in semantic, it should be assigned a 0 score. 1:This means the response may not be a perfect one, but may be treated as a suitable response in some particular scenario, or it is a too general response, like "I don't know". 2:This indicates a quite appropriate response, a response can be sorted to this category only when it is free of grammar and fluency errors and is independent of scenario. \begin{table}[!htb]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|l\|l\|c\|} \hline No.& post & response & score\\ \hline 1 & \tabincell{l}{咳嗽不止，有啥良策吗\\ Couldn't stop cough, any good idea?} & \tabincell{l}{吃点退烧药 \\eat some antipyretics} &0 \\ \hline 2 & \tabincell{l}{永远不要对一个外行聊你的专业 \\ Never talk about your major with strangers} & \tabincell{l}{我很专业的 \\ I'm very professional} &0\\ \hline 3 & \tabincell{l}{真实的团队精神是这样子的~ \\This is what real team spirit likes ~}& \tabincell{l}{是挺厉害的 \\ It's pretty powerful.} &1\\ \hline 4 & \tabincell{l}{哪本新华字典是你用过的 \\ which XinHua dictionary is the one you used} & \tabincell{l}{两本都是\\Both of them are} &1\\ \hline 5 & \tabincell{l}{大熊加油，我们的家) \\Come on for our home, Bill}& \tabincell{l}{我会努力的\\I'll try my best} &2\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{metric} Annotation metric examples. } \end{table} \begin{table}[h]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Models & Mean Score & 0 & 1 & 2 & Agreement \\ \hline HYB & 0.510 & 66.0\% & 17.0\% & 17.0\% & 0.230 \\\hline LTS & \textbf{0.590} & \textbf{59.7\%} & \textbf{21.7\%} & \textbf{18.6\%} & 0.206\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{font-table} Annotation result. } \end{table} \vspace{-1em} Table \ref{metric} show the annotation metric in more detail. The example one conflicts with the logic consistency principle, the post said he got a cough, while the response advised the antipyretics, which is not logical relevant. The example two's response is not semantic relevant to its post, so they got a score of zero. In the example three, the response can be seen as a suitable one but it is too general, so it only got a score of one. While the example four got the same score in a different way that its response strongly depend on a particular scenario that the author of the post must has exactly two dictionaries. The last example show a suitable response that free of the questions that mentioned before. The human annotation result was used to compute these metrics for the two model respectively: mean score, ratios of different categories. From the table 4, we can see that the LTS outperforms the HYP in all metrics. Besides, we evaluated the consistent of different labelers using the Fleiss' kappa, which is listed the Agreement column. We can see that both of the two models' agreement all fall into the range of 0.2-0.4, which indicates that the result is a fair agreement one. \begin{table}[!htb]\small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|l\|l\|l\|} \hline No. & post & HYP & LTS \\ \hline 1 & \tabincell{l}{你们听说过搜狗输入法石化版吗？\\Have you heard of of sogou pinyin's petrochemical\\ version} & \tabincell{l}{这是国服\\This is National Server} & \tabincell{l}{听说挺好的\\I heard it's nice}\\ \hline 2 & \tabincell{l}{别管我为什么叫卢沟桥\\Don't worry about me why called Marco Polo bridge} & \tabincell{l}{那叫什么啊\\What's it called?} & \tabincell{l}{谁管你了\\Who cares for} \\ \hline 3 & \tabincell{l}{这才是大学最大的遗憾\\This is the greatest regret in university} & \tabincell{l}{我也怕大学\\I also afraid of university} & \tabincell{l}{有啥遗憾的\\There is nothing to regret} \\ \hline 4 & \tabincell{l}{“师兄帮帮忙网站”城市开放计划。\\“Ask Brother for Help websitde” Urban open plan}& \tabincell{l}{我很开放的\\I am very open} & \tabincell{l}{很好的项目\\It's a good prodject} \\ \hline 5 & \tabincell{l}{现在开会需要用上喇叭扩音了……\\Now the meeting need to use the\\ horn to be heard……} & \tabincell{l}{不需要补的\\Don't need to fill} & \tabincell{l}{没钱买喇叭\\Don't have the money\\ to buy a horn} \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \caption{\label{results} Some results of two models. } \end{table} \vspace{-1em} \section{Related Work} \subsection{Sequence to sequence for Machine Translation} Using the sequence to sequence model, neural machine translation has already got a comparable performance to the traditional methods \cite{bahdanau2014neural}. As far as we know, it was first introduced into this area by \newcite{kalchbrenner2013recurrent},\newcite{Sutskever2014Sequence},\newcite{Cho2014Learning},\newcite{gao2014learning}. Besides, \newcite{Cho2014Learning} added the vector c as an extra input to every time step of the decoder, by doing like this, all the steps not only the first one, can get full information of the context vector. Furthermore, \newcite{bahdanau2014neural} proposed a novel method to calculated a weighted sum of all the annotations of the encoder. This mechanism can be regarded as a kind of attention, which means when we decode a word we chose which part of the annotations should be paid more attention to. \subsection{Sequence to sequence in Response Generation} General speaking, dialogue systems can be sorted into two classes \cite{serban2016building}: goal-driven represented by systems \newcite{gavsic2013line} and non-goal-driven systems. The neural networks methods are mainly used in the later, because a large scale of data is more easily to get in that area. \newcite{ritter2011data} first combine micro-blogging data with the generative probabilistic models, then \newcite{Shang2015Neural} used this type of data on the Seq2Seq to build a short conservation machine. followed by \newcite{serban2016building}, who came up with the Hierarchical Nerual Network model, aiming to model the utterances and interactive structure to build a multi-round dialogue system. At the same time, \newcite{banchs2012movie} proposed methods using a different type of data,the movie dialogue. Based on that, \newcite{ameixa2014luke} find using the retrieal system and movie subtitles can also improvement the performance. \section{Conclusions} In this paper, we proposed a new approach for the sequence to sequence model to generate the first word. Proved our proposed model can bring a promotion in both the accuracy and the diversity for the first word's generation, thus improving the whole performance of the generation. Experiments in the response generation tasked verified our model's effectiveness, while rather than a method for a specific task, our proposed method is a general framework, which can also used for other tasks. \bibliographystyle{acl}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} Movement ecology is a fast growing area of research concerned with addressing questions of patterns in animal movements, their underlying mechanisms, driving causes and constraints~\cite{Minerva}. Animal movement data gained via GPS, etc. are commonly given as 2-dimensional locations at a sequence of discrete---but not necessarily regular---points in time. A widespread group of models for analysing such data are based on parametrising movement by turning angles and step lengths (see e.g.~\cite{Langrock2012, McClintock2012, Morales2004, Patterson2008}). This movement is formulated in discrete time, with each subsequent location defined by a `turn' and `step' following some circular and positive distribution, respectively. Discrete time `step and turn' models are intuitive to ecologists and statistical inference given observed data can be carried out using a range of existing methods and software. The reliance on a discrete time scale, however, poses a number of issues. The chosen scale must be ecologically relevant to the movement decisions of the animal, but is more often dictated by the sampling rate of the received data. These models are not invariant under a change of time scale, leading to no guarantee of a coherent extension to a different time scale, or how to interpret such an extension. Irregular or missing data can therefore be difficult to model, and there is often no way to compare multiple analyses defined on differing scales. Movement models that are formulated in continuous time avoid the discrete time difficulties; the true underlying mechanism of continuous movement is maintained, no user-defined time frame is needed and flexibility is introduced by time scale invariance. The following introduces a continuous time approach to modelling that preserves the familiar description of movement based on `steps' and `turns'. \section{The continuous time model} \label{sec:model} At any time $t\geq 0$, let the animal have a bearing $\theta(t)$ and a speed $\psi(t)$ that evolve according to the stochastic differential equations \begin{eqnarray} \D\theta(t) = F_1 \left(t,\theta(t)\right) \D t + F_2 \left(t,\theta(t)\right) \D W_1(t), \nonumber \\ \D\psi(t) = F_3 \left(t,\psi(t)\right) \D t + F_4 \left(t,\psi(t)\right) \D W_2(t), \label{eq:contmodel} \end{eqnarray} where $W_i(t), \ i \in \lbrace 1,2 \rbrace$ is Brownian motion and $F_i(t,\cdot), \ i \in \lbrace 1,\ldots,4\rbrace$ are known functions. Many discrete time `step and turn' models make the assumption that animals move with persistence, using a correlated random walk to reflect this. Such an assumption can be made within this continuous time framework by assuming $\theta(t)$ follows Brownian motion with volatility $\sigma_B^2$ by taking $F_1(t,\theta(t))=0$ and $F_2(t,\theta(t))=\sigma_B$. Note that although the direction the animal is facing is constrained to be within $[-\pi,\pi]$, $\theta(t)$ itself is not constrained in this way. Although discussed no further here, a range of other movement modes could be modelled under this framework, including directional bias and attraction to centres. A 1-dimensional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) process is assumed for $\psi(t)$ with parameters $\lbrace\mu,\lambda,\sigma_S^2\rbrace$, reflecting the idea that the animal's speed is stochastic but correlated over time, with some long-term average speed. This is achieved by taking $F_3(t,\psi(t))=\lambda(\mu-\psi(t))$ and $F_4(t,\psi(t))=\sigma_S$. This choice is similar to \cite{Johnson2008}, in which movement is modelled by a 2-dimensional OU velocity process. In the classic examples of discrete time models, the `step' process is assumed to be independent over disjoint time intervals. Although discussed no further here, this form of movement can easily be emulated by basing $\psi(t)$ on a distance process that follows Brownian motion with drift---where the drift describes the average speed of the animal. The continuous time movement model can be simulated by taking an Euler approximation over the small increment $\delta t$. Given $\theta(t)$ and $\psi(t)$ at time $t\geq0$, \begin{eqnarray} \theta\left(t+\delta t\right)\|\theta(t)\sim \textrm{N}\left( \theta(t),\sigma_B^2\delta t\right), \nonumber \\ \psi\left(t+\delta t\right) \| \psi(t) \sim \textrm{N}\left(\mu+\E^{-\lambda\delta t}\left(\psi(t)-\mu\right),\frac{\sigma_S^2}{2\lambda}\left(1-\E^{-2\lambda\delta t}\right)\right). \label{eq:model} \end{eqnarray} The familiar notion of a `turn' is then given by $\theta(t+\delta t)-\theta(t)$ and a `step' by $\nu(t)=\psi(t)\delta t$. \section{Inference for the continuous time model} \label{sec:inference} An animal's location $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$ at a series of discrete times $\vec{t}$ has been observed with error. Throughout the following, observation errors are assumed to be independent and identically distributed in both space and time, following a circular bivariate Normal distribution with variance $\sigma_E^2$. The aim of the following is to describe a method for statistical inference on the movement and error parameters $\bm{\varPhi}=\left\lbrace\sigma_B^2,\mu,\lambda,\sigma_S^2,\sigma_E^2\right\rbrace$, given $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$. It is not possible to evaluate the likelihood of $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$, given $\bm{\varPhi}$. The approach for inference described is to therefore augment $(\vec{X},\vec{Y})$ with a `refined path' defined by $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$. This refined path is given as a set of bearings, $\bm{\theta}$, and steps, $\bm{\nu}$, on some $\delta t$ time scale---assuming throughout that $\delta t$ is small enough that such a refined path can be taken as an approximation to the continuous time model of Eqn.~\ref{eq:contmodel}. A representation of the relationship between $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$ and $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$ is given in Fig.~\ref{fig:refined_path}. The joint likelihood of $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$ and $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$ can be evaluated, given by \begin{equation} \mathcal{L} \left( \vec{X},\vec{Y},\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \right) = \mathcal{L} \left( \bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \right) \mathcal{L} \left( \vec{X},\vec{Y} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\nu},\bm{\varPhi} \right). \label{eq:joint_lik} \end{equation} The first term on the r.h.s. of Eqn.~\ref{eq:joint_lik} is the likelihood of the refined path, given by \begin{equation} \mathcal{L} \left( \bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \right) = \pi_\theta \left( \theta_1 \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \right) \pi_\nu \left (\nu_1 \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \right) \prod_{i=2} \pi_\theta \left( \theta_i \ \| \ \theta_{i-1},\bm{\varPhi} \right) \pi_\nu \left( \nu_i \ \| \ \nu_{i-1},\bm{\varPhi} \right), \label{eq:path_lik} \end{equation} where \begin{eqnarray} \theta_1 \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \sim \textrm{U} (-\pi,\pi), \\ \nu_1 \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi} \sim \textrm{N}\left(\delta t \mu, \frac{\delta t^2 \sigma_S^2}{\lambda} \right), \end{eqnarray} and $\pi_\theta( \theta_i \ \| \ \theta_{i-1},\bm{\varPhi}),\pi_\nu(\nu_i \ \| \ \nu_{i-1},\bm{\varPhi} )$ are given by Eqn.~\ref{eq:model} for $i \geq 2$. The second term on the r.h.s. of Eqn.~\ref{eq:joint_lik} is the likelihood of the observation error when $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$ is the `true' path. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{RefinedPath} \caption{Representation of the refined movement path $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$ and observed locations $(\vec{X},\vec{Y})$.} \label{fig:refined_path} \end{figure} The refined path is unknown and is simulated using a Metropolis-within-Gibbs sampler to carry out full inference on the movement parameters. This sampler alternately updates $\bm{\varPhi}$ and $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$, both also conditioned on $(\vec{X},\vec{Y})$. The respective full conditional distributions cannot be directly sampled from, and so the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm is used within each of the two steps. \subsection{Approach for sampling the movement parameters} \label{subsec:param} The full conditional distribution of the movement parameters $\bm{\varPhi}$, given the refined path $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$ and the observed positions $(\vec{X},\vec{Y})$ is given by \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{L} \left( \bm{\varPhi} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\nu},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right) \propto \pi_\varPhi \left( \bm{\varPhi} \right) \mathcal{L} \left( \vec{X},\vec{Y},\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi}\right), \label{eq:param_cond_lik} \end{eqnarray} where $\mathcal{L}(\vec{X},\vec{Y},\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi})$ is given in Eqn.~\ref{eq:joint_lik} and $\pi_\varPhi(\bm{\varPhi})$ is the prior distribution of the movement parameters. The movement parameters are proposed within the MH algorithm simultaneously using independent Normal random walks (truncated below at zero and centred on the current realisation). Acceptance is then based on the standard MH ratio using Eqn.~\ref{eq:param_cond_lik}. \subsection{Approach for sampling the refined path} \label{subsec:path} The augmentation of refined movement paths is complicated by observed locations. Forward simulation based only on movement parameters will be unlikely to agree well with observations, proving infeasible within a MH step. The following describes a simulation method that, in part, takes the observations into account. The full conditional distribution of the refined path $(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu})$, given the movement parameters $\bm{\varPhi}$ and the observed positions $(\vec{X},\vec{Y})$ can be expressed as \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\theta},\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right) = \mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\theta} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right) \mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\theta}, \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right) \nonumber \\ \propto \mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\theta} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi}\right) \mathcal{L} \left(\vec{X},\vec{Y} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\varPhi}\right) \mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\theta}, \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right), \label{eq:path_cond_lik} \end{eqnarray} where $\mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\theta} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi}\right)$ is given by the product of $\pi_\theta(\cdot)$ in Eqn.~\ref{eq:model}. Each observed location $(X_i,Y_i)$ can be expressed as \begin{eqnarray} X_i = X_0 + \sum_j \nu_j \cos(\theta_j) + \varepsilon_{i,x}, \nonumber \\ Y_i = Y_0 + \sum_j \nu_j \sin(\theta_j) + \varepsilon_{i,y}, \label{eq:locs} \end{eqnarray} which, given $\bm{\theta}$, are linear combinations of the Normally distributed $\bm{\nu},\bm{\varepsilon}$, and so $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\varPhi}\right)$ is Normally distributed with known mean and variance. The final term in Eqn.~\ref{eq:path_cond_lik} is obtained by taking the Normally distributed $\left(\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\theta}, \bm{\varPhi} \right)$, with likelihood given by $\pi_\nu(\cdot)$, and conditioning this on $\left(\vec{X},\vec{Y} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\varPhi}\right)$. The mean and variance of $\left(\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\theta}, \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$ are therefore given by the standard results for multivariate conditioned Normal distributions. Within the MH algorithm, a refined path proposal is made by first proposing bearings with density proportional to $\mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\theta} \ \| \ \bm{\varPhi}\right)$. Conditional on both these bearings and observed locations, steps are proposed with density proportional to $\mathcal{L} \left(\bm{\nu} \ \| \ \bm{\theta}, \bm{\varPhi},\vec{X},\vec{Y}\right)$. Acceptance of a simulated refined path is then based only on $\mathcal{L} \left(\vec{X},\vec{Y} \ \| \ \bm{\theta},\bm{\varPhi}\right)$, by Eqn.~\ref{eq:path_cond_lik} and the standard MH acceptance ratio. Proposing an entire refined path in this way is likely to yield a very low acceptance rate due to the high dimensionality. In reality, only sections of the refined path are updated at a time. This is carried out as above, but with additional conditioning upon the fixed bearings, steps and locations at the endpoints of the chosen section---i.e. $\pi_\theta(\cdot)$ is given by a Brownian bridge and $\pi_\nu(\cdot)$ is given by an OU bridge. The additional condition that the chosen section will need to meet its fixed end locations leads to the step proposal distribution being singular, and so realisations are proposed using singular value decomposition. \section{Reindeer movement example} \label{sec:example} The method described above for statistical inference is demonstrated using observations of {\it Rangifer tarandus} movement. A subset of 50~observations of the reindeer `b53.10' walking in the Mal{\aa} reindeer herding community in northern Sweden was used, taken at mostly 2~minute intervals and shown as the points in Fig.~\ref{fig:example_paths}, with a refined path defined on a time scale of 0.5~minutes. The inference method described above was carried out with flat priors for all parameters apart from a dependence between the speed parameters to reduce the possibility of negative speeds. The refined path was sampled in short sections of between 5--12 points chosen randomly from the entire refined path, with 50 updates to the path for every parameter update in the Gibbs sampler. A burn-in time of $10^5$~iterations was discarded and the sampler run for a further $10^5$~iterations, thinned by a factor of $10^2$. Posterior $90\%$ credible intervals for the remaining $10^3$~samples of $\bm{\varPhi}$ are given as $\sigma_B^2:(0.670,1.53), \ \mu:(24.2, 29.3), \ \lambda:(0.465,0.668), \ \sigma_S^2:(116.4,135.4), \ \sigma_E^2:(80.4,100.9)$. The posterior credible interval for $\sigma_E^2$ agrees well with current levels of observation error, expected to be up to 20~m. Examples of two sampled paths from throughout the run are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:example_paths}. The marked difference in the reconstruction between some pairs of observations exhibited by the example sampled paths suggests that the linear interpolation employed by discrete time methods could be ignoring important characteristics of movement. Furthermore, in sub-plots (a) and (b) there are a number of `sharp' turns between observations 23--25 and 42--43 that have been `smoothed out' in the example path reconstructions. In a discrete time analysis this would amount to multiple turns of approximately $\pi$~radians, leading to large estimates of the turning volatility. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ExamplePaths} \caption{Observations of reindeer `b53.10' (\textit{points}) and examples of two sampled paths (\textit{block and dashed lines}). Sub-figures (\textbf{a}) and (\textbf{b}) show zoomed in sections of the path, indicated by the grey boxes, with numbering showing the temporal ordering of observations.} \label{fig:example_paths} \end{figure} \section{Conclusion} We have introduced a framework for modelling animal movement in continuous time based on the popular movement metrics of step lengths and turning angles. A method for statistical inference via the augmentation of a refined path that is assumed to approximate the continuous time path has been described and demonstrated on a subset of reindeer location observations. Parameter estimates for the proposed movement model give insight into the characteristics of an animal's movement in a form that is immediately interpretable, such as the mean speed at which the animal travels. These judgements are useful in addressing ecological questions relating to space/resource use, such as the size of an animal's `home range'. The augmentation method employed further supports accessible inference by supplying reconstructions of the movement path at a finer time scale than the observations. Therefore, the space use of the animal at the local scale can immediately be estimated and this enables its combination with environmental covariates, such as land cover data, whose resolution is fast increasing. The interpretation of the estimated parameters is also furthered by the ability to visualise the actual movement paths they describe. The method here assumes a simplistic model for observation error, being Normally distributed and independent through time. A common feature of telemetry data is autocorrelation in observation error, and so in further applications more realistic models for observation error will be sought that account for this feature. In all of the work presented here, movement has been assumed to follow a single behavioural mode, which is unrealistic in practice for animal tracks covering an extended period of time. Behavioural switching for this model in continuous time is currently being implemented based on the works of \cite{Blackwell2015,Harris2013}, allowing switching between a finite number of `behavioural states' that represent quantitative or qualitative differences in movement. \input{refs} \end{document}
\section{Introduction} Dynamical systems describe the world around us, modeling the interactions between quantities that co-evolve in time~\cite{guckenheimer_holmes}. These dynamics often give rise to rich and complex behaviors that may be difficult to predict from uncertain measurements, a phenomena that is commonly known as \emph{chaos}. Chaotic dynamics are ubiquitous in the physical, biological, and engineering sciences, and they have captivated amateurs and experts alike for over a century. The motion of planets~\cite{Poincare1890am}, weather and climate~\cite{Lorenz1963jas,Majda2007bpnas,Majda2012nonlinearity,Giannakis2012pnas,Sapsis2013pnas,Majda2014pnas}, population dynamics~\cite{Bjornstad2001science,Sugihara2012science,Ye2015pnas}, epidemiology~\cite{Sugihara1990nature}, financial markets, earthquakes, solar flares, and turbulence~\cite{Kolmogorov1941b,Kolmogorov1941c,Kolmogorov1941,Takens1981lnm,Brunton2015amr}, all provide compelling examples of chaos. Despite the name, chaos is not random, but is instead highly organized, exhibiting coherent structure and patterns~\cite{Tsonis1992nature,Crutchfield2012naturephys}. The confluence of big data and advanced algorithms in machine learning is driving a paradigm shift in the analysis and understanding of dynamical systems in science and engineering. Data are abundant, while physical laws or governing equations remain elusive, as is true for problems in climate science, finance, and neuroscience. Even in classical fields such as turbulence, where governing equations do exist, researchers are increasingly turning towards data-driven analysis~\cite{Sapsis2013pnas,Majda2014pnas,Brunton2015amr}. Many critical data-driven problems, such as predicting climate change, understanding cognition from neural recordings, or controlling turbulence for energy efficient power production and transportation, are primed to take advantage of progress in the data-driven discovery of dynamics~\cite{Schmidt2009science,Brunton2016pnas}. An early success of data-driven dynamical systems is the celebrated Takens embedding theorem~\cite{Takens1981lnm}, which allows for the reconstruction of an attractor that is diffeomorphic to the original chaotic attractor from a time series of a single measurement. This remarkable result states that, under certain conditions, the full dynamics of a system as complicated as a turbulent fluid may be uncovered from a time series of a single point measurement. Delay embedding has been widely used to analyze and characterize chaotic systems~\cite{Farmer1987prl,Crutchfield1987cs,Sugihara1990nature,Rowlands1992physD,Abarbanel1993rmp,Sugihara2012science,Ye2015pnas}, as well as for linear system identification with the eigensystem realization algorithm (ERA)~\cite{ERA:1985} and in climate science with the singular spectrum analysis (SSA)~\cite{Broomhead1989prsla} and nonlinear Laplacian spectrum analysis (NLSA)~\cite{Giannakis2012pnas}. Until now, there has been a disconnect between the use of delay embeddings to characterize chaos and their rigorous use to identify models of the nonlinear dynamics. Historically, the two dominant perspectives on dynamical systems have either been geometric or statistical~\cite{Budivsic2012chaos}. In the geometric perspective, illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig03}, the organization and topology of trajectories in phase space provides a qualitative picture of global dynamics and enables detailed quantitative descriptions of local dynamics near fixed points or periodic orbits~\cite{guckenheimer_holmes,Marsden1976book,MarsdenMTAA,Chorin1990book,Marsden:MS,koon2000heteroclinic}. Phase space transport is largely mediated by saddle points, and even in relatively simple systems such as the double pendulum or Lorenz system in Fig.~\ref{fig03}, the dynamics may give rise to chaotic dynamics. The statistical perspective trades the analysis of a single trajectory with the description of an ensemble of trajectories, providing a notion of mixing and uncertainty, while balancing the apparent structure and disorder in chaotic systems~\cite{Dellnitz2001book,Dellnitz2002hds,Dellnitz:2005,Froyland2009pd,Froyland2010chaos,Froyland2014siads,Kaiser2014jfm}. Recently, a third \emph{operator-theoretic} perspective, based on the evolution of measurement functions of the system, is gaining traction. This approach is not new, being introduced in 1931 by Koopman~\cite{Koopman1931pnas}, although the recent deluge of measurement data has renewed interest. Here, we develop a universal data-driven decomposition of chaos into a forced linear system. This relies on time-delay embedding, a cornerstone of dynamical systems, but takes a new perspective based on regression models~\cite{Brunton2016pnas} and modern Koopman operator theory~\cite{Mezic2005nd,Mezic2013arfm,Giannakis2015arxiv}. The resulting method partitions phase space into coherent regions where the forcing is small and dynamics are approximately linear, and regions where the forcing is large. The forcing may be measured from time series data and strongly predicts attractor switching and bursting phenomena in real-world examples. Linear representations of strongly nonlinear dynamics, enabled by machine learning and Koopman theory, promise to transform our ability to estimate, predict, and control complex systems in many diverse fields. \begin{figure}[b!] \begin{center} \vspace{-.1in} \begin{overpic}[width=.9\textwidth]{SUPP_COMPLEXITY} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.15in} \caption{\small Chaotic dynamical systems are often viewed as a progression of increasing nonlinearity.}\label{fig03} \end{center} \vspace{-.25in} \end{figure} \newpage \section{Background}\label{sec:background} The results in this paper are presented in the context of modern dynamical systems, specifically in terms of the Koopman operator. In this section, we provide a brief overview of relevant concepts in dynamical systems, including a discussion of Koopman operator theory in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Back:Koopman}, data-driven dynamical systems regression techniques in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Back:Regress}, and delay embedding theory in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Back:Delay}. Throughout this work, we will consider dynamical systems of the form: \begin{align} \frac{d}{dt}\mathbf{x}(t) = \mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x}(t)).\label{Eq:ContinuousDynamics} \end{align} We will also consider the induced discrete-time dynamical system \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{x}_{k+1}=\mathbf{F}(\mathbf{x}_k)\label{Eq:DiscreteDynamics} \end{eqnarray} where $\mathbf{x}_k$ may be obtained by sampling the trajectory in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:ContinuousDynamics} discretely in time, so that ${\mathbf{x}_k = \mathbf{x}(k\Delta t)}$. The discrete-time propagator $\mathbf{F}$ is given by the flow map \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{F}(\mathbf{x}_k)={\mathbf{x}_k+\int_{k\Delta t}^{({k+1})\Delta t}\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x}(\tau))\,d\tau}.\label{Eq:FlowMap} \end{eqnarray} The discrete-time perspective is often more natural when considering experimental data. \subsection{Koopman operator theory}\label{Sec:Back:Koopman} Koopman spectral analysis was introduced in 1931 by B. O. Koopman~\cite{Koopman1931pnas} to describe the evolution of measurements of Hamiltonian systems, and this theory was generalized in 1932 by Koopman and von Neumann to systems with continuous spectra~\cite{Koopman1932pnas}. Koopman analysis provides an alternative to the more common geometric and statistical perspectives, instead describing the evolution operator that advances the space of measurement functions of the state of the dynamical system. The Koopman operator $\mathcal{K}$ is an infinite-dimensional linear operator that advances measurement functions $g$ of the state $\mathbf{x}$ forward in time according to the dynamics in \eqref{Eq:DiscreteDynamics}: \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{K} g\triangleq g\circ\mathbf{F} \quad\Longrightarrow\quad \mathcal{K}g(\mathbf{x}_k) = g(\mathbf{x}_{k+1}).\label{Eq:Koopman} \end{eqnarray} Because this is true for \emph{all} measurement functions $g$, $\mathcal{K}$ is infinite dimensional and acts on the Hilbert space of functions of the state. For a detailed discussion on the Koopman operator, there are many excellent research articles~\cite{Mezic2005nd,Rowley2009jfm,Budivsic2009cdc,Budivsic2012physd,Lan2013physd} and reviews~\cite{Budivsic2012chaos,Mezic2013arfm}. A linear description of nonlinear dynamics is appealing, as many powerful analytic techniques exist to decompose, advance, and control linear systems. However, the Koopman framework trades finite-dimensional nonlinear dynamics for infinite-dimensional linear dynamics. Aside from a few notable exceptions~\cite{Gaspard1995pre,Bagheri2013jfm}, it is rare to obtain analytical representations of the Koopman operator. Obtaining a finite-dimensional approximation (i.e., a matrix $\mathbf{K}$) of the Koopman operator is therefore an important goal of data-driven analysis and control; this relies on a measurement subspace that remains invariant to the Koopman operator~\cite{Brunton2016plosone}. Consider a measurement subspace spanned by measurement functions $\{g_1,g_2,\ldots,g_p\}$ so that for any measurement $g$ in this subspace \begin{eqnarray} g = \alpha_1g_1 + \alpha_2 g_2 + \cdots + \alpha_p g_p\label{Eq:MeasurementSubspace} \end{eqnarray} then it remains in the subspace after being acted on by the Koopman operator \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{K}g = \beta_1g_1 + \beta_2 g_2 + \cdots + \beta_p g_p. \end{eqnarray} In this case, we may restrict the Koopman operator to this $p$ dimensional measurement subspace and obtain a $p\times p$ matrix representation, $\mathbf{K}$, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Koopman}. It has been shown previously that such a representation is useful for prediction and control of certain nonlinear systems that admit finite-dimensional Koopman invariant subspaces~\cite{Brunton2016plosone}. If such a matrix representation exists, it is possible to define a linear system that advances the measurement functions, restricted to the subspace in \eqref{Eq:MeasurementSubspace}, as follows: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{y}_{k+1} = \mathbf{K}\mathbf{y}_{k}, \end{eqnarray} where $\mathbf{y}_k=\begin{bmatrix}g_1(\mathbf{x}_k) & g_2(\mathbf{x}_k) & \cdots & g_p(\mathbf{x}_k\end{bmatrix}^T$ is a vector of measurements in the invariant subspace, evaluated at $\mathbf{x}_k$. Left eigenvectors $\mathbf{\xi}$ of $\mathbf{K}$ give rise to Koopman eigenfunctions according to $\varphi = \mathbf{\xi}\mathbf{y}$. In practice, however, it is extremely challenging to obtain such a representation in terms of a Koopman invariant subspace. Moreover, it is impossible to obtain such an invariant subspace that contains linear measurements of the full state $\mathbf{x}$ for systems with more than one attractor, periodic orbit, and/or fixed point. This is simple to see, since a finite-dimensional linear system does not admit multiple fixed points or attracting structures. In addition, it is not always the case that the Koopman operator even has a discrete spectrum, as in mixing chaotic systems. However, the perspective of a data-driven linear approximation to a dynamical system is still valuable. Linear models can be obtained in entire basins of attraction of fixed points or periodic orbits using Koopman theory with the correct choice of measurement functions~\cite{Lan2013physd,Williams2015jnls}. Regression based methods to obtain a finite approximation of the Koopman operator, as described in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Back:Regress}, have become standard in the literature, although these methods all rely on a good choice of measurement functions. Identifying good measurement coordinates that approximately or exactly yield linear evolution equations will be one of the central challenges in dynamical systems in the coming years and decades. In the following, we will demonstrate the ability of delay coordinates to provide an approximately invariant measurement space for chaotic dynamics on an attractor. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_KOOPMAN} \caption{Schematic illustrating the ability of the Koopman operator to globally linearize a nonlinear dynamical system with an appropriate choice of observable functions $g$.}\label{Fig:Koopman} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Data-driven dynamic regression}\label{Sec:Back:Regress} With increasingly large volumes of data, it is becoming possible to obtain models using modern regression techniques. This vibrant field will continue to grow as new techniques in machine learning make it possible to extract more information from data. In this section, we provide a brief overview of two leading regression-based system identification techniques: 1) the dynamic mode decomposition (DMD), which provides a best-fit linear operator from high-dimensional snapshot data, and may approximate the Koopman operator in some cases, and 2) the recent sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy) algorithm, which produces parsimonious nonlinear models through sparse regression onto a library of nonlinear functions. \subsubsection{Dynamic mode decomposition (DMD)}\label{Sec:Back:Regress} Dynamic mode decomposition (DMD) was originally introduced in the fluid dynamics community to decompose large experimental or numerical data sets into leading spatiotemporal coherent structures~\cite{Schmid2008aps,schmid:2010}. Shortly after, it was shown that the DMD algorithm provides a practical numerical framework to approximate the Koopman mode decomposition~\cite{Rowley2009jfm}. This connection between DMD and the Koopman operator was further strengthened and justified in a dynamic regression framework~\cite{Chen:2012,Tu2014jcd,Kutz2016book}. The DMD algorithm seeks a best-fit linear model to relate the following two data matrices \begin{eqnarray} && {\bf X} = \begin{bmatrix} \vline & \vline & & \vline \\ \mathbf{x}_1 & \mathbf{x}_2 & \cdots & \mathbf{x}_{m-1}\\ \vline & \vline & & \vline \end{bmatrix} \qquad\qquad {\bf X}' = \begin{bmatrix} \vline & \vline & & \vline \\ \mathbf{x}_2 & \mathbf{x}_3 & \cdots & \mathbf{x}_{m}\\ \vline & \vline & & \vline \end{bmatrix}.\label{eq:DataCollection} \end{eqnarray} The matrix $\mathbf{X}$ contains snapshots of the system state in time, and $\mathbf{X}'$ is a matrix of the same snapshots advanced a single step forward in time. These matrices may be related by a best-fit linear operator $\mathbf{A}$ given by \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{X}' = \mathbf{A}\mathbf{X} \quad\Longrightarrow\quad \mathbf{A} \approx \mathbf{X}'\mathbf{X}^{\dagger}, \end{eqnarray} where $\mathbf{X}^{\dagger}$ is the pseudo-inverse, obtained via the singular value decomposition (SVD). The matrix $\mathbf{A}$ is a best-fit linear operator in the sense that it minimizes the Frobenius norm error $\\|\mathbf{X}'-\mathbf{A}\mathbf{X}\\|_F$. For systems of moderately large dimension, the operator $\mathbf{A}$ is intractably large, and so instead of obtaining $\mathbf{A}$ directly, we often seek the leading eigendecomposition of $\mathbf{A}$: \begin{enumerate} \item Take the SVD of $\mathbf{X}$: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{X}=\mathbf{U}\mathbf{\Sigma}\mathbf{V}^. \end{eqnarray} Here, $^$ denotes complex conjugate transpose. Often, only the first $r$ columns of $\mathbf{U}$ and $\mathbf{V}$ are required for a good approximation, $\mathbf{X}\approx \mathbf{\tilde{U}}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}$, where $\tilde{~}$ denotes a rank-$r$ truncation. \item Obtain the $r\times r$ matrix $\mathbf{\tilde{A}}$ by projecting $\mathbf{A}$ onto $\mathbf{\tilde{U}}$: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{\tilde{A}} = \mathbf{\tilde{U}}^\mathbf{A}\mathbf{\tilde{U}} = \mathbf{\tilde{U}}^\mathbf{X}'\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}. \end{eqnarray} \item Compute the eigendecomposition of $\mathbf{\tilde{A}}$: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{\tilde{A}} \mathbf{W} = \mathbf{W} \mathbf{\Lambda}. \end{eqnarray} The eigenvalues in $\mathbf{\Lambda}$ are eigenvalues of the full matrix $\mathbf{A}$. \item Reconstruct full-dimensional eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A}$, given by the columns of $\mathbf{\Phi}$: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{\Phi} = \mathbf{X}'\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}\mathbf{W}. \end{eqnarray} \end{enumerate} DMD, in its original formulation, is based on linear measurements of the state $\mathbf{x}$ of the system, such as velocity measurements from particle image velocimetry (PIV). This means that the measurement function $g$ is the identity map on the state. Linear measurements are not rich enough for many nonlinear dynamical systems, and so DMD has recently been extended to an augmented measurement vector including nonlinear functions of the state~\cite{Williams2015jnls}. However, choosing the correct nonlinear measurements that result in an approximately closed Koopman-invariant measurement system is still an open problem. Typically, measurement functions are either determined using information from the dynamical system (i.e., using quadratic nonlinearities for the Navier-Stokes equations), or by a brute-force search in a particular basis of Hilbert space (i.e., searching for polynomial functions or radial basis functions). \subsubsection{Sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy)} A recently developed technique, the sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy) algorithm, identifies the nonlinear dynamics in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:ContinuousDynamics} from measurement data~\cite{Brunton2016pnas}. The SINDy algorithm uses sparse regression~\cite{Tibshirani1996lasso} in a nonlinear function space to determine the few active terms in the dynamics. Earlier related methods based on compressed sensing have been used to predict catastrophes in dynamical systems~\cite{Wang2011prl}. There are alternative methods that employ symbolic regression (i.e., genetic programming~\cite{koza1999genetic}) to identify dynamics~\cite{Bongard2007pnas,Schmidt2009science}. This work is part of a growing literature that is exploring the use of sparsity in dynamics~\cite{Ozolicnvs2013pnas,Schaeffer2013pnas,mackey2014compressive} and dynamical systems~\cite{Bai2014aiaa,Proctor2014epj,Brunton2014siads}. The SINDy algorithm is an equation-free method~\cite{Kevrekidis2003cms} to identify a dynamical system \eqref{Eq:ContinuousDynamics} from data, much as in the DMD algorithm above. The basis of the SINDy algorithm is the observation that for many systems of interest, the function $\bf{f}$ only has a few active terms, making it sparse in the space of possible functions. Instead of performing a brute-force search for the active terms in the dynamics, sparse regression makes it possible to efficiently identify the few non-zero terms. To determine the function $\bf{f}$ from data, we collect a time-history of the state $\mathbf{x}(t)$ and the derivative $\dot\mathbf{x}(t)$; note that $\dot\mathbf{x}(t)$ may be approximated numerically from $\mathbf{x}$. The data is sampled at several times $t_1, t_2, \cdots, t_m$ and arranged into two large matrices: \begin{subequations} \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{X} = \overset{\text{\normalsize state}}{\left.\overrightarrow{\begin{bmatrix} x_1(t_1) & x_2(t_1) & \cdots & x_n(t_1)\\ x_1(t_2) & x_2(t_2) & \cdots & x_n(t_2)\\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ x_1(t_m) & x_2(t_m) & \cdots & x_n(t_m) \end{bmatrix}}\right\downarrow}\begin{rotate}{270}\hspace{-.125in}time~~\end{rotate}\label{Eq:DataMatrix}\qquad\qquad \dot\mathbf{X} = \begin{bmatrix} \dot x_1(t_1) & \dot x_2(t_1) & \cdots & \dot x_n(t_1)\\ \dot x_1(t_2) & \dot x_2(t_2) & \cdots & \dot x_n(t_2)\\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ \dot x_1(t_m) & \dot x_2(t_m) & \cdots & \dot x_n(t_m) \end{bmatrix}.\\\nonumber \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} Next, we construct an augmented library $\boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X})$ consisting of candidate nonlinear functions of the columns of $\mathbf{X}$. For example, $\boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X})$ may consist of constant, polynomial and trigonometric terms: \begin{eqnarray} \boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X}) = \begin{bmatrix} ~~\vline&\vline & \vline & \vline & & \vline & \vline & \vline& \vline & ~~ \\ ~~\mathbf{1}&\mathbf{X} & \mathbf{X}^{P_2} & \mathbf{X}^{P_3} & \cdots & \sin(\mathbf{X}) & \cos(\mathbf{X}) & \sin(2\mathbf{X}) & \cos(2\mathbf{X}) & \cdots ~~\\ ~~\vline &\vline & \vline & \vline & & \vline &\vline &\vline & \vline & ~~ \end{bmatrix}.\label{Eq:NonlinearLibrary} \end{eqnarray} Each column of $\boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X})$ is a candidate function for the right hand side of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:ContinuousDynamics}. Since only a few of these nonlinearities are likely active in each row of $\bf{f}$, sparse regression is used to determine the sparse vectors of coefficients $\boldsymbol{\Xi} = \begin{bmatrix}\boldsymbol{\xi}_1 &\boldsymbol{\xi}_2 & \cdots & \boldsymbol{\xi}_n\end{bmatrix}$ indicating which nonlinearities are active. \begin{eqnarray} \dot\mathbf{X} = \boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X}) \boldsymbol{\Xi}.\label{Eq:SparseRegression} \end{eqnarray} Once $\boldsymbol{\Xi}$ has been determined, a model of each row of the governing equations may be constructed as follows: \begin{eqnarray} \dot{\mathbf{x}}_k = {\bf f}_k(\mathbf{x}) = \boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{x}^T)\boldsymbol{\xi}_k.\label{Eq:sparseRow} \end{eqnarray} We may solve for $\boldsymbol{\Xi}$ in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:SparseRegression} using sparse regression. In many cases, we may need to normalize the columns of $\boldsymbol{\Theta}(\mathbf{X})$ first to ensure that the restricted isometry property holds~\cite{Wang2011prl}; this is especially important when the entries in $\mathbf{X}$ are small, since powers of $\mathbf{X}$ will be minuscule. Note that in the case the the library $\mathbf{\Theta}$ contains linear measurements of the state, the SINDy method reduces to a linear regression, closely related to the DMD above, but with transposed notation. The SINDy algorithm also generalizes naturally to discrete-time formulations. \subsection{Time-delay embedding }\label{Sec:Back:Delay} It has long been observed that choosing good measurements is critical to modeling, predicting, and controlling dynamical systems. The concept of \emph{observability} in a linear dynamical system provides conditions for when the full-state of a system may be estimated from a time-history of measurements of the system, providing a rigorous foundation for dynamic estimation, such as the Kalman filter~\cite{Kalman1960jfe,Ho1965aac,Welch1995book,dp:book,sp:book}. Although observability has been extended to nonlinear systems~\cite{Hermann1977ieeetac}, significantly fewer results hold in this more general context. The Takens embedding theorem~\cite{Takens1981lnm} provides a rigorous framework for analyzing the information content of measurements of a nonlinear dynamical system. It is possible to enrich a measurement, $x(t)$, with time-shifted copies of itself, $x(t-\tau)$, which are known as delay coordinates. Under certain conditions, the attractor of a dynamical system in delay coordinates is \emph{diffeomorphic} to the original attractor in the original state space. This is truly remarkable, as this theory states that in some cases, it may be possible to reconstruct the entire attractor of a turbulent fluid from a time series of a single point measurement. Similar \emph{differential} embeddings may be constructed by using derivatives of the measurement. Takens embedding theory has been related to nonlinear observability~\cite{Aeyels1981jco,Aguirre2005jpa}, providing a much needed connection between these two important fields. Delay embedding has been widely used to analyze and characterize chaotic systems~\cite{Farmer1987prl,Crutchfield1987cs,Sugihara1990nature,Rowlands1992physD,Abarbanel1993rmp,Sugihara2012science,Ye2015pnas}. The use of generalized delay coordinates are also used for linear system identification with the eigensystem realization algorithm (ERA)~\cite{ERA:1985} and in climate science with the singular spectrum analysis (SSA)~\cite{Broomhead1989prsla} and nonlinear Laplacian spectrum analysis (NLSA)~\cite{Giannakis2012pnas}. All of these methods are based on a singular value decomposition of a Hankel matrix, which is discussed below. \subsubsection{Hankel matrix analysis}\label{sec:ERA} Both the eigensystem realization algorithm (ERA)~\cite{ERA:1985} and the singular spectrum analysis (SSA)~\cite{Broomhead1989prsla} are based on the construction of a Hankel matrix from a time series of measurement data. In the following, we will present the theory for a single scalar measurement, although this framework generalizes to multiple input, multiple output (MIMO) problems. The following Hankel matrix $\mathbf{H}$ is formed from a time series of a measurement $y(t)$: \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{H} = \begin{bmatrix}y(t_1) & y(t_2) & \cdots & y(t_{p}) \\ y(t_2) & y(t_3) &\cdots & y(t_{p+1}) \\ \vdots & \vdots &\ddots & \vdots \\ y(t_q) & y(t_{q+1})& \cdots & y(t_{m})\end{bmatrix}.\label{Eq:Hankel} \end{eqnarray} Taking the singular value decomposition (SVD) of the Hankel matrix, \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{H} = \mathbf{U\Sigma V}^T, \end{eqnarray} yields a hierarchical decomposition of the matrix into \emph{eigen} time series given by the columns of $\mathbf{U}$ and $\mathbf{V}$. These columns are ordered by their ability to express the variance in the columns and rows of the matrix $\mathbf{H}$, respectively. When the measurement $y(t)$ comes from the impulse response of an \emph{observable} linear system, then it is possible to use the SVD of the matrix $\mathbf{H}$ to reconstruct an accurate model of the full dynamics. This ERA procedure is widely used in system identification, and it has been recently connected to DMD~\cite{Tu2014jcd,Proctor2016siads}. In the following, we will generalize system identification using the Hankel matrix to nonlinear dynamical systems via the Koopman analysis. \newpage \section{Decomposing chaos: Hankel alternative view of Koopman (HAVOK)} Obtaining linear representations for strongly nonlinear systems has the potential to revolutionize our ability to predict and control these systems. In fact, the linearization of dynamics near fixed points or periodic orbits has long been employed for \emph{local} linear representation of the dynamics~\cite{guckenheimer_holmes}. The Koopman operator is appealing because it provides a \emph{global} linear representation, valid far away from fixed points and periodic orbits, although previous attempts to obtain finite-dimensional approximations of the Koopman operator have had limited success. Dynamic mode decomposition (DMD)~\cite{schmid:2010,Rowley2009jfm,Kutz2016book} seeks to approximate the Koopman operator with a best-fit linear model advancing spatial measurements from one time to the next. However, DMD is based on linear measurements, which are not rich enough for many nonlinear systems. Augmenting DMD with nonlinear measurements may enrich the model, but there is no guarantee that the resulting models will be closed under the Koopman operator~\cite{Brunton2016plosone}. Instead of advancing instantaneous measurements of the state of the system, we obtain intrinsic measurement coordinates based on the time-history of the system. This perspective is data-driven, relying on the wealth of information from previous measurements to inform the future. Unlike a linear or weakly nonlinear system, where trajectories may get trapped at fixed points or on periodic orbits, chaotic dynamics are particularly well-suited to this analysis: trajectories evolve to densely fill an attractor, so more data provides more information. This method is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Overview} for the Lorenz system in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Lorenz} below. The conditions of the Takens embedding theorem are satisfied~\cite{Takens1981lnm}, so eigen-time-delay coordinates may be obtained from a time series of a single measurement $x(t)$ by taking a singular value decomposition (SVD) of the following Hankel matrix $\mathbf{H}$: \begin{eqnarray} ~\nonumber\\ \mathbf{H} = \begin{bmatrix}x(t_1) & x(t_2) & \cdots & x(t_{p}) \\ x(t_2) & x(t_3) &\cdots & x(t_{p+1}) \\ \vdots & \vdots &\ddots & \vdots \\ x(t_q) & x(t_{q+1})& \cdots & x(t_{m}) \end{bmatrix} = \mathbf{U\Sigma V^}.\label{Eq:Hankel}\\ ~\nonumber \end{eqnarray} The columns of $\mathbf{U}$ and $\mathbf{V}$ from the SVD are arranged hierarchically by their ability to model the columns and rows of $\mathbf{H}$, respectively. Often, $\mathbf{H}$ may admit a low-rank approximation by the first $r$ columns of $\mathbf{U}$ and $\mathbf{V}$. Note that the Hankel matrix in \eqref{Eq:Hankel} is the basis of ERA~\cite{ERA:1985} in linear system identification and SSA~\cite{Broomhead1989prsla} in climate time series analysis. The low-rank approximation to \eqref{Eq:Hankel} provides a \emph{data-driven} measurement system that is approximately invariant to the Koopman operator for states on the attractor. By definition, the dynamics map the attractor into itself, making it \emph{invariant} to the flow. We may re-write \eqref{Eq:Hankel} with the Koompan operator $\mathcal{K}$: \begin{eqnarray} ~\nonumber\\ \mathbf{H} = \begin{bmatrix}x(t_1) & \mathcal{K} x(t_1) & \cdots & \mathcal{K}^{p-1}x(t_{1}) \\ \mathcal{K} x(t_1) & \mathcal{K}^2 x(t_1) & \cdots & \mathcal{K}^p x(t_{1}) \\ \vdots & \vdots &\ddots & \vdots \\ \mathcal{K}^{q-1} x(t_1) & \mathcal{K}^q x(t_{1}) & \cdots & \mathcal{K}^{m-1} x(t_{1}) \end{bmatrix}.\label{Eq:HAVOK}\\ ~\nonumber \end{eqnarray} \newpage The columns of \eqref{Eq:Hankel}, and thus \eqref{Eq:HAVOK}, are well-approximated by the first $r$ columns of $\mathbf{U}$, so these eigen time series provide a Koopman-invariant measurement system. The first $r$ columns of $\mathbf{V}$ provide a time series of the magnitude of each of the columns of $\mathbf{U\Sigma}$ in the data. By plotting the first three columns of $\mathbf{V}$, we obtain an embedded attractor for the Lorenz system, shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Overview}. The rank $r$ can be obtained by the optimal hard threshold of Gavish and Donoho~\cite{Gavish2014ieeetit} or by other attractor dimension arguments~\cite{Abarbanel1993rmp}. The connection between eigen-time-delay coordinates from \eqref{Eq:Hankel} and the Koopman operator motivates a linear regression model on the variables in $\mathbf{V}$. Even with an approximately Koopman-invariant measurement system, there remain challenges to identifying a linear model for a chaotic system. A linear model, however detailed, cannot capture multiple fixed points or the unpredictable behavior characteristic of chaos with a positive Lyapunov exponent~\cite{Brunton2016plosone}. Instead of constructing a closed linear model for the first $r$ variables in $\mathbf{V}$, we build a linear model on the first $r-1$ variables and impose the last variable, $v_r$, as a forcing term. \begin{eqnarray} \frac{d}{dt}\mathbf{v}(t) = \mathbf{A}\mathbf{v}(t) + \mathbf{B}{v}_r(t),\label{Eq:ChaosModel} \end{eqnarray} where $\mathbf{v}=\begin{bmatrix}v_1 & v_2 & \cdots & v_{r-1}\end{bmatrix}^T$ is a vector of the first ${r-1}$ eigen-time-delay coordinates. In all of the examples below, the linear model on the first $r-1$ terms is accurate, while no linear model represents $v_r$. Instead, $v_r$ is an input forcing to the linear dynamics in \eqref{Eq:ChaosModel}, which approximate the nonlinear dynamics in \eqref{Eq:ContinuousDynamics}. The statistics of $v_r(t)$ are non-Gaussian, as seen in the lower-right panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Overview}. The long tails correspond to rare-event forcing that drives lobe switching in the Lorenz system; this is related to rare-event forcing distributions observed and modeled by others~\cite{Majda2012nonlinearity,Sapsis2013pnas,Majda2014pnas}. The forced linear system in \eqref{Eq:ChaosModel} was discovered after applying the sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy)~\cite{Brunton2016pnas} algorithm to delay coordinates of the Lorenz system. Even when allowing for the possibility of nonlinear dynamics for $\mathbf{v}$, the most parsimonious model was linear with a dominant off-diagonal structure in the $\mathbf{A}$ matrix (shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:SparseModel}). This strongly suggests a connection with the Koopman operator, motivating the present work. The last term $v_r$ is not accurately represented by either linear or polynomial nonlinear models~\cite{Brunton2016pnas}. We refer to the framework presented here as the Hankel alternative view of Koopman (HAVOK) analysis. The HAVOK analysis will be explored in detail below on the Lorenz system in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Lorenz} and on a wide range of numerical, experimental, and historical data models in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Results}. In nearly all of these examples, the forcing is generally small except for intermittent punctate events that correspond to transient attractor switching (for example, lobe switching in the Lorenz system) or bursting phenomena (in the case of Measles outbreaks). When the forcing signal is small, the dynamics are well-described by the Koopman linear system on the data-driven delay coordinates. When the forcing is large, the system is driven by an essential nonlinearity, which typically corresponds to an intermittent switching or bursting event. The regions of small and large forcing correspond to large coherent regions of phase space that may be analyzed further through machine learning techniques. \newpage \begin{figure}[b!] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{FIG_OVERVIEW} \end{overpic} \end{center} \vspace{-.3in} \caption{\small Decomposition of chaos into a linear dynamical system with intermittent forcing. First, a time series $x(t)$ of of the chaotic Lorenz system is measured and time-shifted copies are stacked into a Hankel matrix $\mathbf{H}$. Next, the singular value decomposition of $\mathbf{H}$ yields a hierarchical decomposition of \emph{eigen} time series that characterize the measured dynamics. In these coordinates, given by the columns of $\mathbf{V}$, we obtain a delay-embedded attractor. Finally, a best-fit linear model is obtained on the time-delay coordinates $\mathbf{v}$; the linear fit for the first $r-1$ variables is excellent, but the last coordinate $v_r$ is not well-modeled with linear dynamics. Instead, we consider $v_r$ as an input that forces the first $r-1$ variables. The rare events in the forcing correspond to lobe switching in the chaotic dynamics.}\label{Fig:Overview} \end{figure} \section{HAVOK analysis illustrated on the chaotic Lorenz system}\label{Sec:Lorenz} To further understand the decomposition of a chaotic system into linear dynamics with intermittent forcing, we illustrate the HAVOK analysis in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Overview} on the chaotic Lorenz system~\cite{Lorenz1963jas}: \begin{subequations} \label{Eq:Lorenz} \begin{eqnarray} \dot{x} & = & \sigma (y - x)\\ \dot{y} & = & x(\rho -z) - y\\ \dot{z} & = & x y - \beta z, \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} with parameters $\sigma=10,\rho=28,$ and $\beta=8/3$. The Lorenz system is among the simplest and most well-studied examples of a deterministic dynamical system that exhibits chaos. A trajectory of the Lorenz system is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP1}, integrated using the parameters in Tables~\ref{Table:Parameters} and \ref{Table:HAVOK} in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Results}. The trajectory moves along an attractor that is characterized by two lobes, switching back and forth between the two lobes intermittently by passing near a saddle point in the middle of the domain at $(x,y,z)=(0,0,0)$. The various panels of Fig.~\ref{Fig:Overview} are provided in more detail below with labels and units. First, a time series of the $x$ variable is measured and plotted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP2}. By stacking time-shifted copies of this measurement vector as rows of a Hankel matrix, as in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Hankel}, it is possible to obtain an eigen-time-delay coordinate system through the singular value decomposition. These eigen-time-delay coordinates, given by the columns of the matrix $\mathbf{V}$, are the most self-similar time series features in the measurement $x(t)$, ordered by the variance they capture in the data. \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.85\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p1_axis} \put(60,0){$x$} \put(7,9){$y$} \put(4,40){$z$} \end{overpic} \caption{Lorenz attractor from Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Lorenz}, simulated using the parameters in Tables.~\ref{Table:Parameters} and \ref{Table:HAVOK}.}\label{Fig:LorenzP1} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p2_axis} \put(55,0){$t$} \put(8,30){$x$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.2in} \caption{A time series of the variable $x(t)$ in the Lorenz system. }\label{Fig:LorenzP2} \vspace{-.2in} \end{center} \end{figure} It is well known from Takens embedding theory~\cite{Takens1981lnm} that time delay coordinates provide an embedding of the scalar measurement $x(t)$ into a higher dimensional space. The resulting attractor, shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP3}, is diffeomorphic to the original attractor in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP1}. \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.85\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p3_axis} \put(30,5){$v_1$} \put(79,7){$v_2$} \put(2,33){$v_3$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.2in} \caption{Time-delay embedded attractor using the eigen-time-delay coordinates obtained from the singular value decomposition of the Hankel matrix in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Hankel}.}\label{Fig:LorenzP3} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.85\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p_SparseModel} \end{overpic} \caption{HAVOK model obtained on time-delay coordinates of the Lorenz system. Exact coefficients are provided in Tab.~\ref{Fig:HAVOKLorenzExact} in the Appendix.}\label{Fig:HAVOKModel} \vspace{-.1in} \end{center} \end{figure} Next, a HAVOK model is developed using the time delay coordinates. In particular, a linear model is obtained for the first $14$ coordinates ($v_1,v_2,\dots,v_{14}$) with linear forcing from the $15^{\text{th}}$ coordinate $v_{15}$, given by the $15^{\text{th}}$ column of $\mathbf{V}$. This model is depicted schematically in Fig.~\ref{Fig:HAVOKModel}, and exact values are provided in Tab.~\ref{Fig:HAVOKLorenzExact} in the Appendix. The model may be obtained through a straightforward linear regression procedure, and an additional sparsity penalizing term may be added to eliminate terms in the model with very small coefficients~\cite{Brunton2016pnas}. The resulting model has a striking skew-symmetric structure, and the terms directly above and below the diagonal are nearly integer multiples of $5$. This fascinating structure is explored in Sec.~\ref{Sec:LorenzAdvanced}. Using the HAVOK model with the signal $v_{15}$ as an input, it is possible to reconstruct the embedded attractor, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP5}. Figure~\ref{Fig:LorenzP4} shows the model prediction of the dominant time-delay coordinate, $v_1$, as well as the input forcing signal from $v_{15}$. From this figure, it is clear that for most times the forcing signal is nearly zero, and this signal begins to \emph{burst} when the trajectory is about to switch from one lobe of the attractor to another. \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.85\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p5_axis} \put(30,5){$v_1$} \put(79,7){$v_2$} \put(2,35){$v_3$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.2in} \caption{Reconstructed embedded attractor using linear HAVOK model with forcing from $v_{15}$.}\label{Fig:LorenzP5} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \vspace{-.2in} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p4_axis} \put(53,2){$t$} \put(4,18){$v_{15}$} \put(4,48){$v_{1}$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.3in} \caption{Reconstruction of $v_1$ using linear HAVOK model with forcing from $v_{15}$.} \vspace{-.2in} \label{Fig:LorenzP4} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{HAVOK models are predictive} It is unclear from Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP4} whether or not the bursting behavior in $v_{15}$ predicts the lobe switching in advance, or is simply active during the switch. To investigate this, it is possible to isolate regions where the forcing term $v_{15}$ is active by selecting values when $v_{15}^2$ are larger than a threshold value ($4\times 10^{-6}$), and coloring these sections of the trajectory in red. The remaining portions of the trajectory, when the forcing is small, are colored in dark grey. These red and grey trajectory snippets are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP82D}, where it is clear that the bursting significantly precedes the lobe switching. This is extremely promising, as it turns out that the activity of the forcing term is \emph{predictive}, preceding lobe switching by nearly one period. The same trajectories are plotted in three-dimensions in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP83D}, where it can be seen that the nonlinear forcing is active precisely when the trajectory is on the outer portion of the attractor lobes. The prediction of lobe switching is quite good, although it can be seen that occasionally a switching event is missed by this procedure. A single lobe switching event is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP10}, illustrating the geometry of the trajectories. \begin{figure}[where!] \begin{center} \vspace{-.1in} \begin{overpic}[width=.95\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p8_2Daxis} \put(55,5){$t$} \put(3,17){$\|v_{15}\|^2$} \put(3,42){$v_{15}$} \put(3,67){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.3in} \caption{Delay coordinate $v_1$ of the Lorenz system, colored by the thresholded magnitude of the square of the forcing $v_{15}$. When the forcing is active (red), the trajectory is about to switch, and when the forcing is inactive (grey), the solution is governed by predominantly linear dynamics. }\label{Fig:LorenzP82D} \vspace{-.15in} \end{center} \end{figure} It is important to note that when the forcing term is small, corresponding to the grey portions of the trajectory, the dynamics are largely governed by linear dynamics. Thus, the forcing term in effect distills the essential nonlinearity of the system, indicating when the dynamics are about to switch lobes of the attractor. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.85\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p8_3Daxis} \put(30,5){$v_1$} \put(79,7){$v_2$} \put(2,35){$v_3$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.3in} \caption{Time-delay embedded attractor of the Lorenz system color-coded by the activity of the forcing term $v_{15}$. Trajectories in grey correspond to regions where the forcing is small and the dynamics are well approximated by Koopman linear dynamics. The trajectories in red indicate that lobe switching is about to occur.}\label{Fig:LorenzP83D} \end{center} \end{figure} \label{Sec:LorenzAdvanced} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \vspace{-.1in} \begin{overpic}[width=.9\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p10_axis} \put(51,2){$v_1$} \put(6,35){$v_2$} \put(51,20){\textbf{A}} \put(56.5,18.5){\textbf{B}} \put(44.5,39.){\textbf{C}} \put(38.,39.25){\textbf{D}} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.05in} \caption{Illustration of one intermittent lobe switching event. The trajectory starts at point (\textbf{A}), and resides in the basin of the right lobe for four revolutions, until (\textbf{B}), when the forcing becomes large, indicating an imminent switching event. The trajectory makes one final revolution (red) and switches to the left lobe (\textbf{C}), where it makes three more revolutions. At point (\textbf{D}), the activity of the forcing signal $v_{15}$ will increase, indicating that switching is imminent.}\label{Fig:LorenzP10} \vspace{-.1in} \end{center} \end{figure} In practice, it is possible to measure $v_{15}$ from a streaming time series of $x(t)$ by convolution with the $u_{15}$ mode ($15^{\text{th}}$ column in the matrix $\mathbf{U}$), shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP7}. Finally, the probability density function of the forcing term $v_{15}$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP6}; the long tails, compared with the normal distribution, indicate the rare intermittent switching events. Dynamic rare events are well-studied in climate and ocean waves~\cite{Cousins2014physd,Babaee2016prsa,Cousins2016jfm}. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \vspace{-.2in} \begin{overpic}[width=.9\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p7_axis} \put(53,0){$t$} \put(4,29){$u_r$} \end{overpic} \caption{Modes $u_r$ (columns of the matrix $\mathbf{U}$), indicating the short-time history that must be convolved with $x(t)$ to obtain $v_r$.}\label{Fig:LorenzP7} \vspace{-.1in} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.9\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p6_axis} \put(51,0){$v_{15}$} \put(5,30){$p$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.2in} \caption{Probability density function of the forcing term in $v_{15}$ (red), plotted against the probability density function of an appropriately scaled normal distribution (black dash).}\label{Fig:LorenzP6} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{HAVOK models generalize beyond training data} It is important that the HAVOK model generalizes to test data that was not used to train the model. Figure~\ref{Fig:LorenzP11} shows a validation test of a HAVOK model trained on data from $t=0$ to $t=50$ on new data from time $t=50$ to $t=100$. The model accurately captures the main lobe transitions, although small errors are gradually introduced for long time integration. \begin{figure}[where] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p11_CROSSVALIDATE_BIG} \put(55,2.5){$t$} \put(3,18){$v_{15}$} \put(3,48){$v_{1}$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.35in} \caption{Performance of HAVOK model on test data from Lorenz system that was not used in the training set. This model was trained on a data set from $t=0$ to $t=50$. }\label{Fig:LorenzP11} \vspace{-.3in} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Structure and integrability of the HAVOK model for the Lorenz system} The HAVOK model for the Lorenz system, provided in Tab.~\ref{Fig:HAVOKLorenzExact} in the Appendix, is highly structured. The $\mathbf{A}$ matrix of the linear dynamics is nearly skew-symmetric, and the terms directly above and below the diagonal are remarkably close to integer multiples of $5$. Intrigued by this structure, we have constructed an approximate system below that represents the \emph{idealized} structure in the HAVOK model for the Lorenz system: \setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{20} \begin{eqnarray} \scriptsize \frac{d}{dt} \begin{bmatrix} v_1\\ v_2 \\ v_3 \\ v_4 \\ v_5 \\ v_6 \\ v_7 \\ v_8 \\ v_9 \\ v_{10} \\ v_{11}\\ v_{12}\\ v_{13} \\ v_{14} \end{bmatrix} \hspace{-.05in} = \hspace{-.05in} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & -5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 5 & 0 & -10 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 10 & 0 & -15 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 15 & 0 & -20 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 20 & 0 & 25 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -25 & 0 & -30 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 30 & 0 & -35 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 35 & 0 & -40 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 40 & 0 & 45 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -45 & 0 & -50 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 50 & 0 & -55 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 55 & 0 & 60 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -60 & 0 & -65\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 65 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \hspace{-.05in} \begin{bmatrix} v_1\\ v_2 \\ v_3 \\ v_4 \\ v_5 \\ v_6 \\ v_7 \\ v_8 \\ v_9 \\ v_{10} \\ v_{11}\\ v_{12}\\ v_{13} \\ v_{14} \end{bmatrix} \hspace{-.05in} + \hspace{-.05in} \begin{bmatrix} 0\\ 0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\-70 \end{bmatrix} v_{15}. \end{eqnarray} This idealized system is forced with the signal $v_{15}$ from the full Lorenz system, and the dynamic response is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP9}. As shown in the zoom-ins in Figs.~\ref{Fig:LorenzP9A} and~\ref{Fig:LorenzP9B}, the agreement is remarkably good for the first 50 time units, although the idealized model performance degrades over time, as shown for the final 50 time units. \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \vspace{-1in} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p9_axis} \put(52,0){$t$} \put(5.5,30){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \caption{Response of idealized HAVOK model with integer coefficients, forced by the $v_{15}$ time series from the Lorenz system.}\label{Fig:LorenzP9} \vspace{-.2in} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p9_Aaxis} \put(52,0){$t$} \put(5.5,30){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.1in} \caption{First 50 time unites of response of idealized HAVOK model with integer coefficients, forced by the $v_{15}$ time series from the Lorenz system.}\label{Fig:LorenzP9A} \end{center} \vspace{-.2in} \end{figure} \newpage \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_p9_Baxis} \put(52,0){$t$} \put(5.5,30){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \caption{Last 50 time unites of response of idealized HAVOK model with integer coefficients, forced by the $v_{15}$ time series from the Lorenz system.}\label{Fig:LorenzP9B} \end{center} \end{figure} The eigenvalues of the full HAVOK model and the integer-valued approximation are provided in Tab.~\ref{Tab:HAVOKEigs}. There is reasonably good agreement between the eigenvalues, with the integer-valued model being exactly integrable, so that trajectories reside on a quasi-periodic orbit. This is to be expected with a Koopman operator model of a dynamical system. Interestingly, a number of the imaginary parts of the eigenvalue pairs are near multiples of each other (e.g., 22.0058 is nearly a multiple of 11.1600). This is also to be expected in a Koopman model, as integer multiples of an eigenvalue of the Koopman operator are also eigenvalues corresponding to that integer power of the Koopman eigenfunction. \begin{table}[b] \caption{Eigenvalues of the HAVOK model and integer-valued approximation.}\label{Tab:HAVOKEigs} \vspace{-.2in} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|l\|\|l\|} \hline HAVOK Model & Integer-Valued Model\\\hline\hline ~~~$0.0000 \pm 2.9703i$ & $0.0000 \pm 3.0725i$\\\hline $-0.0008 \pm 11.0788i$ & $0.0000 \pm 11.1600i$\\\hline $-0.0035 \pm 21.2670i$ & $0.0000 \pm 22.0058i$\\\hline $-0.0107 \pm 34.5458i$ & $0.0000 \pm 35.5714i$\\\hline $-0.0233 \pm 51.4077i$ & $0.0000 \pm 52.3497i$\\\hline $-0.0301 \pm 72.7789i$ &$0.0000 \pm 73.5112i$ \\\hline ~~~$0.0684 \pm 101.6733i$ &$0.0000 \pm 102.2108i$ \\\hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \end{table} \newpage \subsection{Connection to almost-invariant sets and Perron-Frobenius} The Koopman operator is the dual, or left-adjoint, of the Perron-Frobenius operator, which is also called the transfer operator or the push-forward operator on the space of probability density functions. Thus, Koopman analysis typically describes the evolution of measurements from a single trajectory, while Perron-Frobenius analysis describes an ensemble of trajectories. Because of the close relationship of the two operators, it is interesting to compare the Koopman (HAVOK) analysis with the almost-invariant sets from the Perron-Frobenius operator. Almost-invariant sets represent dynamically isolated phase space regions, in which the trajectory resides for a long time, and with only a weak communication with their surroundings. These sets are almost invariant under the action of the dynamics and are related to dominant eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the Perron-Frobenius operator. They can be numerically determined from its finite-rank approximation by discretizing the phase space into small boxes and computing a large, but sparse transition probability matrix of how initial conditions in the various boxes flow to other boxes in a fixed amount of time; for this analysis, we use the same $T = 0.1$ used for the length of the $\mathbf{U}$ vectors in the HAVOK analysis. Following the approach proposed by \cite{Froyland2005physd}, almost-invariant sets can then be estimated by computing the associated reversible transition matrix and level-set thresholding its right eigenvectors. The almost-invariant sets of the Perron-Frobenius operator for the Lorenz system are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:LorenzPF}. There are two sets, and each set corresponds to the near basin of one of the attractor lobes as well as the outer basin of the opposing attractor lobe and the bundle of trajectories that connect them. These two almost-invariant sets dovetail to form the complete Lorenz attractor. Underneath the almost-invariant sets, the Lorenz attractor is colored by the thresholded magnitude of the nonlinear forcing term in the HAVOK model, which partitions the attractor into two sets corresponding to regions where the flow is approximately linear (inner black region) and where the flow is strongly nonlinear (outer red region). Remarkably, the boundaries of the almost-invariant sets of the Perron-Frobenius operator closely match the boundaries of the linear and nonlinear regions from the HAVOK analysis. However, this may not be surprising, as the boundaries of these sets are dynamic separatrices that mark the boundaries of qualitatively different dynamics. \begin{figure}[b!] \begin{center} \vspace{-.2in} \begin{overpic}[width=.75\textwidth]{SUPP_Lorenz_PERRONFROBENIUS_BIG} \put(82,6){$y$} \put(26,2){$x$} \put(4,35){$z$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.1in} \caption{Lorenz attractor visualized using both the HAVOK approximately linear set as well as the Perron-Frobenius almost-invariant sets.}\label{Fig:LorenzPF} \vspace{-.4in} \end{center} \end{figure} \newpage \section{HAVOK analysis on additional chaotic systems}\label{Sec:Results} \begin{figure}[b!] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.95\textwidth]{SUPP_COMPREHENSIVE.jpg} \end{overpic} \end{center} \vspace{-.15in} \caption{\small Summary of HAVOK analysis applied to numerous examples, including analytical systems (Lorenz and R\"ossler), delay differential equations (Mackey-Glass), stochastic/forced equations (forced Duffing and stochastic magnetic field reversal), and systems characterized from real-world data (electrocardiogram, electroencephalogram, and measles outbreaks). The model prediction is extremely accurate for the first five analytical cases, providing faithful attractor reconstruction and predicting dominant transient and intermittent events. In the stochastic and data examples, the model predicts attractor topology and switching dynamics. In the case of measles outbreaks, the forced linear model predicts large transients corresponding to outbreaks. The majority of the examples are characterized by nearly symmetric forcing distributions with long tails (Gaussian forcing shown in black dashed line), corresponding to rare events. }\label{Fig:Comprehensive} \vspace{-.1in} \end{figure} The HAVOK analysis is applied to analytic and real-world systems in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Comprehensive}. Code for every example is available at: http://faculty.washington.edu/sbrunton/HAVOK.zip. The examples span a wide range of systems, including canonical chaotic dynamical systems, such as the Lorenz and R\"{o}ssler systems, and the double pendulum, which is among the simplest physical systems that exhibits chaotic motion. As a more realistic example, we consider a stochastically driven simulation of the Earth's magnetic field reversal~\cite{Petrelis2009prl}, where complex magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) equations are modeled as a dynamo driven by turbulent fluctuations. In this case, the exact form of the attractor is not captured by the linear model, although the attractor switching, corresponding to magnetic field reversal, is preserved. In the final three examples, we explore the method on data collected from an electrocardiogram (ECG), electroencephalogram (EEG), and recorded measles cases in New York City over a 36 year timespan from 1928 to 1964. In each example, the qualitative attractor dynamics are captured, and importantly, large transients and intermittent phenomena are predicted by the model. These large transients and intermittent events correspond to coherent regions in phase space where the forcing is large (right column of Fig.~\ref{Fig:Comprehensive}, red). Regions where the forcing is small (black) are well-modeled by a Koopman linear system in delay coordinates. Large forcing often precedes intermittent events (lobe switching for Lorenz system and magnetic field reversal, or bursting measles outbreaks), making this signal \emph{predictive}. The theory presented here is particularly useful because the forced linear models generalize beyond the training data on which they are constructed. It is possible to test the HAVOK model on data from a test trajectory that was not used to train the model. The forcing signal $v_r(t)$ is extracted from the new validation time series and fed as an input into the model in \eqref{Eq:ChaosModel}, resulting in a faithful reproduction of the attractor dynamics, including lobe switching events. The forcing term $v_r(t)$ is obtained from a relatively short window of time compared with a switching event, so it may be measured and used for prediction in realistic applications. \subsection{Parameters} All systems in this paper are described in this section, including details about the equations of motion, data collection, and key characteristics of each system. The simulation parameters for the numerical examples are in Tab.~\ref{Table:Parameters}, and the parameters used for the HAVOK analysis are in Tab.~\ref{Table:HAVOK}. The example systems range from ordinary differential equation (ODE) models to delay differential equations (DDE) and stochastic differential equations (SDE), as well as systems characterized purely by measurement data. We also consider the forced Duffing oscillator, which is not chaotic for the parameters examined, but provides a weakly nonlinear example to investigate. \begin{table}[where!] \caption{Parameters used to simulate the various numerical example systems.}\label{Table:Parameters} \vspace{-.2in} \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|\|c\|c\|} \hline \bf System & \bf Parameters & \bf Initial Conditions \\\hline\hline \bf Lorenz & $\sigma=10, \rho=28, \beta=8/3$& $(-8, 8, 27)$ \\\hline \bf R\"{o}ssler & $a=0.1,b=0.1,c=14$ & $(1,1,1)$ \\\hline \bf Mackey-Glass & $\beta=2,\tau=2,n=9.65,\gamma =1$ & $0.5$ \\\hline \bf Unforced Duffing & $\delta=0, \alpha=-1, \beta=5, \gamma=0, \omega=0$ & Multiple \\\hline \bf Forced Duffing & $\delta=0.02, \alpha=1, \beta=5, \gamma=8, \omega=0.5$ & Multiple\\\hline \bf Double Pendulum & $l_1=l_2=m_1=m_2=1$, $g=10$ & $(\pi/2,\pi/2,-0.01,-0.005)$ \\\hline \bf Magnetic Field & $B_1=-0.4605i, B_2=-1+0.12i$, & $0.1$\\ & $B_3=0.4395i$, $B_4=-0.06 -0.12i$, & \\ & $b_1=b_4=0.25$, and $b_2=b_3=0.07$, $\mu= \nu=0$ & \\\hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \vspace{-.25in} \end{table} \begin{table}[where!] \caption{Summary of systems and HAVOK analysis parameters for each example. For the measles data, the original 431 data samples are spaced 2 weeks apart; this data is interpolated at 0.2 week resolution, and the new data is stacked into $q=50$ rows.}\label{Table:HAVOK} \vspace{-.2in} \small \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \bf System &\bf Type & \bf Measured & \bf\# Samples & \bf Time step&\bf \# Rows in $\mathbf{H}$&\bf Rank & \bf Energy in $r$ \\ &&\bf Variable & $m$ & $\Delta t$ & $q$ & $r$ &\bf modes (\%) \\\hline\hline \bf Lorenz & ODE& $x(t)$& 200,000& 0.001&100 & 15 & 100 \\\hline \bf R\"{o}ssler & ODE&$x(t)$& 500,000 & 0.001& 100& 6 & 99.9999997\\\hline \bf Mackey-Glass & DDE&$x(t)$& 100,000& 0.001 &100 &4 &99.9999 \\\hline \bf Unforced Duffing &ODE &$x(t)$& 360,000&0.001 &100 &5 & 97.1\\\hline \bf Forced Duffing & ODE&$x(t)$& 1,000,000&0.001 & 100 &5 &99.9998 \\\hline \bf Double Pendulum & ODE&$\sin(\theta_1(t))$& 250,000&0.001 & 100 & 5&99.997 \\\hline \bf Magnetic Field & SDE& $\text{Re}(A)$& 100,000& 1 year & 100& 4& 55.2\\\hline \bf ECG & Data& Voltage& 45,000& 0.004 s& 25& 5&67.4 \\\hline \bf Sleep EEG & Data& Voltage&100,000 & 0.01 s&1,000 & 4 & 7.7\\\hline \bf Measles Outbreak &Data & Cases & 431& 2 weeks& $~~$50$^$& 9& 99.78\\\hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \vspace{-.25in} \end{table} \subsection{Description of all examples} \subsubsection{Duffing oscillator}\label{Sec:Res:Duffing} The Duffing oscillator is a simple dynamical system with two potential wells separated by a saddle point, as shown in the middle panel of Fig.~\ref{fig03}. The dynamics are given by \begin{eqnarray} \label{Eq:Duffing} \ddot{x} +\delta \dot{x} + \alpha x + \beta x^3 = \gamma\cos(\omega t). \end{eqnarray} It is possible to suspend variables to obtain a coupled system of first-order equations: \begin{subequations} \label{Eq:DuffingSys} \begin{eqnarray} \dot{x} & = & v\\ \dot{v} & = & -\delta v - \alpha x - \beta x^3 + \gamma \cos(\omega t). \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} \subsubsection{Chaotic Lorenz system}\label{Sec:Res:Lorenz} The Lorenz system~\cite{Lorenz1963jas} is a canonical model for chaotic dynamics: \begin{subequations} \label{Eq:Lorenz2} \begin{eqnarray} \dot{x} & = & \sigma (y - x)\\ \dot{y} & = & x(\rho -z) - y\\ \dot{z} & = & x y - \beta z. \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} \subsubsection{R\"ossler system}\label{Sec:Res:Rossler} The R\"ossler system is given by \begin{subequations} \label{Eq:Rossler} \begin{eqnarray} \dot{x} & = & -y-z\\ \dot{y} & = & x+ay\\ \dot{z} & = & b + z(x-c) \label{Eq:Rossler} \end{eqnarray} \end{subequations} This system exhibits interesting dynamics, whereby the trajectory is characterized by oscillation in the $x-y$ plane punctuated by occasional transient growth and decay in the $z$ direction. We refer to this behavior as \emph{bursting}, as it corresponds to a transient from an attractor to itself, as opposed to the lobe switching between attractor lobes in the Lorenz system. \subsubsection{Mackey-Glass delay differential equation}\label{Sec:Res:MG} The Mackey-Glass equation is a canonical example of a delay differential equation, given by \begin{eqnarray} \label{Eq:MackeyGlass} \dot{x}(t) = \beta \frac{x(t-\tau)}{1+x(t-\tau)^n} - \gamma x(t), \end{eqnarray} with $\beta=2$, $\tau=2$, $n=9.65$, and $\gamma=1$. The current time dynamics depend on the state $x(t-\tau)$ at a previous time $\tau$ in the past. \subsubsection{Double pendulum}\label{Sec:Res:DP} The double pendulum is among the simplest physical systems that exhibits chaos. The numerical simulation of the double pendulum is sensitive, and we implement a variational integrator based on the Euler-Lagrange equations \begin{eqnarray} \frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\mathbf{q}}} - \frac{\partial L}{\partial \mathbf{q}}=0 \end{eqnarray} where the Lagrangian $L=T-V$ is the kinetic ($T$) minus potential ($V$) energy. For the double pendulum, $\mathbf{q}=\begin{bmatrix}\theta_1 & \theta_2\end{bmatrix}^T$, and the Lagrangian becomes: \begin{align} L = T-V =& \frac{1}{2}(m_1+m_2)l_1\dot{\theta}_1^2 + \frac{1}{2}m_2l_2^2\dot{\theta}_2^2 + m_2l_1l_2\dot{\theta}_1\dot{\theta}_2\cos(\theta_1-\theta_2)\\ & -(m_1+m_2)l_1g(1-\cos(\theta_1))-m_2l_2g\left(1-\cos(\theta_2)\right). \end{align} We integrate the equations of motion with a variational integrator derived using a trapezoidal approximation to the action integral: \begin{align} \delta \int_a^b L(\mathbf{q},\dot{\mathbf{q}},t)dt = 0. \end{align} Because the mean of $\theta_1$ drifts after a revolution, we use $x(t)=\cos(2\theta_1(t))$ as a measurement. \subsubsection{Earth's magnetic field reversal}\label{Sec:Res:Magnetic} The Earth's magnetic field is known to reverse over geological time scales~\cite{Cox1964science,Guyodo1999nature}. Understanding and predicting these rare events is an important challenge in modern geophysics. It is possible to model the underlying dynamics that give rise to magnetic field switching by considering the turbulent magnetohydrodynamics inside the Earth. A simplified model~\cite{Petrelis2008jp,Petrelis2009prl,Petrelis2010ptrsla} may be obtained by modeling the turbulent fluctuations as stochastic forcing on a dynamo. This is modeled by the following differential equation in terms of the magnetic field $A$: \begin{align} \frac{d}{dt}A = \mu A + \nu \bar{A} + B_1A^3 + B_2A^2\bar{A} + B_3A\bar{A}^2+B_4\bar{A}^3 + f \end{align} where $\bar{A}$ is the complex conjugate of $A$ and the stochastic forcing $f$ is given by \begin{align} f = \left(b_1\xi_1 + ib_3\xi_3\right)\text{Re}(A) + \left(b_2\xi_2+ib_4\xi_4\right)\text{Im}(A). \end{align*} The variables $\xi$ are Gaussian random variables with a standard deviation of $5$. The other parameters are given by $\mu=1$, $\nu=0$, $B_1=-0.4605i, B_2=-1+0.12i, B_3=0.4395i$, $B_4=-0.06 -0.12i$, $b_1=b_4=0.25$, and $b2=b_3=0.07$. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_MHD_p8_2Daxis} \put(50,5){$t~$ [years]} \put(3,17){$\|v_{r}\|^2$} \put(3,42){$v_{r}$} \put(3,67){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.45in} \caption{Prediction of Earth's magnetic field reversal using the forcing term $v_r$.}\label{Fig:MHD} \vspace{-.25in} \end{center} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{Fig:MHD} shows the $v_1$ and $v_r$ eigen time series for the Earth magnetic field reversal data. The signal in $v_1$ accurately represents the global field switching dynamics. Color-coding the trajectory by the magnitude of the forcing in $v_r$, it is clear that the field reversal events correspond to large forcing. Analyzing two of these field switching events more closely in Fig.~\ref{Fig:MHDZOOM}, it appears that the forcing signal becomes active before the signal in $v_1$ exceeds the expected variance. This means that the forcing signal provides a prediction of field reversal before there is a clear statistical signature in the dominant $v_1$ time series. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{SUPP_MHD_p8_2DaxisZOOM} \put(50,5){$t~$ [years]} \put(3,17){$\|v_{r}\|^2$} \put(3,42){$v_{r}$} \put(3,67){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.45in} \caption{Prediction of Earth's magnetic field reversal using the forcing term $v_r$. Zoom-in of field reversal events in Fig.~\ref{Fig:MHDZOOM}.}\label{Fig:MHDZOOM} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Electrocardiogram (ECG)}\label{Sec:Res:ECG} An electrocardiogram (ECG) measures the electrical activity of the heart, producing the characteristic spiking pulses associated with each heartbeat. Data from ECG has long been analyzed using delay embeddings to quantify the fractal dimension of ECG recordings, among other quantities~\cite{Schreiber1996chaos,Richter1998pre}. In this analysis, we use the ECG signal \texttt{qtdb/sel102} that was used in~\cite{Keogh2005icdm}, adapted from the PhysioNet database~\cite{Laguna1997cc,Goldberger2000circulation}. This signal corresponds to $T=380$ seconds of data with a sampling rate of $250$ Hz. \subsubsection{Electroencephalogram (EEG)}\label{Sec:Res:EEG} An electroencephalogram (EEG) is a nonintrusive measurement of brain activity achieved through electrodes placed on the scalp. A time series of voltage is recorded from these electrodes, and although typically the spectral content of EEG is analyzed, there are also numerous examples of time series EEG analysis~\cite{Pritchard1992measuring,Acharya2005non,Kannathal2005entropies,Stam2005nonlinear,lainscsek2015delay}. Although it is possible to obtain vast quantities of data, possibly using an array of electrodes, the voltage signal is only a rough proxy for brain activity, as signals must pass through thick layers of dura, cerebrospinal fluid, skull, and scalp. Data is available at~\cite{Goldberger2000circulation,Kemp2000ieeetbe}: https://physionet.org/pn4/sleep-edfx/ \subsubsection{Measles outbreaks}\label{Sec:Res:Measles} Time series analysis has long been applied to understand and model disease epidemics. Measles outbreaks have been particularly well studied, partially because of the wealth of accurate historical data. The seminal work of Sugihara and May~\cite{Sugihara1990nature} use Takens embedding theory to analyze Measles outbreaks. It was also shown that Measles outbreaks are chaotic~\cite{Schaffer1985bs}. Here, we use data for Measles outbreaks in New York City (NYC) from 1928 to 1964, binned every 2 weeks~\cite{London1973aje}. Figure~\ref{Fig:Measles} shows the $v_1$ and $v_r$ eigen time series for the Measles outbreaks data. The $v_1$ signal provides a signature for the severity of the outbreak, with larger negative values corresponding to more cases of Measles. The forcing signal accurately captures many of the outbreaks, most notably the largest outbreak after 1940. This outbreak was preceded by two small dips in $v_1$, which may have resulted in false positives using other prediction methods. However, the forcing signal becomes large directly preceding the outbreak. \begin{figure}[where!] \begin{center} \begin{overpic}[width=.95\textwidth]{SUPP_MeaslesNYC_p8_2Daxis} \put(55,-1){$t$} \put(3,14){$\|v_{r}\|^2$} \put(3,36){$v_{r}$} \put(3,60){$v_1$} \end{overpic} \vspace{-.05in} \caption{Prediction of Measles outbreaks using the forcing term $v_r$.}\label{Fig:Measles} \vspace{-.3in} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} In summary, we have presented a data-driven procedure, the HAVOK analysis, to identify an intermittently forced linear system representation of chaos. This procedure is based on machine learning regressions, Takens' embedding, and Koopman operator theory. The activity of the forcing signal in these models predicts intermittent transient events, such as lobe switching and bursting, and partitions phase space into coherent linear and nonlinear regions. More generally, the search for intrinsic or natural measurement coordinates is of central importance in finding simple representations of complex systems, and this will only become increasingly important with growing data. Simple, linear representations of complex systems is a long sought goal, providing the hope for a general theory of nonlinear estimation, prediction, and control. This analysis will hopefully motivate novel strategies to measure, understand, and control~\cite{Shinbrot1993nature} chaotic systems in a variety of scientific and engineering applications. \newpage \bibliographystyle{plain}
\section{Introduction} We consider the usual linear regression model: Given $n$ realizations of $p$ predictors ${\bf X}=\{x_{ij}\}$ for $i=1,2,\ldots,n$ and $j=1,2,\ldots,p$, the response $Y=(y_1,\ldots,y_n)$ is modeled as \begin{equation} y_i=\beta_0 + \sum_j x_{ij} \beta_j +\epsilon_i \end{equation} with $\epsilon \sim (0,\sigma^2)$. The ordinary least squares (OLS) estimates of $\beta_j$ are obtained by minimizing the residual sum of squares. There has been much work on regularized estimators that offer an advantage over the OLS estimates, both in terms of accuracy of prediction on future data and interpretation of the fitted model. One major focus has been on the {\em lasso} \citep{Ti96}, which minimizes \begin{equation} J(\beta_0,\beta)=\frac{1}{2}\\|Y-\beta_0-{\bf X} \beta\\|_2^2+\lambda \\|\beta\\|_1 \end{equation} where $\beta=(\beta_1, \ldots,\beta_p)$, and the tuning parameter $\lambda \geq 0$ controls the sparsity of the final model. This parameter is often selected by cross-validation. The objective function $J(\beta_0,\beta)$ is convex, which means that the solutions can be found efficiently even for very large $n$ and $p$, in contrast to combinatorial methods like best subset selection. A body of mathematical work shows that under certain conditions, the lasso often will provide good recovery of the underlying true model and will produce predictions that are mean-square consistent \citep{KF2000,meinshausen2006high,zhao2006model,bunea2007sparsity, zhang2008sparsity,meinshausen2009lasso,bickel2009simultaneous, wainwright2009sharp}. The {\em elastic net} of \citet{enet} generalizes the lasso by adding an $\ell_2$ penalty, \begin{equation} \frac{1}{2}\\|Y-\beta_0-{\bf X}\beta\\|_2^2 +\lambda (\alpha \\|\beta\\|_1 +(1-\alpha) \\|\beta\\|_2^2), \end{equation} where $\alpha \in [0,1]$ is a second tuning parameter. This approach sometimes yields lower prediction error than the lasso, especially in settings with highly correlated predictors. \citet{zou2006a} introduced the {\em adaptive lasso}, which minimizes \begin{equation}\label{eq:adaptivelasso} \frac{1}{2}\\|Y-\beta_0-{\bf X}\beta\\|_2^2+\lambda \sum_j w_j\|\beta_j\| \end{equation} for feature weights $w_j$. The feature weights can be chosen in various ways: For example, when $n>p$, we can first compute the OLS estimates $\hat\beta_j$ and then set $w_j=1/\|\hat\beta_j\|$. For $p>n$, we can set $w_j$ by first computing univariate regression coefficients \citep{huang2008adaptive}. Other similar ``two-step'' procedures include variants of the non-negative garrote \citep{breiman1995better,yuan2007non} and the adaptive elastic net \citep{zou2009adaptive}. We have found that one less than ideal property of the adaptive lasso is that there seems to be no underlying generative model that leads to its feature weighting. Perhaps as a result, it is difficult even to simulate a dataset that shows substantial gains for the method, relative to the usual lasso. In this paper, we provide a new perspective by choosing weights in the adaptive lasso in an unsupervised manner. All of the above two-step procedures select weights by computing an initial estimate $\hat\beta$ using the response $Y$. We instead propose to use the partial correlations of the features in ${\bf X}$ to select good weights. We postulate a conceptual model in which there is a core subset $S$ of ``hub'' features that explains both the other features and $Y$. For example, each member of $S$ might be the RNA or protein expression of a ``driver'' gene in a pathway which simultaneously influences other gene expressions and the phenotype under study. Our method, called {\em hubNet}, fits an (unsupervised) graphical model to the features in a way that tries to discover these ``hubs''. These features are then given higher weight in the adaptive lasso. The hubNet procedure can sometimes yield lower prediction error and better support recovery than the lasso, and the discovered hubs can provide insight on the underlying structure of the data. This paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:hubNet} we introduce our underlying model and the hubNet procedure. Simulation studies are presented in Section \ref{sec:sim}, while Section \ref{sec:real} examines applications to real datasets. Some theoretical results on the recovery of the underlying model are given in Section \ref{sec:theory}. Further topics are discussed in Section \ref{sec:further}, such as extensions to random forests and post-selection inference. Section \ref{sec:hubmethodcomparison} compares our method of identifying hubs with an alternative approach. \subsection {Illustrative example: Olive oil data} The data for this example, from \citet{forina1983}, consists of measurements of 8 fatty acid concentrations for 572 olive oils, with each olive oil classified into one of two geographic regions. The goal is to determine the geographic region based on these 8 predictors. We randomly divided the data into training and test sets of equal size. The predictors are: \begin{enumerate}[itemsep=-1mm] \item Palmitic Acid \item Palmitoleic Acid \item Stearic Acid \item Oleic Acid \item Linoleic Acid \item Linolenic Acid \item Arachidic Acid \item Eicosenoic Acid \end{enumerate} Results from hubNet and lasso-regularized logistic regression are given in Figure \ref{fig:olive} with details in the caption. (Extension of hubNet to logistic regression is straightforward and discussed in Section \ref{sec:glm}.) HubNet focuses on just two predictors---2 and 4, which have apparent connections to the other six. In the process, it yields a more parsimonious model than the lasso, with perhaps a lower CV and test error. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{olive.pdf} \caption[fig:olive]{\em Results for olive oil data. Top left panel shows coefficients from lasso (black), hub weights (broken green line) and resulting coefficients from hubNet (solid green). hubNet chooses predictors 2 (palmitoleic acid) and 4 (oleic acid), having connections to other predictors as depicted in the top right panel. The boldness of the link corresponds to the strength of the association. The bottom panels show the cross-validation and test error for the lasso and hubNet.} \label{fig:olive} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{The hubNet procedure} \label{sec:hubNet} Let $Y=(y_1, \ldots,y_n)$ and let ${\bf X}=\{x_{ij} \}$ be the $n\times p$ matrix of features. Define the core set $S$ to be a subset of $\{1,2,\ldots p\}$, with corresponding feature matrix ${\bf X}_S$. Our proposal is based on the following model: \begin{eqnarray} Y &= &\beta_0+{\bf X}_S\beta + \epsilon \label{eqn:linearmodel}\\ X_j &=& {\bf X}_S\Gamma_j + \epsilon_j,\;\;j \notin S \label{eqn:model} \end{eqnarray} where each $\Gamma_j$ is an $s\times 1$ coefficient vector. This model postulates that the outcome $Y$ is a function of an (unknown) core set of predictors $S$, and that the predictors not in $S$ are also a function of this same core set. If this model holds, even approximately, then we can examine the partial correlations among the features to determine the features more likely to belong to this core set $S$, and hence do a better job of predicting $Y$. Following this logic, our proposal for estimating $\beta$ in (\ref{eqn:linearmodel}) consists of three steps: \bigskip \begin{algorithm} \medskip \centerline{\bf The hubNet procedure} \begin{enumerate} \item Fit a model of the form ${\bf X}\approx {\bf X}{\bf B}$ with ${\bf B}_{ii}=0$ using the ``edge-out'' procedure detailed in Section \ref{sec:edgeout} below. Note that $\Gamma_j$ in the generating model (\ref{eqn:model}) correspond to coefficients of ${\bf B}$ in rows $S$ and columns $S^C$. \item Let $s_j=\sum_j \|\hat{\bf B}_{ij}\|, j=1,2,\ldots,p$, and construct feature weights \begin{equation} w_j=1/s_j\,. \label{eqn:wtfamily} \end{equation} \item Fit the adaptive lasso using predictors and feature weights $w_j$ (e.g., using $w_j$ as ``penalty factors'' in the {\tt glmnet} R package.) [If $s_j=0$, then $w_j=\infty$ and $X_j$ is not used.] \end{enumerate} \medskip \end{algorithm} \bigskip The hubNet procedure has a number of attractive features: \begin{description} \item{(a)} The construction of weights is completely unsupervised, separating it from the fitting of the response model in step 3. Thus for example, cross-validation can be applied in step 3 and we can use cross-validation to choose between hubNet and lasso for a given problem. In addition, tools for post-selection inference for the lasso can be directly applied. \item{(b)} The supervised fitting in step 3 is simply a lasso (or elastic net) with feature weights, hence fast off-the-shelf solvers can be used. \item{(c)} Examination of the estimated hub structure for the chosen predictors can shed light on the structure of the final model. \item{(d)} The procedure can be directly applied to generalized regression settings, such as generalized linear models and the proportional hazards model for survival data, using an appropriate method in step 3. \end{description} The challenging task of the hubNet procedure is step 1. For this, one might use the graphical lasso, which produces a sparse estimate of the inverse covariance matrix, corresponding to an edge-sparse feature graph. But we would like an estimate that encourages the appearance of hub nodes, i.e., features having many non-zero partial correlations with other features. These hub nodes then represent our estimate of the core set $S$. \citet{tanetal} propose a method called {\em hglasso} for learning graphical models with hubs, which produces a proper (non-negative definite) estimate of the inverse covariance matrix. Their procedure uses an ADMM algorithm having computational complexity $O(p^3)$ per iteration, which in our experience is too slow for problems with $p=1000$ or greater. We instead use the ``edge-out'' method of \citet{friedman10:_applic_of_lasso_and_group}, which has complexity $O(\min(np^2+snp,sp^2))$ per iteration. A comparison of these methods is presented in Section \ref{sec:hubmethodcomparison}. \subsection{The edge-out procedure} \label{sec:edgeout} To estimate ${\bf B}$ in step 1 of the hubNet procedure, we use the edge-out estimator \begin{eqnarray} \hat{{\bf B}}_{eo} =\argmin_{{\bf B} \in \mathbb{R}^{p \times p}:\,{\bf B}_{ii}=0\,\forall i} \frac{1}{2}\\|{\bf X}-{\bf X} {\bf B}\\|^2_F+\theta\cdot\left(\gamma\\|{\bf B}_{i,.}\|\|_1+ (1-\gamma)\sqrt{p-1}\sum_{i=1}^p \\|{\bf B}_{i,.}\\|_2\right). \label{eqn:edgeout} \end{eqnarray} Here, $\theta,\gamma>0$ are tuning parameters, $\\|\cdot\\|_F$ denotes the Frobenius norm, and ${\bf B}_{i,.}$ denotes the $i$th row of ${\bf B}$. By constraining the diagonal entries of ${\bf B}$ to 0, the edge-out estimator simultaneously regresses each feature onto the remaining features of ${\bf X}$. The procedure applies a combined $\ell_1/\ell_2$ penalty on the regression coefficients, where the $\ell_2$ penalty encourages zeroing-out of entire rows of ${\bf B}$ and the $\ell_1$ penalty encourages additional sparsity in the non-zero rows. (The original hubNet proposal of \citet{friedman10:_applic_of_lasso_and_group} used only the $\ell_2$ penalty.) The estimate $\hat{{\bf B}}_{eo}$ is not symmetric. We expect the ``hub'' features in the core set $S$ to correspond to the rows of ${\bf B}$ having many non-zero entries, and hence the row sums should give higher weight to these features in steps 2 and 3. Our procedure for minimization of the edge-out objective is outlined in Appendix \ref{app:optimization}. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig1.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:fig1]{\em Estimates from 20 simulations from underlying hub model; $n=60, p=40$, and first 3 predictors are hub predictors and contain the signal. The top left panel shows the estimated coefficients over 20 realizations. The top right panel displays the mean-squared test error with the tuning parameter chosen by cross-validation for each method. The bottom left panel shows the minimum CV error for each realization: note that the adaptive lasso CV error is not a valid estimate of error since the weights are estimated in a supervised manner. The bottom right panel shows the number of false positive predictors, in the smallest model where in the procedure has ``screened'', i.e. contains all of the true predictors.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig2.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:fig2]{\em Estimates from 20 simulations from underlying hub model; $n=60, p=40$, first 3 predictors are hub predictors, but signal is a function of predictors 4 to 6. See previous figure caption for details of panels.} \label{fig:fig2} \end{figure} \iffalse \subsubsection{Two stage Edge-out model} Note that $l_1$ penalty part is introduced for the sparsity of edges out from a hub node, and it is not necessary that we estimate them together -- as a matter of fact, we need less stringent condition for soly recovering hub nodes. Thus, we could first estimate hub nodes by solving: \begin{eqnarray} J_{eo,1}({\bf B})=\frac{1}{2} \|\|{\bf X}-{\bf X} {\bf B} \|\|^2_F +\theta\cdot(1-\gamma) \sqrt{m}\sum_{i=1}^p \|\|\beta_{i,-i}\|\|_2 \label{eqn:edgeout} \end{eqnarray} suppose the above optimation problem give us a list of hub nodes S, and then we can constrain ourselves on this set and solve a lasso problem: \begin{eqnarray} J_{eo,2}({\bf B})=\frac{1}{2} \|\|{\bf X}-{\bf X}_S {\bf B}_S \|\|^2_F +\theta\cdot\gamma\sum_{i=1}^p \|\|\beta_{i,-i}\|\|_1 \label{eqn:edgeout} \end{eqnarray} \fi \subsection{Choosing tuning parameters for edge-out} We have two proposals for setting the tuning parameter $\theta$ in the edge-out method. The first is $K$-fold cross-validation, applied to the objective function $\frac{1}{2} \|\|{\bf X}-{\bf X} {\bf B} \|\|^2_F$. The second uses a form of generalized cross validation \[\operatorname{GCV}(\hat{{\bf X}}) =\frac{\|\|{\bf X} - \hat{{\bf X}}\|\|^2_2}{np - {\rm df}(\hat{{\bf X}})}.\] If there is only an $\ell_1$ penalty, we use for ${\rm df}(\hat{{\bf X}})$ the number of non-zero entries $\|\hat{{\bf B}}\|_0$. If there is also an $\ell_2$ penalty, we propose the following adjustment based on our updating formula: \[ {\rm df}(\hat{{\bf X}}) =\sum_{i=1}^p \frac{\\|\hat{{\bf B}}_{i,.}\|\|_2} {\\|\hat{{\bf B}}_{i,.}\\|_2+\theta(1-\gamma)\sqrt{p-1}} \\|\hat{{\bf B}}_{i,.}\\|_0. \] Note that this is not an exact formula for degrees of freedom, but rather a rough estimate. \subsection{Simulated data example.} Figure \ref{fig:fig1} shows hubNet applied to a simulated data example. Here $n=60$, $p=40$, and the first 3 predictors are the core set, explaining both $Y$ and the remaining 37 predictors. The estimated coefficients and various error rates of hubNet over 20 realizations are shown, in comparison to the elastic net, adaptive lasso, and lasso. We see that hubNet does a much better job at recovering the true coefficients, which in turn leads to substantially lower prediction error. In Figure \ref{fig:fig2} we have generated data from an adversarial setting where the first 3 predictors are hub predictors, but the signal is a function of predictors 4 to 6. As expected, the hubNet procedure does poorly; however, its CV error is also high, so this poor behavior would be detectable in practice. \subsection{Extension to generalized regression models} \label{sec:glm} The hubNet procedure can be extended in a straightforward manner to the class of generalized linear models and other settings such as Cox's proportional hazards model. If the outcome $Y$ depends on a parameter vector $\eta$, we assume that a core set of predictors $S$ determines both $\eta$ and the other predictors: \begin{eqnarray} \eta &= &\beta_0+{\bf X}_S\beta + \epsilon\cr X_j &=& {\bf X}_S\Gamma_j + \epsilon_j,\;\;j \notin S \label{eqn:model3} \end{eqnarray} As in the linear case, we fit a model ${\bf X}={\bf X}{\bf B}$ using the edge-out procedure, and use the absolute row sums of $\hat{\bf B}$ as predictor weights in an $\ell_1$-regularized (generalized) regression of $Y$ on $X$. For logistic regression, an alternative strategy would assume that a model of the form $X_j={\bf X}_S\Gamma^k_j + \epsilon^k_j$ for $j \notin S$ holds within each class $k=1,2$. We may then estimate a hub model from the {\em pooled within class} covariance matrix of $X$, and use the absolute row sums as predictor weights. \section{Simulation studies} \label{sec:sim} \subsection{Comparison between hubNet, lasso and other methods} We compare performance under different settings between four methods: hubNet, lasso, elastic net, and the adaptive lasso with weights set to the inverse absolute values of the univariate regression coefficients. We experimented with the following four scenarios: \begin{description} \item{(a)} A favorable model: \begin{align} Y&={\bf X}_S\beta + \epsilon,\;\beta = \bold{1},\;\epsilon \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j&={\bf X}_S\Gamma_j+\epsilon_j,\;j \in T,\;\Gamma_{ij} \sim N(0,4), \;\epsilon_j \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j&=\epsilon_j,\;j \notin T,\;\epsilon_j \sim N(0,1) \end{align} The set $S$ contains the first $s$ features, and $T$ contains 20\% of the remaining features. Hence the model (\ref{eqn:model}) is correct but with only 20\% of non-core features depending on ${\bf X}_S$. \item{(b)} An adversarial model: \begin{align} Y &={\bf X}_{S_1}\beta + \epsilon,\;\beta = \bold{1},\;\epsilon \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j &={\bf X}_{S_2}\Gamma_j + \epsilon_j,\; j \in T,\;\Gamma_{ij} \sim N(0,0.25),\;\epsilon_j \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j &=\epsilon_j,\;j \notin S_2 \cup T \end{align} $S_2$ contains the first $s$ features and $T$ contains 20\% of the remaining features, of which $s$ belong to $S_1$. Hence a core set $S_2$ influences $T$, but $Y$ is explained directly by certain features in $T$ rather than ${\bf X}_{S_2}$. \item{(c)} An extreme adversarial model: \begin{align} Y &={\bf X}_{S_1}\beta + \epsilon,\;\beta = \bold{1},\;\epsilon \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j &={\bf X}_{S_2}\Gamma_j + \epsilon_j,\;j \notin S_2, \;\Gamma_{ij} \sim N(0,0.25),\;\epsilon_j \sim N(0,1)\\ X_j &=\epsilon_j,\;j \in S_2 \end{align} $S_2$ contains the first $s$ features and $S_1$ contains the next $s$ features. This setup is the same as in (b) above, except $T$ is now the set of all features outside $S_2$. \item{(d)} A neutral model: \begin{align} Y &={\bf X}_S\beta+\epsilon,\;\beta=\bold{1},\;\epsilon \sim N(0,1)\\ X &\sim N(0, {\bf \Sigma}) \end{align} $S$ contains the first $s$ features, and ${\bf \Sigma}$ is a random positive-definite covariance matrix (generated using the R function {\tt genPositiveDefMat}) with the ratio of largest to smallest eigenvalue set to 10. \end{description} For each scenario, we consider $(n, p, s) = (100, 500, 10)$ and $(200, 1000, 20)$, and we also scale each feature to have variance 1 before applying each of the four methods. For hubNet, the edge-out tuning parameter $\theta$ is set by minimizing GCV, and we fix $\gamma=1/2$. For the elastic net, we also fix $\alpha=1/2$. The main tuning parameter $\lambda$ in all four methods (corresponding to the tuning parameter for the adaptive lasso step in hubNet) is set by 10-fold cross-validation. We evaluate performance using the proportion of falsely detected features (FP), the proportion of true features that are undetected (FN), the cross-validation mean square prediction error in the training set (cvm), mean square prediction error in the test set, and the total number of selected features. A summary of these values averaged across 100 repetitions of each scenario is presented in Tables \ref{tab:tab1} to \ref{tab:tab4}, with standard deviations reported for cvm and test error. \begin{table}[H] \centering \caption{Comparison of hubNet with other methods in scenario (a)} \label{tab:tab1} \begin{adjustbox}{width=0.6\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{lllllll} \hline $(n,p,s) = (100, 500, 10)$ &&&& & \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline llasso & 1.557(0.234) & 0.940 & 0.973 & 30.120 & 1.623(0.322) \\ elasticNet & 1.568(0.249) & 0.904 & 0.973 & 39.230 & 1.630(0.348) \\ adaptiveLasso & 1.486(0.257) & 0.966 & 0.970 & 11.300 & 1.583(0.332) \\ hubNet & 1.208(0.173) & 0.004 & 0.278 & 16.580 & 1.335(0.215) \\ \hline $(n,p,s) = (200, 1000, 20)$ &&&& & \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error \\ \hline lasso & 1.556(0.210) & 0.934 & 0.977 & 59.540 & 1.564(0.211) \\ elasticNet & 1.576(0.219) & 0.901 & 0.971 & 71.360 & 1.571(0.215) \\ adaptiveLasso & 1.554(0.258) & 0.960 & 0.963 & 20.860 & 1.613(0.311) \\ hubNet & 1.184(0.131) & 0.003 & 0.262 & 29.330 & 1.278(0.143) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} \begin{table}[H] \centering \caption{Comparison of hubNet with other methods in scenario (b)} \label{tab:tab2} \begin{adjustbox}{width=0.6\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{llllll} \hline $(n,p,s) = (100, 500, 10)$ &&&&& \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 5.479(2.233) & 0.032 & 0.847 & 66.330 & 4.588(2.239)\\ elasticNet & 7.017(2.156)& 0.052 & 0.863 & 72.940 & 6.140(2.563) \\ adaptiveLasso & 4.878(1.773)& 0.162 & 0.786 & 41.650 & 5.867(2.623) \\ hubNet & 3.891(1.524) & 0.012& 0.784 & 47.880 & 3.373(1.484) \\ \hline $(n,p,s) = (200, 1000, 20)$ &&&&& \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 15.277(4.159)& 0.128 & 0.854 & 126.800 & 12.611(5.519) \\ elasticNet & 17.328(3.555) & 0.150 & 0.858 & 126.910 & 15.485(4.567) \\ adaptiveLasso & 12.125(2.537)& 0.224 & 0.758 & 67.570 & 13.183(3.658) \\ hubNet & 7.218(3.686) & 0.020 & 0.717 & 72.450 & 6.181(3.262) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} \begin{table}[H] \centering \caption{Comparison of hubNet with other methods in scenario (c)} \label{tab:tab3} \begin{adjustbox}{width=0.6\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{llllll} \hline $(n,p,s) = (100, 500, 10)$ &&&&& \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 2.619 (0.820) & 0.001 & 0.817 & 57.680 & 2.531(0.807) \\ elasticNet & 3.530(1.183) & 0.000 & 0.856 & 71.890 & 3.143(0.984) \\ adaptiveLasso & 5.988(1.889) & 0.193 & 0.786 & 40.860 & 6.258(2.086) \\ hubNet & 5.875(2.296) & 0.137 & 0.546 & 19.170 & 5.788(2.693) \\ \hline $(n,p,s) = (200, 1000, 20)$ &&&&& \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 2.776(0.525)&0.000 & 0.767 & 86.720 & 2.866(0.642) \\ elasticNet & 3.915(0.809) & 0.000 & 0.798 & 99.710 & 3.664(0.877) \\ adaptiveLasso & 13.466 (2.344) & 0.243 & 0.796 & 77.100 & 13.135(2.883) \\ hubNet & 22.007(4.359) & 0.823 & 0.878 & 22.490 & 21.875(4.600) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} \begin{table}[H] \centering \caption{Comparison of hubNet with other methods in scenario (d)} \label{tab:tab4} \begin{adjustbox}{width=0.6\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{llllll} \hline $(n,p,s) = (100, 500, 10)$ &&&& & \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 2.486(0.514) & 0.000 & 0.800 & 54.210 & 2.683(0.778)\\ elasticNet & 3.948(1.110) & 0.000 & 0.850 & 69.600 & 3.649(1.322) \\ adaptiveLasso & 2.038(1.631) & 0.012 & 0.703 & 37.960 & 3.085(2.723) \\ hubNet & 1.709(0.354) & 0.000 & 0.719 & 38.710 & 2.156(0.617) \\ \hline $(n,p,s) = (200, 1000, 20)$ &&&& & \\ \hline & cvm(se) & FN & FP & features & test.error(se) \\ \hline lasso & 2.380(0.364) & 0.000 & 0.801 & 104.400 & 2.668(0.623) \\ elasticNet & 3.374(0.694) & 0.000 & 0.839 & 126.780 & 3.317(0.888) \\ adaptiveLasso & 3.475(1.824) & 0.017 & 0.488 & 41.740 & 4.615(2.687) \\ hubNet & 1.641(0.205) & 0.000 & 0.689 & 66.120 & 2.131(0.415) \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} HubNet outperforms the other three methods in scenario (a) as expected. Perhaps surprisingly, it also seems to outperform the other methods under scenarios (b) and (d). In the extreme adversarial scenario (c), hubNet performs worse than the other methods, although this can be detected in cross-validation. In Figure \ref{fig:paths} of Appendix \ref{app:comparison}, we track FP and FN along the solution paths of the various methods as $\lambda$ varies. The results are in line with the above. \section{Application to real datasets} \label{sec:real} We compare hubNet with the lasso and elastic net on three real data examples. The following table summarizes the cross-validation errors, test errors, number of selected features, and number of such features in common with those selected by lasso. \begin{table}[H] \centering \caption{\em Comparisons among lasso, elasticNet and hubNet on three real data sets.} \label{tab:realdata} \begin{adjustbox}{width=0.8\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{l\|l\|llll} \hline && cvm(se) &Num. features & test error & common features (lasso) \\\hline Breast Cancer Data&lasso& $5.15\%(3.86\%)$ & 46 & -- & -- \\ $p =806 $ &elasticNet& $5.85\%(3.97\%)$ & 303 & --& 46 \\ $n_{\text{train}}= 15359$&hubNet& $3.52\%(2.92\%)$ &92& -- & 26\\\hline && cvm(se) & Num. features & test p-value &common features (lasso) \\\hline Kidney Cancer Data&lasso& 9.89(0.56) & 20 & 0.294 & -- \\ $p =14814 $&elasticNet& 9.96(0.56) &11 & 0.125 & 9\\ $n_{\text{train}}= 88, n_{\text{test}}=89$&hubNet&9.99(0.42) & 1 & 0.008& 0\\\hline &&cvm(se)& Num. features & test p-value &common features (lasso)\\\hline DLBCL-patient Data&lasso& 10.9(0.39) & 29&0.076 & -- \\ $p =7399 $&elasticNet& 10.9(0.39)& 37 & 0.052 & 28 \\ $n_{\text{train}}= 156, n_{\text{test}}=79$&hubNet& 11.0(0.24)& 2& 0.035 & 0 \\\hline \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} \subsection{Example: Lipidomic breast cancer data} This data, from the lab of RT's collaborator Livia Schiavinato Eberlin at UT Austin, consists of 806 features measured on 15,359 pixels in tissue images from 24 breast cancer patients. The pixels are divided into two classes, normal and cancer, and we fit a regularized logistic regression model using each procedure. Cross-validation classification errors are shown in Figure \ref{fig:breast-hubNet} as $\lambda$ varies. Table \ref{tab:realdata} reports results for $\lambda$ selected using 5-fold cross-validation. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{breast-hubNet.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:breast-hubNet]{\em Breast cancer data classification error rates} \label{fig:breast-hubNet} \end{figure} \subsection{Example: B cell lymphoma gene expression data} This data from \citet{aR02} consists of survival times (observed or right-censored) and 7399 gene expression features for 240 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We divided the data with survival time $Y>0$ into 156 training and 79 test samples, and trained a regularized proportional hazards model using each procedure. The p-value of the log-likelihood ratio (LR) statistic of this trained model evaluated on the test set is shown in the left subplot of Figure \ref{fig:BrookBcell} as $\lambda$ varies. Table \ref{tab:realdata} reports results for $\lambda$ selected using 20-fold cross-validation. \subsection{Example: Kidney cancer gene expression data} This data from \citet{Zhaoetal2005} consists of survival times and 14,814 gene expression features for 177 patients with conventional renal cell carcinoma. We divided the data into 88 training samples and 89 test samples and trained a regularized proportional hazards model using each procedure. For computational reasons, hubNet was fit using the 7999 features with largest absolute row sum in the pairwise correlation matrix; lasso and elastic net were fit using all features. Test set LR p-values are shown in the right subplot of Figure \ref{fig:BrookBcell} as $\lambda$ varies, and Table \ref{tab:realdata} reports results for $\lambda$ selected using 8-fold cross validation. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{brook_Bcell_hubNet.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:Bcell]{\em Results for B-cell lymphoma (left) and kidney cancer (right): p-values of LR statistics} \label{fig:BrookBcell} \end{figure} \section{Theory} \label{sec:theory} In this section, we study recovery of the core set $S$ assuming that our generating model (\ref{eqn:linearmodel}, \ref{eqn:model}) holds. We first establish conditions under which the unsupervised edge-out procedure alone can recover $S$, and then discuss recovery of $S$ by the second adaptive lasso step even if the edge-out procedure does not yield perfect recovery. We assume the asymptotic regime $n,p \to \infty$ where $s \ll \min(n,p)$, as well as a fully random design where the rows of ${\bf X}$ are independent and distributed as $N(0,{\bf \Sigma})$, normalized so that ${\bf \Sigma}_{jj}=1$ for all $j=1,\ldots,p$. Without loss of generality, we suppose $S$ contains the first $s$ predictors. By (\ref{eqn:model}), if $X:=(X_S,X_{S^C}) \sim N(0,{\bf \Sigma})$, then \begin{align} X_S &\sim N(0,{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}),\cr X_j\|X_S &\overset{ind}{\sim} N(X_S^T\Gamma_j,\sigma_j^2),\;\;j \in S^C \label{sec:basicmodel} \end{align} where $\sigma_j^2=\operatorname{Var}(\epsilon_j) \in (0,1)$. Specifically, ${\bf \Gamma}:=(\Gamma_{s+1},\ldots,\Gamma_p)$ is given by ${\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}{\bf \Sigma}_{SS^C}$. We assume that this model holds in all of the results that follow. \subsection{Recovery of the core set using the edge-out procedure} We analyze recovery of $S$ by the edge-out procedure applied with only the group-lasso penalty term in (\ref{eqn:edgeout}), corresponding to the setting $\gamma=0$. For any matrix ${\bf M}$, denote by ${\bf M}_{i,.}$ and ${\bf M}_{.,j}$ the $i$th row and $j$th column of ${\bf M}$. We use the following operator norms which measure the maximum $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ norm of any row of ${\bf M}$: \[\\|{\bf M}\\|_\infty:=\sup_{\\|x\\|_\infty=1}\\|{\bf M} x\\|_\infty=\max_i \\|{\bf M}_{i,.}\\|_1,\hspace{0.5in} \\|{\bf M}\\|_{\infty,2}:=\sup_{\\|x\\|_2=1} \\|{\bf M} x\\|_\infty=\max_i \\|{\bf M}_{i,\cdot}\\|_2.\] We define also the usual spectral norm, given by the largest singular value of ${\bf M}$, \[\\|{\bf M}\\|_2:=\sup_{\\|x\\|_2=1} \\|{\bf M} x\\|_2=\sigma_{\max}({\bf M}).\] We show that in the asymptotic regime $n,p \to \infty$, the edge-out procedure can recover the true core set $S$ for a suitable choice of the tuning parameter $\theta$ when the following conditions hold: \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:Cmin} Let $\lambda_{\min}({\bf \Sigma}_{SS})$ be the smallest eigenvalue of ${\bf \Sigma}_{SS}$. For a fixed constant $C_{\min}>0$, $\lambda_{\min}({\bf \Sigma}_{SS}) \geq C_{\min}$. \end{assumptions} \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:irrepresentable} Define ${\bf D}:=\operatorname{diag}(1/\\|\Gamma_{s+1}\\|_2,\ldots,1/\\|\Gamma_p\\|_2)$. For a fixed constant $\delta \in (0,1]$, \[\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T{\bf D}{\bf \Gamma}\\|_{\infty,2} \leq 1-\delta.\] \end{assumptions} \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:s} (Number of hub nodes). The size $s$ of the core set satisfies \[s \ll \min(\sqrt{n},n/\log p).\] \end{assumptions} \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:Gmin} (Hub strength). The minimum hub strength $\Gamma_{\min}=\min_i \\|{\bf \Gamma}_{i,.}\\|_2$ satisfies \[\Gamma_{\min} \gg \max(\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty,1) \\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty\max(1,\sqrt{p/n},\sqrt{p\log p}/n).\] \end{assumptions} Under these assumptions, we can ensure perfect recovery of the core set $S$ by the edge-out method: \begin{restatable}{theorem}{thmA} \label{thm:thmA} Let $\hat{{\bf B}}:=\hat{{\bf B}}_{eo}$ be the edge-out estimate in (\ref{eqn:edgeout}) applied with $\gamma=0$, and denote $\hat{S}=\{i:\\|\hat{{\bf B}}_{i,.}\\|_2>0\}$. Suppose Assumptions \ref{assump:Cmin}, \ref{assump:irrepresentable}, \ref{assump:s}, and \ref{assump:Gmin} hold. Defining $\theta_n=\theta\sqrt{p-1}/n$, if the tuning parameter $\theta$ is chosen so that \begin{equation}\label{eq:lambdachoice} \frac{\Gamma_{\min}}{\max(\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty,1) \\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty} \gg \theta_n \gg \max\left(1,\sqrt{\frac{p}{n}},\frac{\sqrt{p\log p}}{n} \right), \end{equation} then \[P[\hat{S}=S] \to 1.\] \end{restatable} Assumption \ref{assump:Cmin} ensures that the hub features are not too correlated. Assumptions \ref{assump:s} and \ref{assump:Gmin} restrict the maximal size of the core set and minimal ``strength'' of the hub features, as measured by the minimum $\ell_2$ row norm of ${\bf \Gamma}$. Let us remark that our normalization implies an additional implicit constraint on $s$, namely $p \geq \sum_{j \in S^C} \operatorname{Var}(X_j)= \sum_{j \in S^C} \Gamma_j^T{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}\Gamma_j+\sigma_j^2 \geq \\|{\bf \Gamma}\\|_F^2C_{\min} \geq sC_{\min}\Gamma_{\min}^2$, so by Assumption \ref{assump:Gmin} \[s \ll \frac{\min(n,p,n^2/\log p)}{\max(\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty,1)^2 \\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty^2}.\] In the worst case, we have the upper bounds $\\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty \leq \sqrt{s}\\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_2 \leq \sqrt{s}/C_{\min}$ and $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty \leq \sqrt{s}\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_{\infty,2} \leq \sqrt{s/C_{\min}}$, where the latter bound follows from our normalization condition \begin{equation}\label{eq:Gammacolbound} \\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_{\infty,2}^2C_{\min} \leq \max_{j \in S^C} \Gamma_j^T{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}\Gamma_j \leq \operatorname{Var}(X_j) \leq 1. \end{equation} Assuming $\log p \ll \sqrt{n}$, recovery can occur in this worst case when $s \ll \min(n^{1/3},p^{1/3})$. In the best case where an ``irrepresentable condition'' $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty \leq 1$ holds (see below) and ${\bf \Sigma}_{SS}=\mathbf{Id}$, then we have $\max(\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty,1)\\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty=1$, and recovery can occur for $s \ll \min(\sqrt{n},p)$. Assumption \ref{assump:irrepresentable} is analogous to but much weaker than the ``irrepresentable condition'' of \citet{zhao2006model} (see also \citet{wainwright2009sharp}) that is required for perfect support recovery by the standard lasso procedure. In our random design setting, the irrepresentable condition corresponds to \begin{equation}\label{eq:regularirrepresentable} \\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty \leq 1-\delta \end{equation} for some $\delta \in (0,1]$. When (\ref{eq:regularirrepresentable}) holds, Assumption \ref{assump:irrepresentable} is implied by $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T{\bf D}{\bf \Gamma}\\|_{\infty,2} \leq \\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty\\|{\bf D}{\bf \Gamma}\\|_{\infty,2}=\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty$. The following example illustrates that Assumption \ref{assump:irrepresentable} is weaker than (\ref{eq:regularirrepresentable}): \begin{example} Suppose the entries of ${\bf \Gamma}$ are i.i.d.\ and equal to $(1-2\delta)/\sqrt{s}$ or $-(1-2\delta)/\sqrt{s}$ each with probability 1/2. Then $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T{\bf D}{\bf \Gamma}\\|_{\infty,2} \leq \\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_{\infty,2} \\|{\bf D}\\|_2\\|{\bf \Gamma}\\|_2 =\sqrt{s/(p-s)}\\|{\bf \Gamma}\\|_2$. If $p \to \infty$ with $s \ll p$, the maximal singular value of ${\bf \Gamma}$ satisfies, for any fixed $\varepsilon>0$ with probability approaching 1, $\\|{\bf \Gamma}\\|_2 \leq (1+\varepsilon)\sqrt{p} \cdot (1-2\delta)/\sqrt{s}$. (See e.g.\ Theorem 5.39 of \citet{vershynin}.) Hence for large $p$, ${\bf \Gamma}$ satisfies Assumption \ref{assump:irrepresentable} with high probability. However, $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty=(1-2\delta)\sqrt{s} \gg 1$. \end{example} This example shows that Assumption \ref{assump:irrepresentable} can hold even in the worst-case setting where $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty \asymp \sqrt{s}$, as long as the non-hub features are not influenced by the hub features ``in the same way''. \subsection{Recovery of the core set using adaptive lasso} We now consider the linear model (\ref{eqn:linearmodel}) where $\epsilon=(\epsilon_1,\ldots,\epsilon_p)$ is independent of ${\bf X}$ with $\epsilon_i \overset{iid}{\sim} N(0,\sigma^2)$. We study recovery of $S$ by the adaptive lasso step of the hubNet procedure in two cases: (a) the edge-out estimate yields exact recovery of $S$ , and (b) it yields a superset of $S$. Let $w_1,\ldots,w_p \in (0,\infty]$ be any feature weights derived from ${\bf X}$. (Setting $w_i=\infty$ corresponds to $\\|(\hat{{\bf B}}_{eo})_{i,.}\\|_2=0$, i.e.\ a hard constraint that requires $\beta_i=0$.) Define \[\rho:=w_{\max}(S)/w_{\min}(S^C),\;\;\;\; w_{\min}(S^c):=\min_{i\in S^c} w_i,\;\;\;\;w_{\max}(S):=\max_{i\in S} w_i,\] with the convention $\infty/\infty=\infty$. We consider the following conditions as $n,p \to \infty$: \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:wgap} There exists $\eta \in (0,1]$ such that with probability approaching 1, \[\rho\sqrt{\frac{s}{C_{\min}}}\left(1+\sqrt{\frac{12\log p}{n}}\right) \leq 1-\eta.\] \end{assumptions} \begin{assumptions}\label{assump:betamin} The minimum predictor strength $\beta_{\min}=\min_{i \in S} \|\beta^_i\|$ satisfies \[\beta_{\min} \gg \sigma\sqrt{\frac{s\log p}{n} \left(1+\frac{\log p}{n}\right)}.\] \end{assumptions} Then, under our model (\ref{eqn:linearmodel}) and (\ref{eqn:model}), the following result holds for the adaptive lasso: \begin{theorem}\label{thm:thmB} Let $n,p \to \infty$ such that $s \ll n$ and Assumption \ref{assump:Cmin} holds. Furthermore, let $w_1,\ldots,w_p \in (0,\infty]$ be weights (depending on ${\bf X}$) such that Assumption \ref{assump:wgap} holds. Denote by $\hat{\beta}_0,\hat{\beta}$ the estimator minimizing the adaptive lasso objective (\ref{eq:adaptivelasso}), and let $\hat{S}=\{i:\hat{\beta}_i \neq 0\}$. \begin{description} \item {(a)} Denoting $\lambda_n=\lambda/n$, if the tuning parameter $\lambda$ of the adaptive lasso is chosen such that \[\lambda_n \gg \frac{1}{w_{\min}(S^C)} \sigma\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}\left(1+\frac{\log p}{n}\right)}\] with probability approaching 1, then \[P[\hat{S} \subseteq S] \to 1.\] \item{(b)} If, in addition, Assumption \ref{assump:betamin} holds and $\lambda_n \ll \beta_{\min}/(w_{\max}(S)\sqrt{s})$ with probability approaching 1, then \[P(\hat{S}=S) \to 1.\] \end{description} \end{theorem} This result holds for any procedure that selects $w_1,\ldots,w_p$ using ${\bf X}$. Assumption \ref{assump:betamin} is comparable to the beta-min condition in Theorem 3 of \citet{wainwright2009sharp} for the standard lasso procedure, if $\sqrt{s}$ is replaced by $\\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1/2}\\|_\infty^2$. In the context of hubNet, Assumption \ref{assump:wgap} should be interpreted as a weakening of the conditions required for selection consistency of $S$ by the edge-out procedure alone: If the edge-out procedure successfully recovers $S$, then $w_{\min}(S^c)=\infty$ and $w_{\max}(S)<\infty$, so Assumption \ref{assump:wgap} holds. More generally, Assumption \ref{assump:wgap} holds when there is a separation in size between the rows of $\hat{{\bf B}}_{eo}$ belonging to $S$ and to $S^C$, even if the rows belonging to $S^C$ are not identically 0. We prove Theorems \ref{thm:thmA} and \ref{thm:thmB} in Appendix \ref{app:proof}. The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:thmB} is a simple application of the Sign Recovery Lemma in \citet{zhou2009adaptive} for the adaptive lasso procedure. A more refined statement of Theorem \ref{thm:thmB} in terms of the quantities $\\|{\bf \Gamma}^T\\|_\infty$ and $\\|{\bf \Sigma}_{SS}^{-1}\\|_\infty$, similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm:thmA}, is possible, although we have stated the above version for simplicity and interpretability. \section{Further topics} \label{sec:further} \subsection{Adaptive, non-linear models} We can extend our basic model (\ref{eqn:model}) to allow the dependence of $Y$ on the core set of predictors to be of a more general form: \begin{eqnarray} Y &= &f({\bf X}_S)+ \epsilon\\ X_j &=& {\bf X}_S\Gamma_j + \epsilon_j, j \notin S \label{eqn:model4} \end{eqnarray} Here $f(\cdot)$ is a general, non-linear function. For this model, we can estimate hub weights $s_j$ as before and then apply a more flexible prediction procedure such as random forests or gradient boosting using the $s_j$ as feature weights. With random forests, the candidate predictors for splitting are chosen at random. Hence it is natural to implement feature weighting by using the weights to determine the probabilities in this sampling. For example, the {\tt ranger} package in R provides this option. We tried this idea in the example of Figure \ref{fig:fig1}, with additional interactions $.5x_1 x_2$ and $-2x_2 x_3$ added to the mean of $Y$, so that there were interactions for the random forest to find. We used sampling probabilities proportional to $s_j^2$. In Figure \ref{fig:ranfor} we show the ratio of the mean squared error of the hubNet/RF over that for the vanilla random forest, as the error standard deviation $\sigma$ is varied. We see that the hub weights can decrease the mean squared error by as much as 15\%. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{ranFor.pdf} \end{center} \caption{\em MSE ratio of the hub-weighted random forest to the standard random forest, for varying error standard deviation} \label{fig:ranfor} \end{figure} \subsection{Random forests: a drug discovery application} We consider classification data collected by the NCI, described in \citet{feng2003} and analyzed further in \citet{chipman2010}. It consists of $p= 266$ molecular characteristics of $n = 29,374$ compounds, of which $542 $ were classified as active ($Y=1$). These predictors represent topological aspects of molecular structure. We randomly created training and test sets of equal size, and for computational reasons we downsampled the class 0 cases to a set of size 2000 out of the 14,687 class 0s in the training set. We applied both random forests and hubNet/RF, using the {\tt ranger} package in R. The results in Figure \ref{fig:toxRF} show that the hubNet weighting can reduce the number of features by a factor of about 10 (down to 28) with barely any loss in accuracy, and these 28 features would not be detectable from standard RF importance scores (right panel). \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.75\textwidth]{toxRF.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:toxRF]{\em Results for drug discovery dataset. Left panel show out-of-bag error and test error for vanilla random forest (horizontal lines), and the same for hubNet/RF as a function of the number of features having non-zero hub weights (by varying $\theta$ in the edge-out model). We see that the error increases very little, even as the number of number of features is reduced to about one-tenth (28) of the total number. These 28 features are indicated by the green lines in the right panel, superimposed on the RF impurity importance scores for all features. } \label{fig:toxRF} \end{figure} \subsection{Post-selection inference} \label{sec:postsel} Since the construction of weights in the hubNet procedure is unsupervised, we can apply recently developed post-selection inference tools for the lasso. In particular, \citet{lee2016exact} construct p-values and confidence intervals for the lasso that have exact type I error control and coverage, conditional on the active set of predictors chosen. We can apply these methods to the output of hubNet, since the estimation is just a lasso with weights. Figure \ref{fig:figinf} shows the 90\% post-selection confidence intervals for a realization from the setting of Figure \ref{fig:fig1}, for lasso (left panel) and hubNet (right panel). For the lasso, we see there are no coefficients whose intervals are away from zero, and the intervals are very wide. The hubNet intervals are much shorter, and correctly detect the non-zero coefficients (first three predictors). \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.75\textwidth]{figinf.pdf} \caption[figinf]{\em 90\% post-selection confidence intervals for a realization from the setting of Figure \ref{fig:fig1}, for lasso (left panel) and hubNet (right panel). Note the different vertical scales in the two plots. } \label{fig:figinf} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Recovery of hub nodes and speed comparisons} \label{sec:hubmethodcomparison} In this section, we compare the edge-out method with the {\tt hglasso} method of \cite{tanetal} in terms of computational speed and recovery of the underlying structure. We generate ${\bf X}$ according to three settings: \begin{enumerate} \item For a core set $S$ of size $s$, let ${\bf A} \in \{0,1\}^{p \times p}$ have all diagonal entries 1, all entries in row $i$ and column $i$ equal to 1 for all $i \in S$, and remaining entries 0. Define \[{\bf E}=\begin{cases} 0 & {\bf A}_{ij} = 0\\ \operatorname{Unif}([-0.15, -0.015]\cup [0.015,0.15])& \text{otherwise,} \end{cases}\] $\bar{{\bf E}} = \frac{1}{2}({\bf E}+{\bf E}^T)$, and ${\bf \Sigma}^{-1}=\bar{{\bf E}} +(0.2-\lambda_{\min}(\bar{{\bf E}}))\mathbf{Id}$, and generate the rows of ${\bf X}$ from $N(0,{\bf \Sigma})$. \\ \item For two predictor sets $S_1$ and $S_2$ of sizes $s/2$, let \[{\bf A}=\begin{pmatrix} {\bf A}_1 & 0\\ 0 & {\bf A}_2 \end{pmatrix}\] with ${\bf A}_1,{\bf A}_2$ generated as above with core sets $S_1,S_2$. Construct ${\bf X}$ from ${\bf A}$ in the same way as above. \item For a core set $S$ of size $s$, generate ${\bf \Gamma} \in \mathbb{R}^{s \times (p-s)}$ with i.i.d.\ entries distributed as $N(0,4)$ truncated above and below at $\pm 2$. Then generate each row ${\bf X}_{i,.}$ of ${\bf X}$ such that ${\bf X}_{ij}\sim N(0,1)$ for $j \in S$ and ${\bf X}_{ij}={\bf X}_{i,S} {\bf \Gamma}_{.,j}+\epsilon_{ij}$ for $j \notin S$ and $\epsilon_{ij} \sim N(0,1)$. \end{enumerate} In each setting, we re-standardize the predictors to have variance 1. In Figure \ref{fig:edgeoutglassorecovery}, we set $(n,p,s)=(100,200,4)$ and compare edge-out and hglasso by the number of correctly identified hub nodes as well as their corresponding absolute row sums in the estimated matrix. (This matrix is $\hat{{\bf B}}_{eo}$ for edge-out and $\hat{{\bf V}}^T$ in the hglasso decomposition ${\bf \Sigma}^{-1}={\bf Z}+{\bf V}+{\bf V}^T$ where ${\bf Z}$ is sparse and ${\bf V}^T$ has few non-zero rows.) Edge-out was applied with only the $\ell_2$ penalty (eol2) or with $\gamma=0.5$ (eol12), and hglasso with $\lambda_1=1000$ and $\lambda_2=0.2$ or 0.5. The left column of the figure tracks the number of correctly identified hubs as the main tuning parameter ($\theta$ for edge-out and $\lambda_3$ for hglasso) varies, while the right column tracks the maximum rank of any hub node when all nodes are ranked in decreasing order of their absolute row sums. (A maximum rank of 4 indicates that all four hub nodes have larger absolute row sums than all remaining nodes.) Both variants of edge-out perform well in all three settings; hglasso performs well in settings 1 and 3 for $\lambda_2=0.2$ but not for setting 2 under the tested tuning parameters. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Hub_vs_HGlasso.pdf} \caption{\em Recovery results and weights ranking} \label{fig:edgeoutglassorecovery} \end{center} \end{figure} Figure \ref{fig:figspeed} compares the speed of these two methods, with one of $n,p$ fixed while the other grows. We see that the edge-out algorithm is much faster and appears to scale quadratically in $p$ and linearly in $n$. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.7\textwidth]{figspeed.pdf} \end{center} \caption[fig:figspeed]{\em Speed comparisons. In the top row we compare the computation times for the {\tt hglasso} and {\tt edge-out }algorithms, as the number of predictors increases, for sparse and dense problems. The bottom row examines just {\tt edge-out}, with $n$ or $p$ fixed, for larger problems. We were not able to run {\tt hglasso} in these latter settings.} \label{fig:figspeed} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} We have proposed a new procedure, hubNet, that is applicable to many supervised learning problems. The procedure estimates ``hub weights'' from the matrix of predictor values and then uses these weights in a supervised learning method such as the lasso or random forest. HubNet provides a way of utilizing structural information in the predictors, and it can yield more accurate prediction and support recovery in certain situations known to be hard if we neglect such knowledge. Since the estimation of weights is done in an unsupervised manner, standard cross-validation can be applied in the weighted fitting step. We observe in practice that this new procedure can sometimes yield lower prediction error than the unweighted approach, or give similar prediction error using fewer features. Moreover, the estimation of the hub structure can also be useful for interpretation. Further work is needed in making the edge-out algorithm for hub estimation more efficient, so that it can be applied to very large datasets. \medskip {\bf Acknowledgments} Zhou Fan was supported supported by a Hertz Foundation Fellowship and an NDSEG Fellowship (DoD AFOSR 32 CFR 168a). Robert Tibshirani was supported by NIH grant 5R01 EB001988-16 and NSF grant DMS1208164.
\section{Keywords} Free energy; thermodynamic driving force; gradient regularization; configurational stress; spline basis functions. \section{Introduction} We present a variational treatment of evolving configurations in solids. Of interest to us are problems in which a kinematic field can be identified, which describes the essential aspects of the material's configuration, while another distinct field, the displacement, furnishes the kinematics necessary for representing the nonlinear elastic response. Such a separation is possible upon a suitable definition of configurations for the cases at hand. A series of mathematical steps can then follow: The total free energy can then be written as a functional of both the configurational and the displacement fields. With it, we can seek equilibrium states that render the free energy stationary with respect to both fields. The corresponding Euler-Lagrange equations governing the configurational and displacement fields can be solved. The motivation from physics comes of asking whether a solid under load can seek to reach equilibrium by varying some configurational degree of freedom that can be identified as being distinct from the displacement field. The somewhat abstract arguments laid out above have relevance to crystalline solids that undergo phase transformations coupled with elastic deformation: In a classical continuum setting, the elastic deformation is obtained from the displacement, which is the only kinematic field. No phenomena are sought to be modeled, other than the mapping of the reference to current placements. In this setting, the reference and material placements coincide, and most importantly, they are fixed. In contrast stands any phenomenon in which, the material configuration evolves from a \emph{reference material configuration}, and can be represented, on a physical basis, by a configurational field that is distinct from the displacement field. Here, we are concerned with two specific examples: (a) In a multi-phase solid where phase change occurs at interphase interfaces, the configurational field would represent interface migration. The phase, and therefore the crystal structure at a material point will change if the interface migrates through that point. This causes a change in the material configuration of the point. Since the crystal structure (material configuration) changes across the mathematically sharp interface, the latter is incoherent. (b) Alternately, in a multi-phase solid, the crystal structure may change smoothly from one phase to another over an interface that has finite width, rather than being mathematically sharp. In this case also, the material configuration evolves with the crystal structure. Clearly, this would be a case of coherent interphase interfaces. Here too, the configurational field would represent the crystal structure at any point in the solid as a map from some well-defined, reference material configuration. In each of cases a and b, with the evolved material configuration determined as above, the displacement field can be defined as the point-to-point map from this configuration to the current/deformed placement that lies in the spatial manifold. An elastic deformation can then be identified from this displacement field. With two distinct kinematic fields thus identified, the response of the solid can be described by parameterizing the free energy functional in terms of these two fields. The imposition of equilibrium as the conditions of stationarity under variations on the configurational and displacement fields reveals two sets of Euler-Lagrange equations. As expected, one set contains the standard partial differential equations of elasticity. The second set is novel, and consists of partial differential equations and accompanying boundary conditions that involve the conventional elastic stress, the Eshelby stress, as well as a distinct configurational stress. The treatment of a configurational force, distinct from standard, Newtonian, forces acting on imperfections in a crystal lattice was given by \citet{Eshelby1951}, building off work from the late nineteenth century \citep{Burton1892,Larmor1897}. The last two decades have seen a resurgence in the literature on configurational forces. Some of the theoretical underpinnings can be found in \cite{Gurtin2000,Maugin1995,KienzlerHerrmann1997,Steinmann2002,Maugin2011} and \citet{VuSteinmann2012}. Applications have also been developed, such as to finite element discretization \citep{MullerMaugin2002}, to the dynamics of defects \citep{AcharyaFressengeas2012}, to spatial and material covariant balance laws \citep{Yavarietal2006} for modeling elastic inclusions \citep{YavariGoriely2013}, and to fracture mechanics \citep{DenzerMenzel2014}, Configurational force equations can be derived in the setting of classical balance laws, or, with appropriate assumptions, within a variational framework. \citet{Gurtin2000} regards configurational forces as fundamental quantities in continuum physics, analogous to standard forces. On that premise, he regards configurational balance laws as the corresponding, fundamental laws that must exist in order to govern these forces. This has led to a debate on whether new physics is posited by the introduction of configurational forces \citep{Maugin2011,PodioGuidugli2002}. The work we present here lies within a variational setting, and circumvents this debate by relying on the (perhaps) more accepted notion of equilibrium to arrive at balance laws as Euler-Lagrange equations of free energy functionals. The resulting partial differential equation for configurational equilibrium also arises in \citet{Gurtin2000}, and in \citet{Maugin2011}, where it has been called the fully material equilibrium equation. We consider first the problem of configurational changes taking place at a sharp, migrating interface between two solid material phases. We show that the variational method produces a partial differential equation of configurational equilibrium in addition to the standard partial differential equation of elasticity. Assuming satisfaction of quasi-static elastic equilibrium, the partial differential equation for configurational equilibrium is identically satisfied everywhere except on the interface itself. There, it takes the form of a jump condition, which also vanishes if equilibrium is satisfied at the interface. However, it is of interest to consider solids that are far from equilibrium, and therefore have migrating interfaces. Then, the second law of thermodynamics provides guidance for choosing a sufficient form for the interface velocity. We adopt the well-known and widely-used level set method \citep{OsherSethian1988} to track the interface's motion based on this velocity. Here, we list just a few of a vast number of level set applications: \citet{BarthSethian1998} modeled an isotropic etching process with a constant velocity and a directional etching process with a velocity dependent on the interface orientation. \citet{MacklinLowengrub2006} modeled tumor growth with a curvature dependent velocity. The velocity in oxidation problems modeled by \citet{Raoetal2000,RaoHughes2000}, \citet{GarikipatiRao2001} is based on material composition. Finally, we note that \citet{KalpakidesArvanitakis2009} used a velocity based on configurational forces to model ferroelastic materials, although it is arrived at differently than in the present work. We next turn to the problem of smoothly varying configurational changes in crystal structure that occur over interfaces of finite width. The smoothness implies that the configurational change extends over finite sub-volumes and transforms the crystal structure from the parent to the daughter phases. Therefore, it is in contrast to the case of phase transformation only at a migrating sharp interface. The configurational change of the crystal structure over the volume suggests that there is a contribution to the free energy density function, which is associated with this configurational field. The variational treatment based on stationarity of the free energy functional leads to a partial differential equation for configurational balance that holds throughout the volume of the crystalline solid. There is therefore a fundamental difference in the form of the governing equations from that for phase changes that occur only at a sharp interface. The variational setup, however, is similar in both problems. Such a consideration of configurational change that occurs over the volume of a material was attempted, albeit in a limited manner, by \citet{Garikipatietal2006} in the context of remodeling in biology. Since the parent and daughter crystal structures are equilibrium structures under suitable conditions, the free energy density function must exhibit local minima in configurational tangent space corresponding to these structures. The free energy density function is therefore non-convex and admits microstructures, thus placing the problem in a class that has spawned a rich mathematical literature including \cite{BhattacharyaKohn1997,Muller1999,Bhattacharyaetal2004}. It also is well-known that the non-convex free energy density functions must be enhanced by terms that penalize gradients in the tangent maps of the configurational variables for mathematical well-posedness and physically meaningful solutions \citep{BallCrooks2011}. Such considerations were accounted for by \cite{Rudrarajuetal2014,Rudrarajuetal2015}, who treated non-convex free energy density-driven microstructure formation in nonlinear gradient elasticity following \citet{Toupin1962}. We have extended this treatment to the configurational field in this communication. Our treatment begins with consideration of the problem where the configurational change is restricted to a sharp interface in Section \ref{sec:sharpinterface}, and then moves on to the problem of smoothly varying configurational change over a diffuse interface in Section \ref{sec:diffuseinterface}. The treatment is illustrated by numerical examples in both sections. Concluding remarks appear in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}. \section{Configurational change restricted to a sharp interface} \label{sec:sharpinterface} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{schematic} \caption{Kinematics of the configurational changes and elastic deformations with a sharp interface.} \label{fig:sharp} \end{figure} Consider a body that is an open set $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^3$ with two open subsets, $\Omega_\alpha$ and $\Omega_\beta$ consisting of phases $\alpha$ and $\beta$, respectively, that meet at a sharp interface $\Gamma \subset \Omega$. Here $\Gamma$ is a 2-manifold that can be constructed as a mapping $\Gamma: \mathbb{R}^2 \mapsto \mathbb{R}^3$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:sharp}). Let \begin{align} \overline{\Omega} &= \overline{\Omega_\alpha \cup \Omega_\beta} \nonumber \\ \overline{\Gamma} &= \partial \Omega_\alpha \cap \partial \Omega_\beta \nonumber \\ \partial \Omega &= \partial \Omega_\alpha \cup \partial \Omega_\beta \setminus \Gamma \end{align} We denote the traditional traction boundary, where external, standard tractions can be imposed, by $\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_T$, while the traction-like boundary related to changes in material configuration is $\partial \Omega^\mathrm{M}_T$. This description is of the body in some material configuration. We suppose that the body has arrived at the above configuration by undergoing a phase transformation from the reference material configuration $\Omega_0$, characterized by motion of the interface from its reference configuration $\Gamma_0$ to $\Gamma$ in configurational space. The reference material configurations of $\Omega_\alpha$ and $\Omega_\beta$ are, respectively, $\Omega_{\alpha_0}$ and $\Omega_{\beta_0}$. The point-to-point map $\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}$ is from the reference material configuration $\Omega_0$ onto the evolved material configuration $\Omega$. \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ X$} &= \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0) = \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0 + \mbox{\boldmath$ U$} \label{eqn:X}\\ \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} &= \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} = \mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \label{eqn:chi} \end{align} Here, $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}$ are the reference and evolved values of the configurational field. We will refer to $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}$ as the configurational displacement, since it describes the change in material configuration through the evolution of the phases and their interface. The elastic deformation of the body is described in the standard manner based on the mapping $\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}:\Omega \mapsto \Omega_t$, defined as: \begin{equation} \mbox{\boldmath$ x$} = \mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}) = \mbox{\boldmath$ X$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \end{equation} where $\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}$ is the standard displacement field. The elastic deformation gradient is then defined as \begin{equation} \mbox{\boldmath$ F$} = \frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}}{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} = \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} = \mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \end{equation} These variables can also be written in terms of $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0$, as follows: \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ x$} &= \mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}(\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0)) = \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0 + \mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\\ \mbox{\boldmath$ F$} &= \left(\mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\right) \left( \mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \right)^{-1} \label{eqn:F} \end{align} We emphasize the distinctions between the configurational map, $\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}$ and the deformation map $\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}$, their respective tangent maps $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$, and the associated configurational and standard displacement fields $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}$. The Gibbs free energy of the system is given by the following functional defined over $\Omega$, where $\psi^\alpha(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$ X$})$ and $\psi^\beta(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$ X$})$ are the strain energy density functions for the two phases: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \Pi[\mbox{\boldmath$ u$};\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}] &= \int \limits_{{\Omega_\alpha}}\psi^\alpha(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$ X$})\,\mathrm{d}V + \int \limits_{{\Omega_\beta}}\psi^\beta(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$ X$})\,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}) \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \, \mathrm{d}V - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_T} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$} \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\, \mathrm{d}S \end{aligned} \end{align} We perform a change of variables to define the functional over $\Omega_0$, noting that constancy of the traction loading during configurational change implies that $\mbox{\boldmath$ T$} \mathrm{d}S = \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\mathrm{d}S_0$: \begin{align} & \begin{aligned}[b] \Pi[\mbox{\boldmath$ u$};\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}] &=\int \limits_{{\Omega}_{\alpha_0}}\psi^\alpha(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0))\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0 + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_{\beta_0}}\psi^\beta(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0))\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}(\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0)) \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} \subsection{Variational formulation} We consider variations on the configurational displacement, $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon :=\mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and on the standard displacement, $\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon := \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$. We compute the first variation using the functional defined over the fixed, reference material configuration $\Omega_0$. A complete derivation is presented in \ref{sec:appa}. Note that we express the two integrals $\int_{\Omega_\alpha}\psi^\alpha$ and $\int_{\Omega_\beta}\psi^\beta$ with a single integral $\int_{\Omega}\psi$. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \Pi[\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon;\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon] \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \bigg\{ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0))\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}(\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0)) \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \bigg\} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \end{aligned} \label{eqn:PI_eps} \end{align} At equilibrium, the first variation of the Gibbs free energy is zero: $[\mathrm{d}\Pi/\mathrm{d}\varepsilon]_{\varepsilon = 0} = 0$. The first variations of $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$ and $\det \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ are derived from equations (\ref{eqn:F}) and (\ref{eqn:chi}), respectively: \begin{align} \frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} &= \left[ \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \left(\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon \right) \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \right] {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} \label{eqn:F_eps}\\ \frac{d \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} &= \mathbbm{1}:\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1}\right)\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon \label{eqn:det_chi_eps} \end{align} Substituting (\ref{eqn:F_eps}) and (\ref{eqn:det_chi_eps}) into (\ref{eqn:PI_eps}) defining the first Piola-Kirchhoff stress as $\partial \psi/\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ F$} = \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}$, and using $d\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon/d\varepsilon = \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ and $d\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon/d\varepsilon = \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$ gives \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$})\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right): \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}}\left( \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}} -\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\cdot\frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}} \right)\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial {\Omega}^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Following a number of previous authors \citep{Maugin1995,KienzlerHerrmann1997,Gurtin2000} we recognize the Eshelby stress tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}:= \psi\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}$. We now rewrite this weak form on $\Omega$: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \,\mathrm{d}V - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}) \, \mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right): \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}}\left( \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} -\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\cdot\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \right)\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\,\mathrm{d}V - \int \limits_{{\partial {\Omega}^\mathrm{S}_{T}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$} \, \mathrm{d}S \label{weakform} \end{aligned} \end{align} The strong form is derived from the weak form using standard variational arguments. In equation (\ref{weakform}) we allow discontinuities at the phase interface in all fields except $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$. The corresponding strong form consists of the two following sets of equations. The first set (\ref{eqn:standBC} - \ref{eqn:standPDE}) represents the standard governing partial differential equations and boundary conditions of nonlinear elasticity, now extended to include an interface $\Gamma$. The second set of equations (\ref{eqn:confBC} - \ref{eqn:confPDE}) has been simplified under the assumption that the preceding equations of nonlinear elasticity are satisfied. We use the operator $\nabla\cdot$ here to refer to the divergence with respect to $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}$. Note that $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}$ is the unit normal to the boundary of the body, and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma$ is the normal to the interface. \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$} &=0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T} \label{eqn:standBC}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack} &= 0 \text{ on } \Gamma\\ \nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega \label{eqn:standPDE}\\ \left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} + \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} &=0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T} \label{eqn:confBC}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack} &= 0 \text{ on } \Gamma \label{eqn:confJump}\\ \nabla\cdot \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega \label{eqn:confPDE} \end{align} \end{subequations} Note that equation (\ref{eqn:confPDE}) corresponds exactly to the partial differential equation derived in \citet{Gurtin2000} and \citet{Maugin2011}. This reduces further, using coordinate notation for clarity, with lower case indices for objects defined on $\Omega_t$ and upper case indices for objects defined on $\Omega$. \begin{align} \left(\psi\delta_{IJ} - F_{iI}P_{iJ} \right)_{,J} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial X_I} - F_{iI}f_i &= 0 \nonumber \\ \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial F_{iJ}}F_{iJ,I} +\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial X_I} - F_{iI,J}P_{iJ} - F_{iI}P_{iJ,J} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial X_I} - F_{iI}f_i &= 0 \nonumber \\ P_{iJ}F_{iJ,I} - F_{iI,J}P_{iJ} - F_{iI}P_{iJ,J} - F_{iI}f_i &= 0 \end{align} Using the relation $F_{iI,J} = F_{iJ,I}$ and $P_{iJ,J}= - f_i$ from equation (\ref{eqn:standPDE}), this equation vanishes identically. Thus, if the standard governing partial differential equation for nonlinear elasticity, $P_{iJ,J} + f_i = 0$ in $\Omega$ is satisfied, the corresponding configurational partial differential equation $\mathcal{E}_{IJ,J} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial X_I} - F_{iI}f_i = 0$ in $\Omega$ is trivially satisfied. \subsection{Interfacial energy} \label{sec:interfaceEnergy} Interfacial energy can be included by adding the integral \begin{align} \Pi^\Gamma &= \int_\Gamma \psi^\Gamma\,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} to the free energy functional $\Pi$, where $\psi^\Gamma$ is the interfacial free energy density. Assuming $\psi^\Gamma$ is a constant, the first variation of this integral is \begin{align} \frac{\delta \Pi^\Gamma}{\delta \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} &= \int_{\Gamma} -2\psi^\Gamma H \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right) \,\mathrm{d}S\nonumber\\ &\phantom{=} -\oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\right) (\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}) \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \end{align} where $H$ is the mean curvature of $\Gamma$. This term would affect equation (\ref{eqn:confJump}) and add a condition over $\partial\Gamma$, resulting in the following: \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \left({\lbrack\!\lbrack} \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1} {\rbrack\!\rbrack} - 2\psi^\Gamma H\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma &= 0 \text{ on } \Gamma\label{eqn:elastpluscurvdom}\\ \psi^\Gamma \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} &= 0 \text{ on } \partial\Gamma_T\label{eqn:elastpluscurvboun} \end{align} \end{subequations} A full derivation is included in \ref{sec:appc}. \subsection{Nonequilibrium with respect to material evolution} Suppose that the body is at equilibrium everywhere except with respect to configurational evolution of the interface, $\Gamma$. Then, as the foregoing treatment demonstrates, the first variation of the free energy reduces to \begin{align} \frac{\delta \Pi}{\delta \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} &= \int \limits_{\Gamma}\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left[ \left({\lbrack\!\lbrack} \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1} {\rbrack\!\rbrack} - 2\psi^\Gamma H\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right] \,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} The field $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ represents variation of the interface. In a rate formulation, this would be replaced by the interface velocity $ \mbox{\boldmath$ V$}_\Gamma$. \begin{align} \dot{\Pi} &= \int \limits_{\Gamma}\mbox{\boldmath$ V$}_\Gamma\cdot \left[ \left({\lbrack\!\lbrack} \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1} {\rbrack\!\rbrack} - 2\psi^\Gamma H\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right] \,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} We let \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ V$}_\Gamma = -\mbox{\boldmath$ M$} \left[ \left({\lbrack\!\lbrack} \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1} {\rbrack\!\rbrack} - 2\psi^\Gamma H\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right] \label{eqn:lsVelocity} \end{align} with $\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}$ a positive definite tensor to ensure decrease in free energy ($\dot{\Pi} \leq 0$), thus satisfying the second law of thermodynamics. The presence of $H$ in the interface velocity makes this a general curvature driven flow. \subsection{Numerical treatment} We use the level set method for movement of the sharp interface in the case of nonequilibrium with respect to material evolution. All partial differential equations are solved using the finite element method. \subsubsection{Level set method} In the level set method, the interface is represented by the zero contour or level set of a scalar field, $\Phi(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$},t)$ \citep{OsherSethian1988}. The evolution of $\Phi$ (and the zero level set) is governed by the following partial differential equation: \begin{align} \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial t} = -v\|\nabla \Phi\| \end{align} where the scalar $v$ is the advection velocity (i.e. the normal component of the level set velocity). The behavior of the level set evolution is improved when $\Phi$ is a signed distance function. Replacing $v$ with $v_e$ helps to maintain this property, where $v_e$ is the \textit{extensional velocity}, defined as the advection velocity at the closest point on the zero level set. This ``closest point'' generally does not coincide with a node or an integration point. Additionally, the field $\Phi$ is periodically reinitialized as a signed distance function based on the current location of the zero level set. The method of reinitialization used here involves solving the Eikonal equation $\|\nabla \Phi\| = 1$, using the following partial differential equation \citep{RussoSmereka2000} with additional constraints on $\Phi$ to reduce spurious movement of the zero level set: \begin{align} \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial \hat{t}} &= \text{sgn}(\Phi_0)(1 - \|\nabla \Phi\|) \nonumber \\ \Phi_0(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}) &= \Phi(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$},0) \end{align} Note that $\hat{t}$ is a time-like parameter introduced only to allow relaxation of $\Phi$ to a signed distance function during reinitialization. \subsubsection{Finite element methods} Both the level set equation and the Eikonal equation used in reinitialization are solved using finite element methods. To reduce spatial oscillations common to advection-diffusion equations, the streamline upwind/Petrov-Galerkin (SUPG) weak form is used \citep{BrooksHughes1982}: \begin{align} \tilde{w} &= w + \tau \frac{\mbox{\boldmath$ v$}\cdot\nabla w}{\|\mbox{\boldmath$ v$}\|} \nonumber \\ \int \limits_\Omega \tilde{w}\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial t} \,\mathrm{d}V &= -\int \limits_\Omega \tilde{w}v_e\|\nabla \Phi\| \,\mathrm{d}V \end{align} Since we are only interested in $\Phi$ near the zero level set, the level set equation is only solved within a narrow band about the zero level set. The elastic, finite deformation of the body is modeled using the Bubnov-Galerkin weak form. The elasticity problem is solved over the entire domain using the field $\Phi$ to determine material properties at each integration point.\\ \subsection{Numerical simulation} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{BCs} \caption{An example problem of sharp interface motion driven by displacement controlled, uniaxial tension.} \label{fig:sharpExample} \end{figure} Figures \ref{fig:sharpExample} - \ref{fig:sharpDisplace} present the plane strain computation of a two-phase material with a migrating sharp interface, under vanishing body force and zero interfacial energy. The initial phase distribution is as shown in Figure \ref{fig:sharpExample}, with a compliant phase (Young's modulus $E = 20$ GPa) surrounded by a stiffer phase ($E = 30$ GPa). All other material properties are the same for both phases. The body is subjected to displacement controlled, uniaxial tension. At each time step, the interface motion is modeled via the level set equation, and the current elastic deformation is found based on the updated interface location. The zero level set velocity is found using equation \ref{eqn:lsVelocity}. We used a time step of .001 s and $M$ equal to the isotropic tensor multiplied by 2e-8 $\mathrm{m}^3/(\mathrm{Ns})$. The problem was allowed to evolve until an apparent steady state was achieved. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel1} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 1} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel50} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 50} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel250} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 250} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel1000} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 1000} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel4000} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 4000} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.3\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceVel7000} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 7000} \end{minipage} \caption{Evolution of the sharp interface in the evolved reference configuration $\Omega$ over time. The interface is represented by the zero level set (red line) and is updated over a narrow band enclosing the zero level set (colored elements). The velocity vectors of the level sets are shown, but nearly vanish at later times, and are therefore not discernible in (c--f).} \label{fig:lsEvolution} \end{figure} Figure \ref{fig:lsEvolution} shows the evolution of the zero level set as the interface moves in the evolved reference configuration $\Omega$, driven by the jump in the Eshelby stress tensor. A steady state solution is arrived at within 4000 time steps, or 4 s. The time scale of the probem is consistent with the interface velocity, which is initially about 5 m/s, and the size of the domain. It is shown in Figure \ref{fig:tangentVel} that at steady state, all of the level set velocity vectors are tangential to the level set. As a result, there is no movement normal to the zero level set and a steady state is achieved. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{configForce3xVel7000cropped} \caption{At steady state, the level set velocity vectors are all tangential to the level sets (at time step = 7000 and velocity vectors scaled 3x).} \label{fig:tangentVel} \end{figure} The elastic deformation on the top and bottom edges of the body can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:sharpDisplace}, which is in the current, deformed configuration $\Omega_t$. Initially, that deformation is greatest in the middle, due to the concentration of the compliant phase in the center. However, the interface evolves in such a way that the elastic deformation along the edges becomes nearly uniform by the time the phases reach a steady state. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceDisp1} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 1} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{configForceDisp7000} \captionof{subfigure}{Time step = 7000} \end{minipage} \caption{Evolution of elastic deformation due to the change in material configuration (10x displacement shown).} \label{fig:sharpDisplace} \end{figure} \FloatBarrier \section{Configurational change over a volume; diffuse interfaces} \label{sec:diffuseinterface} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{schematicTetragonal} \caption{Kinematics of the configurational changes and elastic deformations causing a diffuse interface.} \label{fig:diffuse} \end{figure} We now turn to the case of a solid that can undergo phase changes throughout the volume, considering again equilibrium with respect to both the configurational and standard displacements. As discussed in the Introduction, the material's configuration, represented by the crystal structure, varies smoothly between parent and daughter phases, thus creating diffuse interfaces between the phases (see Figure~\ref{fig:diffuse}). In this case, the invertible map $\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}$ and its gradient, $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} = \partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}/\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0$, model the distortion of the crystal structure associated with the phase change. We introduce the mapping $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}}$ and gradient $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}}$ giving the final placement of the body via configurational and standard displacements from the reference material configuration: \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ x$} &= \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0) = \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0 + \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}\\ \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}} &= \frac{\partial \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} = \mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \end{align} The deformation map $\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}$ and deformation gradient $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$ model standard elastic deformation relative to the evolved material configuration (distorted crystal structure) and are as defined previously. \subsection{The cubic to tetragonal transformation} \label{sec:cubictet} To fix ideas we consider a cubic to tetragonal transformation, although our methods have wider applicability to any smooth change in crystal structure. In the reference material configuration, the solid is stable in the cubic crystal structure at high temperature. The free energy density function has a single well in this phase. We assume that a rapid quench renders the cubic phase unstable to a configurational change by distortion into tetragonal phase. Three such tetragonal variants are possible, and the solid is stable in any of these structures, implying that they are local minima of the free energy density. Furthermore the configurational change between one tetragonal variant and another is smooth, and these variants are separated by diffuse interfaces. In this phase, therefore, the solid's free energy density is a smooth, non-convex function of $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ with three minima corresponding to the three stable and equivalent tetragonal variants (Figure \ref{fig:tet3d}). A two-dimensional version of these configurational changes is the square to rectangle transformation (Figure \ref{fig:tet2d}), which serves well to fix ideas. We also return to two dimensions for the first numerical example in Section \ref{sec:numsims}. While we use free energy functions with wells of equal depth as examples, there is nothing in this work that requires that the depths be equal. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{martensite3D} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{contour3} \end{minipage} \caption{Tetragonal variants and free energy density contours in 3D. The axis, $\eta_2$ and $\eta_3$, are reparametrized strains.} \label{fig:tet3d} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{martensite} \caption{Tetragonal variants and free energy density schematic in 2D.} \label{fig:tet2d} \end{figure} \subsection{Free energy density functions} \label{sec:freeenergydens} The free energy density function associated with the configurational changes described above is $\psi^\mathrm{M} = \hat{\psi}^\mathrm{M}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$},\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})$. Note that we use the operator $\nabla^0$ to refer to derivatives with respective to $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0$ for brevity in notation. This function allows for inhomogeneity via $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0$ and, as discussed in Section \ref{sec:cubictet}, is dependent on the tangent map of the configurational field $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$. Since $\psi^\mathrm{M}$ is non-convex in the tetragonal phase, it allows the development of microstructures formed by laminae of the tetragonal variants, as discussed extensively in the literature. See \citet{BhattacharyaKohn1997,Muller1999,Bhattacharyaetal2004} for a background discussion. As is also well-known, these microstructures can develop with arbitrary fineness unless the diffuse interfaces between sub-regions of a single variant are penalized. This is done by inclusion of a dependence on $\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ for regularization \citep{BallCrooks2011,Rudrarajuetal2014}. This ensures physically meaningful solutions and mathematical well-posedness. The free energy density function for the standard elastic deformation relative to $\Omega$ is $\psi^\mathrm{S} = {\psi}^\mathrm{S}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$},\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$} = \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0)$. Similar to $\psi^\mathrm{M}$, the elastic free energy depends on $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}$ and the elastic deformation gradient $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$. Anisotropic elastic response can be incorporated if $\psi^\mathrm{S}$ is made to depend on $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$: The local value of $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ determines the tetragonal variant arising as a result of the configurational change, and therefore sets the anisotropy of response due to elastic deformation relative to this evolved material configuration, $\Omega$. The free energy of the system is then modeled with the following Gibbs free energy functional (Figure \ref{fig:energySchem}): \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \Pi[\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}};\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}] &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \big[ \psi^\mathrm{M}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$},\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}) + \psi^\mathrm{S}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$},\mbox{\boldmath$ F$},\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} \big] \,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \label{eqn:diffuseGibbs} \end{align} We draw attention to the definition of quantities relative to the reference material configuration, $\Omega_0$, extending to the work terms of the body force and traction. This seems natural because $\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}$ corresponds to distortion of the crystal structure, and $\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}$ is further motion relative to the distorted crystal. Therefore, the distributed forces are dual to the total displacement $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}} = \mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}$. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{schematicFreeEnergy} \caption{Schematic of the kinematics and free energy associated with evolution of the configuration and elastic deformation.} \label{fig:energySchem} \end{figure} \subsection{Variational formulation} We again seek equilibrium by setting the first variation of the Gibbs free energy to vanish. We consider variations on the configurational displacement, $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon := \mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and the total displacement, $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon := \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}} + \varepsilon \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}$. Then, equilibrium requires \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \Pi[\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon;\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon] \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \bigg\{ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \psi^\mathrm{M}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon,\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon) \,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \psi^\mathrm{S}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon)\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \bigg\} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0}\\ &=0 \end{aligned} \end{align} We apply the earlier results concerning the first variations of $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$ and $\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$. We also define $\mbox{\boldmath$ D$} := \partial\psi^\mathrm{M}/\partial\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$, $\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} := \partial \psi^\mathrm{M}/\partial \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ and $J_\chi := \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$. The resulting weak form is the following: { \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}\vdots\nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} J_\chi\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} +\int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left[\mbox{\boldmath$ D$}+ J_\chi\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right]: \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} J_\chi \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right): \nabla^0\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Here, $\mbox{\boldmath$ D$}$ is a configurational stress that is distinct from the Eshelby stress $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}$, and $\mbox{\boldmath$ B$}$ represents a higher order configurational stress. Deriving the strong form from this weak form involves several additional terms due to the dependence on $\nabla^0 \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$, as described in \citet{Rudrarajuetal2014}. We use the normal and surface gradient operators, $\nabla^n$ and $\nabla^s$, where \begin{align} \nabla^n \psi &= \nabla^0\psi\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\\ \nabla^s \psi &= \nabla^0 \psi - \left(\nabla^n\psi\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \end{align} Also, $\mbox{\boldmath$ b$} = -\nabla^s \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 = \mbox{\boldmath$ b$}^T$ is the second fundamental form of the smooth parts of the boundary, $\partial\Omega_0$. We let $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} = \mbox{\boldmath$\Xi$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$\Xi$}$ is the unit tangent to the smooth curve $\mathcal{C}_0$ that forms an edge between subsets $\partial \Omega^+_0$ and $\partial \Omega^-_0$of the smooth boundary surfaces $\partial \Omega_0$. If $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^+}$ is the outward unit normal to $\mathcal{C}_0$ from $\partial \Omega^+_0$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^-}$ is the outward unit normal to $\mathcal{C}_0$ from $\partial \Omega^-_0$, then we define ${\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} := \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^+} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^-} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right)$. Applying the appropriate integration by parts and standard variational arguments leads to the following strong form. \begin{subequations} \begin{align} J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}}\\ \nabla^0\cdot \left(J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega_0 \label{eqn:diffuse_pde}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} &= 0 \text{ on } \mathcal{C}^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}\\ \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}\\ \mbox{\boldmath$ D$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 -\mbox{\boldmath$ C$} &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}\label{configtracbc}\\ \nabla^0\cdot \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ D$} + J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 - \nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega_0 \end{align} \end{subequations} where, using coordinate notation for clarity, \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] C_I &= \nabla^nB_{I\gamma\zeta}N^0_\zeta N^0_\gamma +2\nabla^s_\gamma B_{I\gamma\zeta} N^0_\zeta\\ &\phantom{=} +B_{I\gamma\zeta}\nabla^s_\gamma N^0_\zeta - (b_{\xi\xi} N^0_\gamma N^0_\zeta - b_{\gamma\zeta})B_{I\gamma\zeta} \end{aligned} \end{align} Details of the above derivations of weak and strong forms appear in \ref{sec:appb}. \subsection{Numerical simulations} \label{sec:numsims} We use the following double well, free energy density function to represent the two-dimensional, square to rectangle transformation: \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$\Theta$} &= {\textstyle{1 \over 2}}(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} - \mathbbm{1})\\ \eta_1 &= \Theta_{11} + \Theta_{22},\, \eta_2 = \Theta_{11} - \Theta_{22},\, \eta_6 = \Theta_{12}\\ \psi^\mathrm{M} &= \frac{d}{s^2}\left(\eta_1^2 + \eta_6^2\right) -\frac{2d}{s^2}\eta_2^2 + \frac{d}{s^4}\eta_2^4 + \frac{l^2d}{s^2}\|\nabla^0 \eta_2\|^2 \label{eqn:psi_M} \end{align} where the energy wells lie at $\eta_2 = \pm s$ with a depth of $-d$. Additionally, we draw attention to the last term in Equation (\ref{eqn:psi_M}), which is the gradient free energy contribution that regularizes the non-convex free energy density as discussed in Section \ref{sec:freeenergydens}. Using standard dimensional arguments this term has been scaled by a length parameter $l$, where $1/l^2$ is the ratio of standard to strain gradient moduli. For the three-dimensional case, we use the following reparameterized strain space: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \eta_1 &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(\Theta_{11} + \Theta_{22} + \Theta{33}),\qquad \eta_2 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\Theta_{11} - \Theta_{22}),\\ \eta_3 &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(\Theta_{11} + \Theta_{22} - 2\Theta{33}),\qquad \eta_4 = \sqrt{2}\Theta_{23} =\sqrt{2}\Theta_{32},\\ \eta_5 &= \sqrt{2}\Theta_{13} =\sqrt{2}\Theta_{31},\qquad \eta_6 = \sqrt{2}\Theta_{12} =\sqrt{2}\Theta_{21}\\ \end{aligned} \end{align} The corresponding free energy density function has three wells located at $(\tfrac{\sqrt{3}}{2}s,\tfrac{1}{2}s)$, $(-\tfrac{\sqrt{3}}{2}s,\tfrac{1}{2}s)$, and $(0,s)$ in $(\eta_2,\eta_3)$ space with a depth of $-d$. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \psi^\mathrm{M} &= \frac{3d}{2s^2}\left(\eta_1^2 +\eta_4^2 +\eta_5^2 + \eta_6^2\right) -\frac{3d}{2s^2}(\eta_2^2 + \eta_3^2) + \frac{3d}{2s^4}\left(\eta_2^2+\eta_3^2\right)^2\\ &\phantom{=} + \frac{d}{s^3}\eta_3\left(\eta_3^2 - 3\eta_2^2\right) + \frac{3l^2d}{2s^2}\left(\|\nabla^0 \eta_2\|^2 + \|\nabla^0 \eta_3\|^2 \right) \label{eqn:psi_M_3D} \end{aligned} \end{align} Note the regularizing gradient free energy in the last two terms of Equation (\ref{eqn:psi_M_3D}). We also use an anisotropic St.~Venant-Kirchhoff model for the elastic deformation, \begin{align} \psi^\mathrm{S} &= {\textstyle{1 \over 2}} \mbox{\boldmath$ E$}:\mathbb{C}(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}):\mbox{\boldmath$ E$} \label{eqn:psi_E} \end{align} where \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \mathbbm{C}(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}) &= \sum_{I=1}^3 \alpha_I(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I\otimes\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I +\sum_{\substack{J,K=1\\J\neq K}}^3 \beta_{JK}(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_J\otimes\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_K \\ &\phantom{=} +2\mu(\mathbb{I} - \sum_{I=1}^3 \mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I\otimes\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I) \end{aligned} \end{align} with $\mbox{\boldmath$ E$} = {\textstyle{1 \over 2}}(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ F$} - \mathbbm{1})$, $\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I = \mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_I\otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_I$, $\beta_{JK} = \beta_{KJ}$, and $\mathbb{I}_{ijkl} ={\textstyle{1 \over 2}} (\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl} + \delta_{il}\delta_{jk})$. Let $\alpha_I(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}) = \alpha\Lambda_I(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$})$, where $\Lambda_I = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^3\chi_{iI}^2}$ is the distortion of the crystal structure in the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_I$ direction due to the configurational change. Also, let $\beta_{JK} = \beta$. Since $\partial \Lambda_I/\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} = \Lambda_I^{-1}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I$, we have \begin{align} \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} &= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{I=1}^3 \frac{\alpha}{\Lambda_I}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\mbox{\boldmath$ M$}_I M_{II}^2 \end{align} \subsubsection{Anisotropy induced by a configurational change in crystal structure} \label{sec:anisotropy} We consider changes in the material configuration that correspond to an evolution from a cubic crystal structure to three tetragonal crystal structures (in 3D), each oriented along one of the coordinate axes. The resulting anisotropy is reflected in the standard elastic deformation fields and the associated stresses. To demonstrate this effect, we consider two unit cubes, each initially with a cubic crystal structure. Through Dirichlet boundary conditions on the configurational domain, we force one cube into a tetragonal crystal structure oriented along $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_1$ and the other cube into an $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$-oriented tetragonal structure. Both cubes are also subjected to simple uniaxial tension along $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_1$ through applied Dirichlet conditions on the standard displacement. The distinct stress plots of Figure~\ref{fig:anisotropy} show the resulting anisotropy. We used the three well free energy function for $\psi^\mathrm{M}$ and $\alpha_I(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}) = \alpha(5\Lambda_I(\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}) - 4)$ to accentuate the anisotropy. The anisotropic tetragonal crystal structures in the two cases also produce distinct lateral deformation. Figure~\ref{fig:anisotropy2} compares the two computations, and the second case shows significantly less displacement in the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$ direction due to the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$-oriented tetragonal structure. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \begin{minipage}[t]{0.35\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{anisotropySchem} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.6\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{anisotropy} \end{minipage} \caption{The $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_1$-oriented tetragonal crystal structure leads to higher stresses than the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$-oriented tetragonal structure when subjected to simple uniaxial tension along $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_1$. This demonstrates the differences in evolved anisotropy induced by the configurational changes in the two cases depicted on the left.} \label{fig:anisotropy} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{anisotropy_simSchem} \caption{Computational results are compared for simple uniaxial tension along $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_1$. The color contour plots of $\eta_2$ display the tetragonal variants, whose corresponding wells are located at $(\sqrt{3}/200,1/200)$, $(-\sqrt{3}/200,1/200)$, and $(0,-0.01)$ in $(\eta_2,\eta_3)$ space. The distortion has been scaled by $20\times$ the elastic deformation. The results on the right show less deformation in the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$ direction due to the anisotropy induced by the $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_2$-oriented tetragonal crystal structure, compared to the case on the left.} \label{fig:anisotropy2} \end{figure} \subsection{Microstructure formation by evolution of the material configuration} Figure \ref{fig:2Dbending} demonstrates a 2D plane strain problem wherein the material configuration evolves to distort the crystal structure from the the square to the rectangle. The beam is rapidly quenched from a high temperature causing the initially stable square structure to become unstable as the configuration-dependent component of the free energy function, $\psi^\mathrm{M}$, changes from convex to double-welled. The beam is then loaded in bending. The double-welled free energy renders the rectangular variants stable, and strain accommodation of the inhomogeneous configuration results in the microstructure shown. The parameter values used in equations \ref{eqn:psi_M} and \ref{eqn:psi_E} are $s = 0.1$, $d = 1$, $l = 0.1$ and $\mu = 1\times 10^{-1}$, $\beta = 1\times 10^{-1}$, $\alpha = 2\times 10^{-1}$, respectively. Contours of $\eta_2$ appear in the plots, where $\eta_2 = \pm 0.1$ locates the wells corresponding to the two rectangular variants, and $\eta_2 = 0$ is the square structure, which exists only in the interfaces between variants in this evolved material configuration. The fineness of the microstructure in the computations is determined by the gradient length scale parameter $l$. The configurational displacement $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}$ at $x_1 = 10$ was specified as $0.5\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}$. Figure \ref{fig:3Dbending} demonstrates the corresponding problem in 3D, where ``plane strain boundary conditions'' have been applied on the faces perpendicular to $\mbox{\boldmath$ e$}_3$. The strain energy density function $\psi^\mathrm{M}$ allows for three tetragonal variants, but only two variants are seen due to the plane strain boundary conditions. The parameter values used in equations \ref{eqn:psi_M} and \ref{eqn:psi_E} are $s = 0.1$, $d = 1$, $l = 0.25$ and $\mu = 1\times 10^{-1}$, $\beta = 1\times 10^{-1}$, $\alpha = 2\times 10^{-1}$, respectively. Contours of $\eta_2$ appear in the plots, where the three tetragonal variants are located at $(\sqrt{3}/20,1/20)$, $(-\sqrt{3}/20,1/20)$, and $(0,-0.1)$ in $(\eta_2,\eta_3)$ space. Again, the configurational displacement $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}$ at $x_1 = 10$ was specified as $0.5\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}$. Note that a larger length scale parameter was used in the 3D problem, resulting in a coarser microstructure than the 2D bending problem. \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{2Dbeam} \caption{Simulation of 2D beam bending and the resulting material microstructure. The configurational displacement $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}$ was specified to be $0.5\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}$ at $X_2 = 10$. Contours of $\eta_2$ are plotted where the values $\pm 0.1$ locate the well corresponding to the two rectangular variants. The top plot is deformed by the configurational displacement and the bottom plot by the total displacement. The displacement for both plots is scaled by a factor of $10\times$.} \label{fig:2Dbending} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{3Dbeam} \caption{Simulation of 3D beam bending with plane strain boundary conditions and the resulting material microstructure. Contours of $\eta_2$ are plotted where the values $\pm 0.0866$ correspond to two of the three tetragonal variants. Only two variants are seen because of the plane strain boundary conditions. The top plot is deformed by the configurational displacement and the bottom plot by the total displacement. The displacement for both plots is scaled by a factor of $10\times$. A larger length scale parameter was used in the 3D problem than the 2D, resulting in a coarser microstructure.} \label{fig:3Dbending} \end{figure} We note that the results of these computations compare well with those obtained by \citet{Rudrarajuetal2014}. However, in that work no configurational fields were identified. The entire problem was posed as a problem of elasticity relative to a high-symmetry (cubic or square) reference crystal. For a state where in the high-symmetry structure became unstable (by quenching, for instance) elastic deformation carried in the crystal structure into stable tetragonal states. The merits of the treatment presented here are that they allow us to separate out the configurational evolution as distinct from elastic deformation. This is particularly useful in describing anisotropy, as we have shown in Section \ref{sec:anisotropy}. \pagebreak \FloatBarrier \section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{irreversibilities} \label{fig:irreversibilities} \end{figure} We have considered the modeling of materials with multiple solid phases within a continuum setting by separating the kinematics associated with the material evolution into a newly-identified configurational field, and the standard displacement field. This applies to interfacial phases changes maintaining a sharp interface and to volume phase changes resulting in multiple diffuse interfaces. By noting that the free energy density can be extended to depend on both these kinematic fields, we have obtained equilibrium conditions associated with the configurational evolution, separately from those that hold for the standard displacement field. This separation of the deformation field into a configurational field in the material space and a standard spatial displacement field allows this framework to model a wide class of materials physics problems involving formation and movement of phase boundaries. In the context of crystalline materials, phase boundaries may occur due to nucleation and growth mechanisms, like those seen during precipitate evolution and formation of grain boundaries, or through phase transformations like martensitic transformations and twin-formation in HCP metals. All these phenomena involve sharp or diffused phase boundaries driven by interface kinetics or volumetric phase transformations. The framework presented here provides an overarching theoretical basis for representing the evolution of both sharp and diffuse phase boundaries. Notably, it also furnishes a variational basis for obtaining the governing partial differential equations. In this first communication of these ideas, we have presented a preliminary exploration of phase transformations restricted to migrating sharp interfaces, such as arise at incoherent interphases, as well as phase transformations that occur throughout the volume of a material, resulting in diffuse interphase interfaces. We have shown that evolving elastic anisotropy due to the phase changes that distort the crystal structure from a parent to a daughter phase can be captured through a dependence of the free energy density function and of the conventional elastic moduli on the tangent map of the configurational field. Additionally, this formulation is able to reproduce the results previously obtained with a treatment of all deformation relative to a high symmetry reference crystal. Irreversibilities of crystallographic slip associated with the material evolution can be represented by imposing a further elasto-plastic decomposition on the tangent map of the configurational field $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} = \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\mathrm{E}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\mathrm{P}$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\mathrm{E}$ models the elastic distortion of the crystal structure and $\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\mathrm{P}$ models the crystallographic slip. Additionally, the common kinematic and variational underpinnings to the treatment of sharp and diffuse interfaces suggests the potential for modeling the evolution within a material from coherent (diffuse) to incoherent (sharp) interphase interfaces. The treatment introduced in this communication therefore has potential for modeling a wide array of phase transformations while clearly exposing the underlying configurational changes. That these configurational fields can be as diverse as that corresponding to interface motion in a non-crystalline material as well as crystal distortion is notable. \section{Acknowledgements} The mathematical formulation for this work was carried out under an NSF DMREF grant: DMR1436154 ``DMREF: Integrated Computational Framework for Designing Dynamically Controlled Alloy-Oxide Heterostructures'', and an NSF CDI Type I grant: CHE1027729 ``Meta-Codes for Computational Kinetics''. GT was also partly supported by an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE 1256260. The numerical formulation and computations have been carried out as part of research supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Materials Sciences and Engineering under Award \#DE-SC0008637 that funds the PRedictive Integrated Structural Materials Science (PRISMS) Center at University of Michigan. \pagebreak \begin{appendix} \section{Variational formulation for the sharp interface problem} \label{sec:appa} We consider variations on the configurational displacement, $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon :=\mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and on the Newtonian displacement, $\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon := \mbox{\boldmath$ u$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$. We find the first variation using the functional defined over $\Omega_0$. At equilibrium, the first variation of the Gibbs free energy is zero. \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \Pi[\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon;\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon] \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0}& \begin{aligned}[t] =& \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \bigg\{ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0))\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ & - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}(\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0)) \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ & - \int \limits_{{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \bigg\} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ & \begin{aligned}[t] =& \bigg\{ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\left[ \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}}:\frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon}{d\varepsilon} + \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}}\cdot\frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon}{d\varepsilon} \right]\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &+ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\psi \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon\,\mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon\, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ & - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot \frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon}{d\varepsilon} + \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\cdot\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}} \cdot\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon}{d\varepsilon} \right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ & - \int \limits_{{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon}{d\varepsilon} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \bigg\}\bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0}\\ \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ &=0 \label{eqn:PI_epsA} \end{align} Consider the first variation of $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$, recalling equation (\ref{eqn:F}): \begin{align} \frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon}{\partial \varepsilon} &\begin{aligned}[t] =& \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\right){\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1}\\ & - \left(\mathbbm{1} + \frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\right) {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}{\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ &= \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\right){\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}{\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} \nonumber \\ &= \left[ \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} + \left(\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon \right) \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \right] {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1} \label{eqn:F_epsA} \end{align} Now consider the first variation of $\det \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$, recalling equation (\ref{eqn:chi}): \begin{align} \frac{d \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} &= \frac{\partial \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}:\frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} \nonumber \\ &= \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-T}:\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \nonumber \\ &=\mathbbm{1}:\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} {\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}^{-1}\right)\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon \label{eqn:det_chi_epsA} \end{align} Substituting (\ref{eqn:F_epsA}) and (\ref{eqn:det_chi_epsA}) into (\ref{eqn:PI_epsA}) and using the relations $\partial \psi/\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ F$} = \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}$, $d\mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}^\varepsilon/d\varepsilon = \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and $d\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}^\varepsilon/d\varepsilon = \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$ gives \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0&= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0}\left[ \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \left[ \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1} + \left(\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$} \right) \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1} \right] + \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \right]\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} (\psi - \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}) \mathbbm{1}:\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right)\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} \,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ w$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\cdot\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}} \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} We group terms according to $\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$, $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and their gradients. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0&= \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$})\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\partial {\Omega}^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$} \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right): \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega_0}}\left( \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}} -\left(\frac{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\kappa$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \right)\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}\,\mathrm{d}V_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Note that $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}:= \psi\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}$ is the Eshelby stress tensor. We now convert the integrals back to the $\Omega$ domain. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}) \, \mathrm{d}V - \int \limits_{{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T}}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$} \, \mathrm{d}S\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right): \frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}}\left( \frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} -\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \right)\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\,\mathrm{d}V \end{aligned} \end{align} We now perform integration by parts, recognizing the potential jump terms at the interface of phases $\alpha$ and $\beta$. We use the operator $\nabla\cdot$ here to refer to the divergence with respect to $\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}$. Note that $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}$ is the unit normal to the boundary of the body, and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma$ is the normal to the interface. \begin{align} &\begin{aligned}[b] 0&= \int \limits_{{\Omega}} [\nabla\cdot (\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}) - \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot(\nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}+\mbox{\boldmath$ f$})] \,\mathrm{d}V - \int \limits_{{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T}}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ w$} \, \mathrm{d}S\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \nabla\cdot\left[\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}^T \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) \right] \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left[\nabla\cdot \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \right]\,\mathrm{d}V \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ &\phantom{0}\begin{aligned}[b] &= \int \limits_{{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T}}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}-\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}) \, \mathrm{d}S -\int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot(\nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}+\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}) \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} +\int \limits_{{\Gamma}} {\lbrack\!\lbrack}\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack}\,\mathrm{d}S + \int \limits_{{\Gamma}} {\lbrack\!\lbrack}\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma{\rbrack\!\rbrack} \,\mathrm{d}S\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T}}}\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left[\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right] \mbox{\boldmath$ N$} \,\mathrm{d}S \\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left[\nabla\cdot \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \right]\,\mathrm{d}V \end{aligned} \end{align} By allowing only continuous fields $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}$, we simplify further. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0&= \int \limits_{{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T}}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}-\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}) \, \mathrm{d}S -\int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot(\nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}+\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}) \,\mathrm{d}V\\ &\phantom{=} +\int \limits_{{\Gamma}} \mbox{\boldmath$ w$}\cdot{\lbrack\!\lbrack}\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack}\,\mathrm{d}S + \int \limits_{{\Gamma}}\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot{\lbrack\!\lbrack} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma{\rbrack\!\rbrack} \,\mathrm{d}S\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T}}}\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left[\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right] \mbox{\boldmath$ N$} \,\mathrm{d}S\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left[\nabla\cdot \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}\right)\mathbbm{1} + \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \right) -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \right]\,\mathrm{d}V \end{aligned} \end{align} The corresponding strong form for the sharp interface problem consists of the two following sets of equations. The second set of equations (\ref{eqn:confBCA} - \ref{eqn:confPDEA}) has been simplified under the assumption that the first set of equations (\ref{eqn:standBCA} - \ref{eqn:standPDEA}) is satisfied. \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$} &=0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T} \label{eqn:standBCA}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack} &= 0 \text{ on } \Gamma\\ \nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega \label{eqn:standPDEA}\\ \left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} + \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} &=0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T} \label{eqn:confBCA}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1}\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma {\rbrack\!\rbrack} &= 0 \text{ on } \Gamma\\ \nabla\cdot \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega \label{eqn:confPDEA} \end{align} \end{subequations} Consider the following simplification of equation (\ref{eqn:confPDEA}): \begin{align} 0 &= \nabla\cdot \left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - (\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ u$})\mathbbm{1}\right) - \mbox{\boldmath$ f$} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \nonumber \\ &= \nabla\cdot \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} - \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} - \left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\mathbbm{1}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} +\left(\frac{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\right)^T\mbox{\boldmath$ u$} \nonumber \\ &= \nabla\cdot \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} -\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$} \end{align} \section{First variation of constant interfacial energy} \label{sec:appc} The mean curvature-driven term in Equation (\ref{eqn:elastpluscurvdom}) and the additional boundary condition (\ref{eqn:elastpluscurvboun}) can be obtained by considering pure curvature-driven motion. We seek to minimize the interface energy \begin{align} \Pi^\Gamma &= \int_\Gamma \psi^\Gamma\,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} with respect to the interface $\Gamma$, where $\psi^\Gamma$ is a constant. To do so, we find $\Gamma$ such that the first variation of $\Pi$ is zero. We define the interface $\Gamma$ by the parameterization $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}(u,v)$, where $u$ and $v$ are defined over the domain $T$. We vary $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}(u,v)$ by $\varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ to allow variations of the interface location. To avoid integration over a varying surface, we perform a change of variables. We let $\Gamma^0$ be a surface defined by the parameterization $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v)$ where $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0$, $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}$, and $\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon$ are related as follows: \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}(u,v) &= \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v) + \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v))\\ \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon(u,v) &= \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v) + \mbox{\boldmath$ U$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v)) + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^0(u,v))\label{eqn:r_eps} \end{align} Then we can write \begin{align} \int_\Gamma \psi^\Gamma\,\mathrm{d}S &= \int_T \psi^\Gamma\left\|\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v}\right\|\,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v \end{align} The first variation is \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \left\{ \int_{\Gamma^\varepsilon} \psi^\Gamma\,\mathrm{d}S^\varepsilon \right\} \Big\|_{\varepsilon=0}\nonumber\\ &= \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \left\{ \int_T \psi^\Gamma\left\|\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,v}\right\|\,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v \right\} \Big\|_{\varepsilon=0}\nonumber\\ &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma \frac{\tfrac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,v}\right)\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} \cdot\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v}\right)} {\left\|\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v}\right\|}\,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\nonumber\\ &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma {\tfrac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \left(\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon_{,v}\right)\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma} \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v \label{eqn:genIntegral} \end{align} From equation (\ref{eqn:r_eps}), we have \begin{align} \tfrac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}^\varepsilon \big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \end{align} Substituting this result gives \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma {\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v} + \mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}_{,v}\right) \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma} \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\nonumber\\ &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma {\left[((\nabla\mbox{\boldmath$ W$})\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u})\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v} - ((\nabla\mbox{\boldmath$ W$})\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v})\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\right] \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma} \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v \end{align} Continuing in coordinate notation for clarity, this becomes \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma \partial_\ell(W_j) \left(r_{\ell,u}r_{k,v} - r_{\ell,v}r_{k,u}\right) \varepsilon_{ijk}N_i^\Gamma \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\nonumber\\ &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma \partial_\ell(W_j) \left(\delta_{\ell m}\delta_{kn} - \delta_{\ell n}\delta_{km}\right) r_{m,u}r_{n,v} \varepsilon_{ijk}N_i^\Gamma \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\nonumber\\ &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma \partial_\ell(W_j) \varepsilon_{p\ell k}\varepsilon_{pmn} r_{m,u}r_{n,v} \varepsilon_{ijk}N_i^\Gamma \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v \end{align} Note that \begin{align} \varepsilon_{pmn} r_{m,u}r_{n,v} &= (\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,u}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_{,v})_p\nonumber\\ &= N^\Gamma_p\|\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_u\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_v\| \end{align} Using this result lets us write the integral over $\Gamma$. \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \int_{T} \psi^\Gamma \partial_\ell(W_j) \varepsilon_{p\ell k} \varepsilon_{ijk}N_i^\Gamma N^\Gamma_p\|\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_u\times\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}_v\| \,\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}v\nonumber\\ &= \int_{\Gamma} \psi^\Gamma \partial_\ell(W_j) \varepsilon_{p\ell k} \varepsilon_{ijk}N_i^\Gamma N^\Gamma_p \,\mathrm{d}S\nonumber\\ &= \int_{\Gamma} \psi^\Gamma \left[ \partial_\ell( N_i^\Gamma W_j \varepsilon_{ijk}) - \partial_\ell(N_i^\Gamma ) W_j \varepsilon_{ijk} \right] \varepsilon_{p\ell k} N^\Gamma_p \,\mathrm{d}S\nonumber\\ &= \int_{\Gamma} \psi^\Gamma [ \partial_\ell( N_i^\Gamma W_j \varepsilon_{ijk}) \varepsilon_{p\ell k} N^\Gamma_p - \partial_\ell(N_i^\Gamma ) W_j (\delta_{ip}\delta_{j\ell} - \delta_{i\ell}\delta_{jp}) N^\Gamma_p] \,\mathrm{d}S\nonumber\\ &= \int_{\Gamma} \psi^\Gamma [ \partial_\ell( N_i^\Gamma W_j \varepsilon_{ijk}) \varepsilon_{p\ell k} N^\Gamma_p - \partial_j(N_i^\Gamma ) N^\Gamma_i W_j + \partial_i(N_i^\Gamma ) W_j N^\Gamma_j] \,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} The term $\partial_j(N_i^\Gamma )N^\Gamma_i$ reduces to zero since $N_i^\Gamma N_i^\Gamma = 1$. The result can be expressed in direct notation. \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \int_{\Gamma} \psi^\Gamma \left[ \nabla\times\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\right) + \left(\nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\right) \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \right]\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} We apply Stoke's theorem to the first term and use $\nabla\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma = -2H$ , where $H$ is the mean curvature. \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}\Pi^{\Gamma_\varepsilon}\big\|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \int_{\Gamma} -2\psi^\Gamma H \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right) \,\mathrm{d}S + \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}) \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \end{align} At equilibrium, the first variation of the total energy is zero, giving the following result. \begin{align} 0 &= \int_{\Gamma} -2\psi^\Gamma H \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right) \,\mathrm{d}S + \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}) \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \label{eqn:gamma_zero} \end{align} If we have a full Dirichlet condition on the boundary of $\Gamma$ then $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} = 0$ on $\partial\Gamma$ and the line integral is equal to zero. This gives the result \begin{align} 0 &= \int_{\Gamma} -2\psi^\Gamma H \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right) \,\mathrm{d}S \end{align} The other possible condition is to allow the boundary of the interface $\Gamma$ to move within the boundary $\partial \Omega$. This corresponds to $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} = \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} = 0$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}$ is the outward unit normal to $\partial\Omega$. We will designate a boundary with this condition as $\partial\Gamma_T$. On such boundaries, we can express $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ using the orthonormal basis $\{\mbox{\boldmath$ N$},\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma,\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\}$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma$ is the unit tangent vector to $\partial\Gamma$. Then we have \begin{align} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} &= W^T\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma + W^{N\times T}\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\right) \end{align} which satisfies the condition $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} = 0$. We substitute this expression into the line integral: \begin{align} \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}) \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} &= \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma\left[ \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times \left[ W^T\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma + W^{N\times T}\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\right) \right] \right] \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \end{align} Since $\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma$ and $\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}$ have the same orientation, $(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma)\cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} = 0$. We also use the identity $\mbox{\boldmath$ a$}\times(\mbox{\boldmath$ b$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ c$}) = \mbox{\boldmath$ b$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ a$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ c$}) - \mbox{\boldmath$ c$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ a$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ b$})$. \begin{align} \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\times\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}) \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} &= \oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma W^{N\times T}\left[ \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma) - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}) \right] \cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}\nonumber\\ &= -\oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma W^{N\times T} (\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}) \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \end{align} since $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma$ are orthogonal. Finally, we use $W^{N\times T} = \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\right)$ and substitute into equation (\ref{eqn:gamma_zero}) to get the complete condition for equilibrium with respect to interfacial energy. \begin{align} 0 &= \int_{\Gamma} -2\psi^\Gamma H \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma \right) \,\mathrm{d}S -\oint_{\partial \Gamma} \psi^\Gamma \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\right) (\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}) \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$} \end{align} Note that $\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma\cdot\mathrm{d}\mbox{\boldmath$ r$}$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^\Gamma$ are always nonzero, so we get the following strong form. \begin{subequations} \begin{align} -2\psi^\Gamma H &= 0 \text{ in } \Gamma \label{eqn:interfacedom}\\ \psi^\Gamma\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\Gamma\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$} &= 0 \text{ on } \partial\Gamma_T\label{eqn:interface} \end{align} \end{subequations} If the interfacial energy is nonzero, this requires zero mean curvature within the interface and that the interface is perpendicular to the boundary of the body where they meet. If the interfacial energy $\psi^\Gamma$ provides only one contribution to the driving force on $\Gamma$, as in Section \ref{sec:interfaceEnergy}, then the left hand-side of Equation (\ref{eqn:interfacedom}) is the corresponding contribution to Equation (\ref{eqn:elastpluscurvdom}), while (\ref{eqn:interface}) is the additional boundary condition (\ref{eqn:elastpluscurvboun}).\\ \pagebreak \section{Variational formulation for the diffuse interface problem} \label{sec:appb} Let $\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon := \mbox{\boldmath$ U$} + \varepsilon \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$ and $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon := \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}} + \varepsilon \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}$. Then, recalling equation \ref{eqn:diffuseGibbs}, equilibrium requires the following: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \Pi[\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon;\mbox{\boldmath$ U$}^\varepsilon] \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} &= \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon} \bigg\{ \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \psi^\mathrm{M}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^0,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon,\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon) \,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \psi^\mathrm{S}(\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon,\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon)\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon \,\mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ u$}}^\varepsilon \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \bigg\}\bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0}\\ &= 0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Then \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}: \frac{\mathrm{d} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{\mathrm{d} \varepsilon} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}\vdots \frac{\mathrm{d} \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{\mathrm{d} \varepsilon} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \right) \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\cdot\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}}:\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon}\bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \right) \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}:\frac{d \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon} \bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$} + \psi^\mathrm{S} \frac{d \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^\varepsilon}{d \varepsilon}\bigg \|_{\varepsilon=0} \right) \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot\bar{w} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} We apply the earlier results concerning the first variations of $\mbox{\boldmath$ F$}$ and $\det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$. We also define $\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} := \partial \psi^\mathrm{M}/\partial \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$ and $J_\chi := \det\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$. Then we have \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left( \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}: \nabla^0 \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}\vdots\nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \right) \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ & \phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \bigg( \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} + \mbox{\boldmath$ P$}: \left[\left( \nabla^0\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$} \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \right)\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1} \right] \bigg) J_\chi \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left[ \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}: \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} +\psi^\mathrm{S}\mathbbm{1}: \left(\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-1}\right)\right] J_\chi\, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} We group terms by $\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}$, $\mbox{\boldmath$ W$}$, and their gradients and use the Eshelby stress tensor, $\mathcal{E} := \psi^\mathrm{S}\mathbbm{1} - \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ P$}$. The resulting weak form is as follows: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}\vdots\nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} J_\chi\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial\mbox{\boldmath$ X$}}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} +\int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_\chi\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right]: \nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} J_\chi \left( \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right): \nabla^0\bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0\cdot \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Applying integration by parts gives the following result. \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}\vdots \nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} +\int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right] \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left(\nabla^0\cdot \left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\left( \boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right] - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \right) \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ & \phantom{=} + \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}\cdot \left( J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \right) \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}\cdot\left[\nabla^0\cdot \left(J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 \right] \, \mathrm{d}V_0 \end{aligned} \label{eqn:intbyparts} \end{align} Deriving the strong form from this weak form involves several additional terms due to the dependence on $\nabla^0 \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}$, as described in \citet{Rudrarajuetal2014}. We use the normal and surface gradient operators, $\nabla^n$ and $\nabla^s$, where \begin{align} \nabla^n \psi &= \nabla^0\psi\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\\ \nabla^s \psi &= \nabla^0 \psi - \left(\nabla^n\psi\right)\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \end{align} Also, $\mbox{\boldmath$ b$} = -\nabla^s \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 = \mbox{\boldmath$ b$}^T$ is the second fundamental form of the smooth parts of the boundary, $\partial\Omega_0$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^E = \mbox{\boldmath$\Xi$}\times\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0$, where $\mbox{\boldmath$\Xi$}$ is the unit tangent to the smooth curve $\mathcal{C}_0$ that forms an edge between subsets $\partial \Omega^+_0$ and $\partial \Omega^-_0$of the smooth boundary surfaces $\partial \Omega_0$. If $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^+}$ is the outward unit normal to $\mathcal{C}_0$ from $\partial \Omega^+_0$ and $\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^-}$ is the outward unit normal to $\mathcal{C}_0$ from $\partial \Omega^-_0$, then we define ${\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} := \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^+} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^{\mathcal{C}^-} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right)$. We can then write \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}\vdots \nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ W$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega_{0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ C$} \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{\mathcal{C}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C}\otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} \, \mathrm{d}L_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{\partial \Omega_{0}} \nabla^n \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} where, using coordinate notation for clarity, \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] C_I &= \nabla^nB_{I\gamma\zeta}N^0_\zeta N^0_\gamma +2\nabla^s_\gamma B_{I\gamma\zeta} N^0_\zeta\\ &\phantom{=} +B_{I\gamma\zeta}\nabla^s_\gamma N^0_\zeta - (b_{\xi\xi} N^0_\gamma N^0_\zeta - b_{\gamma\zeta})B_{I\gamma\zeta} \end{aligned} \end{align} Applying this result to equation \ref{eqn:intbyparts} gives the following: \begin{align} \begin{aligned}[b] 0 &= \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} \, \mathrm{d}V_0 + \int \limits_{\mathcal{C}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} \, dL_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath$ C$} \, \mathrm{d}S_0 + \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}} \nabla^n \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left(\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) \, \mathrm{d}S_0 \\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{\partial \Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot\left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right] \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \mbox{\boldmath$ W$}\cdot \left( \nabla^0\cdot\left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right] - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} \right) \, \mathrm{d}V_0\\ &\phantom{=} + \int \limits_{ \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}} \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}\cdot\left( J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 \right) \, \mathrm{d}S_0\\ &\phantom{=} - \int \limits_{{\Omega}_0} \bar{\mbox{\boldmath$ w$}}\cdot\left[ \nabla^0\cdot \left(J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 \right] \, \mathrm{d}V_0 \end{aligned} \end{align} Applying the appropriate integration by parts and standard variational arguments leads to the following strong form. \begin{subequations} \begin{align} J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 - \mbox{\boldmath$ T$}^0 &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}}\\ \nabla^0\cdot \left(J_{\chi} \mbox{\boldmath$ P$} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega_0 \label{eqn:Bstdpde}\\ {\lbrack\!\lbrack} \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^\mathcal{C} \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) {\rbrack\!\rbrack}^\mathcal{C} &= 0 \text{ on } \mathcal{C}^\mathrm{M}_{T_0}\\ \mbox{\boldmath$ B$}:\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 \otimes \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0\right) &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}\\ \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}}\mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}}\mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \mbox{\boldmath$ N$}^0 -\mbox{\boldmath$ C$} &= 0 \text{ on } \partial {\Omega^\mathrm{S}_{T_0}}\label{eqn:Bconfigtracbc}\\ \nabla^0\cdot \left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{E}} \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}^{-T} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) \right] - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$ X$}} - \nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} &= 0 \text{ in } \Omega_0\label{eqn:Bconfigpde} \end{align} \end{subequations} Consider the simplification of equation \ref{eqn:Bconfigpde}, using coordinate notation for clarity: \begin{align} 0 &= \left[\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} + J_{\chi}\left(\mathcal{E}_{IJ} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha J} + \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} \right) \right]_{,\alpha} - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial X_I} - B_{I\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} \nonumber \\ \phantom{0}& \begin{aligned}[b] &= \left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}}\right)_{,\alpha} + \left(J_{\chi}\psi^\mathrm{S} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)_{,\alpha} - \left(J_{\chi} F_{iI}P_{iJ}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha J}\right)_{,\alpha} + \left(J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} \right)_{,\alpha}\\ &\phantom{=} - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial X_I} - B_{I\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ \phantom{0}& \begin{aligned}[b] &= \left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}}\right)_{,\alpha} + J_{\chi}\left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial X^0_\alpha}+ \frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial F_{iJ}}F_{iJ,\alpha}\right) \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I} + \psi^\mathrm{S}\left(J_{\chi} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)_{,\alpha}\\ &\phantom{=} - F_{iI,\alpha}\left(J_{\chi} P_{iJ}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha J}\right) - F_{iI}\left(J_{\chi} P_{iJ}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha J}\right)_{,\alpha} + \left(J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} \right)_{,\alpha} - J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial X_I} - B_{I\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} \end{aligned} \nonumber \\ \phantom{0}& \begin{aligned}[b] &= \left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}}\right)_{,\alpha} + J_{\chi}P_{iJ}F_{iJ,I} + \psi^\mathrm{S}\left(J_{\chi} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)_{,\alpha}\\ &\phantom{=} - J_{\chi}F_{iI,J}P_{iJ} - F_{iI}\left(J_{\chi} P_{iJ}\chi^{-1}_{I\alpha}\right)_{,\alpha} + \left(J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} \right)_{,\alpha} - B_{I\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} \label{eqn:Bconfigpde_sim} \end{aligned} \end{align} Consider the term $\left(J_{\chi} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)_{,\alpha}$ and use the relation $\chi_{J\beta,\alpha} = \chi_{J\alpha,\beta}$ \begin{align} \left(J_{\chi} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)_{,\alpha} &= \frac{\partial \left(J_{\chi} \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}\right)}{\partial \chi_{J\beta}}\chi_{J\beta,\alpha} \nonumber \\ &= \left(\frac{\partial J_{\chi} }{\partial \chi_{J\beta}}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha I} + J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \chi^{-1}_{\alpha I}}{\partial \chi_{J\beta}}\right)\chi_{J\beta,\alpha} \nonumber \\ &= \left(J_\chi \chi^{-1}_{\beta J}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha I} - J_{\chi}\chi^{-1}_{\alpha J}\chi^{-1}_{\beta I}\right)\chi_{J\beta,\alpha} \nonumber\\ &= 0 \end{align} Substitute this result, the relation $F_{iI,J} = F_{iJ,I}$, and equation \ref{eqn:Bstdpde} into equation \ref{eqn:Bconfigpde_sim}. This gives \begin{align} \left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} + J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \chi_{I\alpha}} \right)_{,\alpha} + F_{iI}f^0_i - B_{I\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} &= 0 \end{align} or, in direct notation, \begin{align} \nabla^0\cdot \left(\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{M}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} + J_{\chi}\frac{\partial \psi^\mathrm{S}}{\partial \mbox{\boldmath$\chi$}} \right) + \mbox{\boldmath$ F$}^T\mbox{\boldmath$ f$}^0 - \nabla^0\nabla^0\mbox{\boldmath$ B$} &= 0 \end{align} \end{appendix} \section*{References} \bibliographystyle{abbrvnat}
\section{\label{sec:intro}Introduction} Progress in chiral effective field theory (EFT) for nuclear forces~\cite{Epel09RMP,Mach11PR} and advances in many-body theory~\cite{Soma14GGF2N3N,Bind14CCheavy,Holt14Ca,Lahd13LEFT,Hage14rev,Sign14BogCC,Dikm15NCSMSM,Herg16IMSRG} offers new paths to systematically improvable calculations of nuclear many-body systems~\cite{Hamm12RMP,Hebe15ARNPS}. In recent years infinite nuclear matter has been studied based on chiral EFT interactions within various frameworks like many-body perturbation theory (MBPT)~\cite{Hebe11fits,Cora14nmat,Well14nmtherm,Dris16asym}, in-medium chiral perturbation theory~\cite{Holt13PPNP}, self-consistent Green's function (SCGF) framework~\cite{Carb13nm}, coupled-cluster theory~\cite{Hage14ccnm}, the Brueckner-Hartree-Fock approach~\cite{Kohn13gmatchiral,Isau16pnmdin} and Quantum Monte Carlo methods~\cite{Geze13QMCchi,Wlaz14QMC,Rogg14QMC,Lynn15QMC3nf}. So far, the employed chiral EFT nucleon-nucleon (NN) and three-nucleon (3N) interactions in these calculations were all derived within Weinberg's power counting scheme~\cite{Epel09RMP,Mach11PR}. Here the leading 3N forces appear at next-to-next-to-leading order (N$^2$LO) and contain two unknown low-energy couplings, $c_D$ and $c_E$, which need to be determined by fits to few- or many-body observables. In contrast, subleading 3N forces at N$^3$LO do not contain any new low-energy couplings~\cite{Bern083Nlong,Bern113Nshort} and are thus completely predicted. Hence, including these contributions in calculations offers the possibility to probe systematically the validity of chiral power counting in nuclear systems and to provide estimates of theoretical uncertainties. Full N$^3$LO calculations of neutron matter were first performed in Refs.~\cite{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong}. These works showed that 3N forces at N$^3$LO provide surprisingly large contributions to the equation of state especially in symmetric matter. Similar results were found for few-body systems in Ref.~\cite{Hebe15N3LOpw}. These findings raise fundamental questions concerning the convergence of the chiral expansion for 3N forces within the employed regularization and power counting scheme. Generally, the treatment and inclusion of 3N forces is still a challenge in many-body calculations. In particular, due to the complexity and rich analytical structure of 3N forces at N$^3$LO~\cite{Bern083Nlong,Bern113Nshort} so far it was possible to include effects from 3N interactions only at the Hartree-Fock level in Refs.~\cite{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong}. While this approximation is expected to be reliable for neutron matter, higher-order terms in the many-body expansion are expected to become significant as soon as the proton fraction becomes sufficiently large. In the present paper we address this issue by making use of two recent advances: a) the development of a novel framework that makes it possible to compute matrix elements of 3N interactions in a partial-wave momentum basis~\cite{Hebe15N3LOpw} and the availability of matrix elements up to N$^3$LO and large model spaces, and b) the development of a novel normal-ordering framework based on partial-wave matrix elements~\cite{Dris16asym} that allows to systematically include these 3N interactions in calculations of nuclear matter for arbitray isospin asymmetry. By combining these two advances it is now possible to include general 3N forces that are available in form of plane-wave partial-wave matrix elements and to treat 3N forces on the same footing as NN forces in the many-body expansion. Furthermore, these developments play an important role in view of future calculations that will employ simultaneous evolution of NN and 3N interactions in a momentum basis via similarity renormalization group techniques~\cite{Hebe12msSRG,Hebe2013nmsrg}. In this paper we will exploit and combine these new capabilities and perform improved calculations of neutron matter up to N$^3$LO in MBPT and SCGF. We benchmark results of these two complementary many-body framework against each other and present a generalization of the normal-ordering framework to finite temperatures. The extension of the present N$^3$LO calculations to arbitrary proton fractions is in principle straightforward but requires reliable fit values for the low-energy couplings $c_D$ and $c_E$ at this order~\cite{Skibi113HN3LO3N, Gola14n3lo}. This is work in progress. In neutron matter these short-range and mid-range topologies do not contribute within the employed regularization scheme. The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:calc_details} we specify the set of employed chiral EFT Hamiltonians and describe the novel normal-ordering framework that allows to include general 3N interactions in calculations of nuclear matter. In addition we briefly discuss the many-body frameworks we used for our calculations. In Sec.~\ref{sec:results} we present our results based on three different sets of Hamiltonians, with a special focus on the effects of 3N forces beyond the Hartree-Fock approximation. Furthermore, we analyze the many-body convergence in MBPT by comparing with SCGF results. Finally we present a generalization of our normal-ordering framework to finite temperatures and benchmark results for the energy against exact Hartree-Fock results. In Sec.~\ref{sec:outlook} we conclude with a summary and an outlook. \section{\label{sec:calc_details}Calculational details} \subsection{\label{subsec:chiral_ham}Chiral EFT Hamiltonians} We consider unevolved NN and 3N forces up to N$^3$LO and calculate the energy per particle of infinite neutron matter in the frameworks of MBPT and SCGF. The Hamiltonian takes the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:ham} H = T + V_\text{NN} + V_\text{3N} + \ldots \,, \end{equation} where $T$, $V_\text{NN}$ and $V_\text{3N}$ denote the kinetic energy, the NN and 3N intercations, respectively. So far, in most calculations of nuclear matter NN and 3N forces were not included consistently up to the same order in the chiral expansion due to the complex structure of 3N forces at N$^3$LO~\cite{Bern083Nlong,Bern113Nshort}. Only recently an efficient partial-wave decomposition of these contributions was developed in Ref.~\cite{Hebe15N3LOpw}. In Refs.~\citep{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong} the N$^3$LO 3N contributions were evaluated exactly for neutron matter and symmetric nuclear matter in Hartree-Fock approximation. It was somewhat unexpected that the subleading 3N forces provide significant contributions to the energy. The findings suggest that it is mandatory to investigate these contributions more systematically by including higher-order effects in the many-body expansion. We note that, considering only NN and 3N forces at N$^3$LO in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ham}) is still not fully consistent in the chiral expansion. In fact, four-nucleon (4N) forces also contribute at this order. However, Ref.~\citep{Kais124N,Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong} demonstrated that the 4N contributions to the energy in neutron matter in the Hartree-Fock approximation are very small compared to the overall uncertainty, \mbox{$E_\text{4N}/N \sim -180$~keV} at saturation density. Therefore, 4N contributions only lead to a small shift for all Hamiltonians and do not affect the relative comparison of MBPT and SCGF. Consequently, if not stated otherwise, we neglect 4N (and higher-body) contributions in Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq:ham} and focus on the improvement of subleading 3N forces. Normal-ordering with respect to a reference state is a well-known method to include 3N contributions in terms of density-dependent effective NN forces, which can then be directly included in NN frameworks. Usually, the remaining residual 3N Hamiltonian leads to small contributions in pure neutron matter and is thus neglected (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Hage14ccnm}). Following Refs.~\cite{Hebe10nmatt,Holt10ddnn} we obtain the effective NN interaction $\overline{V}_\text{3N}^\text{as}$ by summing one particle over the occupied states of the reference state, i.e., \begin{equation} \label{eq:Veff_formal} \overline{V}_\text{3N}^\text{as} = \text{Tr}_{\sigma_3} \int \frac{d\vec{k}_3}{(2\pi)^3} \mathcal{A}_{123} V_\text{3N} \, n_{\vec{k}_3} \bigg\|_{\text{nnn}} \, , \end{equation} with the momentum-distribution function $n_\vec{k}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{123}$ is the antisymmetrizer. At zero temperature it is common to approximate the distribution function by the free Fermi gas function $n_\vec{k} = \Theta \left( k_{\rm F} - \|\vec{k}\| \right)$, with Fermi momentum $k_{\rm F}$. It was demonstrated that the inclusion of correlations in the reference state leads to small effects in observables~\cite{Carb14SCGFdd}. In this article, we also discuss the extension of the normal-ordering framework to finite temperatures. The 3N interactions $V_\text{3N}$ are regularized using non-local regulators of the form $f_\text{R}(p,q)=\exp [-((p^2+ 3 q^2/4)/ \Lambda_{\text{3N}}^2)^{4}]$ with respect to the Jacobi momenta $p,q$. In the literature, Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal} has been first evaluated directly based on the operatorial form of the 3N forces at N$^2$LO~\cite{Holt10ddnn,Hebe10nmatt, Hebe11fits}. Since this procedure becomes rather involved for subleading 3N forces, so far only leading 3N interactions could be considered in this approach. One way to solve this is to make use of the recently developed partial-wave decomposition of the 3N interactions~\cite{Hebe15N3LOpw} and evaluate Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal} in a partial-wave momentum basis of the form \begin{equation} \Ket{pq\alpha} \equiv \Ket{pq; \left[(LS)J \left(l\frac{1}{2}\right)j \right] \mathcal{J} \left(T\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathcal{T}}\, . \end{equation} The quantum numbers $L$, $S$, $J$, and $T=1$ (for neutron matter) denote the relative orbital angular momentum, spin, total angular momentum, and isospin of particles $1$ and $2$ with relative momentum $p$. The quantum numbers $l$ and $j$, respectively, are the orbital angular momentum and total angular momentum of particle $3$ relative to the center of mass of the pair with relative momentum $p$. The quantum numbers $\mathcal{J}$ and $\mathcal{T}=3/2$ define the total 3N angular momentum and isospin. The 3N matrix elements are provided by Ref.~\citep{Hebe15N3LOpw} with total three- and two-body quantum numbers $\mathcal{J} \leq 9/2$ and $J \leq 6$, respectively. The size of this model space is sufficient to ensure convergence for calculations of nuclear matter in the Hartree-Fock approximation~\cite{Hebe15N3LOpw,Dris16asym} (see also Sec.~\ref{subsec:NO_finT}). The resulting effective NN interaction is then added to the NN interactions: \begin{equation} V_\text{NN+3N}^{\text{as}} = V_\text{NN}^{\text{as}} + \zeta \overline{V}_\text{3N}^{\text{as}} \, . \end{equation} We refer to Ref.~\citep{Hebe10nmatt,Carb14SCGFdd,Dris16asym} for detailed discussions on the combinatorial normal-ordering factor $\zeta$. We also note that the summation in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal} results in a dependence of $\overline{V}_\text{3N}^\text{as}$ on the total momentum $\vec{P}$ of the two particles, which is not the case for free-space NN forces due to Galilean invariance. This additional momentum makes the effective NN potential \eqref{eq:Veff_formal} computationally involved. Commonly, the approximation $\vec{P}=0$ is applied, e.g., in Ref.~\cite{Holt10ddnn,Hebe10nmatt,Carb13nm}. In Ref.~\cite{Dris16asym}, an additional approximation that averages over all directions of $\vec{P}$ opposed to $\vec{P}=0$ is studied. It is shown that the resulting 3N Hartree-Fock energies are in reasonable agreement in particular below saturation density. Since the dependence on $\vec{P}$ is currently not implemented in the SCGF code and since we focus on the benchmark of MBPT to this nonperturbative method we focus here on the $\vec{P}=0$ approximation for $\overline{V}_\text{3N}^{\text{as}}$. Finally, we note that once reasonable fit values for $c_D$ and $c_E$ are available at N$^3$LO, the described methods can be directly applied beyond neutron matter. \subsection{\label{subsec:many_body_app}Many-body frameworks} \begin{figure}[t] \includegraphics[page=1,scale=0.95,clip]{N3LO_PNM_panel.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:EOS}(Color online) The energy per particle in neutron matter for three different N$^3$LO NN potentials with N$^2$LO (top) and N$^3$LO (bottom) 3N forces, respectively. The uncertainty bands are due to the given $c_i$ and 3N cutoff variation. For the MBPT results, we consider in addition the maximum range of third-order calculations with a free and a Hartree-Fock spectrum (dark-blue band) plus the change from a second-order calculation with a Hartree-Fock spectrum, which is indicated by the light-blue extension of the pure third-order uncertainty band. The two bands together define the total uncertainty estimate of MBPT. The region between the two red-dashed lines denotes the uncertainty band of the SCGF method, which we do not fill for a better view. In each panel the energy range at saturation density obtained in MBPT is given.} \end{figure} We calculate the energy per neutron at zero temperature up to third order in MBPT. The following notation is used to distinguish interaction energies and total energies at a given order in perturbation theory: \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \frac{E^{ \text{(HF)} }}{N} &= \frac{T}{N} +\frac{E^{(1)}}{N} \, ,\\ \frac{E_{\text{tot}}^{(2)}}{N} &= \frac{E^{(\text{HF})}}{N} +\frac{E^{(2)}}{N}\, ,\\ \frac{E_{\text{tot}}^{(3)}}{N} &= \frac{E_{\text{tot}}^{(2)}}{N} +\frac{E^{(3)}}{N} \, . \end{align} \end{subequations} Particle-hole contributions are neglected at third-order similarly to Refs.~\citep{Hebe10PRL,Krue13N3LOlong,Dris16asym}. In order to estimate the uncertainties due to neglected higher-order contributions we perform calculations with a free and a Hartree-Fock single-particle spectrum. We refer to Ref.~\citep{Hebe10nmatt,Dris16asym} for details of the calculation. We assess the many-body convergence order-by-order by comparing to SCGF. In the SCGF method, the energy per neutron is calculated nonperturbatively via knowledge of a dressed one-body Green's function~\cite{Dick04PPNP}. The energy is obtained in the so-called ladder approximation, where an infinite sum of particle-particle and hole-hole diagrams is performed~\cite{Rios08hotscgf,Soma093ntherm}. Similar to the MBPT calculations, particle-hole contributions are neglected. The SCGF approach has been recently extended to self-consistently include 3N forces~\cite{Carb13SCGF3B}. In this extension, the ladder resummation and the self-energy are redefined incorporating normal-ordered 3N terms with respect to a dressed reference state. Residual 3N contributions are also neglected in this approach. In this extended approach, the modified sum rule to obtain the total energy per particle in neutron matter reads~\cite{Carb13SCGF3B}: \begin{equation} \label{eq:gmk} \frac{E}{N}= \frac{2}{n}\int\frac{{\rm d}{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}\int\frac{{\rm d}\omega}{2\pi}\frac{1}{2}\left\{\frac{k^2}{2m}+\omega\right\}A(k,\omega)f(\omega) - \frac{\langle W\rangle}{2} \,, \end{equation} where $n$ the total density of the system and $f(\omega)$ corresponds to the Fermi-Dirac distribution function. $A(k,\omega)$ is the spectral function; this quantity gives the probability of adding or removing a particle with momentum $k$ which causes an excitation in energy ${\rm d}\omega$ in the many-body system. $\langle W\rangle$ is the expectation value of the 3N operator (see Ref.~\cite{Carb14SCGFdd} for details). Throughout the paper we will refer to Eq.~\eqref{eq:gmk} as $E_{\rm SCGF}/N$. The present implementation of SCGF is not capable of treating the appearance of pairing below a critical temperature, for this reason calculations are always performed at finite $T$. The pairing instability does not affect the MBPT calculations because the energy diagrams are evaluated directly, for which the pairing singularity is integrable. The zero-temperature results in SCGF are extrapolated using the Sommerfeld expansion~\cite{Rios08hotscgf}. In this expansion, the energy can be written as a quadratic expansion in terms of $T/\varepsilon_{\rm F}$, where $\varepsilon_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi energy, as long as $T/\varepsilon_{\rm F}\ll 1$. A more sophisticated computational method to numerically extrapolate self-energies, spectral functions and thermodynamical properties from finite to zero temperature has been recently presented in Ref.~\cite{Ding16scgfpair}. In order to extend the effective NN interaction $\overline{V}_\text{3N}^\text{as}$ to finite temperatures, we extend the framework presented in Ref.~\cite{Dris16asym} and evaluate Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal} at finite temperature using the general Fermi-Dirac distribution function, $n_\vec{k} = \left[ \exp( \beta(\varepsilon_\vec{k}-\mu) ) + 1 \right]^{-1}$. Given a total density $n$, we compute the chemical potential $\mu(n)$ by solving the non-linear density relation \begin{equation} n = \frac{1}{\pi^2} \int \limits_0^\infty dk \, k^2 n_\vec{k}(\mu) \, . \end{equation} We consider here the free single-particle energy, i.e., \mbox{$\varepsilon_\vec{k} = \vec{k}^2/(2m)$}. Higher-order corrections to the self energy include contributions from the effective NN potential itself and would require thus an involved self-consistent solution for the spectrum. It has been shown in Ref.~\cite{Carb14SCGFdd} that the energy per particle in pure neutron matter shows only at higher densities a dependence on the momentum distribution used in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal}. Such high densities are not considered in this work, but it will be important to check this approximation at high temperatures. \section{\label{sec:results}Results} \subsection{Comparison of MBPT and SCGF} \begin{figure}[t] \includegraphics[page=1,scale=0.95,clip]{MBConv.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:MBConv}(Color online) The energy per particle at different orders of MBPT is shown, up to Hartree-Fock ($E_{\text{tot}}^{\text{HF}}/N$), second order ($E_{\text{tot}}^{(2)}/N$) and third order ($E_{\text{tot}}^{(3)}/N$), respectively, in comparison to the energies obtained from the SCGF method ($E_{\rm SCGF}/N$) at $n_0$ (first row) and $n_0/2$ (second row), respectively. The N$^3$LO NN potentials are given in each panel. Three-body effects are included at N$^2$LO (blue) and at N$^3$LO (red), respectively. The dashed lines connecting the data points are in order to guide the eyes. The error bars are due to the $c_i$ and $\Lambda_\text{3N}$ variations. In this plot, the third-order calculation does not include the additional many-body uncertainty (the light-blue band in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}).} \end{figure} We show in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS} the energy per particle as a function of density in neutron matter at zero temperature. From left to right, the first row shows the results for the N$^3$LO NN potentials EM~500~MeV~\cite{Ente03EMN3LO}, EGM~450/500~MeV and EGM~450/700~MeV~\cite{Epel05EGMN3LO} with leading N$^2$LO 3N forces. The momentum scales attached to the potentials correspond to different regulator cutoffs: first, the cutoff in the Lippmann-Schwinger equation and second, if not dimensionally regularized, the cutoff in the two-pion-exchange spectral-function regularization. Analogously, the second row shows the results for the same NN potentials but including 3N forces up to N$^3$LO. We consider two sources of uncertainties: from the chiral Hamiltonian and from considering only a finite order in MBPT. As stated in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}, the theoretical uncertainties due to the Hamiltonian are estimated by parameter variation in the 3N forces, i.e., the cutoff $\Lambda_\text{3N}$ and the low-energy constants $c_1$ and $c_3$. The $c_i$ values need to be refit at each chiral order, however, to investigate the net effect of N$^3$LO forces, we take here solely the $c_i$-range recommended for N$^3$LO calculations~\cite{Kreb123Nlong}. In addition to the uncertainties in the Hamiltonian, we estimate the neglected higher-order contributions in the many-body expansion by varying the single-particle energies at third order using a free and a Hartree-Fock spectrum. These bands are colored in dark blue in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}. Moreover, following Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong} we include the results at second order in MBPT using a Hartree-Fock spectrum to the uncertainty estimate. This extension of the pure third-order equation of state is indicated by light-blue bands. In summary, for a given Hamiltonian we perform in total three calculations in MBPT: two third-order calculations using the two single-particle spectra and a second-order calculation using a Hartree-Fock spectrum. Light- and dark-blue bands together characterize the total uncertainty estimate of MBPT in each panel. The actual energy range of MBPT is given in each panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS} at saturation density $n_0$ (dashed vertical line), with \mbox{$n_0=0.16$~fm$^{-3}$}. Let us focus on the results with leading 3N forces, as shown in the first row of Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}. The qualitative description does not change for the calculations with subleading 3N forces (second row in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}). Whereas the results for the two EGM potentials are almost independent of the many-body details, the effects of the variation of spectra and many-body order in MBPT are much more pronounced for EM~500~MeV: at saturation density the many-body uncertainties provide contributions of about $\sim -2.5$~MeV for this Hamiltonian (see light-blue band in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}). Including subleading 3N forces leads basically only to an overall shift of the bands as shown by the given energy range at saturation density. More specifically, the net 3N contribution leads to more attraction for the EGM potentials while the effect on EM~500~MeV is slightly repulsive. To quantify the many-body convergence in more detail we compare to the results obtained in the SCGF method which are given by the region between the red-dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}. The results in SCGF are considered to be converged in the many-body expansion (at the ladder level) and thus include only the uncertainty due to the Hamiltonian (including variations of the low-energy constants $c_1, c_3$). We focus again on the different NN potentials rather than on discussing the effect of subleading 3N forces. Considering the total uncertainty estimate of MBPT we find for the potentials EM~500~MeV and EGM~450/700~MeV completely overlapping bands and similar trends in density. In the case of EM~500~MeV the extended uncertainty (light-blue band) is however needed to obtain more attraction and consequently fully overlapping bands, whereas for EGM~450/700~MeV the pure third-order energy is already in remarkable agreement. In addition to the above discussion on the size of the light-blue bands this suggests that contributions beyond third-order are small for EGM~450/700~MeV and become significant for EM~500~MeV. For EGM~450/500~MeV we observe a slightly different density dependence between the MBPT and the SCGF curves, leading to an almost total overlap at saturation density but less agreement in the region around $n \sim 0.1$~fm$^{-3}$. Here, the equation of state in SCGF is slightly more repulsive. We recall that the SCGF results are extrapolated down to zero temperature from calculations performed at $T=2$~MeV for $n \leqslant 0.05$~fm$^{-3}$ and at $T=5$~MeV for densities above. We have tested whether this discrepancy is related to the extrapolation to zero-temperature lowering the temperature down to $T=3,4$~MeV in densities between 0.05 and 0.10~fm$^{-3}$, and have found no dependency on the extrapolation. Combining the discussions on the size of the additional many-body uncertainty and the comparison of MBPT vs. SCGF we conclude from Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS} that the perturbativeness improves from EM~500~MeV to EGM~450/500~MeV to EGM~450/700~MeV. It is remarkable that a third-order MBPT calculation compares so well with the nonperturbative case for these chiral NN potentials. We study the many-body convergence as well as the effect of subleading 3N forces in more details in the next section. \subsection{Many-body convergence} In Fig.~\ref{fig:MBConv} we address again the many-body convergence and show order-by-order in MBPT the total energy per neutron at $n_0$ (first row) and $n_0/2$ (second row), analogously to Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}. More specifically, we show the total energy in Hartree-Fock approximation $E_\text{tot}^{\text{(HF)}}/N$ (``HF"), second order (``2nd") and third order (``3rd"), $E_\text{tot}^{(2)}/N$ and $E_\text{tot}^{(3)}/N$ respectively, in comparison to the results obtained in the SCGF method, $E_{\rm SCGF}/N$ (``SCGF"). The uncertainties are obtained as in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS} through variations of the 3N parameters and the single-particle energies. However, to study the many-body convergence the third-order bands do not include here the additional many-body uncertainty (the light-blue bands of Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}). The blue (red) data points correspond to N$^2$LO (N$^3$LO) 3N forces. For all six panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:MBConv} we observe similar overall patterns: comparing order-by-order to the SCGF method we observe that the second order adds always too much attraction which then is compensated by the third-order repulsion. However, the specific behavior is different for EM~500~MeV and the two EGM potentials. In the case of EM~500~MeV the large third order overcompensates the second-order repulsion. In contrast, the third-order contribution is much smaller and less repulsive for the EGM potentials as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:MBConv} (second and third column). In particular, this is pronounced in the calculations based on EGM~450/700~MeV, which agree remarkably well with the SCGF result. As already discussed in the description of Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}, including N$^3$LO 3N forces has only a small repulsive effect on the energies based on EM~500~MeV, whereas the effect on the EGM potentials is larger but attractive. This behavior can be traced back to NN-3N mixing terms that enter the calculation when including 3N forces beyond the HF level. We also note that the values of the low-energy constants $C_S$ and $C_T$, which enter N$^3$LO 3N contributions, differ for all three potentials. However, the many-body convergence is not altered by including contributions from subleading 3N interactions. \subsection{Comparison to previous calculations at N$^3$LO} \begin{figure}[t] \includegraphics[page=1,scale=0.95,clip]{Full_N3LO_ver2.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:fullN3LO}(Color online) The energy per particle of neutron matter at N$^3$LO for the three different NN potentials (this work: blue bands) in comparison to Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong} (Kr\"uger et al. (2013): black lines). The second row combines the results of the first row. In each panel, we give the energy range at saturation density obtained within the improved calculations presented in this work. See text for details.} \end{figure} The authors of Refs.~\cite{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong} performed the first consistent calculations at N$^3$LO including NN, 3N and 4N forces in MBPT. In the cited works N$^3$LO NN and N$^2$LO 3N forces have been considered up to third order in MBPT in terms of effective NN potentials~\cite{Hebe10nmatt}, whereas subleading 3N interactions could only be included in the Hartree-Fock approximation since no 3NF partial-wave matrix elements were available at that time. Thanks to the advances discussed in this paper we are now in the position to revisit and systematically improve these calculations. In Fig.~\ref{fig:fullN3LO} we show our improved results for the energy of neutron matter (blue bands) for the three Hamiltonians EM~500~MeV, EGM~450/500~MeV and EGM~450/700~MeV (first row) and the total band merged from the previous panels (second row). The uncertainty bands cover again variations of the 3N parameters (as given in the figure), the single-particle spectrum and the additional many-body uncertainty (see also discussion of Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}). We furthermore include the 4N Hartree-Fock results, as given in Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong}, and vary the 4N cutoff analogously to the 3N forces. In addition, we show the results of Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong}\footnote{For completeness, we have corrected a small error in the routines of Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong} for the computation of the second- and third- order contribution of the N$^3$LO NN plus N$^2$LO 3N forces as well as the N$^3$LO 3N Hartree-Fock energy corresponding to the ring topology. Moreover, we are using the typo-corrected values for $\bar{\beta}_{8,9}$ (see Ref.~\cite{Epel15improved} for details).} depicted by the black solid lines. For a better view we do not fill this region. We give in each panel the energy range at saturation density obtained within the improved calculations presented in this work. We observe that the effect of adding the N$^3$LO 3N contributions beyond Hartree-Fock varies significantly between the EM~500~MeV and the two EGM potentials. For EM~500~MeV these contributions leave the uncertainty band almost unaffected. For the two EGM potentials the upper uncertainty limits remains the same while the lower increase by $\sim1$~MeV ($\sim0.2$~MeV) for EGM~450/500~MeV (EGM~450/700~MeV), hence decreasing the width of the uncertainty band. These findings are consistent with the observations in Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong}, which stated that the N$^3$LO 3N Hartree-Fock energy is smaller for EM~500~MeV while it is much larger for the two EGM potentials (see Fig.~6 of Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong}). We emphasize, however, that NN and effective NN forces get mixed at second-order and beyond, and therefore the net effect of these subleading 3N contributions cannot be easily disentangled in the many-body calculation. Combining all bands we find a total uncertainty of $\frac{E}{N} (n_0) = (14.7 - 21.1)~\text{MeV}$ in neutron matter at saturation density. Compared to the corrected total band of Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong} $\frac{E}{N} (n_0) = (14.3 - 21.1)~\text{MeV}$, we obtain a slight reduction of the lower limit of the uncertainty band. As suggested in Refs.~\cite{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong}, these effects are indeed rather small. However, we expect the effects to be much more important as soon as the proton fraction is finite (see also discussion of symmetric nuclear matter in Ref.~\cite{Krue13N3LOlong}). \subsection{\label{subsec:NO_finT}Normal-ordering at finite temperatures} \begin{figure}[t] \includegraphics[page=1,scale=1.1,clip]{finiteT_HF.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:finiteT_HF}(Color online) Comparison of the leading 3N Hartree-Fock energies at saturation density for several temperatures obtained using the effective NN potential in terms of 3N operators (blue) and the partial-wave approach (red). We include 3N matrix elements up to $\mathcal{J} \leqslant 9/2$ and $J \leqslant 6$. For the uncertainty estimate we use the same parameter variation in the 3N forces as in Fig.~\ref{fig:EOS}.} \end{figure} We have extended the recently-developed framework for computing effective NN potentials in a partial-wave basis~\cite{Dris16asym} to finite temperatures. Besides being a necessary step in order to include these matrix elements in the SCGF method (due to the extrapolation from finite temperatures), this is also a crucial step for future MBPT calculations of nuclear matter at finite temperatures. In Fig.~\ref{fig:finiteT_HF} we show the resulting N$^2$LO 3N Hartree-Fock energies $E^{(1)}/N(n_0,T)$ at six different temperatures in the range of $T=(0-50)$~MeV. We benchmark our new values (red) against previous results (blue) obtained via an operatorial approach~\cite{Carb14SCGFdd}. The uncertainty bands are obtained through 3N parameter variation analogously to Figs.~\ref{fig:EOS} and~\ref{fig:MBConv}. The single-particle spectrum does not contribute to the uncertainties since the Fermi-Dirac distribution in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Veff_formal} is computed using a free spectrum. A similar benchmark at N$^3$LO is not possible since no matrix elements are currently available based on the operatorial evaluation of 3N forces at N$^3$LO. We note that the 3N interaction energy decreases with temperature as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:finiteT_HF}. Including also kinetic energy contributions would lead to a total increase in energy with increasing temperature. From Fig.~\ref{fig:finiteT_HF} we can conclude that the two different methods for the normal-ordering agree very well at zero and finite temperature up to $T=50$ MeV. \begin{figure}[t] \includegraphics[page=1,scale=1.1,clip]{ME_ddNN_panel.pdf} \caption{\label{fig:Veff_T}(Color online) Momentum-space diagonal matrix elements of the density-dependent effective NN potentials at N$^2$LO for a selection of four partial-wave channels and two temperatures.} \end{figure} In addition to the 3N Hartree-Fock energies, we also benchmark the underlying interaction matrix elements of the effective potential $\overline{V}_\text{3N}^\text{as}$. The results for a selection of four partial-wave channels and two temperatures are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Veff_T}. These matrix elements contribute to the energy presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:finiteT_HF}. The ones obtained in the partial-wave (operatorial) approach are plotted as dashed (solid) lines. We select a representative set of channels, ${}^1\text{S}_0$, ${}^3\text{P}_0$, ${}^3\text{P}_1$, and ${}^3\text{P}_2$, and temperatures $T=10,50$~MeV. We have also compared higher partial waves up to $J=6$ and momentum off-diagonal matrix elements for $\Lambda_\text{3N}=(2.0-2.5)$~fm${}^{-1}$. As in Ref.~\cite{Dris16asym}, we find indications of an incomplete partial-wave convergence only for partial-waves channels with $J>4$, We also checked that the agreement can be systematically improved by increasing the 3N model space, i.e. by including channels with $\mathcal J =11/2$ and $13/2$. We found that contributions from these higher partial-wave channels provide $\lesssim 50$~keV to the energy of neutron matter per particle at saturation density. Overall, we find excellent agreement of the two methods at the level of matrix elements and at finite-temperatures. This shows that the computed matrix elements of the effective interactions at finite temperature at N$^2$LO and N$^3$LO are correct and numerically stable and are hence suitable for future calculations of nuclear matter for astrophysical applications~\cite{Hebe13ApJ}. \section{\label{sec:outlook}Summary and Outlook} In this work we have calculated the zero-temperature equation of state of neutron matter in the framework of MBPT and SCGF based on chiral NN and 3N forces up to N$^3$LO. In addition, we included contributions from 4N interactions at N$^3$LO in the Hartree-Fock approximation. For the inclusion of 3N interactions we have utilized our generalized normal-ordering framework first presented in Ref.~\cite{Dris16asym}. We demonstrated that this framework is able to treat general 3N interactions that are provided in a partial-wave representation and can be extended to finite temperatures. We have systematically improved previous calculations of neutron matter in MBPT at N$^3$LO~\citep{Tews13N3LO,Krue13N3LOlong} by including subleading 3N contributions beyond the Hartree-Fock approximation. Specifically, we have obtained the neutron-matter energy based on three different NN plus 3N interactions derived within chiral EFT, comparing calculations including only leading to up-to-subleading 3N forces. For the N$^3$LO NN potentials EGM~450/500~MeV and EGM~450/700~MeV we found additional attractive subleading 3N contributions of about $\sim$2~MeV for the energy per particle at saturation density, while for the EM~500~MeV potential these contributions are smaller in size and repulsive, of the order of $\sim$500~keV. In order to assess the many-body convergence we have benchmarked our MBPT results for three commonly-used N$^3$LO NN potentials plus leading and also subleading 3N forces against results obtained within the SCGF framework. Since the current implementation of SCGF does not account for Cooper pairing, the zero-temperature limit was obtained by extrapolation. We found a systematic convergence of the MBPT results to the SCGF results at third order in MBPT, whereas the detailed convergence pattern depends on details of the NN and 3N interactions. Finally, we have successfully benchmarked results for the effective NN potential at finite temperature. At order N$^2$LO in the chiral expansion we obtain excellent agreement between results obtained using our novel normal- ordering framework and previous results for 3N Hartree-Fock energy contributions as well as on the level of partial-wave matrix elements. These benchmarks demonstrate that we are now in the position to perform calculations of general isospin-asymmetric matter including all NN and 3N contributions up to N$^3$LO at zero and finite temperatures. Since all 3N topologies contribute for these systems, reliable fits of the 3N low-energy constants $c_D$ and $c_E$ are required. This is currently work in progress. The availability of different sets of Hamiltonians using different regulator choices (see also Refs.~\cite{Tews15QMCPNM,Dyhd16Regs}) and different fitting strategies (see, e.g., Refs.~\cite{Ekst15sat,Carl16sim}) will make it possible to probe systematically the order-by-order convergence in the chiral expansion. In turn, this will advance our understanding of the dense matter equation of state. \begin{acknowledgments} We thank T. Kr{\"u}ger, A. Rios, A. Polls and I. Tews for useful discussions. This work was supported by the ERC Grant No.~307986 STRONGINT, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through Grant SFB 1245. A.C. acknowledges support by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through a Humboldt Research Fellowship for Postdoctoral Researchers. \end{acknowledgments} \bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\section{Introduction} The technique proposed here is motivated by plasma physics examples where particles travel much more easily along magnetic field lines than in the perpendicular direction, so that in quantities like fluid moments elongated structures are formed, aligned with the field lines. In particular, the technique is designed to solve problems in magnetic confinement fusion (MCF), where the field lines wind around a central axis and may be closed, trace out surfaces, or fill ergodic regions. An additional difficulty in MCF problems is that the anisotropic structures are strongly curved, because field lines are not straight (even in cylindrical coordinates) over the length scale of the structures; the departure from straightness is often considerably larger than the wavelength of the structure in the directions of rapid variation. This paper outlines a method for representing functions aligned along field lines which are not necessarily aligned on nested surfaces or closed (such as plasmas with an X-point), and for solving equations relating these functions. A variety of techniques to deal with representing these highly anisotropic functions exist. The canonical technique is to define a 3D mesh to fill the space of interest, with the mesh strongly elongated along the field line. Achieving a very good alignment of the mesh along the field lines is in general quite a difficult meshing problem, and for this reason many MCF physics codes work only in the region where the field lines trace out a nested set of topologically toroidal magnetic surfaces: these are KAM tori\cite{KAM} associated with the field line Hamiltonian. In the tokamak core, for example, because of near-axisymmetry, nested surfaces usually exist and regular grids can efficiently be generated, or angular coordinates may be employed in conjunction with a Fourier representation. This is not the case for stellarator geometry or in the tokamak edge region. To avoid difficult meshing problems for the general case where the region of interest is not filled by nested surfaces, it is desirable to relax the requirement of mesh connectivity. The {\it Flux Coordinate Independent} (FCI) approach\cite{Hariri2013,Ottaviani2011,Stegmeir}, based on a finite difference method, defines function values on nodes lying on a set of surfaces $M_i$ which are taken to be surfaces of constant coordinate $\zeta$. A node $\xb$ on surface $M_i$ can be mapped along the field direction $\Bb$ to find image points, $\xb_\pm$ on surfaces $M_{i \pm 1}$. Although these image points will not in general lie on nodes on the surfaces $M_{i\pm 1}$, the function may be evaluated at these points by interpolation. Given the values of the function at points $\xb_\pm$, derivatives along the field direction may then be determined. Another way to relax the mesh connectivity constraint is via a finite volume technique, where the volumes are extrusions of a polygonal grid cell on one surface to the next, and a polynomial representation is chosen in each volume element; smoothness constraints are then approximately imposed using a discontinuous Galerkin approach. A hybrid method incorporating finite differences along the field line and the discontinuous Galerkin method has also been investigated\cite{Held201629}. A natural method for representing the anisotropic functions of interest is to change coordinates by defining a grid on a surface, and extending this to a volume grid by defining an additional coordinate parameterising the distance along the mapping (this is known as the flux tube method\cite{fluxtubes} in MCF). Locally, this allows for straightforward and efficient representation of the problem anisotropy. However, the coordinate scheme becomes highly distorted for mappings with strong shear or compression. The mesh connectivity problem also resurfaces if the originating surface is eventually mapped back onto itself, as at this point the representation on two non-aligned meshes must be combined in some way. We propose a partially mesh-free method which we call FCIFEM as it is a Finite Element Method translation of the FCI approach. The method represents anisotropic functions using a compact-support set of basis functions which are defined in a local set of coordinates aligned with the mapping. The definition of the set of basis functions is used to define weak forms of differential equations, as in a standard Galerkin method. The philosophy is to design a method which is robust and simple to implement, and requires little manual user interaction, because it avoids complex mesh generation tasks. The representation also provides a simple way to neatly tackle a series of related problems with slightly different configurations, generated, for example, when the field generating the mapping varies slowly with time. \section{Definition of the finite dimensional representation} For the sake of simplicity, we consider a 3D volume labelled by coordinates $R$, $Z$, $\zeta$, and take the surfaces $M$ of interest to be surfaces of constant coordinate $\zeta$, of value $\zeta_i$ on surface $M_i$. Consider a continuous function $\mathcal{Q}: \mathbb{R}^3 \times \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$, that we will refer to as the {\it mapping}, which takes a point $\xb$ and a parameter $s$ and returns a point $\yb$. We will use this function to define projections of the 3D space, along curves locally aligned with the direction of the anisotropy, onto each of the surfaces $M_i$; we require $\mathcal{Q}(\xb,s)_{\zeta} = s$, so that the projection associated with surface $M_i$ has parameter $s=\zeta_i$. We also require $Q(\xb,x_\zeta)=\xb$ so points on the surface map to themselves. One way to generate such a mapping would be to consider the action of a static flow field $\Bb$ displacing the position, leading to a field line equation \begin{equation} \frac{d\xb}{dt} = \Bb(\xb). \end{equation} If we followed a field line from position $\xb$ until it had toroidal coordinate $s$, where the field line was at the point $\yb$, we could define the mapping as $\mathcal{Q}(\xb,s) = \yb$. We will refer to this as an exact mapping, which satisfies the equation \begin{equation} \frac{\partial}{\partial \epsilon} \mathcal{Q}(\xb+\epsilon \Bb,\zeta)\|_{\epsilon=0} = 0. \label{equation:mappingcond} \end{equation} It is convenient to allow the mapping function to be more general, however, and not necessarily exactly be the solution to this field line mapping equation (or to any equation with a modified $\Bb$), either because we don't know the exact solution, or because an approximate solution is numerically more desirable. This has consequences for the quality of approximation, as the anisotropic direction will not align exactly with the mapping direction, and certain statements on convergence will be shown only for the case of an exact mapping. For consistency properties to hold, the mapping will be required to be one-to-one and at least of the same order of smoothness as the element functions defined in the next paragraph. The geometry of this mapping is show in figure \ref{fig:mapping}. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{mapping2d_2.pdf} \caption{ The geometry of the approximate flow line mapping. Here, the mapping from the point $\xb = (R,Z,\zeta)$ to the point $(R',Z',\zeta_0)$ on surface $M_0$ is depicted, with $(R',Z') = \mathcal{Q}(\xb,\zeta_0)$, as well as the analogous mapping to surface $M_1$. The dashed line shows the field line from the point $\xb$, for which eq. \ref{equation:mappingcond} holds exactly. } \label{fig:mapping} \end{figure} The second element of the FCIFEM method to be chosen is the representation on the planes $M_i$. In general in might be helpful to choose a general unstructured mesh, but for the purposes of explanation and initial testing in this paper, we will use a simple uniformly spaced Cartesian mesh on each plane $M$. In the interior region the representation of a scalar function of position is defined as \begin{align} \phi(R,Z,\zeta) = \sum_{i,j,k} \phi_{i,j,k} & \notag \\ \times & \Omega_{R} \left[\mathcal{R}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k) - R_i \right] \notag \\ \times & \Omega_{Z} \left[\mathcal{Z}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k) - Z_j \right] \notag \\ \times & \Omega_{\zeta} \left[ \zeta-\zeta_k \right] \label{eq:FCI_FEM} \end{align} with compact support basis functions $\Omega$, a regular set of Cartesian nodes $i,j,k$, and using the componentwise notation $\mathcal{Q} = (\mathcal{R},\mathcal{Z},\zeta)$. We will choose the functions $\Omega$ to be B-Spline basis functions for the remainder as their properties are sufficient to ensure smoothness and lowest order consistency (and this is similar to a finite element approach used earlier in MCF codes\cite{Fivaz_1998,SebORB5}). An example of the shape of a distorted 2D basis function (the coefficient of $\phi_{i,j,k}$ for some chosen $i,j$ and $k$) is plotted in figure \ref{fig:spline_function}. To evaluate the function value at point $\xb$, each term of the sum in eq. \ref{eq:FCI_FEM} is evaluated by calculating the mapping $\mathcal{Q}(\xb,\zeta_k)$, and the product of the basis functions can then be directly calculated. For a smooth mapping, the overall representation smoothness depends on the order of the spline. The arguments about convergence are most simply made in the case with uniform nodes where $R_i = i \, \delta R $, $Z_j = j \, \delta Z $ and $\zeta_k = k \, \delta \zeta$. The space spanned by these functions will be denoted $S$. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{basisfunction2d_add.pdf} \caption{ A density plot of the function $\phi$ for a 2D restriction of the FCIFEM representation to the plane $(\zeta,Z)$, with a single coefficient $\phi_{i,j,k}$ non-zero (equivalently, this can be seen as a slice at constant $R$ of a 3D FCIFEM representation). The domain of support of this nonzero term in the FCIFEM sum is shown as a blue line, and a domain of support of an element based on the plane $\zeta=-1$ is shown in red. The field $\Bb$ is such that field lines are of the form $ Z = \sin(\pi \zeta / 2) + Z_0$, and an exact mapping is used. Linear B-Spline basis functions are used for $\Omega_Z,\Omega_{\zeta}$.} \label{fig:spline_function} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{meshintersect.pdf} \caption{ The intersection of mesh domains (which form the boundaries of domains of support of basis functions) with a constant $\zeta$ plane, for an example mapping. The red mesh is associated with a regular meshing on this plane $\zeta = \zeta_0$, so is rectilinear, whereas the blue and black meshes are associated with the planes $\zeta_{\pm 1}$. In general the domains of intersection change shape in the $\zeta$ direction.} \label{fig:meshintersect} \end{figure} \section{Basic properties and consistency of FCIFEM} Although it is less obvious than in a standard Finite Element formalism, these elements have a partition of unity property, and can represent the unity function exactly. Substituting unity in the spline coefficients, rearranging the sums and defining quantities $\hat{R}_k = \mathcal{R}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k)$ and $\hat{Z}_k = \mathcal{Z}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k)$ (with $\mathcal{Q} = (\mathcal{R},\mathcal{Z},\zeta)$) yields \begin{align} \sum_k \Omega_{\zeta} \left[ \zeta-\zeta_k \right] \sum_{i,k} \Omega_{R} \left[ \hat{R}_k - R_i \right] \Omega_{Z} \left[ \hat{Z}_k - Z_j \right]. \end{align} Since $\hat{R}_k$ and $\hat{Z}_k$ are independent of $i$ and $j$, the partition of unity property of 1D spline basis functions may be used to show that the sum over $i$ and $k$ is unity, and finally that the overall expression yields unity. We do not, however, have the $\delta$ function property that the function value evaluated at a node $\phi(\xb_{i,j,k})$ is equal to the spline coefficient $\phi_{i,j,k}$ at the node. The resulting representation is smooth, and will be shown to effectively approximate smooth functions in the large mesh resolution limit. In the FCIFEM method, even for a simple structured meshing, the domains of support of basis functions associated with two nodes on different surfaces $M$ generally overlap only partially, and in a potentially messy way (see figures \ref{fig:spline_function} and \ref{fig:meshintersect}). However, given a polynomial mapping function, the representation is piecewise polynomial within a finite set of spatial cells, with cell faces given by the roots of polynomial equations. The method is most obviously applicable for anisotropic grids with spacing $\delta \zeta \gg \delta R, \delta Z$, but it is straightforward to map this to an equivalent problem where the grid spacing is isotropic by compressing the $\zeta$ axis. In the limit that this isotropic grid is refined equally in each direction, we have a parameter $h = \delta R =\delta Z = \delta \zeta$ representing the grid spacing. We wish to show that there exists $\phi \in S$ that is a good approximant to a smooth function $\bar{\phi}$ with derivatives of order 1 in the $R$ and $Z$ directions, and along the mapping direction (but which may vary rapidly in the $\zeta$ direction) so that \begin{equation} \left\| \phi - \bar{\phi} \right\| < C h^2. \end{equation} We will need to assume a certain smoothness of the mapping function so that locally $\mathcal{Q} = (\mathcal{R},\mathcal{Z},\zeta_k) = (R_\zeta [\zeta-\zeta_k] + R, Z_\zeta [\zeta - \zeta_k] + Z,\zeta_k) + O(h^2)$ for constants $R_\zeta$ and $Z_\zeta$. We will also assume that we have at least piecewise linear basis functions so that derivatives exist, and we will take $\Omega_{R,Z,\zeta} = \Omega$ for simplicity. A constructive proof that good approximants may be found is performed by setting the basis function coefficients to their nodal values, so $\phi_{i,j,k} = \bar{\phi}(R_i,Z_j,\zeta_k)$. In this case we have \begin{align} \phi = \sum_{i,j,k} \bar{\phi}(R_i,Z_j,\zeta_k) & \\ \times & \Omega \left[\mathcal{R}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k) - R_i \right] \\ \times & \Omega \left[\mathcal{Z}(R,Z,\zeta,\zeta_k) - Z_j \right] \\ \times & \Omega \left[ \zeta,\zeta_k \right] \\ \end{align} and we expand about $\xb_0 = (R_0,Z_0,\zeta_0)$, using the near-linearity of the mapping, and in the region where $\zeta-\zeta_0 = O(h)$, and $\|(\mathcal{R}-R_0,\mathcal{Z}-Z_0)\| = O(h)$ (which is aligned along the mapping) we find \begin{align} \phi = \sum_{i,j,k} \left(\bar{\phi}(R_0,Z_0,\zeta_0) + h (i,j,k) . \nabla \bar{\phi}(R_0,Z_0,\zeta_0 ) \right) & \\ \times & \Omega_i \left[R_\zeta (\zeta-\zeta_k) + R \right] \\ \times & \Omega_j \left[Z_\zeta (\zeta-\zeta_k) + Z \right] \\ \times & \Omega_k \left[ \zeta \right] + O(h^2). \end{align} This ordering holds, despite the $\zeta$ derivative of the function being large in general, because the vector $(i,j,k)$ is aligned almost parallel to the mapping direction for the contibuting basis functions, and the derivatives are order one in the direction. The algebra proceeds by evaluating the $j$ and $k$ sums, for which $\zeta_k$ is a constant. From the definition of the derivative of B-Spline, we can show $\sum_i i \Omega_i(x) = x/h $ in the interior region. The splines also have the partition of unity property $\sum_i \Omega_i(x) = 1 $ in the interior region, so the coefficient of $\bar{\phi}$ is $1$, so \begin{align} \phi& = \bar{\phi} - \xb_0.\nabla \bar{\phi} \\ & + \frac{\partial\bar{\phi}}{\partial R } \sum_{k} [R_{\zeta} (\zeta - h k) - R] \Omega_k + \frac{\partial\bar{\phi}}{\partial Z } \sum_{k} [Z_{\zeta} (\zeta - h k) - Z] \Omega_k + \frac{\partial\bar{\phi}}{\partial \zeta} \sum_{k} k \Omega_k + O(h^2)\\ & = \bar{\phi} + (R-R_0,Z-Z_0,\zeta-Z_0) . \nabla \bar{\phi} + O(h^2) \end{align} and from the smoothness of $\phi$ we have $\phi = \bar{\phi} + O(h^2)$ in the (mapping-aligned) vicinity of any grid point. Similarly, we can show that the error in derivatives is $O(h)$ in the $R$ and $Z$ directions and along the mapping. However, better bounds are expected in practice due to an equivalence with more standard discretisations. For an exact mapping, it is useful to view the discretisation in a `flux tube' type coordinate scheme $(R',Z',\zeta) = (\mathcal{R}[\xb,\zeta_0],\mathcal{Z}[\xb,\zeta_0],x_\zeta)$. The representation on each surface $M_i$ in these coordinates with $i\neq 0$ is smoothly distorted by the mapping function, which varies on system scale lengths, so the representational power for smooth functions is equivalent to the undistorted mapping: we expect it to be consistent to the same order as the original mapping. The overall representation is then a tensor product of spline functions along the $\zeta$ direction with these $n$th order consistent representations based on surface $M_i$. At lowest order, the distortion is just a translation in $\mathcal{Q}$ in which case polynomials of order $n$ are exactly represented on each plane $M_i$. \section{Variational formulation} Various functional equations for spatial unknowns (typically differential and integro-differential equations) may be represented in this method via their weak form. For an equation $A(\phi) = 0$, we require that the discrete representation $\phi$, for all weight functions $\psi$ in the reduced function space, satisfies \begin{equation} \int \psi A(\phi) = 0, \end{equation} and leads to a sparse matrix problem $\mathbf{A} \mathbf{k} = 0$ where $k$ represents the coefficients of the FCIFEM representation. Where $A$ is a local function of $\phi$ (usually a differential operator) the integration involves evaluations of $\phi$ and $\psi$ at the same spatial locations, and in the standard finite element formalism, the spatial mesh of elements forms a natural basis for a quadrature (integration) mesh; for polynomial basis elements, appropriate quadratures (such as Gauss points) are well-known, which allow machine-precision evaluation of these integrals at reasonable cost. In general mesh-free methods, the lack of alignment between the basis function support domains means that the favourable convergence properties of Gauss quadrature cannot generally be expected\cite{meshfreequadrature}. In the set of coordinates $(\mathcal{R},\mathcal{Z},\zeta)$, with an invertible mapping, the domains of integration are given the tensor product of areas $I$ in the $( \mathcal{R},\mathcal{Z})$ plane (an example of the shapes of such areas is shown in figure \ref{fig:meshintersect}) multiplied by intervals in $\zeta$. The areas are bounded by curves which lie on the union of the images of the meshes of neaxby mother planes. For practical examples the boundaries of these areas are approximately polygonal, with low curvature edges. We do not attempt to do so here, but calculation of these intersections could be performed with standard packages at least where edges can be taken to be straight. Boundary conditions would complicate the meshing process substantially. Instead of performing this complicated meshing procedure we propose the use of simpler methods, in the general spirit of avoiding geometrical complexity. Increasing the number of Gauss points over that required for a standard mesh problem has been found to be sufficient in tests of certain mesh-free methods\cite{Belytschko1996}. We are frequently interested in cases where the operator A is non-local (for example integro-differential, rather than simply differential), so that evaluation points of $\phi$ and $\psi$ are different\cite{Dominski,Mishchenko} and the usual quadrature approaches are not well-justified. In the example of this paper we use quadratures specified on a mesh which conforms to the boundaries\cite{Belytschko1996}; this is only straightforward if the geometry of the boundaries is relatively simple. \section{Handling boundaries in FCIFEM} Boundary conditions may be handled in a FEM by generating a mesh that conforms to the boundary surface, and ensuring the finite element basis functions are consistent with the boundary conditions. However, the mesh volumes in FCIFEM are strongly curved along the $\zeta$ direction, so even if the boundary is flat in Cartesian coordinates, it is curved in the natural mesh coordinates. Attempting to adapt the FCIFEM meshes so they conform to these curved surfaces would lead to a somewhat messy meshing problem. For example, the intersection of the mesh volume with the internal region is in general a complex shape, and in general volumes would need to be broken into smaller pieces to simplify the geometry. In conjunction with this, an additional coordinate transform would in general need to be used to map the curved surfaces to flat faces via an isoparametric transform. The philosophy here, and for mesh-free meshods in general, is to avoid these geometrical complications. There are a number of approaches to handling boundaries in mesh-free methods\cite{Chavanis2005,Huerta2004}. In the methods close in spirit to that proposed here, essential boundary conditions can be imposed by transforming shape functions so that they conform, by introducing penalty functions to the minimisation problem resulting from the weak form, or by introducing an additional boundary mesh that conforms exactly. We will use the latter method, where a standard finite element method mesh is defined near the boundary. If we denote a function represented by the FCIFEM representation in eq \ref{eq:FCI_FEM} as $\phi_{FCI}$ and a conventional finite element representation as $\phi_{FEM}$, with \begin{equation} \phi_{FEM} = \sum_{i} c_i K_i(\xb), \end{equation} we can produce a blended representation \begin{equation} \phi_{BLE} = B(\xb) \phi_{FEM}(\xb) + [1-B(\xb)] \phi_{FCI} \end{equation} where $B(\xb)$ is a {\it ramp function} with $B=1$ on the boundary $\delta \Sigma$, and $B=0$ in the bulk of the domain $\Sigma$ apart from a narrow region near the boundary, where the function smoothly ramps from $1$ to $0$. The FEM representation is taken to conform to the boundary, so the boundary condition is exactly satisfied in the appropriate restriction of the FEM function space. Also, since the FCIFEM and FEM representations individually are consistent up to some order, the blended sum of the two representations is also able to exactly represent polynomials up to that order. However, if the nodal values of the FEM and FCI representation are specified independently, we have introduced additional degrees of freedom in the overall representation, and these may not be sufficiently orthogonal (there may be two ways of approximately representing the same spatial function with very different sets of coefficients): this may result in an ill-conditioned or singular matrix problem. This difficulty can be dealt with in general by modifying the shape functions of the representation in the boundary region to ensure orthogonality\cite{Belytschko1995,Huerta2004}, but for the more specialised representation chosen here, there is a simpler way to proceed. We require that where the FEM representation and the FCIFEM representation share nodal positions, they have the same nodal values $c_i = \phi_j$; this reduces the number of extra degrees of freedom, but still ensures consistency. For the regular FCIFEM grids used in this paper's examples, the FEM boundary grid will be specified on the same $(R,Z)$ node positions; because the FEM grid does not directly capture the anisotropy, the spacing in the $\zeta$ direction needs to be finer than the FCIFEM grid to fully capture the $\zeta$ depencence near the boundary. We have, however, used the same $\zeta$ grid for the FEM and FCIEFEM in the example problems below. The ramp function is chosen to be the sum of FEM basis functions associated with boundary nodes\cite{Belytschko1995}. \section{A simple 2D periodic example problem} In order to provide a simple test case, as well as a straightforward comparison against earlier methods for representing anisotropic functions, we consider a problem in a doubly periodic domain $Z \in [0, 2 \pi]$ and $\zeta \in [0, 2 \pi]$ with a mapping induced by a straight field $\Bb = \zetahat B_{\zeta} + \Zhat B_Z $ and $B_{\zeta} = B_z = 1$. The differential equation we consider in the remainder of the paper (typical for the problems of electromagnetic coupling which arise in tokamak turbulence) is the Laplacian inverse \begin{equation} \nabla^2 \phi = \rho \end{equation} where we solve for $\phi$. We choose \begin{equation} \rho(Z,\zeta) = \sin[ n ( Z - \zeta) ] [1+\sin( Z )]/2, \end{equation} with $n=10$, which results in a nearly field aligned perturbation, since the spatial wavenumbers of the perturbation are $(k_Z,k_{\zeta}) = (n,-n)$ and $(n \pm 1,-n)$, which are aligned with the field to within $10\%$. Note that the periodicity of the grid and homogeneity of the problem would allow direct use of discrete Fourier space to solve for the spline coefficients; the analytic solution is also easily obtained using the Fourier method. For this perturbation, which has an anisotropy direction aligned $pi/4$ radians from the $Z$ and $\zeta$ direction, a Cartesian tensor spline representation on the $Z$ and $\zeta$ directions needs to have high resolution in both directions, and it is most efficient to choose similar resolution in $Z$ and $\zeta$ directions. On the other hand, the FCIFEM representation can take advantage of the slower spatial variation along the anisotropy. For this simple case, if $N_Z$ is an integer multiple of $N_{\zeta}$, the FCIFEM representation reduces to a standard tensor product spline representation, in a sheared coordinate system, because the mapping between surfaces $M$ aligns the nodes. A scan is performed over resolution for both $N_{\zeta}/N_Z = 4/43$ and $N_{\zeta}/N_Z = 1/10$ in order to demonstrate that the accuracy of the method is not significantly degraded by lack of node alignment. The error a a function of grid resolution is plotted in figure \ref{fig:conv_simple}. The testcases for $N_{\zeta}/N_Z = 4/43$ are repeated for linear splines, but other results are reported for quadratic splines only. We also compare the results with the spline representation on a regular Cartesian grid in $Z$ and $\zeta$ (with $N_{\zeta}/N_Z=1$) to demonstrate the advantage of the anisotropy-capturing scheme; the results of the anisotropic scheme have similar error for the same resolution in $N_Z$, but require a factor of 10 fewer grid points in total. RMS errors converge as very nearly $1/N^2$ for linear splines, and $1/N^3$ for quadratic splines. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{converge_simp.pdf} \caption{ Convergence of the $L^2$ error for a simple analytical test problem in a 2D periodic domain with the FCIFEM method and a straight-line mapping function. The legend gives the ratio of $N_{\zeta}/N_Z$ grid points for each scan. All these testcases use quadratic splines except the uppermost data. The data marked with crosses uses a standard cartesian spline representation rather than FCIFEM. } \label{fig:conv_simple} \end{figure} \section{A tokamak-related example problem} The motivating problem is magnetic confinement fusion; we consider a plasma is confined by a magnetic field, with the field lines shown in fig. \ref{fig:figacont}. If the bounding rectangle is taken to be a physical wall, the volume can be separated into an `open field line' region, whose magnetic field lines intersect the wall, and a closed field line region. Fig. \ref{fig:figacont} is typical of a `diverted' tokamak configuration, where the nested set of flux surfaces end at a separatrix, and points outside the last closed flux surface are connected by the magnetic field lines to the wall. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{a_countour.pdf} \caption{ The $\Bb$ field lines on the $(R,Z)$ plane (the $\zeta$ direction is into the page); these are also the countours of the function $A$ specified in equation \ref{eq:aeq}. } \label{fig:figacont} \end{figure} A common computational task is to trace the trajectories of particles in a turbulent field generated by some set of charges and currents, which may be part of a particle-in-cell simulation\cite{BirdsallLangdon,SebORB5}. Accuracy of particle tracing requires a smooth representation of the fields, and a partial differential equation (in general integro-differential) must be solved to determine the fields based on currents and charge sources; we will explain how to use the partially mesh free method to solve an example problem of this type. We define a magnetic field \begin{equation} \mathbf{B} = B_0 \boldsymbol{\hat{\zeta}} + \boldsymbol{\hat{\zeta}} \times \nabla A(R,Z) \end{equation} with \begin{equation} A(R,Z) = (R-1)^2 + Z ( Z^2 - 1 ) \label{eq:aeq} \end{equation} which represents a diverted configuration in the large aspect ratio limit. The contours of $A$ (figure \ref{fig:figacont}) are the field lines projected onto the $(R,Z)$ plane, and an X-point is seen at $(R,Z) = (1, -1 / \sqrt{3} )$. The mapping function is approximated by using a Taylor series expansion of the mapping function $\mathcal{Q}(\xb,\zeta)$ up to quadratic order in $\zeta$ and a spline representation of the Taylor series coefficients on the $(R,Z)$ grid used for the FCIFEM elements. We quantify the error by tracing accurate and approximate field lines starting at positions in the $(R,Z)$ spatial domain at $\zeta=0$ to $\zeta=\zeta_1$. For field lines which remain in the simulation volume, the RMS error in the final $(R,Z)$ position is $0.016$, and the maximum error is $0.06$ (the error is concentrated near the boundaries at large $Z$ where $A$ has large gradients). As in the previous section, we solve the Laplacian inverse problem, but now over a rectangular domain in $R,Z$ and a periodic $\zeta$ direction with $\phi=0$ on the boundaries of the domain. We take $R \in [R_0,R_1]$ and $Z \in [Z_0, Z_1]$ and $\zeta \in [0,\zeta_1]$. In order to ensure that the representation satisfies the boundary conditions exactly, we use a single cell-width first order standard FEM formalism near the boundary, blended with the FCIFEM method using a ramp function. The ramp function is taken to be the sum of the first-order FEM basis functions, which is simply a linear function $(1-x)$, where $x$ is the distance to the boundary in grid units, for points away from a corner; for points near a corner the ramp function is $(1-x)(1-y)$ with $x$ and $y$ the distance to the nearby boundary edges in grid units. Quadratic B-Splines basis functions are chosen to represent the field, with uniform grid spacing $\delta R$, $\delta Z$, $\delta \zeta$. Discretisation proceeds by taking the weak form and finding $\phi \in S $ such that \begin{equation} \int dV ( \nabla \psi . \nabla \phi + \psi \rho) = 0 \end{equation} for all $\psi \in S$. The integration is performed using a set of quadrature points evenly spaced in $R,Z$ and $\zeta$, 10 times finer than $\delta R$, $\delta Z$, $\delta \zeta$ respectively. \subsection{A basic convergence test} In order to examine the basic convergence of the method, a simple test problem is considered with $\rho(R) = \sin(0.5 \pi R) \sin(\pi [Z+1.0]/2.5)$. the domain $R_0 = 0$, $R_1 = 2$, $Z_0 = -1$, $Z_1 = 1.5$ and $\zeta_1 = \pi/20$ is chosen. The solution $\phi$ to this test-problem is not aligned along the field, but constant along $\zeta$, so the use of the FCIFEM is not advantageous in this case. Along the field line, the perturbation varies with typical scale length $\|B_{\zeta}\|/\|B_{R,Z}\|$ times longer than typical wavelengths in $R$ and $Z$. We have therefore chosen $\delta Z$ comparable to $ \delta R \|B_{\zeta}\|/\|B_{R,Z}\|$ so that the effective resolution is sufficiently high along the field line. The field-aligned mesh leads to projected domains of the basis functions in the $(R,Z)$ plane of extent $\sim \|\mathcal{Q}[R,Z,\delta \zeta]-\mathcal{Q}[R,Z,0]\| + \|\delta R\|+\|\delta Z\|$, so the representation, and the effective resolution in the $R$ and $Z$ direction depend on the number of $\zeta$ points chosen. The number of grid points at lowest resolution $(N_R,N_Z,N_{\zeta}) = (20,20,1)$, and this is uniformly increased by a factor $H$ in each direction to perform a convergence scan. Figure \ref{fig:convergence} shows the $L^2$ error $\epsilon$ in the solution versus $H$, which drops as $ H^{3.2} $, in line with the value $3$ expected for a standard second order FEM, and as good as could be expected for the degree of representation smoothness chosen. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{convergence_divertor.pdf} \caption{ Convergence of the $L^2$ error for a simple analytical test problem in a 3D domain rectangular in $R,Z$ and periodic in $\zeta$ with the FCIFEM method and a mapping function based on a divertor-type field. } \label{fig:convergence} \end{figure} \subsection{An illustrative tokamak problem} In order to illustrate the treatment of anisotropic structures in this method, we consider a second test problem in the same spatial domain as the previous problem. Here, we take $\rho(\Rb) = \int d\zeta [ \delta(\mathbf{R} - \xb(\zeta)) - \delta(\mathbf{R} - \xb(\zeta) - \hat{\zeta} \zeta_1/2) ]$ with $\xb(\zeta)$ the curve traced out by a field line parameterised by $\zeta$, starting from the point $\xb(0) =(0.36,-1.0,0)$, so that it passes near the X-point. This results in a highly anisotropic charge perturbation along the magnetic field lines with neighbouring charge filaments of opposite sign, typical of a localised unstable drift mode. The number of grid points in each direction is $(N_R,N_Z,N_{\zeta}) = (100,100,1)$; because the perturbation is highly field aligned, the solution is expected to be also well-aligned, so that the anisotropic solution is well captured, despite using only $1$ point in the $\zeta$ direction. The mean anisotropy can be quantified by the RMS angle that the field line makes with respect to the $\zeta$ direction: following a field line from $\zeta_0$ to $\zeta_1$, the RMS displacement on the $(R,Z)$ plane is $0.3$ units, corresponding to 16 grid cells. Thus, to capture the anisotropy using a Cartesian grid, we would require roughly $16$ grid cells in the $\zeta$ direction. The resulting matrix problem, coupling the coefficients of the $\phi$ representation to those of the weight function, is a sparse matrix of rank equal to the number of degrees of freedom of the system, which we treat as being unstructured. Each row in the matrix has of order $200$ non-zero entries when quadratic splines are used; this is somewhat less sparse, due to irregular overlapping of domains of support, than in the corresponding 3D tensor spline representation, where $125$ non-zero entries would be expected. Index reordering is quite effective in reducing the bandwidth of the resulting matrix, so that direct solution using banded matrix calculation is straightforward for the test problem under consideration. To show the projection of the charge $\rho$ into the space $S$, the weak form \begin{equation} \int dV ( \psi \bar{\rho} - \psi \rho) = 0 \end{equation} is solved for $\bar{\rho} \in S$ in the same fashion as for the Laplacian problem. We show 2D plots and 3D plots of $\bar{\rho}$ and $\phi$ in figure \ref{fig:3dfield}. Due to the structure of the charge (alternating charge lines of opposite sign), the potential $\phi$ decays rapidly away from the field lines where $\rho$ is nonzero. The strong anisotropy of the charge and of $\phi$ are clear in the 3D plots. The structures in the reproduced field $\bar{\rho}$ are conicident with the field lines, as shown in plot (b); this provides some evidence that the mapping $\mathcal{Q}$ is sufficiently accurate. Note that the spatial variation of the the imposed $\rho$ becomes too rapid to be captured by the spline representation near the X-point; this is not typical of the turbulent structures which tend to be of a more uniform typical wavenumber, but allows us to demonstrate how the scheme behaves at short spatial scale. The integration inherent in this Galerkin type method averages out the positive and negative variations below the grid scale to zero in this region. The FCIFEM method, which has uniform resolution near the X-point, is better able to resolve structures in this region than conventional schemes for MCF problems: conventional methods have low resolution near the X-point, as they place sets of nodes on flux surfaces, and flux surfaces become widely spaced near the X-point. Behaviour near the boundaries is acceptable from visual inspection in the reproduced field and the solution to the Laplacian problem. In the interior region, there is some oscillation evident in the function $\bar{\rho}$ in figure \ref{fig:rhobar_2d} which is attempting to represent a $\delta$ function using a smooth spline representation: this is standard for finite-element type representations and not a particularity of FCIFEM. As with the behaviour near the X-point, we have deliberately chosen a somewhat difficult example that probes how the scheme handles sub-grid scale forcing. To determine the effect of an inexact mapping on the problem, the Laplacian problem was repeated with a precise mapping used based on numerical integration rather than a low-order Taylor series. Visually the results were indistinguishable. The relative RMS difference in solutions using the exact and inexact mapping was $3\%$. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}} \subfigure[]{ \includegraphics[width=8cm]{rhobar2d_2.pdf} \label{fig:rhobar_2d} } \subfigure[]{ \includegraphics[width=8cm]{3dplot_mass2.pdf} \label{fig:rhobar_3d} } \\ \subfigure[]{ \includegraphics[width=8cm]{2dplot_lag.pdf} \label{fig:phisoln_2d} } \subfigure[]{ \includegraphics[width=8cm]{3dplot_lag.pdf} \label{fig:phisoln_3d} } \end{tabular} \caption{ 2D plots versus $R$ and $Z$ at $\zeta=0$ (a,c), and 3d voxel renderings (b,d), of $\bar{\rho}$ (a,b) and $\phi$ (c,d). Plot (b) shows a field line in black, essentially coincident with the negative charge region. 2D plots are oversampled by a factor of three compared to the spline grid. 3D plot show regions of positive charge/potential as red, and negative as blue. The $\zeta$ direction extends periodically with period $\pi/20$, but repeats are not shown; note that the scales are not equal in the 3D plots. } \label{fig:3dfield} \end{figure} To demonstrate the effectiveness of the FCIFEM method, we compare it to a method based on a Cartesian mesh with $10$ equally spaced points in the $\zeta$ direction and $100$ points in both $R$ and $Z$ directions; the Cartesian representation has 10 times as many node coefficients as the FCIFEM representation, and solution of the matrix problem requires an iterative method. The solution $\phi$ plotted in fig. \ref{fig:3dfield_cart} is visually quite similar to that of the FCIFEM, although it is noticably less smooth along the field lines; there are short wavelength oscillations at the grid scale which arise as the Cartesian method attempts to reproduce short wavelength anisotropic structures. This kind of aliasing error may be problematic even if the usual measures of error are small. For example, where the fields are used to evaluate particle orbits, the short wavelength structures translate into small timesteps; this may be worked around by filtering out grid-scale wavelengths\cite{SebORB5} at the cost of higher grid resolution. \begin{figure}[htb] \centering \includegraphics[width=8cm]{3dplot_lag_cart.pdf} \caption{3d voxel rendering of $\phi$ for a finite element method based on Cartesian grid.} \label{fig:3dfield_cart} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} We have introduced a numerical technique for representing anisotropic functions, and solving equations related to these functions, in regions where the direction of anisotropy is spatially varying. The guiding principle (as with the FCI method) is to incorporate the complexity of the field line geometry into a mapping function, and avoid specialised geometrical representations based on the magnetic field topology. One important feature of the method proposed here is the ability of the method to handle curved anisotropic structures; once the basis and mapping is defined, there is a straightforward and systematic method for evaluating differential operators. This has been handled only in part in earlier methods. The difficulty is that in MCF problems, the anisotropic stuctures extend along field lines to a length scale typically of order the system scale $R_g$, and the departure of field lines from straight lines over this scale is also of this order, even in cylindrical coordinates (the departure from straightness is of order $a$, the {\it minor radius}, in a tokamak problem). The wavelengths of turbulent structures perpendicular to the field, on the other hand, are orders of magnitude smaller. Methods that require the anisotropy direction to be constant in each mesh cell will require a finer mesh spacing along the field line that those able to explicitly incorporate curvature, like the FCIFEM. We have chosen to test an inexact mapping for the tokamak geometry testcase in the previous section. For this special case, it is possible to take advantage of the topology of the problem to produce a near-exact numerical approximation to the field line mapping operation, but the philosophy of this approach is to avoid relying on concepts like flux coordinates that would be used to construct such a map. Since the method appears to be quite robust to the use of even quite crude inexact mappings, we expect the choice to be a matter of convenience. \section*{Acknowledgments} This work has been carried out within the framework of the EUROfusion Consortium and has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 633053. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission. Thanks to Eric Sonnendrucker for helpful comments on a draft version of this document.
\section{Introduction} The most important objective of the Fermi mission is to study the whole sky at $\gamma$--ray energies; this is achievable with the use of the Large Area Telescope (LAT) thanks to its large collecting area and field of view \citep{Atwood09}. The location accuracy of the telescope, which detects $\gamma$--ray objects emitting at GeV energies, is between 0.5 to 10 arcminutes, depending on the source detection significance. There are more than 3000 sources listed in the latest release of the Fermi catalogue \citep{Acero15}. Of these, only 238 are considered firm identifications by the LAT team, based on spatial morphology, correlated variability, and/or periodic lightcurve properties. Another $\sim 1800$ sources have high confidence associations, based on cross-correlations with multiwavelength catalogues. The majority of these identified and associated sources belong to one of the following categories: extragalactic objects such as blazars (flat spectrum radio quasars or BL Lacs), or Galactic sources (mainly pulsars, pulsar wind nebulae, and supernova remnants). However, there is still an important number of sources (about 30\%) without proper identification, i.e. lacking association with any known class of $\gamma$--ray emitting objects, which constitute the class of unidentified/unassociated gamma-ray sources (UGSs). A similar but less critical situation is found when considering the First Fermi Catalog of detected sources above 10 GeV \citep[1FHL;][]{Ackermann13}: from a total of 514 listed sources, 65 ($\sim$13\%) are UGSs. These are also the numbers resulting from analysing the Second Fermi Catalog of detected sources above 50 GeV \citep[2FHL;]{Ackermann16}: it lists 360 sources, of which 48 (14\%) are UGSs. The search for counterparts of these new high--energy sources is hindered by the relatively large (in comparison with longer wavelengths) Fermi positional error ellipses. This uncertainty in their location means that positional correlations with known objects is often not enough to identify a Fermi source; thus, a multiwavelength approach is needed in order to understand their nature, using X--ray, optical and radio data of likely counterparts. X--ray data analyses are particularly useful in finding a positionally correlated object with broadband spectral parameters that might be expected in a $\gamma$--ray emitting source. Soft X--ray surveys (i.e. with energies below 10 keV) are convenient for this task because they offer 3 great advantages: They cover the whole Fermi error ellipse, their positional accuracy is of the order of arcseconds, and they provide information in an energy band close to that at which the Fermi LAT operates. Since most of the 1FHL sources are BL Lacs and in particular high-energy cutoff BL Lacs (HBL), and as they show the peak of the SED synchrotron component in the X-rays, crossmatching the Fermi catalogue with X-ray surveys should prove useful as a tool to select them. This allows the positional uncertainty of the objects detected with Fermi to be restricted, thus facilitating the identification process. To this end, following \citet{Stephen10}, \citet{Landi15c,Landi15a,Landi15b} performed a crossmatch between the positions in the 1FHL catalogue, the ROSAT All--Sky Survey Bright Source Catalogue of sources detected between 0.1--2.4 keV \citep{Voges99} , the 1SXPS Catalogue of X--ray sources detected with Swift/XRT in the 0.3-–10 keV band \citep{Evans14}, and pointed XRT observations available at the \rm{ASI} Science Data Center\footnote{http://www.asdc.asi.it/} archive. They found correlations with a strong level of confidence ($\sim 90\%$), leading to evidence for the potential association of a number of UGSs with X--ray counterparts, improving the positional error in all correlated objects, and thus opening the possibility for optical follow--up. In particular, 36 secure 1FHL/X--ray potential associations were obtained which allowed the selection of a likely low--energy (optical and below) counterpart for all of them. An investigation of the nature of these sources on the basis of their archival multiwavelength properties indicates that all potential associations are either recently identified blazars \citep{Landi15b,Landoni15,Massaro15,Ricci15} or blazar candidates \citep{Landi15a,Landi15c}. The majority of blazars are expected to show $\gamma$--ray emission in the GeV range \citep[e.g.][]{Acero15}. Nevertheless, 24 of the potential 36 associations are still lacking an optical spectroscopic confirmation of their nature. According to \citet{Stephen10} and \citet{Landi15a}, 1FHL sources like these can be responsible for the emission of very high energy $\gamma$--rays, up to the teraelectronvolt (TeV) range \citep{PadovaniGiommi95,Fossati98}. The interest in extreme TeV blazars arises from the possibility of obtaining information on both the acceleration processes of charged particles in relativistic flows \citep[e.g.][]{Ghisellini10} and the intensity of the extragalactic background light \citep[e.g.][]{Georganopoulos10}, which reflects the time--integrated history of light production and re--processing in the universe, and hence its measurement can provide information on the history of cosmological star formation \citep{Mankuzhiyil10}. This is important when considering that in the 1FHL catalogue, only 22 ($<\,6$\%) objects of the AGN type are considered to be firmly identified out of a total of 393 cases \citep{Ackermann13}. This is why the confirmation of the nature of even a small subset of the unidentified objects of the 1FHL sample would significantly increase the statistics of the GeV/TeV emitting blazars class, which in turn is only achievable after finding the proper association. This would also be relevant for a future search of TeV blazars that can be performed with the Cherenkov Telescope Array \citep{Massaro13b}. Furthermore, as the number of detected sources in the high--energy surveys is growing at an ever--increasing speed, it is necessary to establish well--defined methods to correctly identify and classify as many objects as possible while strictly reducing their positional uncertainties. Therefore, the aim of this work is to spectroscopically analyse 14 optical targets with near-positional coincidence with the X--ray sources out of those 24 without classification. Following the treatment of \citet{Stephen10}, we expect no more than only one spurious correlation out of the selected sample of 14 objects. \begin{table}[!htp] \caption{Observed sample of unidentified sources from the 1FHL catalogue.} \label{tab1} \centering \setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \begin{tabular}{cccccccc} \hline\hline Number & USNO designator & \rm{RA(J2000)} & \rm{DEC(J2000)} & Observatory & UT date & Time & Total exp. \\ & X-ray association & & & &[mm/dd/yy] & [mid. exp.] & [s] \\ (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) \\ \hline\hline 1 & U0750-00173701 & $00^h43^m48\fs66$ & $-11^{\circ}16'07\farcs2$ & NOT & 10/13/2015 & $02:46:41$ & 1200 \\ & 1RXS J004349.3-111612 & &&&&& \\ \hline 2 & U0975-00792795 & $03^h38^m29\fs24$ & $+13^{\circ}02'15\farcs2$ & NOT & 10/13/2015 & $04:59:08$ & 1200 \\ & 1SXPS J033829.0+130213 & &&&&& \\ \hline 3 & U0675-01653184 & $04^h39^m49\fs54^s$ & $-19^{\circ}01'02\farcs5$ & NOT & 10/13/2015 & $05:35:13$ & 1200 \\ & 1SXPS J043949.5-190102 & &&&&& \\ \hline 4 & U0750-02519189 & $06^h40^m07\fs31^s$ & $-12^{\circ}53'18\farcs6$ & NOT & 10/13/2015 & $06:08:22$ & 1200 \\ & 1SXPS J064007.1-125313 & &&&&& \\ \hline 5 & U0875-0218538 & $07^h46^m27\fs14^s$ & $-02^{\circ}25'50\farcs7$ & NOT & 10/14/2015 & $04:53:16$ & 1200 \\ & 1SXPS J074627.1-022550 & &&&&& \\ \hline 6 & U0825-05946383 & $08^h04^m57\fs74^s$ & $-06^{\circ}24'26\farcs3$ & LOI & 03/10/2015 & $21:21:16$ & 3600 \\ & 1RXS J080458.3-062432 & &&&&& \\ \hline 7 & U0825-05946383 & $11^h15^m15\fs58^s$ & $-07^{\circ}01'25\farcs6$ & SPM & 01/14/2016 & $12:31:40$ & 1800 \\ & SWXRT J111515.3-070126 & &&&&& \\ \hline 8 & U0750-08080787 & $13^h15^m52\fs98^s$ & $-07^{\circ}33'02\farcs0$ & LOI & 03/13/2015 & $00:57:54$ & 3600 \\ & 1SXPS J131553.0-073301 & &&&&& \\ \hline 9 & U1575-03416792 & $14^h10^m45\fs83^s$ & $+74^{\circ}05'11\farcs1$ & TNG & 08/26/2015 & $22:36:36$ & 2400 \\ & 1SXPS J141045.3+740508 & &&&&& \\ \hline 10 & U1575-03416943 & $14^h10^m52\fs03^s$ & $+74^{\circ}04'15\farcs1$ & TNG & 08/26/2015 & $23:40:59$ & 1200 \\ & 1SXPS J141051.3+740410 & &&&&& \\ \hline 11 & U0600-17715078 & $15^h12^m12\fs76^s$ & $-22^{\circ}55'08\farcs4$ & TNG & 08/27/2015 & $22:41:45$ & 2000 \\ & 1RXS J151213.1-225515 & &&&&& \\ \hline 12 & U0825-08948904 & $15^h49^m52\fs17^s$ & $-06^{\circ}59'08\farcs3$ & TNG & 08/27/2015 & $23:30:37$ & 2400 \\ & 1SXPS J154952.1-065908 & &&&&& \\ \hline 13 & U1125-10089754 & $18^h41^m21\fs72^s$ & $+29^{\circ}09'41\farcs2$ & TNG & 08/27/2015 & $00:24:02$ & 1600 \\ & 1RXS J184121.8+290932 & &&&&& \\ \hline 14 & U1530-0317394 & $20^h02^m45\fs36^s$ & $+63^{\circ}02'33\farcs6$ & TNG & 08/29/2015 & $00:03:54$ & 3600 \\ & 1RXS J200245.4+630226 & &&&&& \\ \hline\hline \end{tabular} \caption{We report the name in the USNO and X--rays catalogues in column 2, in columns 3 and 4 coordinates referring to J2000.0 for each optical target, in column 5 the observatory, in column 6 the date of observation, in column 7 the UT time at mid exposure, and in column 8 the total exposure time in seconds for each of the optical pointings.} \end{table} In the following sections, we describe our optical follow--up work on a subsample of 14 of the aforementioned potentially associated objects from the 1FHL catalogue. From these, only 1FHL\,J1549.9-0658 appears in the 2FHL catalogue (named 2FHL\,J1549.8-0659), although there is also a detection positionally consistent (2FHL\,J0639.9-1252, at a distance of $\sim 3$ arcmin) with 1FHL\,J0639.6-1244. The reason why only one of the 1FHL objects from our sample can be found in the 2FHL catalogue is the energy threshold: The 2FHL catalogue includes only those sources detected at 50 GeV or more, while the 1FHL catalogue has a threshold of 10 GeV. We note that 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 shows two different X--ray objects \citep{Landi15a} within its $\gamma$--ray positional error box, each with a single corresponding optical source. We define 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 A as the one marked as \#1 in \citet{Landi15a}, and 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 B as the one marked as \#2. In section 2 we briefly discuss the selection of the sample, in section 3 we describe the observations, in section 4 we analyse our results, and in section 5 we summarise our conclusions. \section{Sample selection} Our sample of 1FHL fields is a subset of those presented in \citet{Landi15c,Landi15a}. They found only one X--ray counterpart for each Fermi source, with the exception of 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408. However, despite the better positional accuracy achieved, it is important to note that X--ray error circles are still large enough (i.e. $\sim$6 arcseconds) to find more than one optical source tentatively associated with each single X--ray counterpart. Thus, a supplementary investigation is needed to single out the actual counterpart of the $\gamma$--ray/X--ray emitter. For this reason, we set up an international campaign to obtain spectroscopic observations of candidate optical counterparts in 13 fields, which are the subject of this paper. Details on the observations can be found in Table 1. \section{Observations} The optical spectroscopic observations were carried out at four different observatories for a total of 18 nights: \begin{itemize} \item Three nights (from 10 Mar 2015 to 12 Mar 2015) at the 1.52m Cassini telescope of the Bologna Observatory in Loiano (LOI), Italy, with the BFOSC spectrograph and a 2.0 arcsec slit (0.40 nm/px dispersion). The data covered a range from 350 to 800\,nm. \item Three nights (19 May 2015, 21 Jun 2015, and 09 Jul 2015) at the 3.58m Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) in La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain, with the DOLORES (LRS) spectrograph and a 1.5 arcsec slit (0.25 nm/px dispersion). The data covered a range from 370 to 800\,nm. \item Two nights (13 Oct 2015 and 14 Oct 2015) at the 2.5m\,Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT), in La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain, with the ALFOSC spectrograph and a 1.0 arcsec slit (0.30 nm/px dispersion). The data covered the 350 to 900\,nm range. \item Eight nights (from 06 Nov 2015 to 09 Nov 2015 and from 14 Jan 2016 to 17 Jan 2016) at the 2.12m telescope in San Pedro M\'artir (SPM), Mexico, with the Boller \& Chivens spectrograph and a 2.5 arcsec slit (0.23 nm/px dispersion). The data covered a range from 350 to 800\,nm. \end{itemize} The data were cleaned from cosmic rays, bias corrected, flat--fielded, and both wavelength and flux calibrated using IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy (AURA) under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.} standard packages, wavelength calibration lamps, and spectrophotometric standard stars. In each case, the estimated wavelength calibration error is less than 0.4\,nm. \section{Results} In Figure \ref{fig1}, we present the optical spectra for each analysed object in the upper panels, while in the lower panels we show the continuum--normalised spectra in order to highlight the presence of spectral features (if any). \begin{figure}[!htp] \centering \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0044.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0338.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0439.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0639_3.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0746.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ0804.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ1115_B.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.463\hsize]{1FHLJ1315.eps} \caption{Optical spectra obtained for the whole sample presented in this paper. Upper panels show the observed spectra, while lower panels show the spectra with normalised flux. Absorption lines or bands present at 686.9\,nm, $\sim$718.6\,nm, and 760.5\,nm are telluric. Absorption lines present at 589.0\,nm and 589.6\,nm correspond to the NaI doublet from the interstellar medium, although in the case of 1FHL\,J0639.6-1244 it could possibly be superimposed on the MgI line at $z=0.135$. Lines marked 'DIB' correspond to diffuse interstellar bands, while those marked with a question mark are hard to identify because they are on the edge of detection and because of the lack of other lines to obtain a redshift value. Sources are given with their USNO designator, while the proposed 1FHL counterpart is given in parenthesis.} \label{fig1} \end{figure} \addtocounter{figure}{-1} \begin{figure}[!htp] \centering \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ1410_A.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ1410_B.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ1512.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ1549.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ1841.eps} \includegraphics[angle=270,width=0.47\hsize]{1FHLJ2002.eps} \caption{(Continued).} \label{fig2} \end{figure} \begin{table}[!htp] \caption{Nature of each of the observed optical counterpart candidates for 1FHL sources.} \label{tab2} \centering \setlength{\tabcolsep}{6pt} \begin{tabular}{cccccc} \hline\hline \\ USNO designator & Features & EW [\AA] & Flux & Redshift & Class \\ 1FHL association (Distance) &&&&& \\ (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) \\ \hline\hline U0750-00173701 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0044.0-1111 (5.7) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0975-00792795 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0338.4+1304 (2.5) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0675-01653184 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0439.9-1858 (2.9) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0750-02519189 & G &1.0$\pm$0.6 & -8$\pm$-4 & 0.135$\pm$0.001 & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0639.6-1244 (10.7) & Na &2.3$\pm$1 & -21$\pm$-10 & & \\ \hline U0875-0218538 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0746.3-0225 (1.7) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0825-05946383 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}0804.8-0626 (2.1) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0825-05946383 & Ly$\alpha$& 312$\pm$28 & 95$\pm$10 & 2.929$\pm$0.003 & QSO \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1115.0-0701 (3.2) & NV & 262$\pm$49 & 76$\pm$12 & & \\ & SiV/OIV & 79$\pm$14 & 21$\pm$3 & & \\ & CIV & 264$\pm$31 & 82$\pm$6 & & \\ \hline U0750-08080787 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1315.7-0730 (3.3) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U1575-03416792 & MgII & 17$\pm$6 & 15$\pm$4 & 0.429$\pm$0.001 & NLS1 \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1410.4+7408 A (4.4) & H$\gamma$ & 18$\pm$9 & 9$\pm$4 & & \\ & H$\beta$ & 35$\pm$14 & 14$\pm$5 & & \\ & [OIII] & -- & -- & & \\ \hline U1575-03416943 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1410.4+7408 B (3.3) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0600-17715078 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1512.1-2255 (1.0) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U0825-08948904 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1549.9-0658 (1.4) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U1125-10089754 & -- & -- & -- & -- & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}1841.1+2914 (5.6) & -- & -- & -- & -- & \\ \hline U1530-0317394 & FeII & 11$\pm$7 & -1.5$\pm$-0.9 & $\ge$0.9 & BL Lac \\ \rm{1FHL\,J}2002.6+6303 (1.1) & MgIIa & 10$\pm$3 & -1.6$\pm$-0.6 & & \\ & MgIIb & 7$\pm$2 & -1.1$\pm$-0.4 & & \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Notes: The units for all the reported flux densities are $\rm{1\times 10^{-16}\cdot erg \cdot cm^{-2} \cdot sec^{-1} \cdot \AA^{-1}}$.}\\ \multicolumn{6}{c}{The equivalent width (EW) is given in the observer's frame. Emission lines are given}\\ \multicolumn{6}{c}{as positive flux values, and absorption lines as negative flux values. The distance}\\ \multicolumn{6}{c}{between the USNO source and the 1FHL centroid is given in arcseconds.}\\ \end{tabular} \end{table} \normalsize In 12 out of 14 cases, the spectra resulted in non-thermal continua. Moreover, no intrinsic features were present in 10 out of 14 objects. Both are typical characteristics of blazar spectra. In all cases in which some features are found, a redshift (or at least a lower limit to it) was derived, in addition to obtaining equivalent widths and fluxes for all lines, in order to determine the nature of each source. Results from our analysis can be found in Table \ref{tab2}, where we report in column 1 the USNO source name along with the name of the proposed 1FHL counterpart and the distance between them, in column 2 the emission and/or absorption lines found (if any), in columns 3 and 4 their measured equivalent widths and fluxes, in column 5 the derived redshift (if any), and in column 6 the classification of the source. Further details are shown in the next sections. It is worth mentioning that, in the cases of 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701 and 1FHL\,J0804.8-0626, the correlation with X--ray data showed only one source inside the $\gamma$--ray positional error area, while in optical wavelengths (as seen in the USNO plates, with a limiting magnitude of $V\approx21$ mag) two objects could be found within the X--ray error circle. In both cases, the other object was also analysed and ruled out because of its star--like spectrum, i.e. showing a thermal continuum, no emission lines, and a variety of absorption lines potentially associated with stellar processes (for instance, the Balmer series) at redshift zero. A different case is that of fields 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 A and B, which are potentially associated with the same source in the 1FHL catalogue but for which two X--ray objects were found within the $\gamma$--ray error ellipse \citep{Landi15a} and, consequently, two putative optical counterparts could be potentially associated with this $\gamma$--ray source. This case will be discussed in Section 5.2. Once confirmed as potential counterparts (i.e. after discarding all the sources from which no high-energy emission is expected, as for example stars), we improved their equatorial coordinates by searching for detected objects in the 2MASS \citep{Skrutskie06} catalogue, which provides positions with uncertainties of less than 0.1 arcsec. Only four of them were not found in this catalogue: the optical sources potentially associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408A, 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408B, 1FHL\,J1549.9-0658, and 1FHL\,J1841.1+2914. Nevertheless, the first three were found in the USNO-A2.0 catalogue \citep{Monet98}, and the last one in the USNO-B1.0 catalogue \citep{Monet03}, which provide an accuracy of 0.2 arcsec. Source details are given in the following subsections. \subsection{BL Lacs} Out of the 14 optical sources observed, we were able to classify 12 as blazars of BL Lac class: These are our associations with Fermi sources 1FHL\,J0044.0-1111, 1FHL\,J0338.4+1304, 1FHL\,J0439.9-1858, 1FHL\,J0639.6-1244, 1FHL\,J0746.3-0225, 1FHL\,J0804.8-0626, 1FHL\,J1315.7-0730, 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 B, 1FHL\,J1512.1-2255, 1FHL\,J1549.9-0658, 1FHL\,J1841.1+2914, and 1FHL\,J2002.6+6303. Indeed, all the sources show a non--thermal, power--law, intrinsically blue continuum, and no apparent intrinsic emissions or absorptions, with the exception of U0750-02519189 (associated with 1FHL\,J0639.6-1244), in which its host galaxy contribution is visible (meaning it is a blazar of the BZG type, as described by the Roma-BZCAT catalogue in \citet{Massaro15z}), showing Na and G-band absorptions at a redshift $z=0.135\pm 0.001$. This, alongside a lower limit for the redshift of our association for 1FHL\,J2002.6+6303, U1530-0317394 ($z\ge 0.9$), obtained from the detection of intervening FeII and MgII absorptions, is the only value for $z$ we were able to derive from the spectra of this BL Lac subsample. In the case of the optical association of 1FHL\,J0804.8-0626, there are two optical sources inside the X--ray error box, according to the USNO plates. Both of them were observed and analysed. The faintest one (at optical position $8^h04^m58\fs48^s, -6^{\circ}24'21\farcs1$) showed a normal G-type star spectrum, thus discarding any possibility of potential association with the high--energy emitting source. The coordinates published in Table \ref{tab1} are thus those of the BL Lac conclusively associated through optical spectroscopy, which is the WISE source suggested by \citet{Landi15c} and which we associate with the $\gamma$--ray source. \subsection{U1575-03416943} This source potentially associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 A shows clear emission lines (MgII, H$\delta$, H$\gamma$, H$\beta$, and [OIII]) at a common redshift $z=0.429\pm 0.001$. Given that the velocities associated with the emission of the H$\beta$ line are around $1450\, \rm{km/s}$, and that the ratio between the fluxes of emission lines $[\rm{OIII}]$ and $\rm{H}\beta$ is $\le 0.5$, we conclude that this object is a narrow line Seyfert 1 galaxy \citep[NLS1,][]{Osterbrock85,Goodrich89}. \subsection{U0825-05946383} The field associated with 1FHL J1115.0-0701 presented two optical sources within the X--ray positional uncertainty box, according to the USNO plates. In this case, again, both spectra were analysed, and we could discard one of them on the basis of typical stellar features (in particular, we classified it as a K-type star, at position $11^h 15^m 15\fs3^s,-07^{\circ}01'26\farcs9$). The spectrum of the other optical source shows strong, luminous emission lines for Ly$\alpha$, NV, SIV, and CIV, at the high redshift value of $z=2.929\pm 0.003$; these characteristics are typical of a high--redshift quasar. However, its potential association with the 1FHL source is not ironclad (see Section 5.3). \section{Discussion} In this section we analyse in detail the spectral characteristics of the results obtained for the 14 objects we spectroscopically associated in this work. In particular, we discuss general properties in subsets divided by class of object: BL Lacs (12 objects), NLS1 (1 object), and quasars (1 object). \subsection{BL Lacs} In order to analyse the emission processes involved, we built a plot of spectral indices as shown in \citet{Abdo10c}, which is useful to easily spot the synchrotron peak for each object. To this end, and following \citet{Masetti13}, we searched for the X--ray fluxes of the sources in our sample as measured with XRT or ROSAT, corrected from Galactic absorption with PIMMS \citep{Mukai93} using the Galactic $N_H$ values given by \citet{Landi15a}, when available, or those given by \citet{Kalberla05}. We also retrieved their $R$ magnitudes from the USNO catalogues, from which we derived absorption-corrected fluxes using the absorption maps from \citet{Schlegel98}, the reddening law of \citet{Cardelli89}, and the total-to-selective extinction ratio of \citet{Rieke85}; with the conversion factor of \citet{Fukugita95} we then rescaled the flux values to 500\,nm using the same procedure given by \citet{Masetti13}. Furthermore, we obtained their radio flux densities at 1.4GHz, when available, from the NVSS catalogue \citep{Condon98} and rescaled them to 5\,GHz assuming a radio flat spectral shape \citep{Begelman84} in order to use the same relationship given in \citet{Abdo10c}. With the radio, optical, and X-ray absorption-corrected fluxes we were able to obtain spectral indices $\alpha_{ox}$ from X--ray to optical and $\alpha_{ro}$ from optical to radio frequencies. In Figure \ref{fig3}, we included all the sources from this sample, numbered in order of right ascension (see Table \ref{tab1}), in a $\alpha_{ox}-\alpha_{ro}$ plot \citep{PadovaniGiommi95,Abdo10c}. In dashed lines, we indicate the location of synchrotron peaks at low ($10^{14}\rm{Hz}$), intermediate ($10^{15}\rm{Hz}$), and high ($10^{16}\rm{Hz}$) frequencies. Eight BL Lacs in our sample have their synchrotron peaks at a frequency higher than $10^{15}\rm{Hz}$, which are likely candidates to be detected at TeV energies \citep{Massaro08}. It is important to highlight that the BL Lac associated with 1FHL\,1410.4+7408 B did not show any radio emission, which is why we used the detection threshold from the NVSS survey ($2.5\rm{mJy}$) as upper limit to its radio flux density. The resulting lower limit to $\alpha_{ro}$ is indicated in the plot with an arrow. For completeness, we also included the recently studied optical objects associated with 1FHL\,J1129.2-7759, 1FHL\,J1328.5-4728, and 1FHL\,2257.9-3644 which were confirmed as BL Lacs by \citet{Massaro15} (for which we found an intermediate synchrotron peak, marked with an M in Figure \ref{fig3}), \citet{Ricci15} (which shows a low synchrotron peak, marked with an R) and \citet{Landoni15} (intermediate synchrotron peak, marked with an L), respectively. These objects are also part of the sample selected by \citet{Landi15c} and \citet{Landi15a}. In addition, we added the two non-BL Lac objects from our sample, the potential associations with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 A (the NLS1 presented in Section 4.2) and 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701 (the quasar) just to present the whole sample in one plot, although it is not possible to compare these sources with BL Lacs given that this kind of objects generally present a thermal emission component which cannot be easily separated from the non-thermal one. Neither one presents radio emission, as seen in Figure \ref{fig3}, so also in this case we used the NVSS threshold value to determine a lower limit for $\alpha_{ro}$. \begin{figure}[!htp] \centering \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{SpectralIndices.eps} \caption{Analysed sources in the spectral indices $\alpha_{ox}-\alpha_{ro}$ plane. Lower limits are indicated with an arrow. Numbers refer to the values presented in Table \ref{tab1}, while letters L, M, and R refer to the objects in \citet{Landi15a,Landi15c} associated by \citet{Landoni15}, \citet{Massaro15}, and \citet{Ricci15}, respectively. Sources 5, 6, 11 and 13 are shown as points for the sake of clarity. The red shaded area indicates the region where the relationship describing synchrotron peak values changes its functional form, as explained in \citet{Abdo10c}.} \label{fig3} \end{figure} \subsection{The case of 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408} As 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 is potentially associated with two different X--ray emitting and optically peculiar objects according to \citet{Landi15a}, it is not clear which of them is responsible for the detected $\gamma$--ray emission. Given that the spectral index of the $\gamma$--ray source, according to the 1FHL catalogue, is $\alpha_{\gamma}=2.65$, its counterpart is more likely a flat spectrum radio quasar (FSRQ) than a BL Lac \citep{Ackermann15}. We were not able to find any radio counterpart association in public surveys for the NLS1 potentially associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,A. Although NLS1 have been indicated as responsible for $\gamma$--ray as well as X--ray emission \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{Abdo09,Foschini15}, the fact that it is not detected at radio bands brings up the possibility that this association is the product of a contamination of the sample due to the relative width of the Fermi positional error boxes. Only radio loud NLS1 have been detected in high energies. Likewise, the BL Lac object probably associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,B also does not show radio emission. It is important to note that, if confirmed, the BL Lac object 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,B would be one of the very few radio quiet $\gamma$--ray emitting BL Lac objects identified to date. Similar recent cases can be found in \citet{Paggi14} and in \citet{Ricci15}. To be conservative, it is thus safe to say that it is still not clear which of the two sources is the actual $\gamma$--ray emitter, or that the two objects are possibly contributing to the total $\gamma$--ray flux detected with Fermi. However, given the above considerations, it is more likely that the counterpart to this 1FHL $\gamma$--ray source is the BL Lac object associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,B. Regarding the NLS1 object associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,A, a central black hole mass value can be estimated through measuring the FWHM and flux of the $H_{\beta}$ line \citep{Kaspi00,Wu04} corrected for foreground galactic absorption. This allows us to infer a mass of $\sim5\times10^{6}\rm{M}_{\sun}$ for the black hole. \subsection{The case of 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701} We classified the optical counterpart of the X--ray source found within the 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701 positional uncertainty ellipse as a high--redshift quasar, with $z=2.929\pm 0.003$. This value, in turn, allows us to estimate a luminosity distance of $\sim24.7$ Gpc, assuming $\rm{H_0}=70.0$, $\Omega_{\rm{m}}=0.3$ and $\Omega_{\rm{\Lambda}}=0.7$. Following \citet{Park13}, we measured the flux and width of the CIV emission line together with the flux level of the continuum at 135\,nm (rest--frame), both corrected for foreground galactic absorption, to obtain an estimate for the mass of its central black hole. This resulted in $4.6\times10^{9}\rm{M}_{\sun}$, which is within the range of expected black hole masses for this kind of AGN \citep{Vestergaard06}. Moreover, the above distance estimate implies an X--ray luminosity of $L_X=7.9\times10^{45}\rm{erg/s}$ in the 2--10 keV band, whereas the black hole mass corresponds to an Eddington luminosity value $L_{\rm{Edd}}=5.5\times10^{47}\rm{erg/s}$. Adopting a correction factor $C_X=15.8$ to obtain the X--ray bolometric luminosity \citep{Ho09}, we find an Eddington ratio of $L_{\rm{X}}/L_{\rm{Edd}} = 0.2$. Assuming this quasar is the real counterpart for the 1FHL source, its $\gamma$--ray luminosity results in $L_{\gamma}=3.2\times10^{47}\rm{erg/s}$. This value, although rarely reached, is within the range expected for $\gamma$--ray emitting FSRQs \citep{Cavaliere02}. However, \citet{Petrov13}, \citet{Massaro13}, and \citet{Schinzel15} proposed a potential association of this Fermi source with a radio object (NVSS\,J111511--070238) located at a distance $\sim90\,\rm{arcsec}$ from the X--ray source found by \citet{Landi15a}. The radio source NVSS\,J111511--070238 is located at a distance of $\sim$2.5\,arcmin from the 1FHL source, while the X--ray source lies at a distance of $\sim$3.2\,arcmin from the latter. These two objects are not positionally consistent with each other. Therefore, this suggests that there may be two AGN within the Fermi error ellipse, a radio emitting one and an X--ray emitting one, which is the one we classify as a quasar. In an attempt to discard one of the two proposed counterparts, we searched for archival multiwavelength data for both sources. We found no radio emission at the position of the X--ray quasar, suggesting that the object is possibly radio quiet and/or too cosmologically distant to be detected in the NVSS. However, this non--detection does not completely rule out the quasar as the real counterpart. Figure 14 of \citet{Abdo09b} suggests a connection between radio luminosities and the $\gamma$--ray spectral indices obtained with the whole energy band at which Fermi/LAT works (i.e. 20 MeV to 300 GeV). If this object falls on the faint side of the connection ($\sim 1\times 10^{42}\,\rm{erg/s}$), shallow radio surveys are not able to detect any emission: indeed, at a redshift $z=2.929$ that luminosity would correspond to a flux density of $\sim 1\,\rm{mJy}$, which is well below the detection threshold of the NVSS ($2.5\,\rm{mJy}$). Moreover, given that the spectral index across the whole Fermi/LAT energy range \citep[$\alpha_{\gamma}=2.11$,][]{Acero15} for this $\gamma$--ray source is an intermediate value between those of each kind, we cannot determine whether it is a BL Lac or a FSRQ. On the other hand, its $\gamma$--ray spectral index above 10 GeV ($\alpha_{\gamma}=1.88$) is too low for typical FSRQs, but rather normal for BL Lac objects \citep{Ackermann13}. In conclusion, although no other high--energy emitting source was found within the 1FHL positional uncertainty ellipse, we cannot rule out the possibility that this quasar is a background object and that the potential association is actually spurious. To conclusively pinpoint the true association it is necessary to obtain a spectrum of the optical counterpart of the above mentioned radio source, which shows a magnitude $R$ of $\sim\,19.5$ in the USNO-B1.0 catalogue. \section{Conclusions} We obtained optical spectra for 14 potential associations with $\gamma$--ray sources from the 1FHL catalogue, which were selected on the basis of their X--ray emission. These are our findings: \begin{enumerate} \item From these spectra, it is clear that 12 of these objects correspond to blazars belonging to the BL Lac class, with non-thermal continua and no spectral features. There are two exceptions: U0750-02519189, associated with 1FHL\,J0639.6-1244, whose host galaxy's spectroscopic signature is visible and allowed us to place it at a redshift of $z=0.135\pm 0.001$; and U1530-0317394, associated with 1FHL\,J2002.6+6303, which presents absorption from an intervening medium, placing it at a minimum redshift $z\ge 0.9$. The other 10 BL Lacs remain without a value for their redshifts. \item At least 8 out of the 12 BL Lacs present spectral indices in agreement with a synchrotron peak at a frequency higher than $10^{15}\rm{Hz}$, meaning they are likely candidates to be detected at TeV energies. \item The X--ray counterpart within the field of 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701 presents strong, broad optical emission lines at a redshift of $z=2.929\pm 0.003$, indicating that it is an AGN of the quasar class. By measuring the flux and width of the CIV emission line, we could estimate the mass of the central black hole as $4.6\times10^{9}\,\rm{M}_{\sun}$. Assuming this is the real counterpart for 1FHL\,J1115.0-0701, its luminosity would be $L_{\gamma}=3.2\times10^{47}\,\rm{erg/s}$ and $L_X=7.9\times10^{45}\,\rm{erg/s}$. However, from multiwavelength considerations, we cannot rule out the possibility that this quasar is a background object and that its potential association with the $\gamma$--ray source is the product of statistical contamination. Further analysis is needed, in particular concerning the other object proposed as the real counterpart, radio source NVSS\,J111511--070238. \item U1575--03416943, potentially associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 A, shows relatively narrow but strong emission lines at a redshift of $z=0.429\pm 0.001$. Given its optical spectral characteristics, we classified it as a NLS1. For this object we infer a central black hole mass of $\sim5\times10^{6}\,\rm{M}_{\sun}$. \item Given that the source 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408 was potentially associated with objects A (a NLS1) and B (a BL Lac), we suggest -to be conservative- that it is still not clear which of the two sources is the actual $\gamma$--ray emitter, or if both of them are contributing to the total $\gamma$--ray emission. However, it is more likely the BL Lac object associated with 1FHL\,J1410.4+7408\,B. \item Our optical spectroscopy confirmed all the counterpart candidates of the X--ray sources potentially associated with 1FHL objects selected for this paper, with 1FHL\,J1115.0--0701 as the only possible exception. We were able to classify all of them as extragalactic high--energy active nuclei. This strengthens the utility of the proposed approach - crossmatching $\gamma$--ray positions to soft X--ray ones, improving accuracy, then completing the identification process with optical follow--up work and multiwavelength archival data. \end{enumerate} \begin{acknowledgements} E. J. Marchesini would like to thank Francesco Massaro and Paola Grandi for the useful discussions on this work, and Gianluca Israel for coordinating the NOT observations and for useful comments. N. Masetti thanks the Facultad de Ciencias Astron\'omicas y Geof\'isicas de La Plata for the warm hospitality during the preparation of this paper. We thank Roberto Gualandi for night assistance at the Loiano telescope, and Gloria Andreuzzi for coordinating our service mode observation at the TNG. We also acknowledge the Italian Space Agency financial support (ASI/INAF agreement n. 2013-025.R.0). This work is funded under the co-tutoring agreement between University of Turin and University of La Plata. \end{acknowledgements} \bibliographystyle{aa}
\section{Introduction} \setcounter{equation}{0} Bern, Carrasco, and Johansson discovered that the color-ordered amplitudes of tree-level $n$-gluon amplitudes obey a set of helicity-independent relations, linear relations whose coefficients depend only on Lorentz-invariant combinations of the momenta of the particles \cite{Bern:2008qj}. They inferred these relations by imposing color-kinematic duality on the kinematic numerators appearing in a cubic decomposition of the amplitude. These BCJ relations have been proven through a variety of approaches: string theory \cite{BjerrumBohr:2009rd,Stieberger:2009hq}, on-shell BCFW recursion \cite{Feng:2010my,Chen:2011jxa}, the Cachazo-He-Yuan representation \cite{Cachazo:2012uq,Cachazo:2013iaa,Cachazo:2013iea}, and most recently by using the invariance of the $n$-gluon amplitude under a momentum-dependent shift of the color factors appearing in the cubic decomposition \cite{Brown:2016mrh}. \\ [-2mm] Several authors have turned their attention to the question of color-kinematic duality in gauge-theory amplitudes containing (massless or massive) quarks or other particles in the fundamental representation of the gauge group \cite{Johansson:2014zca,Naculich:2014naa,Weinzierl:2014ava,Johansson:2015oia,Mastrolia:2015maa,delaCruz:2015dpa,delaCruz:2015raa,Chiodaroli:2015rdg,He:2016dol}. Melia characterized an independent basis of primitive amplitudes for tree-level amplitudes that involve gluons and an arbitrary number of pairs of differently flavored fundamentals \cite{Melia:2013bta,Melia:2013epa,Melia:2015ika}. By imposing color-kinematic duality, Johansson and Ochirov showed that these Melia amplitudes satisfy a set of BCJ relations that are formally identical\footnote{ {i.e.,~} when written in terms of $k_a \cdot k_b$, where $k_a$ is the momentum of one of the gluons} to a subset of the $n$-gluon BCJ relations \cite{Johansson:2015oia}. The same relations had previously been established, also by assuming color-kinematic duality, for amplitudes with gluons and a single pair of massive fundamentals \cite{Naculich:2014naa}. These relations were subsequently proven using BCFW on-shell recursion by de la Cruz, Kniss, and Weinzierl \cite{delaCruz:2015dpa}. \\ [-2mm] In this paper, we demonstrate that all the BCJ relations found in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia} are a consequence of the color-factor symmetry possessed by the amplitude. This symmetry, recently established in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}, states that the amplitude is invariant under certain momentum-dependent shifts of the color factors. We show that for the $n$-point amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$, with $k$ pairs of fundamentals and $n-2k$ gluons, there is an $(n-3)!/k!$-parameter family of color-factor shifts associated with each external gluon in the amplitude. The total number of independent color-factor shifts is given by $(n-2k) (n-3)!/k!$ for $k\ge 2$, and $(n-3) (n-3)!$ for $k=0$ and $1$. We show that the color factors introduced by Johansson and Ochirov \cite{Johansson:2015oia} transform in a particularly simple way under a color-factor shift. Consequently, the BCJ relations among the primitive amplitudes follow immediately from the invariance under color-factor shifts of the Melia-Johansson-Ochirov proper decomposition of the amplitude. \\ [-2mm] Johansson and Ochirov found that the BCJ relations satisfied by the Melia primitives are directly tied to the presence of external gluons in the amplitude. Each set of fundamental relations corresponds to one of the external gluons, and when the amplitude contains no external gluons, no relations exist among the primitive amplitudes. The link shown in this paper between the color-factor symmetry and BCJ relations makes sense of this result, since the color-factor shifts are associated with external gluons in the amplitude. The number of independent BCJ relations is precisely equal to the dimension of the color-factor group, and the absence of color-factor symmetry for amplitudes with no gluons explains the absence of relations among the primitive amplitudes. \\ [-2mm] We also describe the cubic vertex expansion for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ that was introduced in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}, and show that the color-factor symmetry leads to gauge-invariant constraints on the kinematic numerators. These constraints are less stringent than the kinematic Jacobi relations but are nonetheless sufficient to imply the validity of the BCJ relations. \\ [-2mm] The contents of this paper are as follows. In sec.~\ref{sec:proper}, we describe the Melia basis of primitive amplitudes for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ and the corresponding color factors found by Johansson and Ochirov. In sec.~\ref{sec:bcj}, we review the BCJ relations for the primitive amplitudes of $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$. In sec.~\ref{sec:cfs}, we describe the color-factor symmetry and determine the shifts of the Johansson-Ochirov color factors. In sec.~\ref{sec:bcjcfs}, we review the proof of the invariance of $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ under the color-factor shift, and show that the BCJ relations as well as constraints on kinematic numerators follow directly from this invariance. Section~\ref{sec:concl} contains our conclusions. \section{Proper decompositions of gauge-theory amplitudes} \setcounter{equation}{0} \label{sec:proper} In this section, we describe proper decompositions of gauge-theory amplitudes with particles in the adjoint and fundamental representations; that is, decompositions in terms of an independent set of color factors and gauge-invariant primitive amplitudes. These include the Del Duca-Dixon-Maltoni decomposition of $n$-gluon amplitudes and the recently developed Melia-Johansson-Ochirov decomposition of amplitudes with $n-2k$ gluons and $k$ pairs of fundamentals. \\ [-2mm] Consider a tree-level $n$-point gauge-theory amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ with $n-2k$ gluons and $k$ pairs of (massless or massive) particles $\psi$ and ${\bar\psi}$ in the fundamental (and antifundamental) representation\footnote{The particles $\psi$ can actually be in any representation, but we refer to the fundamental for convenience.} of the gauge group, with arbitrary spin $\le 1$. This amplitude may be written in a cubic decomposition\cite{Bern:2008qj} \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,k} ~=~ \sum_i {c_i ~ n_i \over d_i } \label{cubicdecomp} \end{equation} namely, as a sum over diagrams $i$ consisting only of trivalent vertices. The color factor $c_i$ associated with each diagram is obtained by sewing together $ggg$ vertices $f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{c}} $ and ${\bar\psi} g \psi $ vertices $(T^\textsf{a} )^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}}$, where $T^\textsf{a}$ denote generators in the fundamental (or other) representation. The kinematic numerator $n_i$ carries information about the spin state of the particles. The denominator $d_i$ consists of the product of the inverse propagators associated with the diagram. Contributions from Feynman diagrams with quartic vertices (either $gggg$ or ${\bar\psi} g g \psi $ in the case of a scalar or vector $\psi$) are parceled out among the cubic diagrams. \\ [-2mm] In general, the color factors $c_i$ are not independent, but obey a set of Jacobi relations of the form \begin{equation} c_i + c_j + c_k ~=~ 0 \end{equation} by virtue of the group theory identities $ f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{e}} f_{\textsf{c} \textsf{d} \textsf{e}} +f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{c} \textsf{e}} f_{\textsf{d} \textsf{b} \textsf{e}} +f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{d} \textsf{e}} f_{\textsf{b} \textsf{c} \textsf{e}}=0 $ and $ f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{c}} ( T^{\textsf{c}} )^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}} = [ T^{\textsf{a}}, T^{\textsf{b}} ]^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}} $. Because of this, the kinematic numerators $n_i$ are not well-defined, but may undergo generalized gauge transformations \cite{Bern:2010ue,Bern:2010yg} that leave \eqn{cubicdecomp} unchanged. In principle, the Jacobi relations for the color factors may be solved in terms of an independent set of color factors $C_j$, and the amplitude written in a {\it proper} color decomposition \cite{Melia:2015ika} \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,k} ~=~ \sum_j C_j A_j \,. \label{proper} \end{equation} The coefficients $A_j$, referred to as primitive amplitudes, receive contributions from several different terms in \eqn{cubicdecomp}. Because the $C_j$ are independent, the primitive amplitudes will be well-defined (gauge invariant). \\ [-2mm] The primitive amplitudes may be chosen to be an independent subset of color-ordered amplitudes. The color-ordered amplitude $A(\alpha)$ is computed, using color-ordered Feynman rules \cite{Dixon:1996wi}, from the sum of planar Feynman diagrams whose external legs are in the order specified by the permutation $\alpha$. The color-ordered amplitudes are not independent, but obey various relations such as cyclicity and reflection invariance \cite{Mangano:1990by} and the Kleiss-Kuijf relations \cite{Kleiss:1988ne}. For pure gluon amplitudes ($k=0$), an independent set of $(n-2)!$ color-ordered amplitudes are those belonging to the Kleiss-Kuijf basis $A(1, \gamma(2), \cdots, \gamma(n-1), n ) $, in which the positions of two of the gluons are fixed and $\gamma$ is a permutation of $\{2, \cdots, n-1\}$. The corresponding color factors $C_j$ are the $(n-2)!$ half-ladder diagrams \begin{equation} {\bf c} _{1 \gamma n} ~=~ \sum_{\textsf{b}_1,\ldots,\textsf{b}_{n{-}3}} f_{\textsf{a}_{1} \textsf{a}_{\gamma(2)} \textsf{b}_1} f_{\textsf{b}_1 \textsf{a}_{\gamma(3)} \textsf{b}_2} \cdots f_{\textsf{b}_{n{-}3} \textsf{a}_{\gamma(n{-}1)} \textsf{a}_n} \,, \qquad \gamma \in S_{n-2} \end{equation} and the proper decomposition \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,0} (g_1, g_2, \cdots, g_{n}) ~=~ \sum_{\gamma \in S_{n-2}} {\bf c} _{1 \gamma n } \, A(1, \gamma(2), \cdots, \gamma(n-1), n) \label{ddm} \end{equation} is known as the Del Duca-Dixon-Maltoni decomposition \cite{DelDuca:1999rs}. \\ [-2mm] The $n$-point gauge-theory amplitude with $n-2$ gluons and one pair of fundamentals has a similar proper decomposition \cite{Kosower:1987ic,Mangano:1988kk} \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,1} ({\bar\psi}_1, \psi_2, g_3, \cdots, g_{n}) ~=~ \sum_{\gamma \in S_{n-2}} C_{1\gamma 2} \, A (1, \gamma(3), \cdots, \gamma(n),2) \label{ddmfund} \end{equation} where the independent color factors are given by \begin{equation} C_{1\gamma 2} ~=~ \left( {T}^{\textsf{a}_{\gamma(3)}}{T}^{\textsf{a}_{\gamma(4)}} \cdots {T}^{\textsf{a}_{\gamma(n)}} \right)^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~~ \textsf{i}_2} \label{halfladderfund} \qquad {\rm ~for~} k=1 \end{equation} with $\gamma$ a permutation of $\{3, \cdots, n\}$. \\ [-2mm] Finding a proper decomposition for amplitudes with more than one pair of fundamentals is a more subtle problem, but was recently solved by Melia \cite{Melia:2013bta,Melia:2013epa} and Johansson and Ochirov \cite{Johansson:2015oia}. Consider an $n$-point amplitude of the form \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,k} ( {\bar\psi}_1, \psi_2, {\bar\psi}_3, \psi_4, \cdots, {\bar\psi}_{2k-1}, \psi_{2k}, g_{2k+1}, \cdots, g_n) \end{equation} where particles $\psi$ in the fundamental representation have even labels, and particles ${\bar\psi}$ in the antifundamental representation have odd labels.\footnote{In refs.~\cite{Melia:2013bta,Melia:2013epa,Johansson:2015oia}, $\psi$ and ${\bar\psi}$ are referred to as quarks and antiquarks, but they could just as easily be scalar or vector particles.} We assume that the $\psi_{2\ell}$ all have different flavors (and possibly different masses), with ${\bar\psi}_{2\ell-1}$ having the corresponding antiflavor (and equal mass) to $\psi_{2\ell}$. This assumption entails no loss of generality since amplitudes with multiple pairs of fundamentals with the same flavor and mass can be obtained by setting flavors and masses equal and summing over permutations. As shown in ref.~\cite{Melia:2013bta}, many of the color-ordered amplitudes $A(\alpha)$ associated with this amplitude vanish because no planar Feynman diagram with external legs in the order $\alpha$ can be drawn that does not violate flavor conservation. Moreover, the non-vanishing color-ordered amplitudes satisfy further relations in addition to the Kleiss-Kuijf relations. Melia identified a subset of $(n-2)!/k!$ color-ordered amplitudes that form an independent set. \\ [-2mm] To describe the Melia basis of primitive amplitudes, we must recall the definition of a Dyck word \cite{Melia:2013bta}. A Dyck word of length $2r$ is a string composed of $r$ letters $ {\barpsi } $ and $r$ letters $ {\psi} $ such that the number of $ {\barpsi } $'s preceding any point in the string is greater than the number of preceding $ {\psi} $'s. An easy way to understand this is to visualize $ {\barpsi } $ as a left bracket $\{$ and $ {\psi} $ as a right bracket $\}$, in which case a Dyck word corresponds to a well-formed set of brackets. The number of such words is $(2r)!/(r+1)!r!$, the $r$th Catalan number. For example for $r=1$ there is only one Dyck word: $\{ \} $, for $r=2$ there are two: $\{\} \{\} $ and $\{\{\} \} $, and for $r=3$ there are five: $\{\} \{\} \{\} $, $\{\} \{\{\} \} $, $\{\{\} \} \{\} $, $\{\{\} \{\} \} $, and $\{\{\{\} \} \} $. \\ [-2mm] The Melia basis is the set of color-ordered amplitudes $ A( 1, \gamma(3), \cdots, \gamma(n), 2 )$, where $\gamma$ is any permutation of $\{ 3, \cdots, n \}$ such that the set of $k-1$ $ {\barpsi } $ and $k-1$ $ {\psi} $ in $\gamma$ form a Dyck word of length $2k-2$. The gluons may be distributed anywhere among the ${\bar\psi}$ and $\psi$ in $\gamma$. The number of distinct allowed patterns of ${\bar\psi}$, $\psi$, and $g$ is given by the number of Dyck words of length $2k-2$ times the number of ways of distributing $n-2k$ gluons among the letters of the Dyck word \begin{equation} {(2k-2)! \over k!(k-1)! } \times {n-2 \choose 2k-2} \,. \end{equation} For each allowed pattern, there are $(n-2k)!$ distinct choices for the gluon labels, and $(k-1)!$ choices for the ${\bar\psi}$ labels. The label on each $\psi$ is then fixed: it must have the flavor of the nearest unpaired ${\bar\psi}$ to its left. Thus, for example, for $ {\cal A} _{6,3}$ the allowed permutations $\gamma$ are $ {\bar\psi}_3 \psi_4 {\bar\psi}_5 \psi_6 $, $ {\bar\psi}_5 \psi_6 {\bar\psi}_3 \psi_4 $, $ {\bar\psi}_3 {\bar\psi}_5 \psi_6 \psi_4 $, and $ {\bar\psi}_5 {\bar\psi}_3 \psi_4 \psi_6 $, whereas for $ {\cal A} _{5,2}$ the allowed permutations are $ {\bar\psi}_3 \psi_4 g_5$, $ {\bar\psi}_3 g_5 \psi_4 $, and $ g_5{\bar\psi}_3 \psi_4 $. The multiplicity of the Melia basis is given by \begin{equation} {(2k-2)! \over k!(k-1)! } \times {n-2 \choose 2k-2} \times (n-2k)! \times (k-1)! ~=~ {(n-2)! \over k!} \end{equation} as found in ref.~\cite{Melia:2013epa}. \\ [-2mm] Having chosen the color-ordered amplitudes in the Melia basis $A(1, \gamma, 2)$ to be the primitive amplitudes in a proper decomposition (\ref{proper}), one may ask what is the corresponding set of independent color factors $C_{1 \gamma 2}$? Johansson and Ochirov (JO) posed and solved this problem in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. For $k=1$, all permutations $\gamma$ of $\{ 3, \cdots, n\}$ are allowed, and the corresponding color factors are given by \eqn{halfladderfund}, which we can conveniently denote as $\{1\| \gamma(3) \cdots \gamma(n) \| 2\}$. For $k>1$, the JO color factors $C_{1 \gamma 2}$ are given by linear combinations of cubic color factors $c_i$. To obtain these linear combinations, one starts with $\{1\| \gamma(3) \cdots \gamma(n) \| 2\}$ and then replaces each ${\bar\psi}_a$ appearing in $\gamma$ with the expression $\{ a \| \, T^\textsf{b}\!\otimes \Xi_{l-1}^\textsf{b}$, each $\psi_a$ with the expression $ \| a \} $, and each gluon $g_a$ with the operator $\Xi_{l}^{\textsf{a}_a}$, where \begin{equation} \Xi_l^\textsf{a} ~=~ \sum_{s=1}^{l} \underbrace{1 \otimes \cdots \otimes 1 \otimes \overbrace{T^\textsf{a} \otimes 1 \otimes \cdots \otimes 1}^{s} }_{l} \,. \label{Xi} \end{equation} The integer $l$ denotes the level of bracket ``nestedness'' at the point where $\Xi_l^{\textsf{a}_a}$ is inserted, {i.e.,~} the number of left brackets minus the number of right brackets to the left of the operator. The operator $\Xi_{l}^\textsf{a}$ is a tensor product of $l$ copies of the Lie algebra, where the sum runs over each position $s$ in the tensor product. Each copy of the Lie algebra representation corresponds to a particular nestedness level, starting from level $l$ (the leftmost copy) down to level one (the rightmost copy). The $\{a\|$ and $\|a\}$ act only on the copy of the Lie algebra at their corresponding nestedness level $l$. The operator $\Xi_l^\textsf{a}$ is conveniently represented by fig.~\ref{fig:u1}, in which the open circles represent summation over the possible locations where the gluon line can attach. For $k=1$, $\Xi_{1}^\textsf{a} = T^\textsf{a}$ so the JO prescription simply reduces to \eqn{halfladderfund}. For $k>1$, we end up with (a linear combination of) $k$ strings of generators of the form (\ref{halfladderfund}). For a more detailed description and justification of the JO color factors and many illuminating examples, we refer the reader to ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. \\ [-2mm] \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=100 690 80 50,clip=true]{f1.pdf} \caption{Diagrammatic form of the operator $\Xi^\textsf{a}_l$.} \label{fig:u1} \end{center} \end{figure} Having defined the primitive amplitudes and corresponding color factors, we can write the proper (Melia-Johansson-Ochirov) decomposition of the amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ as \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,k} ( {\bar\psi}_1, \psi_2, {\bar\psi}_3, \psi_4, \cdots, {\bar\psi}_{2k-1}, \psi_{2k}, g_{2k+1}, \cdots, g_n) ~=~ \sum_{\gamma \in \text{Melia basis}} C_{1\gamma 2} \, A (1, \gamma(3), \cdots, \gamma(n), 2) \,. \label{mjo} \end{equation} This expression is equivalent to \eqn{cubicdecomp}, as was explicitly verified for $n \le 8$ (and for $n=9$, $k=4$) in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}, and was proven for all $n$ in ref.~\cite{Melia:2015ika}. Noting the similarity to \eqn{ddmfund}, the JO color factors $C_{1\gamma 2}$ can be considered the natural generalization of the half-ladder color factors \eqn{halfladderfund}. We will see more evidence of this correspondence in sec.~\ref{sec:cfs}. \\ [-2mm] \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=80 710 50 65,clip=true]{f2.pdf} \caption{\small Color factors $c_1$ through $c_5$ for $ {\cal A} _{5,2}$.} \label{fig:u2} \end{center} \end{figure} We conclude this section with a concrete example of the ideas discussed above, the five-point amplitude with one gluon and two pairs of fundamentals $ {\cal A} _{5,2} ( {\bar\psi}_1, \psi_2, {\bar\psi}_3, \psi_4, g_5)$. Five cubic diagrams contribute to this amplitude (see fig.~\ref{fig:u2}) \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{5,2} ~=~ \sum_{i=1}^5 {c_i ~ n_i \over d_i } \label{fivepointcubicdecomp} \end{equation} where the color factors and denominators have the form \cite{Johansson:2015oia} \begin{align} c_1 &= (T^{\textsf{a}_5} T^\textsf{b} )^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~\textsf{i}_2} (T^\textsf{b})^{\textsf{i}_3}_{~\textsf{i}_4} \,, \qquad~ & d_1 &= (s_{15}\!-\!m_1^2) s_{34} = 2 s_{34} \, k_1 \cdot k_5 \, \,, \nonumber\\ c_2 &= (T^\textsf{b} T^{\textsf{a}_5})^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~\textsf{i}_2} (T^\textsf{b})^{\textsf{i}_3}_{~\textsf{i}_4} \,, \qquad~ & d_2 &= (s_{25}\!-\!m_1^2) s_{34} = 2 s_{34} \, k_2 \cdot k_5 \, \,, \nonumber\\ c_3 &= (T^\textsf{b} )^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~\textsf{i}_2} (T^{\textsf{a}_5} T^\textsf{b})^{\textsf{i}_3}_{~\textsf{i}_4} \,, \qquad~ & d_3 &= s_{12} (s_{35}\!-\!m_3^2) = 2 s_{12} \, k_3 \cdot k_5 \, \,, \nonumber\\ c_4 &= (T^\textsf{b} )^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~\textsf{i}_2} (T^\textsf{b} T^{\textsf{a}_5})^{\textsf{i}_3}_{~\textsf{i}_4} \,, \qquad~ & d_4 &= s_{12} (s_{45}\!-\!m_3^2) = 2 s_{12} \, k_4 \cdot k_5 \, \,, \nonumber\\ c_5 &= f^{\textsf{a}_5 \textsf{b} \textsf{c}}\;\! (T^\textsf{b})^{\textsf{i}_1}_{~\textsf{i}_2} (T^\textsf{c})^{\textsf{i}_3}_{~\textsf{i}_4} \,, \qquad~ & d_5 &= s_{12} s_{34} \label{fivepointcolorfactors} \end{align} with $s_{ij} = (k_i + k_j)^2$. The kinematic numerators $n_i$ depend on the spin of the fundamentals; explicit expressions for spin one-half fundamentals are given in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. By virtue of $[T^{\textsf{a}},T^{\textsf{b}}]^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}} = f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{c}} ( T^{\textsf{c}} )^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}} $, the color factors obey two Jacobi relations \begin{equation} c_1 - c_2 + c_5 ~=~ 0 \,, \qquad \qquad c_3 - c_4 - c_5 ~=~ 0 \,. \label{fivepointjacobi} \end{equation} Thus the proper decomposition contains three terms. The Melia basis primitive amplitudes are \begin{equation} A(1,5,3,4,2) ~=~ \frac{n_1}{d_1} - \frac{n_3}{d_3} - \frac{n_5}{d_5} \,, \qquad A(1,3,5,4,2) ~=~ \frac{n_3}{d_3} + \frac{n_4}{d_4} \,, \qquad A(1,3,4,5,2) ~=~ \frac{n_2}{d_2} - \frac{n_4}{d_4} + \frac{n_5}{d_5} \label{primitives5point} \end{equation} and the corresponding JO color factors are \begin{align} C_{15342} ~&=~ \{1\| T^{\textsf{a}_5} \{3\| T^\textsf{b} \otimes T^\textsf{b} \|4\} \|2\} ~=~c_1 \,, \nonumber\\ C_{13542} ~&=~ \{1\| \{3 \| (T^\textsf{b} \otimes T^\textsf{b}) \Xi^{a_5}_2 \|4\} \|2\} ~=~ c_2 + c_4 \,, \nonumber\\ C_{13452} ~&=~ \{1\| \{3\| T^\textsf{b} \otimes T^\textsf{b} \|4\} T^{\textsf{a}_5} \|2\} ~=~ c_2 \label{fivepointJO} \end{align} where $C_{13542}$ is represented graphically in fig.~\ref{fig:u3}. It is straightforward to check that the proper decomposition \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{5,2} ~=~ C_{15342} \, A(1,5,3,4,2) ~+~C_{13542} \, A(1,3,5,4,2) ~+~C_{13452} \, A(1,3,4,5,2) \end{equation} is equal to \eqn{fivepointcubicdecomp}. \\ [-2mm] \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=150 705 150 80,clip=true]{f3.pdf} \caption{Color factor $C_{13542}$ for the amplitude $ {\cal A} _{5,2} $.} \label{fig:u3} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{BCJ relations for QCD amplitudes} \setcounter{equation}{0} \label{sec:bcj} In refs.~\cite{Johansson:2014zca,Johansson:2015oia}, Johansson and Ochirov explored whether tree-level QCD amplitudes with both gluons and quarks obey color-kinematic duality; that is, whether there exists a generalized gauge in which the kinematic numerators $n_i$ in the cubic decomposition (\ref{cubicdecomp}) satisfy the same algebraic relations as do the color factors $c_i$ for amplitudes with particles in the adjoint and fundamental representations (see also ref.~\cite{Mastrolia:2015maa}). Color-kinematic duality is well-established for pure gluon amplitudes \cite{Bern:2008qj,Bern:2010yg,Bern:2013yya}, for massless particles in supersymmetric Yang-Mills multiplets that contain gluons \cite{Bern:2010ue,Carrasco:2011mn,Bern:2011rj,Bern:2012uf,Boels:2012ew,Carrasco:2012ca,Bjerrum-Bohr:2013iza,Bern:2013uka,Bern:2014sna}, or only matter \cite{Nohle:2013bfa,Chiodaroli:2013upa,Johansson:2014zca} (see also refs.~\cite{Mafra:2011kj,Mafra:2014gja,Mafra:2015mja,He:2015wgf} for a string-theoretic approach). The Cachazo-He-Yuan (CHY) representation for gauge theory amplitudes naturally encodes color-kinematic duality \cite{Cachazo:2013iea}. In ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}, Johansson and Ochirov established color-kinematic duality for amplitudes $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ with $k$ pairs of quarks and $n-2k$ gluons through explicit calculations for $n \le 8$. For certain low-multiplicity amplitudes (specifically, $ {\cal A} _{4,1}$, $ {\cal A} _{5,2}$, and $ {\cal A} _{6,3}$) they found that the numerators derived from Feynman rules automatically satisfy the kinematic Jacobi relations. For higher-multiplicity amplitudes, a generalized gauge transformation is required to bring the kinematic numerators into a form that is manifestly color-kinematic dual. \\ [-2mm] As discussed in the introduction, color-kinematic duality implies new relations among color-ordered amplitudes for tree-level $n$-gluon amplitudes \cite{Bern:2008qj}. These were subsequently proven using string theory \cite{BjerrumBohr:2009rd,Stieberger:2009hq} and on-shell recursion \cite{Feng:2010my,Chen:2011jxa}, and necessarily hold for massless CHY amplitudes \cite{Cachazo:2012uq,Cachazo:2013iaa}. BCJ relations have also been established for amplitudes containing gluons and a pair of massive scalars in the fundamental representation by expressing these amplitudes in a CHY representation \cite{Naculich:2014naa}. See ref.~\cite{Weinzierl:2014ava} for earlier work on a CHY representation for amplitudes containing gluons and massless quark-antiquark pairs. \\ [-2mm] Also as noted earlier, Johansson and Ochirov derived relations among the primitive amplitudes in the Melia basis for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ that follow from color-kinematic duality; these are the $k \ge 1$ analogs of the BCJ relations \cite{Johansson:2015oia}. They proceeded by expressing the Melia primitive amplitudes as linear combinations of $n_i/d_i$, and then imposing the Jacobi relations on the kinematic numerators. Inverting these equations, they obtained equations for a subset of the $n_i$ in terms of the primitive amplitudes, together with (for $n>2k$) equations among the primitive amplitudes. Among their findings are that there are no relations among the primitive amplitudes for amplitudes containing no gluons ($n=2k$). For amplitudes containing gluons, they found that the primitive amplitudes obey relations such as \begin{equation} \sum_{b=3}^{n} \left( k_n \cdot k_1 + \sum_{c=3}^{b-1} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(c)} \right) A (1, \sigma(3), \cdots, \sigma(b-1), n, \sigma(b), \cdots, \sigma(n-1),2) ~=~0 \label{bcj} \end{equation} where $n$ denotes a gluon, and $\sigma$ is a permutation of $\{3, \cdots, n-1\} $. \Eqn{bcj} has exactly the same form (when expressed in terms of invariants $k_a \cdot k_b$ where $k_a$ is the momentum of a gluon) as one of the fundamental BCJ relations \cite{BjerrumBohr:2009rd,Feng:2010my,Sondergaard:2011iv} for an $n$-gluon amplitude. Johansson and Ochirov found that relations of the form (\ref{bcj}) are satisfied when $n$ is replaced by the label of any of the other gluons in the amplitude, but not when $n$ is replaced by the label of a fundamental or antifundamental particle. Thus, the relations that hold for $k \ge 2$ are a proper subset of the BCJ relations for $k=0$ or $k=1$. These relations were obtained by Johansson and Ochirov from explicit calculations for $n \le 8$ and for $n=9$, $k=4$, and were proved for all $n$ using BCFW on-shell recursion by de la Cruz, Kniss, and Weinzierl \cite{delaCruz:2015dpa}. The latter authors also presented a CHY representation for these amplitudes \cite{delaCruz:2015raa} (see also ref.~\cite{He:2016dol}). \\ [-2mm] We will see in the next two sections that these results have a natural explanation in terms of the color-factor symmetry possessed by the amplitude. There is a set of color-factor shifts associated with each external gluon in the amplitude and these give rise to the corresponding BCJ relations. The absence of color-factor symmetry for amplitudes with no gluons explains the absence of relations among the Melia primitive amplitudes. \\ [-2mm] For amplitudes containing only gluons, or amplitudes with gluons and one pair of fundamentals, the fundamental BCJ relations allow one to express the $(n-2)!$ amplitudes of the Kleiss-Kuijf basis in terms of a smaller basis of $(n-3)!$ amplitudes \cite{Bern:2008qj}. Johansson and Ochirov found that for $k \ge 2$, the BCJ relations allow one to express the $(n-2)!/k!$ amplitudes of the Melia basis in terms of a reduced basis of $(n-3)! (2k-2)/k!$ amplitudes \cite{Johansson:2015oia}. The difference between $(n-2)!/k!$ and $(n-3)! (2k-2)/k!$ is precisely equal to $(n-2k) (n-3)!/k!$, which as we will see is the dimension of the color-factor group for $k\ge 2$. \section{Color-factor shifts} \setcounter{equation}{0} \label{sec:cfs} In ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}, we introduced the color-factor symmetry, and proved that gauge-theory amplitudes containing gluons and massless or massive particles in an arbitrary representation of the gauge group and with arbitrary spin $ \le 1$ are invariant under certain momentum-dependent shifts of the color factors. In this section, we review the definition of these shifts, and determine how they act on the Johansson-Ochirov color factors described in sec.~\ref{sec:proper}. \\ [-2mm] Associated with each external gluon in the amplitude is a set of symmetries that act as momentum-dependent shifts of the color factors appearing in the cubic decomposition (\ref{cubicdecomp}). Consider a tree-level color factor $c_i$ for an amplitude with an external gluon $a$. The gluon leg divides the diagram in two at its point of attachment. Denote by $ S_{a,i} $ the subset of the remaining legs on one side of this point; it does not matter which side. The action of the shift $\delta_a c_i$ is constrained by two requirements: (I) that it preserve all the Jacobi relations satisfied by $c_i$, and (II) that it satisfy \begin{equation} \delta_a c_i ~\propto~ \sum_{c\in S_{a,i} } k_a \cdot k_c \label{colorfactorshift} \end{equation} where all momenta are outgoing. (Choosing to sum over the complement of $ S_{a,i} $ gives the same result up to sign due to momentum conservation.) In particular, if gluon $a$ is attached to an external leg $b$ with momentum $k_b$, the shift is proportional to $k_a \cdot k_b$. \\ [-2mm] Let $\{ c_i \}$ be the set of $n$-point color factors, and consider the subset of them obtained from a fixed $(n-1)$-point cubic diagram by attaching gluon $a$ in all possible ways. One of these has gluon $a$ attached to external leg 1 of the $(n-1)$-point diagram; define its shift to be $\alpha\, k_a \cdot k_1$. Then the conditions (I) and (II) above uniquely fix the coefficients of the shifts of all the other color factors in this subset. For example, in the five-point example discussed in the previous section (see fig. 2), we define the color-factor shift associated with gluon 5 (the only external gluon in the amplitude) to act on $c_1$ as \begin{equation} \delta_5 c_1 \equiv \alpha~ k_5 \cdot k_1 \,. \label{fivepointshiftdef} \end{equation} Then using \eqn{fivepointjacobi}, we find the shifts of the other four color factors to be \begin{equation} \delta_5 c_2 ~=~ -\alpha~ k_5 \cdot k_2 \,, \qquad \delta_5 c_3 ~=~ \alpha~ k_5 \cdot k_3 \,, \qquad \delta_5 c_4 ~=~ -\alpha~ k_5 \cdot k_4 \,, \qquad \delta_5 c_5 ~=~ -\alpha~ k_5 \cdot (k_1 + k_2) \,. \qquad \label{fivepointshift} \end{equation} The shifts of the JO color factors (\ref{fivepointJO}) associated with this amplitude are then \begin{equation} \delta_5 C_{15342} ~=~ \alpha~ k_1 \cdot k_5 \,, \qquad \delta_5 C_{13542} ~=~ \alpha~ (k_1+k_3) \cdot k_5 \,, \qquad \delta_5 C_{13452} ~=~ \alpha~ (k_1+k_3+k_4) \cdot k_5 \qquad \end{equation} where a clear pattern emerges: the shift $\delta_a C_{\cdots a \cdots}$ depends on the sum of momenta of the particles whose labels appear to the left of $a$ in $C_{\cdots a \cdots}$. \\ [-2mm] Now consider a general amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ with at least one gluon. There is a set of color-factor symmetries for each of the $n-2k$ gluons, but to simplify the presentation, we will focus on the shift associated with gluon $n$. Consider the set of JO color factors $C_{1n\sigma 2}$ where $\sigma$ is a permutation of $\{3, \cdots, n-1\}$. Since $\sigma$ is a permutation of $n-2k-1$ gluons, $k$ ${\bar\psi}$'s, and $k$ $\psi$'s, where the ${\bar\psi}$'s and $\psi$'s form a Dyck word of length $2k-2$, the number of allowed choices of $\sigma$ is $(n-3)!/k!$. Each $C_{1n\sigma 2}$ is a linear combination of cubic color factors $c_i$, in each of which gluon $n$ is attached to external leg 1, and which consequently have a shift proportional to $k_n \cdot k_1$. We therefore define the shift of $C_{1n\sigma 2}$ associated with gluon $n$ to be \begin{equation} \delta_n~ C_{1 n \sigma 2} ~\equiv~ \alpha_{n,\sigma}\, k_n \cdot k_1 \label{defineshift} \end{equation} where $\alpha_{n,\sigma}$ are a set of $(n-3)!/k!$ independent arbitrary constants. Given \eqn{defineshift}, the shifts $\delta_n c_i$ of all other color factors are then uniquely determined. The proof of this is as follows. The JO color factors form an independent basis in terms of which all the color factors $c_i$ can be expressed. In particular, all color factors $c_i$ with gluon $n$ attached to external leg 1 can be expressed in terms of the JO color factors $C_{1 n \sigma 2}$, and therefore their shifts under $\delta_n$ are determined by \eqn{defineshift}. But we argued above that the shifts of all color factors are fixed once we know the shifts of the color factors that have gluon $n$ attached to external leg 1. \\ [-2mm] Therefore we have shown that associated with each gluon is an $(n-3)!/k!$-parameter family of color-factor shifts. Including all the gluons, the color-factor shifts form an abelian group of dimension $(n-2k) (n-3)!/k!$ for $k\ge 2$. For $k=1$, the color-factor shift associated with one of the gluons is a linear combination of those associated with all the others \cite{Brown:2016mrh} and thus in that case the dimension of the color-factor group is $(n-3) (n-3)!$. \\ [-2mm] We now show that, given \eqn{defineshift}, the shifts of the rest of the JO color factors are particularly simple, viz. \begin{equation} \delta_n~ C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(b-1) n \sigma(b) \cdots \sigma(n-1) 2 } ~=~ \alpha_{n,\sigma} \left( k_n \cdot k_1 + \sum_{c=3}^{b-1} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(c)} \right) \,, \qquad b=3, \cdots, n \,. \label{JOshift} \end{equation} We note that \eqn{JOshift} has exactly the same form as the shifts of the half-ladder color factors in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}; thus with respect to the color-factor symmetry, the JO color factors are the precise analog of the half-ladder color factors. To establish \eqn{JOshift}, we consider the ``commutator'' of JO color factors \begin{equation} C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(b-1) [\sigma(b) n] \sigma(b+1) \cdots \sigma(n-1) 2 } ~\equiv~ C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(b) n \sigma(b+1) \cdots \sigma(n-1) 2 } -C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(b-1) n \sigma(b) \cdots \sigma(n-1) 2 } \end{equation} or more briefly $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$, where we let $c= \sigma(b)$. We can most transparently compute this commutator using the inspired graphical notation of ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. \\ [-2mm] \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=150 680 150 50,clip=true]{f4.pdf} \caption{Commutator $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ for gluon $g_c$.} \label{fig:u4} \end{center} \end{figure} First, let $c$ label another gluon; then $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ is represented in fig.~\ref{fig:u4}. The two diagrams on the l.h.s.~only fail to commute when the gluons are attached to the same line, in which case one can use $ [ T^{\textsf{a}}, T^{\textsf{b}} ]^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}}=f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{c}} ( T^{\textsf{c}} )^{\textsf{i}}_{~\textsf{j}} $ to give the diagram on the right. Fig.~\ref{fig:u4} is the graphical depiction of the identity \cite{Johansson:2015oia} \begin{equation} \big[\Xi_{l}^\textsf{a},\,\Xi_{l}^\textsf{b} \big]~=~f_{\textsf{a} \textsf{b} \textsf{c}}\,\Xi_{l}^\textsf{c}\,. \end{equation} The diagram on the r.h.s.~of fig.~\ref{fig:u4} is a linear combination of color factors in which gluon $n$ is attached to external gluon $c$, and which therefore undergo a shift proportional to $k_n \cdot k_c$ under the color-factor symmetry associated with gluon $n$. A little bit of thought shows that the coefficient of proportionality of the shift of the commutator is $\alpha_{n,\sigma}$ and therefore \begin{equation} \delta_n C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(b-1) [\sigma(b) n] \sigma(b+1) \cdots \sigma(n-1) 2 } ~=~ \alpha_{n, \sigma} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(b)} \,. \label{commutatorshift} \end{equation} \begin{figure}[b] \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=100 700 100 50,clip=true]{f5.pdf} \caption{Commutator $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ for ${\bar\psi}_c$. } \label{fig:u5} \end{center} \end{figure} Next, let $c$ be the label of an antifundamental ${\bar\psi}_c$; the commutator $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ is then represented by fig.~\ref{fig:u5}. The final diagram of the figure is a linear combination of color factors with gluon $n$ attached to ${\bar\psi}_c$, whose shifts are proportional to $k_n \cdot k_c$. Again a bit of thought shows that the shift of this diagram is given by \eqn{commutatorshift}. \\ [-2mm] \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[scale=1.0,trim=150 705 150 50,clip=true]{f6.pdf} \caption{Commutator $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ for $\psi_c$. } \label{fig:u6} \end{center} \end{figure} Finally, consider the case where $c$ labels a fundamental $\psi_c$; the commutator $C_{\cdots [cn] \cdots}$ is shown in fig.~\ref{fig:u6}. The r.h.s.~of the figure is a linear combination of color factors with gluon $n$ attached to $\psi_c$. Taking account of the minus sign, the shift of the commutator is given by \eqn{commutatorshift}. \\ [-2mm] We can now apply \eqn{commutatorshift} recursively starting with \eqn{defineshift} to obtain \eqn{JOshift}. The shift of the last JO factor is thus \begin{equation} \delta_n C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(n-1) n 2 } ~=~ \alpha_{n,\sigma} \left( k_n \cdot k_1 + \sum_{c=3}^{n-1} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(c)} \right) ~=~ - \alpha_{n,\sigma} k_n \cdot k_2 \end{equation} which is consistent with the fact that $ C_{1 \sigma(3) \cdots \sigma(n-1) n 2 } $ represents a linear combination of color factors in which gluon $n$ is attached to $\psi_2$. \\ [-2mm] In the next section we will use \eqn{JOshift} in the Melia-Johansson-Ochirov decomposition to obtain the BCJ relations for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$. \section{BCJ relations from color-factor symmetry} \setcounter{equation}{0} \label{sec:bcjcfs} In this section, we establish that the BCJ relations obtained by Johansson and Ochirov for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ are a direct consequence of the color-factor symmetry of the amplitude. We also show that the kinematic numerators for $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ obey a set of gauge-invariant constraints that are less stringent than the kinematic Jacobi relations, but which follow from the color-factor symmetry and are therefore sufficient to imply the BCJ relations. \\ [-2mm] It was shown in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh} that gauge-theory amplitudes with gluons as well as massless or massive particles in an arbitrary representation of the gauge group and arbitrary spin $\le 1$, and therefore specifically $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$, are invariant under the family of color-factor shifts described in sec.~\ref{sec:cfs}. The proof of this uses the radiation vertex expansion of the amplitude \cite{Brown:1982xx}. A full description of the radiation vertex expansion and the proof of color-factor symmetry is given in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}, but the basic strategy is as follows. The radiation vertex expansion is a recursive approach that constructs an $n$-point amplitude by attaching a gluon in all possible ways to all possible diagrams that contribute to the $(n-1)$-point amplitude consisting of all the particles except for a chosen gluon $a$. We may attach the gluon to an external leg, an internal line, or to one of the cubic $ggg$ or ${\bar\psi} g \psi$ vertices (for $\psi$ a scalar or vector) to make a quartic vertex. Then all the contributions are reorganized into a sum over the legs of each of the vertices of each of the $(n-1)$-point diagrams. The next step is to consider the action of the color-factor shift associated with gluon $a$ on the color factors appearing in the radiation vertex expansion. One proves that the sum over legs for each vertex is invariant under the shift of color factors. It immediately follows that the entire $n$-point amplitude is invariant under the color-factor symmetry associated with gluon $a$, {viz.,~} $\delta_a {\cal A} _{n,k}=0$. \\ [-2mm] Now consider an amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ with at least one gluon $n$, and consider the effect of the color-factor shift $\delta_n$ associated with this gluon on the amplitude written in the Melia-Johansson-Ochirov proper decomposition (\ref{mjo}). Since the action of the shift on the Johansson-Ochirov color factors $C_{1\gamma 2}$ is given by \eqn{JOshift}, the shift acts on \eqn{mjo} as \begin{align} &\delta_n {\cal A} _{n,k} \nonumber\\ &~=~ \sum_{\sigma \in \text{Melia basis}} \alpha_{n,\sigma} \sum_{b=3}^{n} \left( k_n \cdot k_1 + \sum_{c=3}^{b-1} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(c)} \right) A (1,\sigma(3), \cdots, \sigma(b-1), n, \sigma(b), \cdots, \sigma(n-1),2) \,. \end{align} and since $\alpha_{n,\sigma}$ are independent parameters, we conclude that \begin{equation} \sum_{b=3}^{n} \left( k_n \cdot k_1 + \sum_{c=3}^{b-1} k_n \cdot k_{\sigma(c)} \right) A (1, \sigma(3), \cdots, \sigma(b-1), n, \sigma(b), \cdots, \sigma(n-1),2) ~=~0 \end{equation} precisely the fundamental BCJ relations obtained in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. The BCJ relations with $n$ replaced by another gluon $a$ follow from the invariance of the amplitude under the color-factor shift associated with gluon $a$. There is no color-factor symmetry associated with gluonless amplitudes, and therefore no BCJ relations among the Melia primitive amplitudes are expected in that case, as was found in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. In sec.~\ref{sec:cfs}, we showed that the dimension of color-factor group is $ (n-2k) (n-3)!/k!$ for $k \ge 2$, which reduces the number of independent primitives from the Melia basis of $(n-2)!/k!$ to $(2k-2) (n-3)!/k!$ as found in ref.~\cite{Johansson:2015oia}. (For $k=1$, the color-factor group has dimension $(n-3) (n-3)!$ and thus reduces the number of independents from $(n-2)!$ to $(n-3)!$.) \\ [-2mm] Although the BCJ relations (\ref{bcj}) were previously proven using on-shell BCFW recursion \cite{delaCruz:2015raa}, the proof in this paper based on color-factor symmetry reveals a close connection between the BCJ relations and the symmetries of the Lagrangian formulation of gauge theory. This connection is made explicit in the radiation vertex expansion proof of color-factor symmetry given in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh}, and summarized in the discussion section of that paper, which we briefly recap here. The variation of the amplitude under the color-factor shift associated with gluon $a$ can be separated into contributions that are constant, linear, and quadratic in the gluon momentum $k_a$. The $ {\cal O} (k_a^0)$ term is proportional to $\sum_r \varepsilon_a \cdot K_r$, where $K_r$ are the momenta flowing out of each vertex. This vanishes by $\varepsilon_a \cdot k_a = 0$ together with momentum conservation (a result of spacetime translation invariance of the Lagrangian). The $ {\cal O} (k_a^1)$ term of the variation of the amplitude is given by a sum of angular momentum generators $J_r^{\alpha\beta}$, which act as a first-order Lorentz transformation on the relevant vertex factors. These terms vanish by Lorentz invariance of the Lagrangian. The vanishing of the $ {\cal O} (k_a^2)$ term of the variation of the amplitude is more subtle, but relies on Poincar\'e invariance together with Yang-Mills gauge symmetry. Thus, the vanishing of the variation of the amplitude under the color-factor shift (and therefore the BCJ relations) is closely tied to (if not quite a direct consequence of) the gauge and Poincar\'e symmetries of the gauge theory. \\ [-2mm] We also introduced in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh} the cubic vertex expansion of an amplitude containing at least one gluon. (This is related to, but distinct from, the radiation vertex expansion.) Consider the set of cubic diagrams $I$ that contribute to the $(n-1)$-point amplitude of all the particles in $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ except for gluon $a$. For any $a$, the amplitude $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ can be written as a triple sum over the legs $r$ of the vertices $v$ of the cubic diagrams $I$: \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{n,k} ~=~ \sum_I \sum_v {1 \over \prod_{s=1}^3 d_{(a,I,v,s)} } \sum_{r=1}^3 { c_{(a,I,v,r)} n_{(a,I,v,r)} \over 2 k_a \cdot K_{(a,I,v,r)} } \,. \label{cubicvertexexpansion} \end{equation} Here $d_{(a,I,v,r)}$ is the product of propagators\footnote{If leg $r$ is external, then $d_{(a,I,v,r)}=1$.} that branch off from leg $r$ of vertex $v$ of diagram $I$, $K_{(a,I,v,r)}$ is the momentum flowing out of that leg, $c_{(a,I,v,r)}$ is the color factor of the $n$-point diagram obtained by attaching gluon $a$ to leg $r$ of vertex $v$ of diagram $I$, and $n_{(a,I,v,r)}$ is the $n$-point kinematic numerator associated with that color factor. As a concrete example, consider the five-point amplitude discussed in sec.~\ref{sec:proper}. Using the identity \begin{equation} {1 \over s_{12} s_{34} } ~=~ {1 \over 2 s_{34} (-k_1-k_2) \cdot k_5 } ~+~ {1 \over 2 s_{12} (k_1+k_2) \cdot k_5 } \end{equation} it is straightforward to write \eqns{fivepointcubicdecomp}{fivepointcolorfactors} as \begin{equation} {\cal A} _{5,2} ~=~ {1 \over s_{34} } \left[ {c_1 n_1 \over 2 k_1 \cdot k_5} +{c_2 n_2 \over 2 k_2 \cdot k_5} +{c_5 n_5 \over 2(-k_1-k_2) \cdot k_5} \right] + {1 \over s_{12} } \left[ {c_3 n_3 \over 2 k_3 \cdot k_5} +{c_4 n_4 \over 2 k_4 \cdot k_5} +{c_5 n_5 \over 2 (k_1+k_2) \cdot k_5} \right] \end{equation} which is precisely of the form (\ref{cubicvertexexpansion}). \\ [-2mm] The color factors appearing in \eqn{cubicvertexexpansion} obey $\delta_a \, c_{(a,I,v,r)} ~=~ \alpha_{(a,I,v)} \,k_a \cdot K_{(a,I,v,r)}$ under the shift associated with gluon $a$. Since $\delta_a {\cal A} _{n,k}=0$, we may conclude from the cubic vertex expansion (\ref{cubicvertexexpansion}) that \begin{equation} \sum_I \sum_v {\alpha_{(a,I,v)} \over \prod_{s=1}^3 d_{(a,I,v,s)} } \sum_{r=1}^3 n_{(a,I,v,r)} ~ = ~ 0 \,. \label{sumoverdelta} \end{equation} Because the $\alpha_{(a,I,v)} $ are not independent\footnote{The set of $\alpha_{(a,I,v)}$ for all the vertices of a given diagram $I$ are equal (up to signs) because any two adjacent vertices share a common color factor. Moreover $\alpha_{(a,I,v)}$ must respect the Jacobi relations among the color factors for different diagrams $I$.} we may not draw the more stringent conclusion that $ \sum_{r=1}^3 n_{(a,I,v,r)} =0$ for each vertex. For the five-point amplitude considered above, \eqn{sumoverdelta} yields only one constraint \begin{equation} 0 ~=~ \delta_5 {\cal A} _{5,2} ~=~ {\alpha \over 2} \left[ {n_1 - n_2 + n_5 \over s_{34} } ~+~ {n_3 - n_4 - n_5 \over s_{12} } \right] \end{equation} rather than the two kinematic Jacobi relations\footnote{For this five-point example with spin one-half fundamentals, Johansson and Ochirov found that the numerators derived from the Feynman rules automatically satisfy the kinematic Jacobi relations.} $n_1 - n_2 + n_5 =0$ and $n_3 - n_4 - n_5 =0$. In general, color-kinematic duality states that a generalized gauge transformation exists such that the numerators {\it in that gauge} obey the kinematic Jacobi relations. The relation (\ref{sumoverdelta}), however, holds for the kinematic numerators in any gauge, since it is invariant under generalized gauge transformations, as can be seen from its derivation. \section{Conclusions} \setcounter{equation}{0} \label{sec:concl} In this paper, we have shown that BCJ relations \cite{Johansson:2015oia} among the Melia-basis primitive amplitudes of $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ with $n-2k$ gluons and $k$ pairs of particles in the fundamental (or other) representation of the gauge group follow directly from the invariance of $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$ under a set of color-factor shifts. We have also derived as a consequence of this symmetry a set of gauge-invariant constraints on the kinematic numerators of $ {\cal A} _{n,k}$. \\ [-2mm] The tree-level color-factor symmetry has been proven for a wide class of gauge-theory amplitudes, including those with massless or massive particles with gauge-theory couplings in arbitrary representations of the gauge group and arbitrary spin $\le 1$ \cite{Brown:2016mrh}. This is connected to the radiation symmetry coming out of theorems on photon radiation zeros in refs.~\cite{Brown:1982xx,Brown:1983pn}. The color-factor symmetry also applies to theories with gauge bosons that become massive through spontaneous symmetry breaking ({e.g.,~} see refs.~\cite{Naculich:2015zha,Naculich:2015coa,Chiodaroli:2015rdg}). The only particles in the amplitude that need be massless are the gluons (or photons) with which the color-factor symmetries are associated. Thus it applies to standard-model gauge theory amplitudes as well as to many extensions thereof. \\ [-2mm] BCJ relations are constraints among gauge-invariant primitive amplitudes, the coefficients in a proper decomposition of the gauge-theory amplitude. Such decompositions have been identified for tree-level and one-loop $n$-gluon amplitudes in ref.~\cite{DelDuca:1999rs} and for the tree-level amplitudes considered in this paper in refs.~\cite{Melia:2013bta,Melia:2013epa,Melia:2015ika,Johansson:2015oia}. Once proper decompositions for more general amplitudes have been identified, relations among their primitive amplitudes will follow as a consequence of color-factor symmetry. \\ [-2mm] Finally, it was shown in ref.~\cite{Brown:2016mrh} that one-loop amplitudes that have color-kinematic-dual representations are invariant under a loop-level generalization of the color-factor symmetry, although a proof based on Lagrangian methods is still lacking. One can legitimately hope that color-factor symmetry will soon lead to many new insights into gauge theories in general and color-kinematic duality in particular. \section*{Acknowledgments} We would like to thank H.~Johansson and A.~Ochirov for sharing with us their files for producing figures. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grants Nos.~PHY14-16123 and PFI:BIC 1318206. RWB is also supported by funds made available through a CWRU Institute Professorship Chair. SGN gratefully acknowledges sabbatical support from the Simons Foundation (Grant No.~342554 to Stephen Naculich). He would also like to thank the Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics and the Physics Department of the University of Michigan for generous hospitality and for providing a welcoming and stimulating sabbatical environment. \vfil\break
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} Though a large number of Indian languages have indigenous scripts, the lack of a standardized keyboard, and the ubiquity of QWERTY keyboards, means that people most often write using ASCII\footnote{The ASCII character set is the union of Roman alphabets, digits, and a few punctuation marks.} \cite{ascii86} text using spellings motivated largely by pronunciation \cite{ahmed-EtAl:2011:WTIM2011}. Increasingly, many technologies such as Web search and natural language processing are adapting to this phenomenon \cite{Roy:2013:OFT:2701336.2701636,Gupta:2014:QEM:2600428.2609622,vyas-EtAl:2014:EMNLP2014}. In the area of Speech Synthesis, although the efforts of the 2013, 2014 and 2015 Blizzard Challenges\footnote{\url{http://www.synsig.org/index.php/Blizzard_Challenge}} \cite{prahallad2014blizzard,prahallad2013blizzard} resulted in improvements to the naturalness of speech synthesis of Indian languages, the text was assumed to be written in native script. In this work, we transliterate Blizzard data to informal chat-style ASCII text using Mechanical Turkers, and synthesize speech from the resulting transliterated ASCII text. This represents a more realistic use case than in the Blizzard Challenge. Synthesizing speech from ASCII text is challenging: Since there is no standard way to spell pronunciations, people often spell same word in multiple ways, e.g., the word \word{start} in Telugu can be ASCII spelled \word{prarhambham}, \word{prarambham}, \word{prarambam}, \word{praranbam}, etc. whilst words that differ in both pronunciation and meaning might be spelled the same, e.g., the words \word{ledhu} and \word{ledu} in Telugu could both be spelled \word{ledu}. We address these problems by first converting ASCII graphemes to phonemes, followed by a DNN to synthesise the speech. We propose three methods for converting graphemes to phonemes. The first model is a naive model which assumes that every grapheme corresponds to a phoneme. In the second model, we enhance the naive model by treating frequently co-occurring character bi-grams as additional phonemes. In the final model, we learn a Grapheme-to-Phoneme transducer from parallel ASCII text and gold-standard phonetic transcriptions. \ignore{Generation of synthetic speech in Indian languages from noisy ASCII text which to our knowledge is the first such application of G2P based speech synthesis.} \noindent The contributions of this paper are: \begin{itemize} \setlength\itemsep{0em} \item to synthesize speech from ASCII transliterated text for Indian languages, which to our knowledge is the first such attempt. Our results show that our Grapheme-to-Phoneme conversion model combined with a DNN acoustic model performs competitively with state-of-the-art speech synthesizers that use native script text. \item the release of parallel ASCII transliterations of Blizzard data to foster research in this area. \end{itemize} \section{Related work} \subsection{Transliteration of Indian Languages} Many standard transliteration systems exist for Indian languages. Table~\ref{table1} shows different transliterations for an example sentence. Among these, CPS (Common Phone Set) \cite{bib7} and IT3 \cite{lavanya2005simple} are widely used by the speech technology community, ITRANS\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITRANS}} \cite{madhavi2005om} is used in publishing houses, and WX\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WX_notation}} \cite{gupta2010transliteration} by the Natural Language Processing (NLP) community. Though these scripts provide umambiguous conversion to native Indian scripts, due to their lack of readability, and the overhead in learning how to use them, people still spell their words motivated by pronunciation. One such transliteration is shown in the row \word{Informal} of Table \ref{table1}. The most common trend observed in the literature is to treat transliteration as a machine translation and discriminative ranking problem \cite{Li:2009:RNM:1699705.1699707}. Our work aims to exploit the fact that transliterations are phonetically motivated, and therefore treat transliteration as a conversion problem. Specifically, we convert informal transliterations to phonetic script, and then synthesize speech from the phonetic script using a DNN. \begin{table}[t] \centering \caption{Transliteration of Hindi text in various notations} \begin{tabular}{\|M{2cm}\|M{5.5cm}\|} \hline Original Sentence & \vspace{-0.1em} \includegraphics{figures/hindi_sample_sentence} \\ \hline \hline \bf{Notation} & \bf{Transliteration} \\ \hline CPS & aapakei hiqdii pasaqda karanei para khushii huii \\ \hline IT3 & aapakei hin:dii pasan:da karanei para khushii huii \\ \hline ITRANS & Apake hiMdI pasaMda karane para khushI huI \\ \hline WX & Apake hiMdI pasaMda karane para KuSI huI \\ \hline Informal & apke hindi pasand karne par kushi hui \\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{table1} \end{table} \begin{table}[t] \centering \caption{Training data for the Grapheme-to-Phoneme model} \label{pronunciationTable} \begin{tabular}{\|M{1.4cm}\|M{2cm}\|M{3.5cm}\|} \hline Word & Informal transliteration & Pronunciation (CPS notation) \\ \hline \begin{minipage}{1.1cm} \includegraphics[width=9mm]{figures/congress} \end{minipage} & congress & /k/aa/q/g/r/e/s/ \\ \hline \begin{minipage}{1.3cm} \includegraphics[height=5mm,width=15mm]{figures/praves} \end{minipage} & pravesikkavum & /p/i/r/a/w/ei/c/i/k/k/a/w/u/m/ \\ \hline \begin{minipage}{1.1cm} \includegraphics[width=9mm]{figures/aapke} \end{minipage} & aapke & /aa/p/a/k/e/ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \subsection{Statistical Speech Synthesis} Most existing work in speech synthesis for Indian languages uses unit selection \cite{bib9} with syllable-like units \cite{bib12,bib6}. Recently, based on the observation that Indian languages share many commonalities in phonetics, a language independent phone set was proposed, and was used in building statistical parametric (HMM-based) speech synthesis systems \cite{bib7}. We make use of this common phone set in one of our models. Our work also aligns with the recent literature on unsupervised learning for text-to-speech synthesis which aims to reduce the reliance on human knowledge and the manual effort required for building language-specific resources \cite{bib16,bib8,watts2015nst}. These approaches are able to learn from noisy input representations where there is no standard orthography. Following the success of DNNs for speech recognition \cite{bib3} and synthesis \cite{zen2013dnn, wu2015dnn, bib15}, we also use a DNN as the acoustic model. \section{Our Approach} \label{sec:approaches} Our speech synthesis pipeline consists of two steps: 1)~Converting the input ASCII transliterated text to a phonetic script; 2)~learning a DNN based speech synthesizer from the parallel phonetic text and audio signal. \subsection{Converting ASCII text to Phonetic Script} \label{sec:approachesA} We explore three different approaches which vary in the degree of supervision in defining a phoneme. \subsubsection{Uni-Grapheme Model} \label{ssec:Grapheme} In this approach, we assume each ASCII grapheme acts as a phoneme. We assume that the DNN will learn to map these ``phonemes'' to speech sounds. We normalize the data to lowercase and remove all punctuation marks. This ensures that the phone-set contains 26 letters and an extra $/sil/$ phone to mark beginning and end of the sentence. \subsubsection{Multi-Grapheme Model} \label{ssec:Hybrid} In this approach, in addition to uni-graphemes, we also include some frequently co-occurring bi-graphemes as ``phonemes''. From manual inspection of the top 50 bi-graphemes, we found that the phonemes indicating stop consonants such as $/kh/$, $/ch/$, $/th/$, $/ph/$, $/bh/$ and long vowels such as $/aa/$, $/ii/$, $/ee/$, $/oo/$, $/uu/$ and dipthongs such as $/ai/$, $/au/$, $/ou/$ appear most frequently across languages. We selected 17~of these bi-graphemes as phonemes in addition to the above 27~uni-graphemes, making a total of 44~phonemes. \subsubsection{Grapheme-to-Phoneme (G2P) Model} \label{ssec:g2p} In this model, we assume the phoneme-set is given. We use the common phone set (CPS, \cite{bib7}) to work with the languages of interest. We convert the native text to CPS~phonetic text using deterministic converters \cite{lavanya2005simple, raj2007text}. We then align the phonetic transcriptions to the ASCII transliterations from Mechanical Turkers to create a pronunciation table. Table \ref{pronunciationTable} shows the parallel data with the native text in the first column, the informal ASCII transliteration in the second column, and the CPS phonetic transcription in the third column. Given the pronunciation lexicon, we train a G2P transducer \cite{Bisani2008434} for each language separately with varying n-gram sequences. The corpus used for training is described in Section~\ref{ssec:data}. Figure \ref{fig:g2p_performance} displays the phone error rate of the G2P model with varying n-grams. The 6-gram model achieved the lowest phone error rate across the three languages. Telugu and Tamil achieved lower phonetic error rates compared to Hindi. This can be attributed to the ineffective handling of intricate \emph{schwa deletion}, a well-known phenomenon in Indo-Aryan languages. An advantage with this model is that, since the phoneme-set is standard, we can train G2P and DNN on two independent datasets -- G2P on parallel transliterations of a very large corpus that could be obtained via crowdsourcing, and DNN model on gold phonetic speech transcriptions independently of the G2P model's performance. We leave this aspect of our work for future. In this work, we train a DNN model on the output of G2P aligned with natural speech. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[b]{1.0\linewidth} \centering \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/G2P_ngrams_per}} \caption{Performance of G2P models from uni-gram to 6-gram for Hindi, Telugu and Tamil} \label{fig:g2p_performance} \end{minipage} \end{figure} \ignore{The phone error rate of Hindi is slightly higher when compared to Telugu and Tamil. This is partly because of the schwa deletion in manual transliteration and incorrect alignments during training. We also observed that some of the errors in G2P are substitutions are of short to long vowels, /t/ for /th/, /d/ for /dh/, /s/ for /sh/ and vice-versa. } \vspace{-2mm} \subsection{DNN Speech Synthesizer} \label{sec:approachesB} We use a DNN for learning to synthesize speech from the phonetic strings obtained in the previous step. We use two independent DNNs -- one for duration and the other for acoustic modeling. Let $x_{i}$ $=$ $[x_{i}(1),... ,x_{i}(d_{x})]^{T}$ and $y_{i}$ $=$ $[y_{i}(1),... ,y_{i}(d_{y})]^{T}$ be static input and output feature vectors of the DNN, where $d_{x}$ and $d_{y}$ denote the dimensions of $x_{i}$ and $y_{i}$, respectively, and $T$ denotes transposition. \textbf{Duration Model:} For duration modeling, the input comprises binary features ($x_p$) derived from a subset of the questions used by the decision-tree clustering in the standard HTS synthesiser. Similar to \cite{zen2013dnn, wu2015dnn}, frame-aligned data for DNN training is created by forced alignment using the HMM system. The output is an eight-dimensional vector ($y_p$) of durations for every phone, comprising five sub-state durations, the overall phone duration, syllable duration and whole word duration. We use this form of multi-task learning to improve the model; the three additional features (phone, syllable, and word durations) act as a secondary task to help the network learn more about suprasegmental variations in duration at word level. At synthesis time, these features are predicted, but ignored. \textbf{Acoustic Model:} The input uses the same features as duration prediction, to which $9$~numerical features are appended. These capture frame position in the HMM state and phoneme, state position in phoneme, and state and phoneme duration. The DNN outputs comprise MCCs, BAPs and continuous $logf_0$ (all with deltas and delta-deltas) plus a voiced/unvoiced binary value. In both acoustic and duration model, all the input features are normalized to the range of $[0.01, 0.99]$ and output features are normalized to zero mean and unit variance. The DNNs are then trained to map the linguistic features of input text to duration and acoustic features respectively. If $D(x_i)$ denotes the DNN mapping of $x_i$, then the error of the mapping is given by: \begin{equation} \epsilon = \sum \|\|y_i-D(x_i)\|\|^{2} \end{equation} \begin{equation} D(x_i) = \widetilde{d}(z_{n+1}) \end{equation} \begin{equation} z_{n+1}=d(w^{(n)}d(z_{n})) \end{equation} \begin{equation} d(\vartheta )=a \tanh (b\vartheta ), \widetilde{d}(\vartheta )=\vartheta \end{equation} \noindent where $n$ indexes layer and $w^{(n)}$ is the weight matrix of the $n^{th}$ layer of the DNN model. At synthesis time, duration is predicted first, and is used as an input to the acoustic model to predict the speech parameters. Maximum likelihood parameter generation (MLPG) using pre-computed variances from the training data is applied to the output features for synthesis, and spectral enhancement post-filtering is applied to the resulting MCC trajectories. Finally, the STRAIGHT vocoder \cite{bib5} is used to synthesize the waveform. \section{Experimental Setup} \label{sec:experiments} \subsection{Speech Databases} \label{ssec:data} Our languages of interest are Hindi, Tamil and Telugu, all of which are widely-spoken Indian languages. We train and test on the 2015 Blizzard Challenge data which contains about four hours of speech and corresponding text for each language. The data-set contains 1710 utterances for Hindi, 1462 utterances for Tamil, and 2481 utterances for Telugu, with a single speaker per language. We used 92\% of the data for training, 4\% for development and 4\% for testing. \subsection{Annotation} Starting from the original transcriptions in native script, we asked crowdsourced human annotators to ASCII transliterate them using pronunciation as their main motivation for spelling. For Hindi and Tamil, we recruited paid workers via Mechanical Turk who could read and speak the language fluently (as self-reported); for Telugu we had access to a trusted pool of native speakers. We tokenize each sentence to words with whitespace and punctuations as the delimiters. The annotators were provided with a web-interface containing a text box for each word. This ensures transliteration of every word given in the input sentence. The total number of annotators for Telugu, Tamil and Hindi are 50, 66 and 82 respectively. We diversified train, dev and test splits by having different set of annotators for each split. \subsection{Experimental Settings} We used the same DNN architectures (Section \ref{sec:approachesB}) for both duration and acoustic modeling. The number of hidden layers used was 6 with each layer consisting of 1024 nodes. As shown in equation 4, the tanh function was used as the hidden activation function, and a linear activation function was employed at the output layer. During training, L2 regularization was applied to the weights with penalty factor of 0.00001, the mini-batch size was 256 for the acoustic model and 64 for the duration model. For the first 10 epochs, momentum was 0.3 with a fixed learning rate of 0.002. After 10 epochs, the momentum was increased to 0.9 and from that point on, the learning rate was halved at each epoch. The learning rate of the top two layers was always half that of other layers. Learning rate was fine-tuned in duration models to achieve best performance. The maximum number of epochs was set to 30 (i.e., early stopping). \subsection{Our Models} As outlined in Section \ref{sec:approachesA}, we train three different models for each language. The number of questions used in DNN were different from system to system. For Uni-Grapheme model (labelled as \textbf{UGM}), the questions based on quin-phone identity were used, and other questions include suprasegmental features such as syllable, word, phrase and positional features. For Multi-Grapheme model (labelled as \textbf{MGM}) and Grapheme-to-Phoneme model (labelled as \textbf{G2P}), other questions based on position and manner of articulation were additionaly included. \subsection{Benchmark} As a benchmark, we use the DNN speech synthesizer trained on CPS phonetic transcriptions of the speech data. The goal is thus to synthesize speech from ASCII text that is as close as possible in quality to this benchmark (labelled as \textbf{BMK}). \section{Results} \subsection{Objective Evaluations} \begin{table}[t] \vspace{-0.5cm} \centering \caption{Objective results of the proposed techniques versus the benchmark approach. MCD and BAP are Mel-Cepstral Distortion and Band Aperiodicity distortion, respectively. V/UV error means frame-level voiced/unvoiced prediction error. Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of F0 was calculated on a linear frequency scale.} \begin{tabular}{\|M{3.2cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|} \hline {\bf } & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}MCD\\ (dB)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}BAP\\ (dB)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F0\\ RMSE (Hz)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}V/UV error\\ rate(\%)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}MCD\\ (dB)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}BAP\\ (dB)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F0\\ RMSE (Hz)\end{tabular}} & {\bf \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}V/UV error\\ rate(\%)\end{tabular}} \\ \hline {\bf Method} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{{\bf Telugu}} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{{\bf Hindi}} \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{\|M{3.2cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|} \hline Uni-Grapheme-TTS & 4.97 & 2.05 & 35.13 & 6.23 & 4.82 & 1.92 & 10.87 & 9.25 \\ Multi-Grapheme-TTS & 5.02 & 2.06 & 36.49 & 6.01 & 4.81 & 1.92 & 11.29 & 9.31 \\ G2P-TTS & 4.77 & 2.04 & 35.18 & 5.94 & 4.80 & 1.92 & 10.77 & 9.30 \\ Benchmark & 4.81 & 2.04 & 37.09 & 5.83 & 4.52 & 1.90 & 10.86 & 8.07 \\ \hline {\bf Method} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{{\bf Tamil}} & \multicolumn{4}{c\|}{{\bf Combined Average}} \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{\|M{3.2cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|M{1cm}M{1cm}M{1.5cm}M{1.5cm}\|} \hline Uni-Grapheme-TTS & 4.87 & 2.07 & 40.65 & 9.63 & 4.89 & 2.01 & 28.88 & 8.37 \\ Multi-Grapheme-TTS & 5.15 & 2.09 & 43.31 & 9.92 & 4.99 & 2.02 & 30.36 & 8.41 \\ G2P-TTS & 5.16 & 2.09 & 44.27 & 10.38 & 4.91 & 2.02 & 30.07 & 8.54 \\ Benchmark & 5.06 & 2.08 & 43.67 & 10.04 & 4.79 & 2.01 & 30.54 & 7.98 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{tab:objective} \end{table} \begin{table}[t] \vspace{-1.5em} \caption{RMSE (frames per phone) between predicted and forced-aligned durations. } \begin{tabular}{\|M{2cm}\|M{1.3cm}M{1.3cm}M{1.3cm}\|} \hline Models & Telugu & Hindi & Tamil \\ \hline UGM & 5.121 & 8.924 & 12.540 \\ MGM & 5.015 & 9.876 & 13.105 \\ G2P & 4.897 & 9.657 & 13.026 \\ BMK & 4.118 & 9.321 & 12.378 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{tab:dur_rmse} \end{table} \begin{table}[t] \vspace{-1.5em} \caption{Pearson correlation between predicted and forced-aligned durations. } \begin{tabular}{\|M{2cm}\|M{1.3cm}M{1.3cm}M{1.3cm}\|} \hline Models & Telugu & Hindi & Tamil \\ \hline UGM & 0.787 & 0.525 & 0.618 \\ MGM & 0.807 & 0.533 & 0.624 \\ G2P & 0.818 & 0.564 & 0.657 \\ BMK & 0.866 & 0.692 & 0.695 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{tab:dur_corr} \end{table} \subsubsection{Duration Model} To evaluate the duration prediction DNN, we calculated the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and Pearson correlation between reference and predicted durations, where the reference durations are estimated from the forced-alignment step in HTS. Tables \ref{tab:dur_rmse} and \ref{tab:dur_corr} present the results on test data. Overall, the benchmark system showed better performance than other systems in all languages. Among the proposed approaches, G2P performed slightly better than the other two in terms of correlation, whereas RMSE performance was not consistent across the languages. A possible explanation for this is that G2P uses superior phone set defined manually whereas UGM and MGM use unsupervised phones. Nevertheless, the proposed systems are not too far from the benchmark. Compared to Telugu, Hindi and Tamil show worse objective scores. For these two languages, punctuation marks were not retained in the corpus, which made pauses harder to predict. As a consequence, occasional pauses in the acoustics were frequently forced-aligned to non-pause phones, introducing errors in the reference durations. These unpredictable elongations inflated the objective measures, without perturbing the actual predictions too much. (Telugu, in contrast, used oracle pauses, inserted using Festvox's \texttt{ehmm} based on the acoustics.) \subsubsection{Acoustic Model} We used following four objective evaluations to assess the performance of the proposed methods in comparison to the benchmark system. \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{MCD:} Mel-Cepstral Distortion (MCD) to measure MCC prediction performance. \item \textbf{BAP:} to measure distortion of BAPs \item \textbf{F0 RMSE:} Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) to measure the accuracy of F0 prediction. The error value was calculated on a linear scale instead of log-scale which was used to model the F0 values. \item \textbf{V/UV:} to measure voiced/unvoiced error. \end{itemize} In all these metrics, a lower value gives the better performance. While the objective metrics do not map directly to perceptual quality, they are often useful for system tuning. Table \ref{tab:objective} presents the results on test data. As expected, the benchmark model performs well on most metrics. While the G2P Model performs well on Telugu and Hindi, the Uni-Grapheme model does well on Tamil. Overall, the proposed approaches compare favourably with the benchmark. \subsection{Subjective Evaluations} Three MUSHRA (MUltiple Stimuli with Hidden Reference and Anchor)\footnote{\url{https://github.com/HSU-ANT/beaqlejs}} \cite{beaqlejs2014html} tests were conducted to assess the naturalness of the synthesized speech. For each language, $16$ native listeners were exposed to 20 sentences, chosen randomly from the test set. For each sentence, $5$ unlabelled stimuli were presented in parallel: one for each of the four synthesis systems speaking that sentence plus copy-synthesis speech (i.e., vocoded speech, labelled as \textbf{VOC}) used as the hidden reference. Listeners were asked to rate each stimulus from $0$ (extremely bad for naturalness) to $100$ (same naturalness as the reference speech), and also instructed to give exactly one of the $5$ stimuli in every set a rating of $100$. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[b]{1.0\linewidth} \centering \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/new_mos_three_languages}} \caption{Performance of systems evaluated in the MUSHRA test for all three languages.} \label{fig:MUSHRA_MOS} \end{minipage} \vspace{-0.5cm} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[h] \begin{minipage}[b]{1.0\linewidth} \centering \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/new_results_mos}} \caption{Box plot of absolute values from all three languages' listening tests. Red lines are medians, dashed lines means. Box edges show quartiles. Plus signs indicate outliers.} \label{fig:new_results_mos} \end{minipage} \vspace{-0.5cm} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[b]{1.0\linewidth} \centering \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/new_results_ranks}} \caption{Box plot of aggregate ranks from listening tests (higher is better). Red lines are medians, dashed lines means. Box edges show quartiles. Plus signs indicate outliers.} \label{fig:new_results_ranks} \end{minipage} \vspace{-0.5cm} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[h] \begin{minipage}[b]{1.0\linewidth} \centering \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/preference_over_systems}} \caption{Preferences among systems (how often $y$ was rated above $x$).} \label{fig:preference_over_systems} \end{minipage} \vspace{-0.5cm} \end{figure} For Telugu and Hindi, we had access to a trusted pool of native speakers from IIIT-Hyderabad, while for Tamil we recruited paid workers via Amazon Mechanical Turk as listeners. The Mean Opinion Scores (MOS) from the tests are presented in Figure \ref{fig:MUSHRA_MOS} with their standard deviation represented in log-scale. The benchmark model achieves a higher MOS in Telugu and Hindi, as expected, while in Tamil the Uni-Grapheme model achieves best performance. However, according to paired $t$-tests with Holm-Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, the difference with next best system is significant only in Telugu and Hindi. Among the proposed approaches, G2P performed significantly better than other two in Telugu and Hindi. However in Tamil, both G2P and benchmark performed worse than the rest. This strange behaviour can be attributed to two reasons: 1) the absence of a mechanism for detecting outliers in turker judgements (as opposed to the use of trusted pool of listeners for Hindi and Telugu); 2) the lack of our expertize in enhancing letter to sound rules specific to Tamil. The difference in ratings suggest that some additional rules or fine-tuning of lexicon may be required for Tamil. The MUSHRA scores combined across all three languages for each system are presented in Fig. \ref{fig:new_results_mos}. For further analysis, each set of fifteen parallel listener scores was converted to ranks from 1 (worst) to 5 (best), with tied ranks set to the mean of the tied position. A box plot of these rank scores aggregated across all sentences and listeners is shown in Figure \ref{fig:new_results_ranks}. Listener preferences between systems are also illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:preference_over_systems}. All these figures indicate, G2P performed the best among the proposed approaches. An interesting issue is that some test sentences include English-language words (e.g.: road, page, congress) due to frequent code-switching among the native speakers (also reflected in the text corpus). This affected the performance of G2P conversion for those sentences, in turn creating a marginal difference between G2P and benchmark over the listening test. G2P trained on large corpora of parallel text may remove such errors in the future, thereby improving the synthesis quality and reducing the gap towards the benchmark. \cite{sunanya2016codeswitch} is one such recent attempt for synthesizing speech from code-mixed text. No intelligibility evaluation was conducted since transcription word error rate (WER) has been found to be a poor metric for Indian languages, cf.\ \cite{prahallad2014blizzard}. However, we believe listeners do take into account intelligibility while rating the stimuli, even though they were asked to rate the naturalness. \section{Applications} The grapheme-to-phoneme conversion described herein enabled us to build indic-search\footnote{\url{http://srikanthr.in/indic-search}}, a search engine that helps end-users use ASCII to search for pages written in Unicode. Text-to-speech interfaces with ASCII input also enable users to type in their own pronunciation rather than conforming to a specific notation. \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:print} In this paper, we considered the problem of synthesizing speech from ASCII transliterated text of Indian languages. Our proposed approach first converts ASCII text to phonetic script, and then learns a DNN to synthesize speech from the phonetic script. We experimented with three approaches, which vary in the degree of manual supervision in defining phonemes. Our results show that G2P model with few assumptions is competitive with manually-defined phoneme models. All the data, and samples used in the listening tests are available online at: \footnotesize{\url{http://srikanthr.in/indic-speech-synthesis}}. \newpage \textbf{Acknowledgements: }Thanks to Nivedita Chennupati and Spandana Gella for their contribution in data collection with Amazon Mechanical Turk. Also, thanks to Sivanada Achanta for evaluating the systems through listening tests. We thank Gustav Henter for proofreading. However, the errors that remain are the authors' responsibilities. \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Introduction} \IEEEPARstart{I}{dentifying} who is performing which action has been deemed as one of the most important multimedia applications. For example, with the emergence of smart space, sensing human actions or activities automatically becomes essential. Moreover, with identification, user's information can be used to trigger specific customization such as temperature or illumination adjustment in room, content shown on television etc. \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{scenario.pdf_tex}} \caption{Wi-Fi sensing scenario. We analyze the change of Wi-Fi signal caused by human action, classify it into a predefined action set, and identify the person performing it.} \label{fig:scenario} } \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{\input{system_diagram.pdf_tex}} \caption{Framework Overview. Different from image/video-based methods, we utilize Wi-Fi signals for recognition. (Blocks with yellow mark are the main differences between other works and our work.)} \label{fig:system} } \end{figure} \par Several action recognition methods have been deployed, such as learning trajectory \cite{nn-traj}, motion descriptor \cite{racket-sport}, or optical flow and gradient descriptors \cite{codebook}. Overall, an 90\% accuracy has been achieved among most vision-based works. However, cameras might not be applicable in every place and scenario. For example, in restroom where privacy is of the first priority or in places where lighting is scarce, cameras are of little use. Nevertheless, action recognition could not be spared in these places. For instance, timely detection of falling in a bathroom limits the damage to minimum. Hence, previous works propose using wearable devices such as accelerometers to obtain the speed profile and detect the action \cite{accelerometer}. Those solutions, however, require users to wear devices all the time, which is unrealistic in some scenarios like taking a shower. Hence, one might prefer a non-contact method, avoiding intruding in users' daily life. To achieve identification, the most intuitive and popular way is face recognition. Though, a pretty high accuracy has been achieved with the power of deep learning \cite{deepface}, most works analyze on frontal faces, and in fact, side-view recognition is still very challenging. Some researchers propose to identify a person through gait analysis from sensor data. Yet, as the problem mentioned above, users would prefer a device-free solution. Given the flaws of the aforementioned methods, Wi-Fi leaps out at researchers' radar. \par Preliminary research on RF-based action recognition collects raw signals received by USRP~\cite{usrp}, a software defined radio, and tracks the timestamps of motion \cite{wisee, allsee}. However, commercial APs do not provide raw signals, urging later works \cite{shopper, eeye} to seek for a more practical solution that analyzes on CSI obtained from the modified driver \cite{csitool}. We also realize our work based on this CSI toolkit. Though extensive efforts have been put into CSI-based action recognition, to the best of our knowledge, most existing works extract ad-hoc features which might encounter accuracy degradation as environments change. On the other hand, prior work on identification \cite{rfcapture} utilizes antenna array along with tailored devices to recognize the person standing behind the wall, triggering us to achieve identification via commercial APs. \par We, interestingly, observe that a CSI-transformed image actually has some special texture appearances. Hence, in this work, we also use the CSI toolkit, but aim at investigating a general vision-based solution for action recognition and user identification. The fundamental challenge of such a vision-based method is how to exclude the effect of location dependent information typically embedded in the captured CSI. To overcome this issue, we propose a de-noising method based on SVD to improve reliability of cross-environment performance. We further extend our vision-based framework to identify users, and verify its accuracy for various distances, packets sampling rates and outfits. Our contributions include: \begin{itemize} \item We provide an overview on action recognition and person identification via Wi-Fi. \item To our best knowledge, we are the first to investigate the feasibility of processing CSI by vision-based methods with extendible learning-based framework \cite{icassp}. \item Despite of the promising performance in one room, we enable cross-environment action recognition by removing location dependency via the SVD-based de-noise method \cite{mm}. \item We further experimentally verify the possibility of using our vision-based framework to identify users, and discuss some factors that may affect performance and are worth future studies as open problems. \end{itemize} \begin{table}[h!] \begin{center} \resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|P{65pt}\|P{48pt}\|P{78pt}\|P{180pt}\|} \hline Work & Software-Defined Radio & Directional Antenna & Fequency Modulated Carrier Wave & Task\\ \hline WiSee \cite{wisee}, AllSee \cite{allsee} & V & V & & Coarse-grained action recognition \\ E-eyes \cite{eeye}, CARM \cite{carm} & & & & Fine-grained action recognition \\ RF-Capture \cite{rfcapture} & & V & V & Identification \\ WiTrack \cite{witrack} & & V & V & Human body localization \\ \hline Our solution & & & & Fine-grained action recognition \& Identification \\ \hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Comparison of specified hardware among related works. The mark ``V'' means the corresponding work utilizes the instruments or techniques listed above in the header, while ``Task'' in the header indicates what the work aims to solve. } \label{tab:compare} \end{center} \end{table} \section{Related Works} \par In this section, we introduce some related works using wireless signals with divergent aspects. \subsection{Raw Signal} \label{ssec:raw} \par From the frequency aspect, if we view human body as a source of reflected signals, when the user pushes toward a receiver, the relatively approaching speed causes a positive Doppler shift at the receiver. On the contrary, a negative Doppler shift occurs as the user's hand departs from the receiver. Harnessing the Doppler effect, WiSee~\cite{wisee} achieves a 94\% accuracy differentiating between nine gestures. As from the amplitude angle, since the total path from a transmitter to human body and to a receiver is shorten as pushing happens, the power dissipation decreases, rendering a rising amplitude on the receiver side. Utilizing this phenomenon, AllSee~\cite{allsee} successfully reduces the computational cost by performing analysis directly on the time domain signals with an 91\% accuracy classifying four gestures. However, such raw signals are only available on special hardware such as USRP or WARP~\cite{warp}, nudging researchers toward using CSI, which can, in practice, be accessed from today's commodity devices and computed by the modified driver \cite{csitool}. \subsection{Channel State Information} \label{ssec:csi} \par With CSI, more actions and even human activities are successfully recognized, giving rise to many interesting applications. E-eyes~\cite{eeye} presents a user-feedback system, separating actions into walking and in-place activity, which is capable of identifying several trajectories and activities. WiHear~\cite{wihear} processes CSI for mouth motion profiles in order to read what people say. CARM~\cite{carm} leverages a de-noising method based on principal component analysis (PCA) followed by discrete wavelet transform (DWT), and supports human activity recognition independent of environment variances. Nonetheless, parts of the features used in CARM~\cite{carm} are related to the time duration of an action, which to our knowledge, might render classifiers highly vulnerable to duration estimation errors. Also, despite the promising results, most works involve ad-hoc domain knowledge specifically related to the defined scenarios such as WiFall~\cite{wifall} primarily designed for fall detection. \par And with its high sensitivity to environmental variances caused by moving objects, researchers start exploring the possibility of Wi-Fi identification. In FreeSense~\cite{freesense}, Tong et al. propose an approach that identifies the line-of-sight path crossing moments followed by PCA and DWT to extract features for K-nearest neighbor classifier and achieve an accuracy of 90\% in a six-person scenario. Yet, their approach would work only if a subject passes through the LOS path. WifiU~\cite{WifiU} also harnesses PCA to reduce the uncorrelated noises in different subcarriers. By applying short-time Fourier transform to convert PCA components into spectrograms, it achieves a top-1 accuracy of 92\%. However, several of their features such as walking speed, gait cycle time, to the best of our knowledge, would be ineffective when applied on actions other than walking. For instance, aperiodic and in-situ actions like jump do not involve movement speed or period. \par Also, different to these works, we focus on providing a general feature that could not only be applied on identification even when a person performs actions other than walking, but also be utilized in different objectives, such as action recognition. \subsection{Others} \par Besides CSI from commercial APs, some researchers utilize directional antennas or antenna array to extract more detailed information, achieving a better localization resolution and realizing more powerful applications. RF-Capture~\cite{rfcapture} designs a unique device using a T-shape antenna array and Frequency Modulated Carrier Wave (FMCW) to identify persons through wall. The antenna array differentiates the direction of signals and the frequency chirp estimates the delay of received signals by constantly tuning the transmitted signals. WiTrack~\cite{witrack} uses a similar device to localize a person in 3D space through wall. These works are orthogonal to our work. Requiring simply commercial APs with only omni-directional antennas, which are rather low-cost and ubiquitous, our framework can be deployed widely. \subsection{Comparison} \par We conduct a comprehensive survey into recent works harnessing FMCW radar, directional antenna, software-defined radio and commercial AP in Table \ref{tab:compare}, comparing the main differences among these works in order to differentiate our works with other researches. \par We further place related works on a quadrantal diagram with the two axes being scalability and extensibility in Figure \ref{fig:scenario_diff}. Scalability measures how well a framework could be spread while extensibility measures how well a framework could be adapted to new techniques. The reason we choose these two aspects among numerous designing criteria is we aim at designing a system that could be easily deployable. \par For scalability, since E-eye~\cite{eeye}, CARM~\cite{carm} and our method resort to commercial off-the-shelf instruments such as AP and laptops, we consider them easier to scale up. Since WiSee~\cite{wisee}, AllSee~\cite{allsee}, RF-Capture~\cite{rfcapture} and WiTrack~\cite{witrack} utilize specifically designed hardware or software defined radios, we consider rather difficult and hence place them in the lower position of the figure. For extensibility, since WiTrack~\cite{witrack}, RF-Capture~\cite{rfcapture} and ours take advantage of learning algorithms rather than designing dedicated ones such as WiSee~\cite{wisee} or AllSee~\cite{allsee}, we consider them to be more extensible as novel learning techniques come out. Hence, we put them on the right side of the graph. \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{scenario_diff.pdf_tex}} \caption{Design space comparing to related works. Scalability means the easiness to deploy the proposed framework, considering hardware specificity and accessibility. Extensibility is how well a framework could be extended and since our proposed framework takes advantage of vision techniques, it could be rather easy to take in any promising vision works, making it flexible.} \label{fig:scenario_diff} } \end{figure} \section{Channel State Information} \par In this section, we deeply dig into what CSI is, how it could be used for vision-based methods and describe the location dependency embedded in CSI. \subsection{Background} \label{sec:background} \par As Wi-Fi waves propagate from a transmitter (Tx) through the air to a receiver (Rx), it bumps into objects and goes through several reflection, absorption, scattering or other effects caused by human or objects before reaching the receiver (Rx). When an action takes place, reflecting paths associated with human body differ. Action recognition could thus be realized by observing the variation of the CSI. Current Wi-Fi transmitting protocols such as 802.11n implement OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing) for reducing interference and fading. It segments the bandwidth into several closely-spaced sub-carriers, each carrying a data stream. For more details about OFDM please refer to \cite{ofdm}. As receiving signals, a receiver learns its Channel State Information (CSI), which is a complex number detailing the phase shift and power decay corresponding to the decay and propagation delay of multiple paths. In particular, we can formulate the communication model as $Y = HX$, where $X$ is the transmitted signals, $Y$ is the received signals, and $H$ is the CSI, denoting the overall influence of the environment to $X$. After decoding the received preambles or pilot bits, which are information both known by Tx and Rx, the receiver can learn the CSI, i.e., $H$, by comparing the differences between $Y$ and $X$. When an action happens, the number of reflecting paths and their distances change accordingly and thereby, by extracting information from the CSI, one could classify the action performed. \subsection{Formulation} \label{ssec:cfr} From CARM~\cite{carm}, we know the amplitude of a sub-carrier with frequency \textit{f} at time \textit{t} could be expressed as \textit{H(t, f)} in equation (\ref{eq:cfr-simple}), where \textit{H\textsubscript{s}(f)} is the aggregate channel of all the static paths, \textit{H\textsubscript{d}(f, t)} is the aggregate channel of the dynamic paths and $\Delta f$ is the frequency offset between Tx and Rx. \begin{equation} \label{eq:cfr-simple} H(f, t) = e^{-j2\pi\Delta ft}\left(H_s(f) + H\textsubscript{d}(f,t)\right) \end{equation} $H\textsubscript{d}(f) = \sum_{k\in P_d}^{}a_k(f, t)e^{-j\frac{2\pi d_k(t)}{\lambda}}$, where \textit{a\textsubscript{k}(f, t)} is attenuation of the \textit{k\textsubscript{th}} path at time \textit{t} and frequency \textit{f}, \textit{d\textsubscript{k}(t)} is the distance of \textit{k\textsubscript{th}} path and \textit{P\textsubscript{d}} is the set of all dynamic paths. \par If an object moves at a constant speed, the distance of the \textit{k\textsubscript{th}} path, \textit{d\textsubscript{k}(t)}, could be expressed as \textit{d\textsubscript{k}(t) = d\textsubscript{k}(0) + v\textsubscript{k}}. Thus the power of CSI $\|H(f, t)\|^2$ at time \textit{t} and frequency \textit{f} can be derived as: \begingroup\makeatletter\def\f@size{7.5}\check@mathfonts \def\maketag@@@#1{\hbox{\m@th\large\normalfont#1}} \begin{align} \label{eq:cfrcomplex} &\|H(f, t)\|^2= \\ &\sum_{k\in P_d}2\|H_s(f)a_k(f, t)\|\cos\left(\frac{2\pi v_kt}{\lambda} + \frac{2\pi d_k(0)}{\lambda} + \phi_{sk}\right) + C(f,t) + \nonumber \\ &\sum_{\substack{k,l\in P_d \\ k\neq l}}2\|a_k(f, t)a_l(f, t)\|\cos\left(\frac{2\pi (v_k - v_l)t}{\lambda} + \frac{2\pi (d_k(0) - d_l(0))}{\lambda} + \phi_{kl}\right), \nonumber \end{align} \endgroup where $C(f, t)$ is a constant given sub-carrier frequency $f$ and time $t$, and $\phi_{sk}$ and $\phi_{kl}$, respectively, represent initial phase offsets of transmitter and receiver. \par We observe that in equation (\ref{eq:cfrcomplex}), frequencies of cosine waves are determined by the action speed \textit{v\textsubscript{k}}. A faster speed leads to a larger phase change and renders denser stripes on transformed images, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:cfr}. Since actions of different speeds present different textures on transformed images, we propose applying vision-based methods on transformed images. \begin{figure}[h] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{ecb.pdf_tex}} \caption{Transformed images of (a) standing, (b) clapping, (c) boxing (X-axis: timestamp, Y-axis: 30 sub-carriers $\times$ 4 channels). We could observe a faster punching speed leads to denser stripes, as in the rear part of boxing.} \label{fig:cfr} } \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{ifft_result.pdf_tex}} \caption{Each tap represents the aggregated time-domain channel of the paths with similar distances. A smaller time-domain index corresponds the signals from shorter paths, thereby causing a shorter delay.} \label{fig:ifft_result} } \end{figure} \subsection{Location Dependency} \par To elaborate on why CSI embeds location information, we transform a frequency-domain CSI profile collected from our testbed to the time domain by inverse fast Fourier transformation. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:ifft_result}, the first tap usually represents the channel of the line-of-sight path (with the shortest delay), and, hence, has the strongest amplitude. The rest of weaker taps consist of other static paths, reflected by nearby objects, and dynamic paths, reflected by human bodies. We can observe that, even after removing the strongest line-of-sight path, the remaining signal patterns in the two rooms are still very different because the reflected static paths change with environments and, more importantly, still have a relatively strong power, as compared to those reflected by human. \par Hence, we argue that, to enable location-independent recognition, we should remove those dominant environmental information and only transform the CSI of dynamic paths into images. \section{Location Dependency Removal Method} \par To deal with location dependency, we propose a method based on SVD to remove the background energy. \par In CARM~\cite{carm}, Wei et al. consider the correlation between CSI streams and point out the fact that any effects to signals would be presented across CSI streams, inspiring us to apply SVD on CSI. In image processing techniques, SVD is an attractive algebraic transformation used to manipulate an image in two distinctive sub-spaces, i.e., data spaces and noise spaces. \cite{svd} If we treat the CSI profile as a matrix $H$ of dimension $t \times N\textsubscript{subcarriers}$ (denoted as $d$), after applying SVD, $H$ is factorized into three matrices, $U, S$ and $V$, where $U$ is a $t \times t$ orthogonal matrix, $V$ is a $d \times d$ orthogonal matrix, and $S$ is a $t\times d$ matrix with the diagonal elements representing the singular values of $H$. \par We can formulate low rank approximation of $H$ as follows: \begin{align} \label{eq:compress} &H' = \sum_{i = 1}^{k}s_i u_i v_i^T = s_1u_1v_{1}^T + s_2u_2v_{2}^T + \cdots + s_ku_kv_{k}^T, \end{align} in which $k$ is usually smaller than $d$ for compression and $s_i$ means the singular values (SV) in decreasing order corresponding to a pair of singular vectors $u_i$ and $v_i$. Intuitively, this equation shows that $H$ is a sum of different bases with its importance score for approximating the original $H$. \par After decomposition, we remove the dominant background energy by setting the first singular value to zero for each image. We illustrate our design rationale via the example shown in Figure \ref{fig:svd_example}. We can observe from the figure that if we set all SV in $S$ to zero except for the largest one, denoted by $S=S_{SV_1 \neq 0}$, and reconstruct the channel information by $H_{SV_1\neq 0}=US_{SV_1 \neq 0}V^T$, then, the reconstructed channel $H_{SV_1\neq 0}$ would be similar to the CSI recorded in the quite environment. This example shows that the largest SV packs most of energy corresponding to the static paths. Therefore, we set the largest SV to zero so that the background can be mostly removed and the reconstructed channel $H_{SV_{1}=0}$ preserves only the human action part. \par We illustrate how the SVD-based background removal method improves the performance by the examples shown in Figure \ref{fig:beforeafter}. In this experiment, the subject performs the same action (pick up box) in two different rooms. Before SVD is applied, even when the same action is performed, the power distributions of the whole CSI captured in two locations differ due to distinct static paths in different rooms, making the models trained in one place fail to recognize actions recorded in other places. However, after removing the largest SV, as shown in the right ones in Figure \ref{fig:beforeafter}, the textures of the remaining part from two different rooms resemble each other. \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{svd_example.pdf_tex}} \caption{CSI-transformed images of picking up box from different reconstructed channels $H$.} \label{fig:svd_example} } \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{beforeafter.pdf_tex}} \caption{CSI-transformed images of the same action (pick up box) from two different rooms.} \label{fig:beforeafter} } \end{figure} \section{Proposed Vision-based Framework} \par In this section, we describe the overall flow of the proposed framework, from collecting CSI, pre-processing, extracting features to training the classifier, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:system}. \subsection{Collecting CSI} \label{ssec:collectCSI} \par We use MacBook Pro 2014 or ASUS U80v with Intel 5300 NIC as Tx and Fujitsu SH560 with Intel 5300 NIC as Rx, each having two antennas. With \textit{N\textsubscript{Tx}} = 2, \textit{N\textsubscript{Rx}} = 2, we have 2 $\times$ 2 = 4 \textit{Tx-Rx} pairs, each generating a set of CSI with dimension 30 (sub-carriers) $\times$ \textit{t} (samples). We then process these four sets of CSI separately and investigate whether early or late fusion yields better performance. \subsection{Pre-processing} \label{ssec:pre} \par Due to interference caused by other devices in the same Wi-Fi channel, packets received are not evenly distributed in time. Thus, we linearly interpolate raw CSI to 1000 samples/second. We then apply 5th-order Butterworth filter with cutoff frequency 50Hz to remove high-frequency noise. And since power distributions of different sub-carriers vary, we normalize each sub-carrier by subtracting the average of a moving-window, width set as 300ms, from each sample. \subsection{Location Dependency Removal} \par We will later investigate, via experiments, the two settings: (1) apply SVD on each set of CSI with dimension $30 \times t$ separately, and (2) apply SVD on all the CSI streams with dimension $120 \times t$, and explore which option performs better. \subsection{Feature Extraction} \label{ssec:feature} \par After transforming a set of CSI into an image of specific size, we experiment with Gabor and BoW-SIFT on it. Though deep features are potentially more powerful, due to the scarcity of current data we will not address it in our work. \subsubsection{Gabor Filter} \label{sssec:gabor} \par A Gabor filter is defined by a plane wave multiplied by a Gaussian function. By setting different scales and orientations, a set of filters are obtained. (Details could be found in \cite{gabor}.) These filters are convoluted with a transformed image. When a local patch resembles the filter, a high response will be obtained. Finally, a response map is produced, of which we then take two statistics, mean and standard deviation. \par We set \textit{\#scale}, \textit{\#orientation} and size of the Gabor filters to 8, 6 and 15 respectively, which usually produce better accuracy from our measurements. Hence, the dimension of our final Gabor feature is 8 $\times$ 6 $\times$ 2 = 96. \subsubsection{Bag of Word-SIFT} \label{sssec:sift} \par SIFT (Scale Invariant Feature Transform) seeks to transform an image into a collection of keypoints, each described by a feature vector invariant to illumination, translation, rotation and scaling. \cite{sift} We take all feature vectors of the training images from a \textit{Tx-Rx} pair and perform K-means clustering to find 48 centroids. BoW-SIFT feature is then generated by quantizing vectors of an image to the nearest centroid, producing a histogram of dimension 48. \par Thus, in testing phase, we quantize the feature vectors of the input image into centroids found during training and feed the produced 48-dimension feature into the trained classifier. \subsection{Training SVM Classifier} \label{ssec:svm} For each of the four \textit{Tx-Rx} pairs, we obtain a feature vector. We investigate fusing them before or after training linear SVM classifiers. \subsubsection{Early Fusion} \label{sssec:earlyfuse} We concatenate four features from four \textit{Tx-Rx} pairs into a new feature. Then, we train a single classifier and take action with the highest probability as the predicted result. \subsubsection{Late Fusion} \label{sssec:latefuse} Instead of concatenating four feature vectors and training a single classifier, we train one for each pair, so there would be four classifiers. Given a testing instance, probability of each action is obtained, rendering four probability vectors of length \#\textit{action} (seven in our case). Summing these four vectors, we take action with the highest probability as the predicted result. \section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp} In this section, we present our experimental results on action recognition and person identification. \subsection{Action Recognition without SVD} \subsubsection{Dataset and Settings} \par Dataset A is collected in a seminar room, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:seminar_room}, for verifying if our method could recognize actions as well as locations. We define seven actions: \textit{Box, Clap, Wave hand, Kick, Quick squat, Jump, Stand still} and six locations \textit{a, b, c, d, e, f}. A single subject performs each action 10 times on each location, so in total we have 7 $\times$ 6 $\times$ 10 = 420 data. Dataset B is collected to compare with vision-based methods on video action recognition, and thus we define actions the same as the benchmark dataset, KTH~\cite{KTH}. These actions include: \textit{Box, Clap, Wave hand, Walk, Jog, Run, Stand still}. Two subjects are asked to perform each action 10 times and in total we have 2 $\times$ 7 $\times$ 10 = 140 data. \par All actions are performed in a 5-second period, each generating four sets of CSI with dimension 30 $\times$ 5000 (interpolated to 1000 samples/second). We then transform them into four images of size 576 $\times$ 432. \begin{figure}[h] \centering{ \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{\input{seminar_room.pdf_tex}} \caption{Subject performs actions in each circle.} \label{fig:seminar_room} } \end{figure} \subsubsection{Results} \par We evaluate the performance using 10-fold cross validation. First, we conduct experiments on dataset A with late-fusion scheme (Details will be discussed in Table \ref{tab:late-early}), as cross-validation accuracy shown in Table \ref{tab:datasetA}. We could verify that viewing CSI as texture is feasible and Gabor filters, particularly suitable for texture recognition, perform better. Hence, following experiments are primarily based on Gabor. \begin{table}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Location & BoW-SIFT & Gabor \\ \hline a & 64.29\% & 84.36\% \\ b & 81.43\% & 96.57\% \\ c & 77.14\% & 89.79\% \\ d & 80.00\% & 86.71\% \\ e & 51.43\% & 81.21\% \\ f & 74.29\% & 81.50\% \\ \hline all & 50.48\% & 77.45\% \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Accuracy of Gabor and BoF-SIFT on dataset A.} \label{tab:datasetA} \end{center} \end{table} \par Table \ref{tab:late-early} shows the results of cross-validation on both datasets using early fusion and late fusion. As the statistics show, late fusion performs better since it exploits four different channels with four classifiers. Though each classifier is weaker compared to that of early fusion, more channels provide more information for recognition. Due to the superiority of late fusion to early fusion, we only list results of late fusion in the following experiments. Also from results on dataset B, we believe Wi-Fi could actually supports cameras in differentiating actions that are visually similar but of different CSI patterns. \begin{table}[ht] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline & Dataset A & Dataset B \\ \hline Early & 70.24\% & 80.23\% \\ Late & 77.45\% & 86.96\% \\ \hline \end{tabular \caption{Accuracy of early and late fusion applying Gabor.} \label{tab:late-early} \end{table} \par Wondering if location affects the accuracy, we split the classification process into two stages, namely, location identification followed by action recognition. Location is predicted using classifier trained on all data first. \begin{table}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|} \hline Target & Accuracy \\ \hline Location & 98.00\% \\ Action (Given location) & 83.00\% \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Accuracy of location-awareness classification.} \label{tab:loc-aware} \end{center} \end{table} \begin{table}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Training location & Testing location & Accuracy \\ \hline b & e & 12.86\% \\ b, e & c & 17.14\% \\ b, c, e & d & 42.86\% \\ b, c, d, e & a & 23.00\% \\ a, b, c, d, e & f & 17.00\% \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Accuracy of cross-location classification.} \label{tab:cross-loc} \end{center} \end{table} \par Then a classifier trained with data of the suggested location is employed to classify the action, with results shown in Table \ref{tab:loc-aware}. The 98\% accuracy in predicting location and the 83.00\% accuracy in action classification (compared to 77.45\% in Table \ref{tab:late-early}) reveals that our features still embed location information. Hence, a classifier trained on all data performs poorly compared to a classifier dedicated for that specific location. To further testify, we experiment a trained classifier on data of unseen location with results demonstrated in Table \ref{tab:cross-loc}. We note though a slight performance boost might be witnessed as we incorporate data from more locations. When testing on an instance of a difference location, a classifier performs poorly and without consistency. \par Finally, we conduct an experiment exploring whether size of the transformed images affects accuracy, as shown in Table \ref{tab:size}. The result demonstrates that as the size of images becomes smaller, performance remains excellent as long as the size of filters alters accordingly, implying the proposed framework is computationally efficient. \begin{table}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Size & Filter size & Accuracy \\ \hline 5000 $\times$ 30 & 15 & 66.54\% \\ 576 $\times$ 432 & 15 & \textbf{86.96\%} \\ 72 $\times$ 54 & 15 & 75.64\% \\ 72 $\times$ 54 & 9 & 84.46\% \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Accuracy on dataset B between different sizes (in pixels) of image.} \vspace{-10pt} \label{tab:size} \end{center} \end{table} \subsection{Action Recognition with SVD} \subsubsection{Dataset and Settings} \par We collect our dataset in five seminar rooms, such as the two shown in Figure \ref{fig:R539_R540_R542}, to verify if our method could recognize actions from different places. We define six actions: \textit{Stand still}, \textit{Walk}, \textit{Run}, \textit{Pick up box}, \textit{Golf swing}, and \textit{Jump}. A single subject performs each action 20 times so in total we have 120 traces for each room. All actions are performed in a 5-second period, each generating four sets of CSI with dimension $t \times 30$ and roughly more than 2000 samples/sec. We then transform them into four images of size $576 \times 432$. \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{R539_R540_R542.pdf_tex}} \caption{Examples of the seminar rooms. Subject performs actions along the trajectories and in circles.} \label{fig:R539_R540_R542} } \end{figure} \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Room & A & B & C & D & E \\\hline \# of data & 120 & 120 & 120 & 120 & 120 \\\hline None-4SVM & 30.00\% & 29.17\% & 26.67\% & 30.00\% & 30.83\% \\\hline SVD30-1SVM & 99.17\% & 97.50\% & 97.50\% & 96.67\% & 96.67\% \\ SVD30-4SVM & 98.33\% & 96.67\% & 99.17\% & 97.50\% & 95.83\% \\ SVD120-1SVM & 99.17\% & 98.33\% & 99.17\% & 99.17\% & 99.17\% \\ SVD120-4SVM & 99.17\% & 99.17\% & 98.33\% & 99.17\% & 100.00\% \\\hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Cross validation accuracy of each room. (Both training and testing data are at the same room.)} \label{tab:one_room} \end{center} \end{table} \subsubsection{Results} \par For each room, we evaluate the performance by 10-fold cross validation, as accuracy shown in Table \ref{tab:one_room}. We experiment on four settings, in which SVD$x$-$y$SVM means applying SVD on $x$ sub-carriers and training $y$ SVM classifiers. If we do not apply SVD on CSI, performance debases significantly due to noises and background interference, showing that our method can also remove noises. With our setting and de-noise strategy, the performance of 10-fold cross validation in one room is remarkably better than those without location dependency removal method. \par Then, we also conduct cross room experiments with one room being testing data and others being training data, as shown in Table \ref{tab:cross_room}. The results of none pre-processing set are not even better than random guess, while those applying SVD achieve a promising accuracy. Moreover, we can observe that SVD120 outperforms SVD30 in average performance, inferring that 120 sub-carriers considered together capture more human action information. However, the results show that both fusion schemes produce similar performance. \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Testing room & A & B & C & D & E \\\hline None-4SVM & 16.67\% & 16.67\% & 16.67\% & 16.67\% & 16.67\% \\\hline SVD30-1SVM & 80.83\% & 89.17\% & 89.17\% & 99.17\% & 98.33\% \\ SVD30-4SVM & 84.17\% & 53.33\% & 83.33\% & 90.83\% & 96.67\% \\ SVD120-1SVM & 76.67\% & 91.67\% & 97.50\% & 98.33\% & 95.83\% \\ SVD120-4SVM & 84.17\% & 75.83\% & 81.67\% & 84.17\% & 98.33\% \\\hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Accuracy of leave-one-out testing (all other rooms as training data).} \label{tab:cross_room} \end{center} \end{table} \par Finally, we would like to explore whether the amount of training data affects the accuracy. Since the SVD120-1SVM obtains the better average performance in the previous experiment, we only list the results using SVD120-1SVM in Table \ref{tab:more_data}. The results among all rooms show tendency that when more training data are involved, the higher accuracy may be achieved, implying the model is improved by investigating more data. \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Testing room & A & B & C & D & E \\\hline Train with 1 room & 66.67\% & 40.00\% & 43.33\% & 31.67\% & 71.67\% \\ Train with 2 rooms & 66.67\% & 88.33\% & 95.83\% & 91.67\% & 96.67\% \\ Train with 3 rooms & 74.17\% & 95.00\% & 95.83\% & 95.83\% & 98.33\% \\ Train with 4 rooms & 76.67\% & 91.67\% & 97.50\% & 98.33\% & 96.67\% \\\hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Accuracy on SVD120-1SVM of increasing amount of training data (other rooms as training data).} \label{tab:more_data} \end{center} \end{table} \subsection{Person Identification} \subsubsection{Dataset and Settings} \par We invite seven male and three female subjects with age ranging from 20 to 27 and ask each of them to perform walking. All actions are also performed in a 5-second period, and the remaining settings are the same as those in action recognition. \subsubsection{Results} \par We separate our experiments into three parts, with results shown in the three blocks of Table \ref{tab:id}. For each part, we follow the same procedure as in action recognition, where we perform 10-fold cross validation on a sub dataset. For the first part, we test on the 100 instances with result demonstrated in the first row, indicating that different person indeed has his or her own walking style, and thus enabling precise identification. \par In the next part, we investigate if the proposed method could correctly identify the subject given different outfits or accessories. For this purpose, we ask one of the volunteer to record 30 additional data wearing long-sleeve T-shirt, cotton suit and coat. Also, we ask the subject to record 20 additional data bearing side bag or backpack in the original outfit. Hence, in total, we have 50 additional data for the chosen volunteer. We experiment adding data instances of different clothes, different bags or both to our dataset and the minute degradation implies that the classifier could still recognize the person even in different clothes and accessories. \par In the last part, we deliberately label wrongly the additional ``clothes'' and ``bags'' data of the chosen subject as of 5 different people. That is, we regard each setting as if recorded by a new person. As shown in the last block of the table, the plummeting accuracies verify that if we view instances of the same person with different outfits or accessories as of different people, the classifier would be compromised trying to separate instances that are literally of the same person, leading to a huge debasement in performance. \begin{comment} \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Settings & Accuracy & Remarks \\\hline 7 males + 3 females & 91\% & Total 10 people \\\hline 1 male mixed with ``clothes'' & 87\% & \\ 1 male mixed with ``bags'' & 86\% & \\ 1 male added with ``clothes'' & 86.43\% & 40 walks\\ 1 male added with ``bags'' & 86.25\% & 30 walks\\ 1 male added with ``clothes'', ``bags'' & 88.13\% & 70 walks\\\hline ``clothes'' as avatars & \bf{13.85\%} & Total 13 people \\ ``bags'' as avatars & \bf{18.33\%} & Total 12 people\\ ``clothes'', ``bags'' as avatars & \bf{14\%} & Total 15 people \\\hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Cross validation accuracy of identification with different settings using 10 walks per person. So in ``1 male mixed with clothes'', we took 3 from the original, 3, 2 and 2 from the other three outfits to perform cross validation. ``1 male mixed with bag'' is of the same logic except we took 4, 3 and 3 data respectively from the original where the volunteer wore no bag and the other two bags. And in ``1 male added with clothes'', in additional to the original 10 data, we also incorporated the other 30 clothes data. The same logic applied on ``1 male added with bags''.} \label{tab:id} \end{center} \end{table} \end{comment} \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline Used data & \# of data & Accuracy & Remarks \\\hline O & 100 & 91\% & Total 10 people \\ (O + C)$^{\star}$ & 100 & 87\% & \\ (O + B)$^{\star}$ & 100 & 86\% & \\ O + C & 130 & 86.43\% & \\ O + B & 120 & 86.25\% & \\ O + B + C & 150 & 88.13\% & \\\hline C as avatars & 130 & \bf{13.85\%} & Total 13 people \\ B as avatars & 120 & \bf{18.33\%} & Total 12 people\\ C and B as avatars & 150 & \bf{14\%} & Total 15 people \\\hline \end{tabular} } \scriptsize{$^{\star}$We randomly sample 10 walks of the chosen subject to match the \# of instances of other subjects\\} \caption{Cross validation accuracy of identification with different settings using 10 walks per person. In the ``Used data'' column, {\em O} means the original 10-people dataset; {\em C} means 30 additional data of the volunteer wearing three different clothes; and {\em B} means 20 additional data of the volunteer bearing side bag or backpack. We can see that despite different clothing or accessories, our methods could still correctly identify the subjects.} \label{tab:id} \end{center} \end{table} \section{Discussions and Open Problems} \par In this section, we study how distances, sampling rates or outfits would affect the performance and find out that only distance has noticeable effect while other factors have minor impact, with results demonstrated in Table \ref{tab:cross_factors}. For each setting (room, distance, sampling rate and distance), we record 60 instances, that is, 10 instances for each action. For the {\em Original} row, we record our dataset at the predefined position/course (as shown in Figure \ref{fig:course_demo}) with sampling rate 2400 samples/sec and T-shirt as our subject$'$s outfit. For the {\em Environments} row, we record an additional dataset for each of the other 4 rooms. Hence, in total, we have 5 datasets of size 60. We then evenly and randomly sample 60 instances from these 5 sets to perform cross validation. For the {\em Distances} row, three additional datasets are recorded 2m, 4m and 6m away from the predefined position/course (please refer to Figure \ref{fig:course_demo} for a clearer picture.) and, same as in {\em Environments}, are randomly sampled 60 instances for cross validation. For the {\em Sampling rates} row, we again record 3 other datasets with sampling rate 400, 800 and 1200 samples/sec and follow the same procedure as in previous two rows. Lastly for the {\em Outfits} row, 3 datasets are employed with our subject wearing long-sleeve T-shirt, cotton suit and coat. \par The accuracy is evaluated by 10-fold cross validation with the proposed location dependency removal method. The results show that different distances would debate the accuracy slightly while other factors would not. We consider that even our method removes the environment information, data recorded in various distances would have different human-body-reflected signal power. Thus, proper pre-processing to normalize the power distribution may be worth investigated in the future if we want to recognize data from different distances. \begin{figure}[t] \centering{ \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{course_demo.pdf_tex}} \caption{Positions and courses for distances mixed experiment.} \label{fig:course_demo} } \end{figure} \begin{table}[t] \begin{center} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline - & Stand still & Jump & Pick up box & Run & Golf swing & Walk & All \\\hline Original & 100\% & 90\% & 100\% & 95\% & 100\% & 100\% & 97.5 \\\hline Environments & 100\% & 85\% & 100\% & 95\% & 85\% & 100\% & 94.17\% \\ Distances & 75\% & 90\% & 80\% & 95\% & 95\% & 100\% & \bf{89.17\%} \\ Sampling rates & 95\% & 85\% & 95\% & 95\% & 95\% & 100\% & 94.17\% \\ Outfits & 100\% & 85\% & 100\% & 100\% & 95\% & 100\% & 96.67\% \\\hline \end{tabular} } \caption{Cross validation accuracy of mixed datasets.} \label{tab:cross_factors} \end{center} \end{table} \par As for identification, however, we do not conduct experiments of different environments, distances and sampling rates as we did on action recognition. Besides, some open issues could be further discussed, such as detecting a person outside the group, recognizing even a larger group of people, evaluating if diverse age would affect, and on-line learning the classifier adapting to the change in the outfit and moving patterns of a person. \section{Conclusion} \par In this paper, we provide an overview on human action recognition along with user identification using Wi-Fi, and clearly differentiate our work with other related researches. \par We observe the resemblance of CSI to texture and apply vision-based methods on images transformed from CSI. With this brand new angle, we develop a framework that achieves an accuracy above 85\% identifying the seven predefined actions. Though environment dependency is a challenging issue, which lowers the performance when the user deviates from the training locations too much, we propose a location dependency removal method based on SVD to remove the environment information embedded in CSI. Thus, actions recorded in different locations could still be recognized by the trained classifiers. Our experimental results show that the SVD-based solution achieves an accuracy above 90\% classifying the six predefined actions on cross-environment action recognition. \par Finally, we discuss about the feasibility of our methods applied on identification. Preliminary studies show promising performance identifying people's gait. Some potential issues are listed for further investigation as open research problems. \ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff \newpage \fi
\section{Introduction} A fundamental problem in Dynamical Systems is the description of the orbits of elements under a given motion law, in our case this law will be given by diffeomorphisms. One of the most effective ways to do so is through classification, that is understanding a given dynamics by its relation with some other better known model. A typical and important class of examples of Dynamical Systems are the hyperbolic diffeomorphisms, also known as Anosov diffeomorphisms. Anosov \cite{Anosov} proved that these maps (here we always assume at least $C^{1 + \alpha}$) are ergodic with respect to the volume measure. One of the key steps of his proof relies on the understanding of the behavior of the two associate invariant foliations, the stable and the unstable, which are uniformly contracting and uniformly expanding respectively. These hyperbolic maps exhibit enough structure so that one can analyze them using some geometric and metric tools. A diffeomorphism $f:M \rightarrow M$ on a smooth manifold $M$ is said to be transitive if there exists $x \in M$ such that $\{f^n(x)\}_n$ is dense in $M$. We say that $f$ is robustly transitive if there exists a $C^1$ neighborhood of $f$ such that all diffeomorphisms in this neighborhood are transitive. One of the first examples of robustly transitive systems were the Anosov diffeomorphisms (see \cite{BDV} and references therein). It was then thought that hyperbolic diffeomorphisms were the only robustly transitive systems, in fact Ma\~n\'e \cite{mane.ECL} proved that $C^1$ robustly transitive diffeomorphims on a surface are the hyperbolic ones. But Shub \cite{shub.T4} and Ma\~n\'e \cite{mane.stability.conjecure} gave examples of robustly transitive systems which were not hyperbolic. Their systems fall on a larger class known as Partially Hyperbolic diffeomorphisms. The partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms are similar to Anosov diffeomorphism as they have expanding and contracting directions and the respectively associated stable and unstable foliations. The difference is that there is a center direction for a partially hyperbolic diffeomorphism which is dominated by the stable and unstable directions (see Definition \ref{defi:PH}). A major difficulty to understand these systems comes on predicting the behavior of the center direction since it may not exhibit any kind of hyperbolicity. And as one expects this brings new difficulties, but most important it gives rise to new dynamical behaviors. The stable and unstable foliations of a partially hyperbolic diffeomophism are absolutely continuous, this means that for a set of full volume almost every leaf intersects this set in a full leaf-volume measure. That is, one should see absolute continuity of a foliation as a Fubini like behavior, which may also be seen as some sort of regularity condition of these foliations. In contrast, the center foliation may exhibit a new type of behavior, it may have atomic disintegration: there is a set of full volume which intersects each center leaf in a finite number of points. At first this might sound as a pathological behavior, but it turns out that this is in fact a common behavior for the center foliation \cite{AVWI,PTV,ruelle.wilkinson}. If one imposes some regularity on a center foliation, for instance absolute continuity as it happens for the stable and unstable foliations, one may get a very rigid structure. For instance Avila, Viana and Wilkinson \cite{AVWI} assuming absolute continuity of the center foliation for volume preserving perturbations of a time-one map of the geodesic flow on a constant negatively curved surface, they obtain that in fact this perturbation is a time-one map of a $C^\infty$ Anosov flow. So far the main results on the rigidity problem concerning the center foliation are the ones presented in \cite{AVWI}, as described above, and in \cite{varao.etds}. On \cite{varao.etds} it is studied the rigidity problem for the class of derived from Anosov systems, which are partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms homotopic to a linear Anosov. These systems have a hyperbolic memory, more precisely they are semi-conjugate to a linear Anosov, also called as the linearization of this diffeomorphism (see \S \ref{sec:preliminaries} for details). It is assumed on \cite{varao.etds} that the center foliation is $C^1$ and have transversely absolutely continuous foliations with bounded Jacobian, and the implication is $C^{1}$ conjugacy with a linear Anosov. Our main result largely extends this last result since it does not assume any smoothness from the center foliation, in fact it assumes an almost everywhere condition and, then, it implies a much stronger regularity, $C^\infty$. The low regularity assumption in our result is simply a uniform version of absolute continuity of a foliation. More precisely, the disintegration of volume on any foliated box has conditional measures with a uniformly bounded density with respect to the leaf-volume (see Definition \ref{defi:UBD}). Micena and Tahzibi \cite{micena.tahzibi.UBD} called this the UBD Property, our main result also answers their conjecture that UBD property would imply $C^1$ conjugacy, we obtain in fact $C^\infty$. Transversely absolutely continuous foliations with bounded Jacobian means that the holonomies of transversal foliations have uniformly bounded Jacobian, one can easily check that this implies the UBD property (the proof follows from the appropriate modifications of Proposition 6.2.2 of \cite{brin.stuck}). In the context of Avila, Viana, Wilkinson \cite{AVWI} absolute continuity implies smoothness, in our context this is far from possible and one cannot drop the UBD property as, by \cite[Theorem 1.3]{varao.etds}, the center foliation may be $C^1$ and $f$ not even $C^1$ smoothly conjugate to its linearization. We point out that being a $C^1$ foliation implies to have locally uniform bounded densities. Hence our hypothesis (the uniform version of absolute continuity) is a natural one and, from the explained before, can be seen as a sharp condition. Our main result, Theorem \ref{main:rigidity.C}, in contrast to other results is a global rigidity result, i.e. one does not assume any proximity of the derived from Anosov to its linearization. We also point out that we do not assume ergodicity. We now state our main result: \begin{thm}\label{main:rigidity.C} Let $f:\mathbb{T}^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ be a conservative partially hyperbolic diffeomorphism homotopic to a linear Anosov. The center foliation has the Uniform Bounded Density property if and only if $f$ is $C^{\infty}$ conjugate to its linearization. \end{thm} \textit{Structure of the paper:} The next section is the preliminaries where one finds the formal definitions and results mentioned in this section and elsewhere. After the preliminaries we prove our main result. Remark \ref{rem}, where we propose a general program to tackle rigidity problems for the center foliations of partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms in a more general setting, comes after the proof of Theorem \ref{main:rigidity.C}. \section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:preliminaries} We briefly present the main definitions and results we will be using throughout this work. \begin{defn}\label{defi:PH} Let $M$ be a smooth compact Riemannian manifold. A diffeomorphism $f:M \rightarrow M$ is called partially hyperbolic if the tangent bundle of the ambient manifold admits an invariant decomposition $TM = E^s \oplus E^c \oplus E^u$, such that for all unit vectors $v^{\sigma} \in E^{\sigma}, \sigma \in \{s, c, u\}$ and all $x, y, z \in M$ \[ \\|D_xf v^s \\| < \\|D_yf v^c\\| < \\| D_zf v^u\\| \] and $\\|D_xf v^s\\| < 1 < \\|D_zf v^u\\|$. \end{defn} It is well known that for partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms, there are foliations $\mathcal F^{s}$ and $\mathcal F^{u}$ tangent to the sub-bundles $E^{s}$ and $E^{u}$ called \textit{stable} and \textit{unstable foliation} respectively (for more details see for example \cite{YP}). On the other hand, a priori there is no garantee of the existence of a center foliation for a partially hyperbolic diffeomorphism. But that is not our concern since in the context we will be working (partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms on $\mathbb T^3$) all partially hyperbolic diffeomorphisms (as defined above) on $\mathbb T^3$ admit a central foliation tangent to $E^c$ by a result of Brin, Burago, Ivanov \cite{BBI}. We say that $f$ is an Anosov diffeomorphism if it satisfies Definition \ref{defi:PH} but there is no center direction. Anosov diffeomorphisms also have stable and unstable invariant foliations as described above. \begin{defn} \label{defi:DA} We say that $f\colon \mathbb{T}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{T}^n$ is a derived from Anosov diffeomorphism or just a DA diffeomorphism if it is a partially hyperbolic diffeomorphism homotopic to a linear Anosov automorphism $A:\mathbb T^n \rightarrow \mathbb T^n$. \end{defn} If $f$ is a DA diffeomorphism we call the linear Anosov $A$ as the linearization of $f$, it also means that $f$ has a hyperbolic memory. More precisely, by results of J. Franks \cite{Franks} and A. Manning \cite{Manning} there is a semi-conjugacy $h: \mathbb{T}^3 \rightarrow \mathbb{T}^3$, which we will call the Franks-Manning semi-conjugacy, between $f$ and its linearization $A$, that is, \begin{equation} \label{semiconjugacy} A \circ h = h \circ f. \end{equation} Moreover, this semi-conjugacy has the property that there exists a constant $\Omega \in \mathbb{R}$ such that if $H, F : \mathbb{R}^3 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3 $ denotes the lift of $h$ and $f$ to $\mathbb{R}^3$ respectively, we have $\\|H(x) - x\\| \leq \Omega$ for all $x \in \mathbb{R}^3$, and given two points $a,b \in \mathbb R^3$ \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:h} H(a) = H(b) \Leftrightarrow \\| F^n(a) - F^n(b)\\| < \Omega , \forall n\in \mathbb Z. \end{eqnarray} Let $(M, \mu, \mathcal B)$ be a probability space, where $M$ is a compact metric space, $\mu$ a probability measure and $\mathcal B$ the Borelian $\sigma$-algebra. Given a partition $\mathcal P$ of $M$ by measurable sets, we construct a probability space $(\mathcal P, \widetilde \mu, \widetilde{\mathcal B})$ in the following way. Let $\pi:M \rightarrow \mathcal P$ be the canonical projection, that is, $\pi$ associates to a point $x$ of $M$ the partition element of $\mathcal P$ that contains it. Then we define $\widetilde \mu := \pi_* \mu$ and $ \widetilde{\mathcal B}:= \pi_\mathcal B$. \begin{defn} \label{definition:conditionalmeasure} Given a partition $\mathcal P$. A family $\{\mu_P\}_{P \in \mathcal P} $ is a \textit{system of conditional measures} for $\mu$ (with respect to $\mathcal P$) if \begin{itemize} \item[i)] given $\phi \in C^0(M)$, then $P \mapsto \int \phi d\mu_P$ is measurable; \item[ii)] $\mu_P(P)=1$ $\widetilde \mu$-a.e.s; \item[iii)] if $\phi \in C^0(M)$, then $\displaystyle{ \int_M \phi d\mu = \int_{\mathcal P}\left(\int_P \phi d\mu_P \right)daq }$. \end{itemize} \end{defn} When it is clear which partition we are referring to, we say that the family $\{\mu_P\}$ \textit{disintegrates} the measure $\mu$. \begin{prop}\label{prop:unique.disintegration} \cite{EW,Ro52} Given a partition $\mathcal P$, if $\{\mu_P\}$ and $\{\nu_P\}$ are conditional measures that disintegrate $\mu$ on $\mathcal P$, then $\mu_P = \nu_P$ $\widetilde \mu$-a.e.. \end{prop} An easy consequence of this proposition, but which will be useful for us, is \begin{cor} \label{cor:same.disintegration} If $T:M \rightarrow M$ preserves a probability $\mu$ and the partition $\mathcal P$, then $T_\mu_P = \mu_{T(P)}, \widetilde \mu$-a.e.. \end{cor} \begin{proof} It follows from the fact that $\{T_\mu_P\}_{P \in \mathcal P}$ is also a disintegration of $\mu$.\end{proof} \begin{defn} \label{def:mensuravel} We say that a partition $\mathcal P$ is a measurable partition (or countably generated) with respect to $\mu$ if there exist a measurable family $\{A_i\}_{i \in \mathbb N}$ and a measurable set $Y$ of full measure such that if $B \in \mathcal P$, then there exists a sequence $\{B_i\}$, where $B_i \in \{A_i, A_i^c \}$ such that $B \cap Y = \bigcap_i B_i \cap Y$. \end{defn} The next theorem guarantees the existence of conditional measures with respect to a measurable partition. \begin{thm}[Rokhlin's disintegration \cite{Ro52}] \label{teo:rokhlin} Let $\mathcal P$ be a measurable partition of a compact metric space $M$ and $\mu$ a probability. Then there exists a disintegration by conditional measures for $\mu$. \end{thm} Recall that a foliation is absolutely continuous if the conditional measures on the leaves of the foliation are equivalent to the Lebesgue measure. In other words, a set of full volume intersects almost every leaf in a set of full leaf-volume. The Uniformly Bounded Density property is the uniform version of a foliation being absolutely continuous. \begin{defn}\label{defi:UBD} We say that a foliation $\mathcal F$ has the Uniform Bounded Density property (or UBD for short) if there exists a uniform constant $K$ such that for any foliated box $\mathcal B$ $$K^{-1} \leq \frac{dm_x^\mathcal B}{d \widehat{\lambda_x}} \leq K $$ where $m_x^{\mathcal B}$ is the conditional measure of volume on the segments of $\mathcal F$ on $\mathcal B$ and $\widehat{\lambda_x}$ means the normalized Lebesgue measure on the connected component of $\mathcal F(x) \cap \mathcal B$ which contains $x$. \end{defn} \section{The proof of Theorem \ref{main:rigidity.C}.} \begin{proof} We work on the universal cover of $\mathbb T^3$, $\mathbb R^3$. Let $\pi:\mathbb R^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ be the canonical projection. We denote by $F$ and $H$ the lifted function of $f$ and the semi-conjugacy $h$ respectively. And for the other lifts we use the symbol $\sim$, for instance $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ is the lift of the center foliation $\mathcal F^c$. We shall use $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ to refer to the center foliation of $F$ and $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x, \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c(x)$ for the lifted center foliation through $x$. Suppose the splitting for $A$ is of the form $E^{ss} \oplus E^{wu} \oplus E^{uu}$, otherwise work with $F^{-1}$. Throughout the proof we shall denote by $\lambda$ the eigenvalue of the center direction of $A$, which is greater than one since we suppose $A$ to have an expanding center direction. We also see $A$ as a partially hyperbolic with the splitting of the tangent bundle as $E^s_A \oplus E^c_A \oplus E^u_A$. At the universal cover let us define a ``base space" $$B : = \bigcup_{x \in \widetilde{\mathcal F}^s(0)} \widetilde{\mathcal F}^u(x).$$ By \cite{hammerlindl.thesis} all the center leaves of $F$ intersect $B$ at a unique point. We may also assume that $0$ is a fixed point for $F$, otherwise take a periodic point $p$ of period $n$ for $f$ and work with $f^n$ instead of $f$. The lifted function $F$ is such that $\pi(0)=p$. This implies that $B$ is $F$ invariant, $F(B)=B$. On $\mathbb R^3$ the center foliation is an oriented foliation. We also assume that $F$ preserves the center foliation orientation, otherwise work with $f^2$ instead of $f$ (and the respective lift). Note that these changes do not affect the result since $h$ is also a semiconjugacy between $f^n$ and $A^n$ for all $n \in \mathbb N$. Let us define the following set $$ \mathcal B_0 = \{y \in \mathbb R^3 \; \| \; d^c(P(y),y) \leq \Omega \text{ and } y \in \widetilde{ \mathcal F}^{c,+}\}$$ where $d^c(.,.)$ is the distance inside the center leaf, $\mathcal F^{c,+}$ stands for the positive half side of the orientable foliation $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ and $\Omega$ as defined in \S \ref{sec:preliminaries}. We consider the following iterations $\mathcal B_k := F^k(\mathcal B_0)$ for all $k \in \mathbb N$. Now let $m_{x}^{\mathcal B_k}$ be the conditional measure defined on $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k$ which is the disintegration of volume restricted to $\mathcal B_k$ and the partition given by $\{\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_{\xi} \cap \mathcal B_k \}_{\xi \in B}$. In particular $m_{x}^{\mathcal B_k}$ is a probability measure. The existence of $m_x^{\mathcal B_k}$ is guaranteed by Theorem \ref{teo:rokhlin}, but there are two remarks concerning the application of Rokhlin's theorem, the first one is that Theorem \ref{teo:rokhlin} is for a probability measure, the second is that $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k$ should be checked to be a measurable partition. Let us see how to deal with these two issues. Note that it is not difficult to see that $B$ is a metrizable space with the topology of subspace of $\mathbb R^3$. Hence let $Z \subset B$ be a ball in $B$ and consider $Z_k:=(P\|\mathcal B_k)^{-1}(Z)$, let $S_Z$ be a countable dense set in $Z$ and for all discs $D(s,r)$ inside $B$ of center $s \in S_Z$ and radius $r \in \mathbb Q$ let $A_{s,r}:= (P\|\mathcal B_k)^{-1}(D(s,r))$, then these $A_{s,r}$ (there are a countable number of them) play the rule of $A_i$ in Definition \ref{def:mensuravel} (and on Definition \ref{def:mensuravel} one may assume $Y$ to be $ \mathbb R^3$). Hence we may apply Theorem \ref{teo:rokhlin} to disintegrate $Vol\|Z_k$ when normalized. Then the conditional measures $m_x^{\mathcal B_k}$ comes from this disintegration. But the normalization does not affects the disintegration as since the only change one gets is for the projected measure (which in the notation of Definition \ref{definition:conditionalmeasure} would be $\widetilde \mu$). Let us denote $\mu_{\mathcal B_k}:=P_Vol\|\mathcal B_k$. That is, $\mu_{\mathcal B_k}$ is the projection on $B$ of the volume measure restricted to $\mathcal B_k$. We are able to relate two different conditional measures, by \cite[Lemma 3.2]{AVWI} we have that \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:two.conditionals} m_x^{\mathcal B_k} \frac{d \mu _{\mathcal B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0}}(x)= m_x^{\mathcal B_0}. \end{eqnarray} Note that these measures differ up to multiplication by the constant $\frac{d \mu _{\mathcal B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0}}(x)$. Observe as well that $$ m_x^{\mathcal B_k}(.) = \rho_k(x,.) \widehat \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,.), \; \forall k \in \mathbb N,$$ where $\widehat{\lambda}_{\mathcal B_k}(x,.)$ is the normalized length measure on the leaf $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k$ and $\rho_k(x,.):\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k \rightarrow \mathbb R$ is the density function. By the UBD property of the center foliation $\rho_k \in [K^{-1},K]$. Then \begin{eqnarray} m_x^{\mathcal B_k}(I) & = & \int_I \rho_k(x,\zeta) d\widehat \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,.)(\zeta) = \int_I \rho_k(x,\zeta) d\frac{ \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,.)}{\lambda_x(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}(\zeta)\\ & \leq & \frac{K}{\lambda_x(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)} \int_I d \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,.)(\zeta) \leq \frac{K \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,I)}{\lambda_x(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)} \end{eqnarray} for all $k \in \mathbb N$ and $I \subset \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x$ measurable and where $\lambda_x$ is the Lebesgue (length) measure on the leaf $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$. Analogously \begin{eqnarray} m_x^{\mathcal B_k}(I)\geq \frac{K^{-1} \lambda_{\mathcal B_k}(x,I)}{\lambda_x(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}. \end{eqnarray} From the above inequalities we have $$ \frac{d \mu _{\mathcal B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0}}(x)= \frac{m_x^{\mathcal B_0}(.)}{m_x^{\mathcal B_k}(.)} \leq K^2 \frac{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_0)},$$ similarly we get $$ \frac{d \mu _{\mathcal B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0}}(x) \geq K^{-2} \frac{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_0)}.$$ So far we have taken for granted that if the conditional measure exists for $\mathcal B_0$ it also exists for $\mathcal B_k$, this is shown in the next lemma. \begin{lem} There is a set $A \subset \mathbb R^3$ which is $F$-invariant, has full volume measure and is $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ foliated for which $m_{x}^{\mathcal B_k}$ is well defined for all $x \in A$ and $k \in \mathbb N$. \end{lem} \begin{proof} Let $S \subset B$ be a countable dense set of $B$, let $S':=\pi(S)$ and $B':=\pi(B)$ (recall that $\pi:\mathbb R^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ is the canonical projection). Then $S'$ is a dense set of $B'$. For a given $s \in S'$ and $r \in \mathbb Q$ define $C'(s,r)$ to be a foliated box such that all segments of the center foliation have length $r$ and $Vol(\partial C'(s,r))=0$ and satisfying also that $Vol(\bigcup_{s \in S'} C'(s,r))=1$. We disintegrate volume on the foliated box $C'(s,r)$, hence its conditional measures are defined on a set $M(s,r)$ which has $Vol\|C'(s,r)$ full measure. Then $Vol( M(s,r) \cup C'(s,r)^c )=1$. Now define $$A_0 := \bigcap_{r \in \mathbb Q} \left(\bigcup_{s \in S'} C'(s,r)\right) \text{ and } A_1:= A_0 \setminus \bigcup_{(s,r)\in S'\times \mathbb Q } \partial \left( C'(s,r) \right). $$ Notice that $A_0$ and $A_1$ have full volume and that if $x \in A_1$ then there are conditional measures defined on the center leaf of $x$ with arbitrary size. Let $A_2:= \bigcap_{i \in \mathbb Z} f^{i}(A_2)$, which is an $f$ invariant full volume set. Then the lemma is proved by taking $A:=\pi^{-1}(A_2)$. \end{proof} Let $\eta_{x,k}$ be a measure (not a probability) defined on $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x\cap \mathcal B_k$ as $$ \eta_{x,k}:= \lambda^k m_x^{\mathcal B_k}.$$ Recall that $\lambda$ is the eigenvalue of the center direction of $A$. Now, using Equation (\ref{eq:two.conditionals}), on $\mathcal B_0$ we have $$\eta_{x,k}= \lambda^k m_x^{\mathcal B_k} = (\frac{d \mu_{\mathcal B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0 }}(x))^{-1} \lambda^k m_x^{\mathcal B_0 }$$ and from the inequalities above $$\frac{d \mu_{B_k}}{d \mu_{\mathcal B_0}}(x) = \alpha_{x,k} \frac{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}{{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_0)}},$$ where $\alpha_{x,k} \in [K^{-2}, K^2]$, for all $x \in A \subset \mathbb R^3$ and $k \in \mathbb N$. Combining the above we may rewrite $$\eta_{x,k} = \left(\alpha_{x,k} \frac{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k)}{{\lambda_x(\mathcal F^c_x \cap \mathcal B_0)}}\right)^{-1} \lambda^k m_x^{\mathcal B_0}.$$ \begin{lem}\label{lemma:growth.bound} There is $\beta >0$ such that $\lambda^k / \lambda_x(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_k) \in [1/\beta, \beta]$ for all $x \in \mathbb R^3$. \end{lem} \begin{proof} Let $x, y \in \mathbb R^3$ be the extreme points of the segment $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x \cap \mathcal B_0$, then $F^n(x)$ and $F^n(y)$ are the extreme end points of $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c(F^n(x)) \cap \mathcal B_k$. Hence we want to measure the growth of these extreme points inside the center foliation. By \cite{hammerlindl.thesis} the center foliation $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ is quasi-isometric. That means that there exists a constant $Q$ such that for all $z \in \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c(w)$, then $Q^{-1}\|\|z-w\|\| \leq d^c(z,w) \leq Q \|\|z-w\|\|$ where $d^c$ is the distance inside the center foliation. Hence due the quasi-isometry of the center foliation we only need to analyze the growth of $\|\|F^n(x)-F^n(y)\|\|$. We will majorate, to minorate is an analogous argument. \begin{eqnarray} \|\|F^n(x)-F^n(y)\|\| \leq & & \|\|F^n(x) - H\circ F^n(x)\|\|\\ & + & \|\|H\circ F^n(x) - H\circ F^n(y)\|\| + \|\|H\circ F^n(y) - F^n(y)\|\|. \end{eqnarray} Because $H$ is uniformly close to the identity, as exposed in \S \ref{sec:preliminaries}, the first and third terms of the right hand side are uniformly bounded. We have to see that the term $\|\|H\circ F^n(x) - H\circ F^n(y)\|\| = \|\|A^n(H(x)) - A^n(H(y))\|\|$ grows at rate $\lambda$. On the last identity we used $H\circ F = A \circ H$. By \cite{ures} the semi-conjugacy sends center leaf into center leaf (i.e. $H(\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_F)=\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_A$), therefore $\|\|A^n(H(x)) - A^n(H(y))\|\|$ does grows at rate $\lambda$ since $H(x) \in \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_A(H(y))$. \end{proof} \begin{lem}\label{lemma:eta} For all $x \in A$ there exists a measure $\eta_x$ such that $F_\eta_x=\lambda^{-1}\eta_{F(x)}$ and $\eta_x = \rho_x \lambda_x$ where the density $\rho_x(.)$ is uniformly bounded (independent of $x \in A$). \end{lem} \begin{proof} Since the disintegration is unique and $F$ is volume preserving, that means that the family $\{F_\eta_{x,k}\}_{x \in B}$ when normalized is a disintegration of volume restricted to $\mathcal B_{k+1}$ and the family $\{\eta_{x,k+1} \}_{x \in B}$ when normalized is a disintegration of volume restricted to $\mathcal B_{k+1}$, hence these normalized measures are the same by Proposition \ref{prop:unique.disintegration}. As a consequence $F_\eta_{x,k}$ and $\eta_{x,k+1}$ are the same up to multiplication by a constant. To find out this constant one could simply evaluate these measures on the same set. Using the $F$ invariance of $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c$ and the definition of $\eta_{x,k}$ we obtain \begin{eqnarray} F_\eta_{x,k}(F(\mathcal B_k \cap \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x)) & = & \eta_{x,k}(F^{-1}( F(\mathcal B_k \cap \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x) )) = \eta_{x,k}(\mathcal B_k \cap \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x) \\ & = & \lambda^k = \lambda^{-1} \lambda^{k+1} = \lambda^{-1} \eta_{F(x),k+1}(\mathcal B_{k+1} \cap \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_{F(x)})\\ & = &\lambda^{-1} \eta_{F(x),k+1}(F(\mathcal B_k \cap \widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x)), \end{eqnarray} therefore $F_* \eta_{x,k}= \lambda^{-1} \eta_{F(x),k+1}$. Hence if there is a subsequence $k_{i(x)}$ such that $\eta_{x,k_{i(x)}}$ converges weakly to $\eta_x$ and $\eta_{F(x),k_{i(x)}+1}$ converges weakly to $\eta_{F(x)}$, then $F_\eta_x = \lambda^{-1} \eta_{F(x)}$. We now show how to define these subsequences. By the Axiom of Choice we can choose a set $W \subset A$ such that if $x, y \in C$ and $x \neq y$ then $\{F^{n}(x)\}_{n \in \mathbb Z} \cap \{F^{n}(y)\}_{n \in \mathbb Z} = \emptyset$. For $x\in W$ let $\alpha_{x,k_{i(x)}}$ be a subsequence such that $\{\alpha_{x,k_{i(x)}}\}_{i(x)}$ is a convergent subsequence. Now consider the subsequence $k_{i(x)} +1$ and take $i(F(x))$ a subsequence of $i(x)$ such that $\{ \alpha_{F(x),k_{i(F(x))+1} } \}_{i(F(x))}$ is a convergent subsequence. Repeat the argument for the positive iterates $F^n(x)$. By cantor diagonal process there exists a sequence $j(x)$ such that $\alpha_{F^n(x),(k_{j(x)} +n)_{j(x)}}$ is a convergent subsequence for all $n \in \mathbb N$. Repeat the argument for the backward iteraction and one obtain the desired subsequence in the orbit of $x$. \end{proof} Some comments on the arbitrariness of the set $W$ used in the lemma above may be seen on Remark \ref{rem}, after the proof of our main theorem. One of our goals is to calculate the center Lyapunov exponent for all points of $\mathbb R^3$. For that we will need the dynamically defined measures $\eta_x$, but they are defined only almost everywhere. We wish we could define these measures on all center leaves. A priori it is not possible, what we shall do is to construct some sort of fake dynamically defined conditional measures, but they are good enough for us to compute the Lyapunov exponents for all point. Given $\xi \in \mathbb R^3$ take any sequence $\{\xi_n\} \subset \mathbb R^3$ for which it is defined $\eta_{\xi_n}$ for all $n$ and $\displaystyle \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \xi_n = \xi$. Let $\mathcal I_{\xi}$ be the set of all connected intervals on $\mathcal F^c_{\xi}$. Given $I \in \mathcal I_{\xi}$ define \begin{eqnarray} m_\xi (I) &:=& \liminf_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \eta_{\xi_i}(I_{\xi_i}), \quad \forall I \in \mathcal I_{\xi};\\ M_\xi (I) &:=& \limsup_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \eta_{\xi_i}(I_{\xi_i}), \quad \forall I \in \mathcal I_{\xi}; \end{eqnarray} where $I_{\xi_i} \in \mathcal I_{\xi_i}$ is defined as $$I_{\xi_i} := \text{ bounded interval of }\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_{\xi_i} \backslash \left( \left(\bigcup_{z \in \widetilde{\mathcal F}^{s}(a_I)} \widetilde{\mathcal F}^{u}(z) \right) \; \bigcup \; \left(\bigcup_{z \in \widetilde{\mathcal F}^{s}(b_I)} \widetilde{\mathcal F}^{u}(z)\right) \right)$$ where $a_I$ and $b_I$ are the bottom and top extreme points respectively of the interval $I$. \begin{lem}\label{lemma:min.max.ineq} There exists $\gamma >1$ independent of the choice of $\xi$ and $\{\xi_n\}_n$ such that \begin{eqnarray} \gamma^{-1} \lambda_{\xi}(I) \leq m_{\xi}(I) \leq M_{\xi}(I) \leq \gamma \lambda_{\xi}(I), \end{eqnarray} for all $I \in \mathcal I_\xi$ small enough. \end{lem} \begin{proof} By \cite[Theorem B]{holder.foliations} the unstable holonomy inside center-unstable leaf and the stable holonomy inside the center-stable leaf is uniformly $C^1$. The uniformity is defined for interval $I$ with a uniform bounded length and the holonomies are uniformly $C^1$ if we consider then to be close of some uniformly bounded distance. And from Lemma \ref{lemma:eta} we know that $\eta_{\xi_i}$ have uniformly bounded densities, hence the lemma follows. \end{proof} Since $F(\mathcal I_\xi) = \mathcal I_{F(\xi)}$ it makes sense to state \begin{lem} For all $I \in \mathcal I_{F^n(\xi)}$ small enough \begin{eqnarray} F_^n m_{\xi}(I) &=& \lambda^{-n} m_{F^n(\xi)}(I);\\ F_^n M_{\xi}(I) &=& \lambda^{-n} M_{F^n(\xi)}(I). \end{eqnarray} \end{lem} \begin{proof} We prove the result for $m_{\xi}$ as the case $M_{\xi}$ is analogous. Let $I \in \mathcal I_{F^n(\xi)}$. Since the stable and unstable foliations are $F$-invariant and $F$ preserves intervals on center leaves we have $( F^{-n}(I) )_{\xi_i} = F^{-n}(I_{F^n(\xi_i)})$ then \begin{eqnarray} F_^n m_{\xi}(I) = m_\xi (F^{-n}(I)) & = & \liminf_{m \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m m_{\xi_i}( ( F^{-n}(I) )_{\xi_i} )\\ & = & \liminf_{m \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m m_{\xi_i}(F^{-n}(I_{F^n(\xi_i)}))\\ & = & \liminf_{m \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \lambda^{-n} m_{\xi_i}(I_{F^n(\xi_i)})\\ & = & \lambda^{-n} m_{F^n(\xi)}(I). \end{eqnarray} \end{proof} Now let us see that the center Lyapunov exponent is defined everywhere and equals $log (\lambda)$. Using the above two lemmas we have that for a given $n$ \begin{eqnarray} \gamma^{-1} F^n_ \lambda_\xi (I) & = & F^n_* (\gamma^{-1}\lambda_\xi) (I) \leq F^n_* (m_\xi) (I)\\ & \leq & \lambda^{-n} m_{F^n(\xi)}(I) \leq \lambda^{-n} M_{F^n(\xi)}(I) \leq \gamma F^n_* \lambda_\xi (I). \end{eqnarray} Dividing it all by $F^n_ \lambda_\xi (I)$ and applying $\frac{1}{n} log$, then $$\frac{1}{n}log(\gamma^{-1}) \leq \frac{1}{n}log \left( \lambda^{-n} \frac{m_{F^n(\xi)}(I)}{F^n_* \lambda_\xi (I)}\right) \leq \frac{1}{n}log\left( \lambda^{-n} \frac{ M_{F^n(\xi)}(I)}{F^n_* \lambda_\xi (I)} \right)\leq \frac{1}{n}log(\gamma).$$ Now let we shrink the interval $I$. Let $x\in I$ and define $I_\epsilon$ as the interval inside the center foliation of radius $\epsilon$ centered on $x$. Therefore \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:cal.exp} \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \lambda^{-n} \frac{m_{F^n(\xi)}(I_\epsilon)}{F^n_* \lambda_\xi (I_\epsilon)} & = &\lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \lambda^{-n} \frac{m_{F^n(\xi)}(I_\epsilon)}{\lambda_\xi (F^{-n}(I_\epsilon))}\\ & = & \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \lambda^{-n} \frac{\int_{I_\epsilon} \rho_{F^n(\xi)} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)}}{\lambda_\xi (F^{-n}(I_\epsilon))}.\nonumber \end{eqnarray} But we know that $m_{F^n(\xi)} (=\rho_{F^n(\xi)} \lambda_{F^n(\xi)})$ has bounded density with respect to the Lebesgue measure, then for some universal constant $\beta$ $$ \beta^{-1} \int_{I_\epsilon} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)} \leq \int_{I_\epsilon} \rho_{F^n(\xi)} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)} \leq \beta \int_{I_\epsilon} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)}.$$ The two above estimates imply that \begin{eqnarray} \beta^{-1} \lambda^{-n} \|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x)\|\|^{-1} & \leq & \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \lambda^{-n} \frac{\int_{I_\epsilon} \rho_{F^n(\xi)} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)}}{\lambda_\xi (F^{-n}(I_\epsilon))}\\ & \leq & \beta \lambda^{-n} \|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x)\|\|^{-1}. \end{eqnarray} Hence applying $\frac{1}{n}log$ and passing to the limit as $n$ goes to infinity we get \begin{eqnarray} -log \lambda - \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{n}\|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x) \|\| & \leq & \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \lambda^{-n} \frac{\int_{I_\epsilon} \rho_{F^n(\xi)} d\lambda_{F^n(\xi)}}{\lambda_\xi (F^{-n}(I_\epsilon))}\\ & \leq & -log \lambda - \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{n}\|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x) \|\|. \end{eqnarray} From equation (\ref{eq:cal.exp}) take $I$ to be $I_\epsilon$ as defined above and passing to the limit as $n$ goes to infinity we get $$0 \leq -log \lambda - \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{n}\|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x) \|\| \leq 0.$$ This implies that \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:lyapunov.center} \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{-n}\|\|DF^{-n}\|\widetilde{E^c}(x) \|\| = log \lambda, \; \forall x \in \mathbb R^3. \end{eqnarray} The above means that the center Lyapunov exponent of $F^{-1}$ equals $log(\lambda^{-1})$ for every point. In particular because $\pi:\mathbb R^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ is a local isometry and $\pi \circ F^{-1} = f^{-1} \circ \pi$ the center Lyapunov exponent of $f^{-1}:\mathbb T^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ is defined for every point in $\mathbb T^3$ and equals $log(\lambda^{-1})$. \begin{lem} The diffeomorphism $f$ is in fact an Anosov diffeomorphism. \end{lem} \begin{proof} We know that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \|\|Df^n\|E^c_f\|\|=log(\lambda), \forall x \in \mathbb T^3$. Consider $\varepsilon >0$ satisfying $\lambda_\varepsilon := \lambda - \varepsilon > 0$. Since the center exponent exists for every $x$ then, given $x \in \mathbb T^3$, there are $n_x \in \mathbb N$ and a neighborhood $\mathcal U_x$ of $x$ such that $\forall x \in \mathcal U_x$ $\|Df^{n_x}\|E^c\| \geq e^{n_x \lambda_\varepsilon}$. Since $\mathbb T^3$ is a compact manifold take a finite cover $\mathcal U_{x_1} \ldots \mathcal U_{x_l}$. Let $C_i<1$ be small enough so that for $x \in \mathcal U_{x_i}$ then $\|Df^{n}(x)\|E^c\| \geq C_{x_i} e^{n \lambda_\varepsilon}$ for all $n \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, n_{x_i}\}$. Let $C:= \min_i \; C_{x_i}$, we then have that $\|Df^{n}(x)\|E^c\| \geq C e^{n \lambda_\varepsilon}$ for all $x \in \mathbb T^3$ and $n \in \mathbb N$. Hence the center foliation is expanding, therefore $f$ is in fact an Anosov diffeomorphism. \end{proof} \begin{lem} $f$ is $C^\infty$ conjugate to its linearization. \end{lem} \begin{proof} Let us first prove that $$\lambda_f^s(x) = \lambda_A^s;\; \lambda_f^c(x) = \lambda_A^c;\; \lambda_f^u(x) = \lambda_A^u; \; \; \forall x \in Per(f),$$ where $\lambda^_{g}$ is the Lyapunov exponent in the direction $ \in \{s,c,u\}$ of the map $g \in \{f, A\}$. From Equation (\ref{eq:lyapunov.center}) we know that $\lambda_f^c(x) = \lambda_A^c$ on any periodic point $x \in \mathbb T^3$ for $f$. Since the center foliation is absolutely continuous and $f$ is an Anosov diffeomorphism, then by \cite{gogolev} we get that $\lambda_f^u(x) = \lambda_A^u$. Since $f$ and $A$ are volume preserving then $\lambda_f^s(x) + \lambda_f^c(x)+\lambda_f^u(x)=0$ and $\lambda_A^s(x) + \lambda_A^c(x)+\lambda_A^u(x)=0$, which implies that $\lambda_f^s(x) = \lambda_A^s$ for all periodic point $x \in \mathbb T^3$ of $f$. Hence if the Lyapunov exponents are constant on periodic points for any direction, then $f$ is $C^{1}$ conjugate to its linearization by \cite[Proposition 1.1]{varao.etds}. Recall that $f= h^{-1}\circ A \circ h$. Take $h_0:\mathbb T^3 \rightarrow \mathbb T^3$ a $C^\infty$ diffeomorphism $C^1$ close to $h$. Note that $$h_0 \circ f \circ h_0^{-1} = h_0 \circ h^{-1} \circ A \circ h \circ h_0^{-1} = (h \circ h_0^{-1})^{-1} \circ A \circ (h\circ h_0^{-1}).$$ Then $h_0 \circ f \circ h_0^{-1}$ is $C^1$ close to $A$ since $(h \circ h_0^{-1})^{-1}$ and $(h\circ h_0^{-1})$ are close to the identity. Observe that $h\circ h_0$ is a $C^1$ conjugacy between $h_0 \circ f \circ h_0^{-1}$ and $A$, then it naturally satisfies the smooth conjugacy hypothesis from \cite{bootstrap}, therefore we obtain that $h_0 \circ f \circ h_0^{-1}$ is $C^\infty$ conjugate to $A$. Now because $h_0$ and $h\circ h_0^{-1}$ are $C^\infty$ then $h$ is $C^\infty$ as we wanted to show. \end{proof} We have proven above that UBD property implies $C^\infty$ conjugacy. It is easy to see that the converse is true. The theorem is now proven. \end{proof} \begin{rem}\label{rem} It is worth to note that the construction of the measures $\eta_x$ (Lemma \ref{lemma:eta}) on the universal cover are used simply as a tool to obtain information on the Lyapunov exponent. Although the measures $\eta_x$ are intimately connect with the Rohklin disintegration of volume on the center foliations, they lack a very important property, they do not \textit{a priori} vary measurably. In our case we did not need to chose them in order to vary in such a way. Besides that, these measures really live on the universal cover, i.e. we cannot project them coherently on $\mathbb T^3$: two measures $\eta_x$ and $\eta_y$ in $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_x$ and $\widetilde{\mathcal F}^c_y$ respectively and such that $\pi(x)=\pi(y)$, then most likely satisfies $\pi_\eta_x\neq \pi_\eta_y$. But because we know that in the end $f$ is smoothly conjugate to its linearization we can induce the length measure from the linearization to the dynamics of $f$ and obtain such dynamically defined measures varying measurably. Hence, an interesting \textbf{program to tackle rigidity problems} related to invariant foliations seems to better understand partially hyperbolic dynamics which admits a measurably dynamically defined measures (e.g. $f_*\mu_x=\lambda \mu_{f(x)}$). With this generality one should not expect to obtain smooth rigidity results a priori, but one should start by obtaining rigidity results from the measurable point of view. That would most likely give implications on Lyapunov exponent, entropy, metric isomorphisms and so on. \end{rem} \textit{Acknowledgment:} The author would like to thank Andrey Gogolev for some comments concerning smooth conjugacy and Ali Tahzibi for some comments on the UBD property.
\section{} \vspace{-1cm} \footnotetext{\textit{Inorganic Chemistry Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QR, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1865 272137; E-mail: andrew.goodwin@chem.ox.ac.uk.}} \section{Introduction} A large variety of important physical properties of perovskite oxides are the result of symmetry-breaking processes that involve ordering of structural, electronic, or magnetic degrees of freedom. From a materials design viewpoint, the role of octahedral tilts is especially important because so-called ``tilt engineering'' approaches now allow control over macroscopic polarisation\cite{Benedek2011} and magnetisation.\cite{Pitcher2015,Benedek2015} Moreover, because tilt degrees of freedom often dominate the vibrational behaviour of perovskites, the same approaches can allow control over dynamical phenomena such as negative thermal expansion (NTE).\cite{Senn2016a} Central to these design approaches is an understanding of the ways in which activation of specific tilt systems can affect space group symmetry.\cite{Glazer1972,Howard1998,Howard2003} Formally, this relationship is given by the irreducible representation of a given tilt distortion, which can be used either to account for static symmetry breaking (\emph{e.g.}\ emergence of long-range polarisation) if tilts are frozen in or to label the corresponding phonon branch, if tilts remain dynamic. The soft-mode description of displacive phase transitions links these two pictures, with the symmetry of the soft phonon dictating the descent in space group symmetry as the tilt distortions become static.\cite{Dove1993} In addition to conventional inorganic perovskites, there are several molecular perovskite analogues, including organic halide perovskites,\cite{Snaith2013,Mitzi2001} dicyanamides,\cite{Tong2003,Schlueter2004,Schlueter2005,Bermudez-Garcia2016} azides,\cite{Du2015a,Gomez-Aguirre2016} Prussian blue analogues,\cite{Buser1977,Aguila2016} dicyanometallates,\cite{Lefebvre2007,Hill2016} and formates.\cite{Sletten1973,Wang2004a,Wang2004} These are systems of strong scientific currency in which at least one component of the ABX$_3$ perovskite structure is molecular: typically the A-site cation and/or the anionic linker X. An important consequence of the incorporation of molecular components is the emergence of new structural degrees of freedom for which there is no analogue in conventional perovskites. Examples include (i) the so-called ``forbidden'' tilts found in some azides, Prussian Blue analogues, and dicyanometallates, in which neighbouring octahedra (no longer corner-sharing) rotate in the \emph{same} sense as one another,\cite{Du2014,Hill2016,Duyker2016,Kareis2012} and (ii) multipolar order associated with orientational degrees of freedom of molecular A-site cations.\cite{Evans2016,Zhang2015} Coupling of these exotic degrees of freedom to the lattice then allows for entirely new symmetry-breaking mechanisms,\cite{Xu2016a} and hence new crystal engineering strategies for targeting \emph{e.g.}\ multiferroic or NTE responses.\cite{Stroppa2013,Benedek2011,Pitcher2015,Senn2016a} It is natural then to ask: are there any other degrees of freedom of general relevance to the structural chemistry of molecular perovskites? Here, a key consideration is the energy scale associated with different deformations, since those with high energies (\emph{e.g.}\ bond stretches or distortion of coordination geometries) are unlikely to behave as soft modes. Fortunately, simple geometric tools\cite{Giddy1993} can be used to identify distortion modes that preserve bond lengths and coordination geometries and hence are predisposed to play a key role in the low-energy dynamics of materials; these are termed the rigid-unit modes (RUMs) of a given topology. So, for example, it was shown in Ref.~\citenum{Giddy1993} that the only RUMs supported by the conventional perovskite structure are the well-known octahedral tilts discussed above [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)]. A similar analysis of the ABX$_3$ lattice with \emph{molecular} X components, however, revealed the existence of \emph{two} types of rotational degrees of freedom (these are the conventional and forbidden tilts) together with a translational degree of freedom involving correlated displacements of columns of connected BX$_6$ octahedra [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b,c)].\cite{Goodwin2006} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig1.png} \caption{Rigid-body distortions in conventional and molecular perovskites. (a) Conventional tilt degrees of freedom, in which neighbouring octahedra rotate in alternating directions. (b) A ``forbidden'' tilt system unique to molecular perovskites in which all coordination octahedra rotate in the same direction. (c) A columnar shift degree of freedom, again unique to molecular frameworks.} \label{fig1} \end{figure} We refer to these columnar translations as `shifts' and argue here that they can indeed play an important role in the structural chemistry of certain families of molecular perovskites. Our paper begins by establishing the conceptual framework for interpreting and characterising columnar shifts. By focusing initially on a two-dimensional simplification of the perovskite framework, we explore the interplay between shift activation and symmetry breaking, the relationship to shear modes, and the potential for coupling with tilt degrees of freedom. We proceed to extrapolate this analysis to the interpretation of static symmetry-breaking distortions in three-dimensional molecular perovskites, drawing on topical case studies from the recent crystal engineering literature. The link to dynamical properties is then made via a simple lattice dynamical model, which we then use to demonstrate that dynamic shift distortions have a distinctive NTE character. Our paper concludes with a discussion regarding the possibility of developing `shift engineering' approaches as an alternative mechanism of accessing polar states in molecular perovskites. \section{Theory} \subsection{Rigid unit modes in molecular perovskites}\label{rums} Our starting point is a brief recap of the key results in the RUM analysis of Ref.~\citenum{Goodwin2006}; our aim is to clarify the particular periodicities at which shift distortions can occur in molecular perovskites and their 2D analogues. This analysis makes use of a dynamical matrix approach in which a simplified lattice-dynamical model is used to assign energies to distortion patterns.\cite{Giddy1993,Pawley1972} While the absolute energies are not themselves meaningful, the model is set up such that those modes---and only those modes---which do not result in changes to individual bond lengths or coordination environments correspond to solutions with energies exactly equal to zero. Formally, this is achieved using a molecular `rigid unit' translation/rotation basis for the dynamical matrix with the lattice enthalpy determined by the variation in separation between neighbouring rigid units: \begin{equation} \phi_{jj^\prime}=\frac{1}{2}K(d_{jj^\prime}-\bar d)^2. \end{equation} Here $\phi$ is the interaction potential between neighbouring units $j$ and $j^\prime$, $d_{jj^\prime}$ the corresponding inter-unit separation, $\bar d$ the equilibrium separation, and $K\neq0$ the (fictitious) force constant. Having set up the dynamical matrix $\mathbf D(\mathbf k)$ as in Refs.~\citenum{Giddy1993} and \citenum{Goodwin2006}, the RUMs are identified by the eigenstates of $\mathbf D(\mathbf k)$ for which the corresponding eigenvalue is zero. By varying the distortion periodicity $\mathbf k$, the entire set of RUM-type degrees of freedom can be determined comprehensively. In practice, the form of $\mathbf D(\mathbf k)$ is really very simple for molecular perovskites. Even so, we consider first the (even simpler) 2D analogue of connected squares, for which \begin{equation} \mathbf D(\mathbf k)=\left[\begin{array}{cc\|c}1-\cos(2\pi k_x)&0&0\\ 0&1-\cos(2\pi k_y)&0\\\hline 0&0&0\end{array}\right],\label{dmat} \end{equation} where $\mathbf k=[k_x,k_y]=k_x\mathbf a^\ast+k_y\mathbf b^\ast$. The rows and columns of $\mathbf D$ index in turn rigid-body translations parallel to $\mathbf a$, rigid-body translations parallel to $\mathbf b$, and rigid-body rotations within the plane; the separation between translational and rotational components in Eq.~\eqref{dmat} is indicated using horizontal and vertical lines. The diagonal form of $\mathbf D$ means that the RUMs can be identified by inspection. No matter what the value of $\mathbf k$, the vector $[0, 0, 1]$ is an eigenvector with zero-valued eigenvalue, and hence rigid-body rotations with arbitrary periodicities are valid RUMs of the system: these distortion modes include both the conventional ($\mathbf k=[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]$) and ``forbidden'' ($\mathbf k\neq[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]$) tilts described in the introduction [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(x)]. The remaining eigenstates have eigenvalues $1-\cos(2\pi k_x)$ and $1-\cos(2\pi k_y)$ and so correspond to RUMs if and only if $k_x=0$ and/or $k_y=0$. The corresponding eigenvectors $[1, 0, 0]$ and $[0, 1, 0]$ describe rigid-body translations parallel to the $\mathbf a$ and $\mathbf b$ crystal axes, respectively. Taken together, this means that rigid-body translations are allowed so long as individual rows and columns displace along the corresponding row/column axis as a collective object: translations parallel to $\mathbf a$ can correlate with periodicities $\mathbf k=[0,k_y]$ for any $k_y$; those parallel to $\mathbf b$ can correlate with periodicities $\mathbf k=[k_x,0]$. These results translate directly to the three-dimensional case of molecular perovskites. The dynamical matrix now assumes the form \begin{equation} \mathbf D(\mathbf k)=\left[\begin{array}{c\|c}\begin{array}{ccc}1-\cos(2\pi k_x)&0&0\\ 0&1-\cos(2\pi k_y)&0\\ 0&0&1-\cos(2\pi k_z)\end{array}&\ast\\ \hline \ast&\ast\end{array}\right], \end{equation} where the symbol $\ast$ denotes a null $3\times3$ submatrix; the six rows and columns of $\mathbf D$ index first rigid-body translations along the crystal axes $\mathbf a, \mathbf b, \mathbf c$ and then rigid-body rotations about these same axes. The octahedral shift distortions correspond to the first three eigenstates. In each case, the corresponding eigenvalue is zero valued only if the relevant wave-vector component $k_\alpha=0$ (\emph{i.e.}, for shifts parallel to axis $\alpha\in\{\mathbf a, \mathbf b, \mathbf c\}$). Hence, the shift degrees of freedom in 3D molecular perovskites also involve collective row/column displacements polarised along the row/column axis. By way of example, shifts involving translations parallel to $\mathbf a$ can propagate with periodicities $\mathbf k=[0,k_y,k_z]$ for any $k_y,k_z$. In the special case that either $k_y$ or $k_z=0$, these shifts involve collective translations of entire planes of octahedra (the $(001)$ and $(010)$ planes, respectively); in the even more special case $k_y=k_z=0$, the shift mode describes a shear of the lattice, in this instance polarised along $\mathbf a$ [Fig.~\ref{fig2}]. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig2.png} \caption{Representative shift distortions with different periodicities. In all three cases, shifts occur parallel to the $\mathbf a$ axis (approximately horizontal in this representation). (a) When correlated at $\mathbf k=[0,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]$, neighbouring columns shift in alternating directions. (b) At $\mathbf k=[0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$, entire planes of octahedra shift in the sense along $\mathbf a$; the direction of this translation reverses between neighbouring planes. (c) When correlated at $\mathbf k=[0,0,0]$ shift distortions resemble a shear of the framework structure.} \label{fig2} \end{figure} \subsection{Shifts in 2D: enumeration and symmetry breaking} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig3.png} \caption{Symmetry lowering arising from simple shift distortions of a 2D molecular perovskite analogue. (a) The parent structure has $p4mm$ plane group symmetry. Panels (b)--(i) illustrate the effect of activating zone centre ($\mathbf k=[0,0]$) of zone boundary ($\mathbf k\in\langle\frac{1}{2},0\rangle$) shifts along the $\mathbf a$ and/or $\mathbf b$ axes. The corresponding unit cells are shown in red, and the plane group labels are given below each illustration.} \label{fig3} \end{figure} We now consider the explicit form of the various possible shift modes for the 2D molecular perovskite analogue of connected squares. The analysis given above indicates that this system supports two types of shifts: one involving collective translations of rows of connected squares along a direction parallel to $\mathbf a$ and modulated with periodicity $\mathbf k=[0,k_y]$; the other involving collective translations of columns of connected squares parallel to $\mathbf b$, where the modulation is now characterised by $\mathbf k=[k_x,0]$. By analogy to the common displacive instabilities in conventional perovskites, we anticipate that the physically most relevant cases are those for which $\mathbf k$ lies either at the zone centre or at the zone boundary---\emph{i.e.}, $k_x,k_y\in\{0,\frac{1}{2}\}$. We limit our analysis to the corresponding set of $\mathbf k$ points, such that for each of the two orthogonal shift systems there are three possibilities: (i) the shifts are inactive, (ii) the shifts are active with $\mathbf k=[0,0]$, or (iii) the shifts are active with $\mathbf k\in\langle0,\frac{1}{2}\rangle$. Since the two sets of shifts are orthogonal this gives us a total of nine cases to consider; we now take these in turn, summarising our discussion in Fig.~\ref{fig3}. What at face value might appear to be the simplest case---namely, activation of a single shift system with periodicity $\mathbf k=[0,0]$---turns out to give rise to a relatively complex situation. These shifts describe a shear of the perovskite lattice polarised along one of the lattice vectors $\mathbf a$ or $\mathbf b$; the corresponding distortions are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b,d). In both cases the vast majority of the symmetry elements present in the $p4mm$ plane-group symmetry of the parent lattice are lost and the lattice symmetry is now reduced to $p2$. This symmetry lowering is so severe that activation of these shifts allows coupling to an entirely different type of rigid body distortion---namely, the ``forbidden'' (in-phase) tilts also at $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ [Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a,b)]. In fact, these tilts provide a continuous pathway between $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ shifts polarised along $\mathbf a$, on the one hand, and those polarised along $\mathbf b$, on the other hand, such that the former type of shift cannot be distinguished from a combination of the latter shift type together with an in-phase tilt (or \emph{vice versa}). This confusing situation arises because $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ shifts polarised along either $\mathbf a$ or $\mathbf b$ are characterised by the same irreducible representation; in other words, the two shift systems break the parent symmetry in identical ways. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig4.png} \caption{Some symmetry relationships in 2D shift systems. (a) Activation of zone-centre shifts leads to structures that are related to one another \emph{via} in-phase tilts of he rigid units. (b) This transformation is continuous because the plane group symmetry elements of the shifted structures (2-fold rotation axes distributed as illustrated here) are compatible with the activation of in-phase tilts. (d) For some shift systems, such as the $c2mm$ distortion shown here, the persistence of mirror symmetry elements forbids mixing of shifts and tilts. (e) This particular shift system is related to the compliant structure of the MIL-53 family, shown here in polyhedral representation.\cite{Nanthamathee2015,Serra-Crespo2015}} \label{fig4} \end{figure} Coupling to tilts is by no means a universal feature of shift distortions, and a counter-example is given by the case in which the two $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ shifts are active to precisely the same extent. This situation corresponds to a shear polarised along the cell diagonal, which results in a much less severe symmetry-lowering process: the resulting plane group is now $c2mm$ [Fig.~\ref{fig3}(e)]. Importantly, the persistence of mirror symmetry elements bisecting the rigid units means that coupling to tilts can only occur by further symmetry lowering [Fig.~\ref{fig4}(c)]. So in this case, the particular shift modes can be uniquely identified from the lattice symmetry. Of course, the transition from $p4mm$ to $c2mm$ structures---couched here in terms of activation of $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ shifts---corresponds to a ferroelastic distortion of the lattice.\cite{Aizu1969,Salje2012a} The ferroelastic state is well known to be mechanically compliant,\cite{Ortiz2012,Coudert2015} and as such is often associated with phenomena such as uniaxial NTE and negative linear compressibility (NLC).\cite{Hunt2015,Cairns2015,Redfern1988} Indeed, the 2D model we consider here may be interpreted as a projection of the 3D ``wine-rack'' structure of well-known compliant framework materials such as the MIL-53 family, which is certainly known to exhibit both NTE and NLC [Fig.~\ref{fig4}(d)].\cite{Nanthamathee2015,Serra-Crespo2015} Whereas zone-centre shift modes describe ferroelastic distortions, those at the zone boundary give rise to antiferroelastic states. In the case of shifts polarised along $\mathbf a$, the relevant zone boundary periodicity is $\mathbf k=[0,\frac{1}{2}]$. Consequently, activation of this shift mode results in a doubling of the cell in the $\mathbf b$ direction with the corresponding plane group symmetry now $p2gm$. Once again, the persistence of mirror symmetry elements bisecting the rigid units forbids coupling to tilts. The equivalent shift mode polarised along $\mathbf b$ gives rise to an analogous distortion: the cell now doubles along $\mathbf a$ and the plane group symmetry is $p2mg$. In contrast to the situation for the corresponding zone-centre shift modes, in this case there is clearly no continuous pathway between the two states. Simultaneous activation of \emph{both} zone-boundary shift modes to identical extents results in the appealing antiferroelastic distortion shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(i). This distortion requires doubling along both cell axes and is described by the plane group $p4gm$. Once again, the point symmetry at the rigid unit site includes a mirror plane and so this particular shift system is symmetry forbidden from coupling with tilt modes. For completeness, we consider the final possibility in which a zone-centre shift mode polarised along one axis is combined with a zone-boundary shift polarised along the remaining axis. The corresponding distortions for the two possible axis choices are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(f,h). In both cases the cell doubles and in both cases the resulting plane group symmetry is $p2$. Yet, while each shift distortion now has sufficiently low symmetry to couple with tilt modes (as above), there is no continuous path between the two: they are distinguishable by virtue of the particular axis along which the cell has doubled. Our key point in covering all these different possibilities is to demonstrate that activation of different shift modes results in different symmetry-breaking processes that can be fundamentally distinct from those accessible \emph{via} tilt degrees of freedom---whether conventional\cite{Kennedy1999} or forbidden.\cite{Du2014,Hill2016,Duyker2016,Kareis2012} \subsection{Notation}\label{notation} Given the complexity of shift distortions and their combinations---even in 2D---it is clearly desirable to develop a concise notation to represent the particular set of shift modes active in a given structure. In the case of tilt distortions, the most widely-used notation is that of Glazer;\cite{Glazer1972} we first review this notation with the view of subsequently extending the approach to shifts. Like shifts, independent tilt systems can be associated with each of the three crystal axes. In conventional perovskites, rotations around the $\mathbf a$ axis (by way of example) can propagate with periodicity $\mathbf k=[k_x,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]$. Hence, the particular tilt distortion associated with a single axis $\alpha$ is described by two terms: the tilt magnitude $e_\alpha$ and the relevant wave-vector component $k_\alpha$, which---as discussed above---is usually either $0$ (`in-phase' tilts) or $\frac{1}{2}$ (`out-of-phase' tilts). Glazer condenses this information for each axis into a compound symbol $\lambda^\mu$. The index $\mu\in\{0,+,-\}$ denotes whether a tilt is inactive ($\mu=0$; $e_\alpha=0$), in-phase ($\mu=+$; $k_\alpha=0$) or out-of-phase ($\mu=-$; $k_\alpha=\frac{1}{2}$); the primary symbol $\lambda$ reflects the magnitude of an active tilt in order to show the existence or absence of symmetry relationships between tilts along different axes of the parent perovskite lattice. The untilted aristotype has Glazer symbol $a^0a^0a^0$; the term $a^-a^-a^-$ denotes equal-magnitude out-of-phase tilts around each of the three crystal axes; and the term $a^+b^-b^-$ denotes in-phase tilts around $\mathbf a$ with distinct equal-magnitude out-of-phase tilts around $\mathbf b$ and $\mathbf c$. Howard and Stokes established a link between these labels and the corresponding space group symmetries.\cite{Howard1998} We note that the index $\mu$ is equal to the value of $e_\alpha\exp[2\pi{\rm i}k_\alpha]$ if (i) the symbol `$+$' can be associated with 1 and `$-$' with $-1$, and (ii) $e_\alpha$ is taken to equal $1$ for active tilt modes and $0$ for inactive tilt modes. The various shift distortions of the 2D molecular perovskite structure discussed above are also describable in terms of the magnitude and periodicity of collective translations along each crystal axis. This immediately suggests an analogous notation to that of Glazer's for tilts, with only one subtle conceptual modification: the periodicity implied by the index $\mu$ must now refer to the component of $\mathbf k$ \emph{perpendicular} to the corresponding crystal axis. So, for example, the diagonal ferroelastic distortion discussed in terms of $\mathbf k=[0,0]$ shifts along both $\mathbf a$ and $\mathbf b$ might be summarised by the `Glazer' symbol $a^+a^+$: here the $+$ index would indicate $k_y=0$ for shifts parallel to $\mathbf a$ and $k_x=0$ for shifts parallel to $\mathbf b$; likewise the use of the same primary symbol $a$ would indicate that the shifts have identical magnitude along these two crystal axes. The corresponding symbols for each of the distortions originally presented in Fig.~\ref{fig3} are given in Table~\ref{table1}. \begin{table}[b] \small \caption{\ A summary of Glazer and matrix notation for the 2D shift systems illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig3}.} \label{table1} \begin{tabular}{0.48\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}llccl} \hline $\mathbf a$-shifts&$\mathbf b$-shifts&`Glazer'&Matrix&Plane \\ & & symbol&symbol&group\\ \hline &\\[-5pt] inactive&inactive&$a^0a^0$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}0&0\\ 0&0\end{array}\right]$&$p4mm$\\[10pt] in-phase&inactive&$a^+b^0$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}+&+\\ 0&0\end{array}\right]$&$p2$\\[10pt] in-phase&in-phase&$a^+a^+$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}+&+\\ +&+\end{array}\right]$&$c2mm$\\[10pt] out-of-phase&inactive&$a^-b^0$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}+&-\\ 0&0\end{array}\right]$&$p2gm$\\[10pt] out-of-phase&in-phase&$a^-b^+$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}+&-\\ +&+\end{array}\right]$&$p2$\\[10pt] out-of-phase&out-of-phase&$a^-a^-$&$\left[\begin{array}{cc}+&-\\ -&+\end{array}\right]$&$p4gm$\\[10pt] \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} We will come to show that an unambiguous extrapolation of this notation to 3D molecular perovskites is not straightforward, and so we present an alternative---albeit perhaps more cumbersome---approach similar to that developed in Ref.~\citenum{Hill2016} to describe ``forbidden'' tilts. Here the idea is to exploit the equivalence $\mu\equiv e\exp[2\pi{\rm i}k]$ noted above. We assemble the matrix \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ll}\mu_{xx}&\mu_{xy}\\ \mu_{yx}&\mu_{yy}\end{array}\right],\label{mumat} \end{equation} where $\mu_{\alpha\beta}\equiv e_\alpha\exp[2\pi{\rm i}k_\beta]$ describes both the magnitude $e_\alpha$ of shift displacements parallel to axis $\alpha$ and also the component $k_\beta$ of the corresponding periodicity $\mathbf k$ parallel to axis $\beta$. We note that if $\beta=\alpha$ then $k_\beta=0$; this is the result of the RUM analysis given above. For consistency we use the Glazer $0,+,-$ symbols for $\mu$ rather than the numerical values of $e_\alpha\exp[2\pi{\rm i}k_\beta]$. So, for the diagonal ferroelastic distortion (assigned Glazer symbol $a^+a^+$ above) we now have the matrix representation \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ll}+&+\\ +&+\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} Equivalent representations for each of the 2D shift distortions are listed in Table~\ref{table1}. \subsection{Extension to 3D} The key result of our RUM analysis was to show that the shift degrees of freedom in 3D molecular perovskites involve collective displacements of columns of octahedra along a direction parallel to the column axis $\alpha$. Shifts may occur along any combination of the three crystal axes; the only constraint on the periodicity $\mathbf k$ of these displacements is that component $k_\alpha$ must equal zero for shifts polarised along axis $\alpha$. Consequently, the shifts associated with each axis now require \emph{three} terms if they are to be described completely: a magnitude $e_\alpha$ together with the \emph{two} wave-vector components $k_\beta,k_\gamma$ corresponding to the \emph{two} axes perpendicular to $\alpha$. It is this additional complexity that renders ambiguous the direct extrapolation of the Glazer notation to 3D shifts. By contrast, the more cumbersome matrix notation is straightforwardly extended to 3D shifts: we use the representation \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{lll}\mu_{xx}&\mu_{xy}&\mu_{xz}\\ \mu_{yx}&\mu_{yy}&\mu_{yz}\\ \mu_{zx}&\mu_{zy}&\mu_{zz}\end{array}\right], \end{equation} defined exactly as for Eq.~\eqref{mumat}. By way of example, the antiferroelastic planar shift distortion shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5} would be characterised by the shift matrix \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc}+&+&-\\ 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} Here, the first row signifies that shifts polarised along $\mathbf a$ are active, and propagate with periodicity $\mathbf k=[0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$. The second and third rows signify that shifts along $\mathbf b$ and $\mathbf c$ are inactive. This particular distortion results in symmetry lowering of the $Pm\bar3m$ aristotype to $Pmma$. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig5.png} \caption{An antiferroelastic planar shift system characterised by displacements parallel to $\mathbf a$, correlated with modulation wave-vector $\mathbf k = [0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$.} \label{fig5} \end{figure} One possible approach to modifying the Glazer-type notation for these 3D shifts might be to exploit the Bradley-Cracknell abbreviations for high-symmetry points in the Brillouin zone.\cite{Bradley1972} In some cases, the use of this abbreviation as the Glazer index $\mu$ would allow unambiguous identification of the two required wave-vector components. For example, the $Pmma$ shift system discussed immediately above might be assigned the Glazer symbol $a^{\rm X}b^0c^0$. Here, the index `$\rm X$' of the first term signifies that shifts polarised along $\mathbf a$ are active and are modulated with a periodicity $\mathbf k\in\langle\frac{1}{2},0,0\rangle$. Since $k_x$ must equal zero, we know that $\mathbf k=[0,\frac{1}{2},0]$ or $[0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$; in the absence of active shifts along $\mathbf b$ or $\mathbf c$ these two periodicities give rise to symmetry-equivalent distortions. Despite this success of the nomenclature in this one example, it is straightforward to envisage scenarios in which unambiguous identification is not possible. Nevertheless, for each of the case studies below, we try to give both Glazer and matrix notations, with the understanding that future usage will likely determine limitations of the two approaches and identify of which of these is the more useful in practice. \section{Case studies} Having established a theoretical basis with which to identify and categorise shift distortions in molecular perovskites, we proceed to interpret the structures of three experimental systems in this context. Our goals are to demonstrate that a variety of different shift systems is observed experimentally, and to highlight the potential for interplay with tilt and A-site orientational degrees of freedom. \subsection{Tetramethylammonium calcium azide} Our first example is the azide-containing perovskite framework [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$ (Me = CH$_3$), the structure of which was reported in Ref.~\citenum{Mautner1988}. At room temperature, this system adopts a tetragonal structure (space group $P4/nmm$) with cell parameters related to that of the cubic aristotype by $a\sim\sqrt2a_0$ and $c\sim a_0$ [Fig.~\ref{fig6}(a)]. It can be shown that this symmetry is entirely accounted for by the presence of an active shift system along the tetragonal axis.\cite{Campbell2006} In this particular example, columns of CaN$_6$ octahedra aligned parallel to $\mathbf c$ are shifted along $\mathbf c$ relative to their immediate neighbours. The shift pattern alternates along $\mathbf a$ and $\mathbf b$ such that the distortion is clearly associated with the modulation wave-vector $\mathbf k=[\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2}, 0]$ (given relative to the parent cell). There are no shifts along either $\mathbf a$ or $\mathbf b$. So, using the approaches described above, we identify this distortion with the Glazer symbol $a^0a^0c^{\rm M}$ and the matrix representation \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc} 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\\ -&-&+\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} As an aside, we note that one straightforward method of assigning tilts is to consider cross-sections taken perpendicular to each parent axis, from which the corresponding 2D shifts may be determined by inspection [Fig.~\ref{fig6}(b)]: \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc} \cdot&\cdot&\cdot\\ \cdot&0&0\\ \cdot&-&+\end{array}\right]\qquad\left[\begin{array}{ccc} 0&\cdot&0\\ \cdot&\cdot&\cdot\\ -&\cdot&+\end{array}\right]\qquad\left[\begin{array}{ccc} 0&0&\cdot\\ 0&0&\cdot\\ \cdot&\cdot&\cdot\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} The corresponding 3D shift matrix is a superposition of these three 2D sub-matrices, with the understanding that shifts may sometimes appear inactive in one cross-section but are obviously active in another. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics{fig6.png} \caption{Static shift distortions in [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$. (a) A polyhedral / ball-and stick representation of the crystal structure of [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$, as reported in Ref.~\citenum{Mautner1988}. Ca atoms are shown in yellow and N atoms in blue. The [NMe$_4$]$^+$ cations have been omitted for clarity. Shifts are polarised along $\mathbf c$ (the vertical axis in this representation) and are related to those illustrated originally in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a). (b) 2D sections of the crystal structure using the same representations as in (a). These sections lie perpendicular to the $\mathbf a$, $\mathbf b$, and $\mathbf c$ axes (left--right) and relate the 2D shift systems enumerated in Fig.~\ref{fig3} with the matrix representation of the full 3D shift system active in this material. (c) A representation of the local environment of the [NMe$_4$]$^+$ cation in this material; colours are as for (a) and (b), with C atom shown in black. Thermal ellipsoids are given at 50\% probability. There is a close match in A-site cation geometry and the framework distortion effected by shift activation. The relatively large thermal ellipsoids suggest substantial dynamic disorder in this system. \label{fig6}} \end{figure} As in a number of the simple 2D cases studied above, the particular shift distortion mode we observe in [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$ retains a number of the mirror symmetry elements of the aristotype, which has the effect of preventing mixing between shifts and octahedral tilts. Indeed, there are no static active tilts in the reported structure. What is clear, however, is that there is likely a large degree of dynamic distortion, given the magnitude of the thermal ellipsoids. Consequently, it is possible that this system will exhibit displacive phase transitions on cooling; a re-examination using variable temperature methods may be rewarding in this case. But what drives the presence of static shifts in this system? We offer two suggestions. The first concerns the coordination preference of the azide anion as a bridging linker. It has long been known that the preferred `end-to-end' bridging geometry involves substantially bent M--N--N angles; together with the \emph{trans}-EE coordination of the N$_3^-$ ion this is presumably what allows such large ($\simeq1.3$\,\AA) displacements between neighbouring Ca$^{2+}$ ions [Fig.~\ref{fig5}(x)]. Indeed this propensity of azide to allow activation of shifts is likely a general phenomenon; however, this point does not explain why it is this particular $a^0a^0c^{\rm M}$ shift system that is adopted here. So our second observation concerns the relationship between the geometry of the [NMe$_4$]$^+$ cation and the structural distortions to the A-site cavity that occur as a result of columnar shifts. In the aristotype structure, the point symmetry at the A site is $m\bar3m$ ($O_h$), which is a supergroup of the $\bar43m$ ($T_d$) symmetry of tetramethylammonium; consequently the cation must exhibit orientational disorder in this parent structure. On activation of the $a^0a^0c^{\rm M}$ shifts, the A-site point symmetry is reduced to $\bar42m$ ($D_{2d}$), a subgroup of $\bar43m$. This allows orientational order of the cation. Indeed, there is a close match between the geometry of the (ordered) cation and the shape of the A-site cavity that suggests the distortions is driven largely by packing and cation--framework interactions [Fig.~\ref{fig6}(c)]. \subsection{Dimethylammonium manganese azide} \begin{figure}[b] \centering \includegraphics{fig7.png} \caption{Static shift distortions in [NMe$_2$H$_2$]Mn[N$_3$]$_3$. (a) A representation of the crystal structure as reported in Ref.~\citenum{Zhao2013}. Mn atoms are shown as pink polyhedra; N atoms as blue spheres. There are two orthogonal shift distortions active in this system. One is precisely the same as thoat shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}(a) and gives rise to alternating columnar displacements polarised along $\mathbf c$ (the vertical axis in our representation here). At the same time there is an antiferroelastic planar shift system polarised along the $\mathbf b$ direction (the horizontal axis in this representation) that by itself gives rise to the type of distortion shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5} (albeit with axes relabelled). (b) Thermal ellipsoid representation of the local environment of [NMe$_2$H$_2$]$^+$ cations within the distorted perovskite framework. \label{fig7}} \end{figure} A closely related system that supports two orthogonal shift systems at once is the ambient phase of [NMe$_2$H$_2$]Mn[N$_3$]$_3$.\cite{Zhao2013} The reported crystal structure has orthorhombic $Cmce$ symmetry with $a\sim2a_0$, $b\sim2a_0$, $c\sim2a_0$ [Fig.~\ref{fig7}(a)]. The two shift systems present involve displacements along $\mathbf c$ and $\mathbf b$. The former is of precisely the same form as in [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$; the latter involves concerted alternating displacements of sheets of octahedra and is associated with the modulation wave-vector $\mathbf k=[0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$. Once again, it can be shown that these two distortions acting together account entirely for the observed space group symmetry;\cite{Campbell2006} in other words, their combined effect acts as the primary order parameter. Using the approach of section \ref{notation} we assign to this distortion the Glazer label $a^0b^{\rm X}c^{\rm M}$ and the shift matrix \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc} 0&0&0\\ +&+&-\\ -&-&+\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} This is an example of the ambiguity of the Glazer-type notation we have proposed. In our label $a^0b^{\rm X}c^{\rm M}$ it is not clear whether the shifts polarised along $\mathbf b$ are associated with periodicity $\mathbf k=[0,0,\frac{1}{2}]$ or $[\frac{1}{2},0,0]$; yet these two cases now result in meaningfully different symmetry-breaking processes. In contrast, the matrix representation is unambiguous. What should be immediately apparent from both notations, however, is the existence of a group--subgroup relationship between the structure type of this compound and that of the preceding example. The arguments presented to explain the activation of $a^0a^0c^{\rm M}$ shifts in [NMe$_4$]Ca[N$_3$]$_3$ appear to hold again for the $a^0b^{\rm X}c^{\rm M}$ shifts we find in [NMe$_2$H$_2$]Mn[N$_3$]$_3$. Clearly the azide linker is common to both, but we find also that the point symmetry at the A site is reduced in order allow orientational order of the [NMe$_2$H$_2$]$^+$ cation [Fig.~\ref{fig7}(b)]. The crystallographic point symmetry of this site is $2$ ($C_2$) in the $Cmce$ structure, which is clearly a subgroup of the idealised $222$ ($C_{2v}$) molecular point symmetry. One effect of the activation of multiple shift systems is that the crystal symmetry is now sufficiently low that a set of octahedral tilts couples to the shift-induced distortions. This tilt system is characterised by the (conventional) Glazer label $a^-b^0b^0$ and cannot by itself account for the $Cmce$ symmetry. In other words, octahedral tilts do not act as the primary order parameter in this system. \subsection{Dimethylammonium manganese formate} In our final case study, we consider a system for which shift distortions are present but clearly not the primary order parameter: [NMe$_2$H$_2$]Mn(HCOO)$_3$. In the high-temperature phase of this compound, the crystal symmetry is $R\bar3c$ with $a\sim\sqrt2a_0$ and $c\sim2\sqrt3a_0$ [Fig.~\ref{fig8}].\cite{Wang2004a} The existence of a rhombohedral distortion itself implies activation of a shear strain polarised along the body diagonal of the ABX$_3$ cube. Consequently the shift distortion is given by the straightforward labels $a^\Gamma a^\Gamma a^\Gamma$ and \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc} +&+&+\\ +&+&+\\ +&+&+\end{array}\right]. \end{equation} This distortion reduces the $Pm\bar3m$ aristotype symmetry to $R\bar3m$ ($a\sim\sqrt2a_0$ and $c\sim\sqrt3a_0$), which is a minimal supergroup of the observed space group $R\bar3c$ ($c\sim2\sqrt3a_0$) and so cannot act as a primary order parameter. Instead, it is the conventional octahedral tilt distortion (Glazer notation $a^-a^-a^-$) that is responsible for breaking the aristotypic symmetry; here the shifts couple to the tilts. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig8.png} \caption{Representation of the crystal structure of [NMe$_2$H$_2$]Mn(HCOO)$_3$, as reported in Ref.~\citenum{Wang2004a}. Mn atoms are shown as pink polyhedra, O atoms as red spheres, and C atoms as black spheres. Here the shift distortions are associated with macroscopic shear of the lattice.\label{fig8}} \end{figure} \subsection{Some complications} In selecting these case studies we have intentionally focussed on systems for which the active shift distortions are relatively straightforward. There is absolutely no difficulty in anticipating complicating factors in other systems that would make the kind of analysis we present much trickier. We briefly highlight some of these factors here, noting that many of these are complications also in the characterisation of octahedral tilts in conventional perovskites. First, there will be systems for which the difference in magnitude of shifts for different directions will meaningfully affect the symmetry of the distorted state. Glazer notation allows this distinction to be made through the use of different primary symbols $\lambda$; however, the matrix notation as presented would need to be modified to reflect this variation---perhaps through the use of variables or constants $\neq\pm1$ in the matrix itself. Second, we have focused on shifts characterised by periodicities at the zone centre or zone boundary. More complex periodicities are allowed: an example occurs in the material [NPr$_4$]Ni(dca)$_3$ (Pr = C$_3$H$_7$; dca = [N(CN)$_2$]$^-$), for which $\mathbf c$-shifts are active and modulated by the wave-vector $\mathbf k=[\frac{1}{4}, \frac{1}{4}, 0]$.\cite{Schlueter2005} One might anticipate the use of the Bradley-Cracknell symbol $\Sigma$ in the corresponding Glazer notation; likewise there is in principle no reason why complex (or in this case, imaginary) values of $\exp[2\pi{\rm i}k_\alpha]$ might not be used in the matrix notation. Nevertheless, in both cases there are issues of distortion \emph{phase} that are probably too difficult to be unambiguously resolved by a terse symbolic representation. And, third, it is perfectly feasible for a system to support more than one shift distortion along a given axis. Indeed, this may not be particularly rare, given that zone-centre shifts correspond to shear modes.\cite{Zhao2013} This situation is akin to the well-known case of `compound tilts' found in the study of some inorganic perovskites.\cite{Peel2012} \section{Dynamic shifts} So far, our focus has been on the characterisation and understanding of static shift distortions in molecular perovskites. For a structural degree of freedom---such as shifts---to influence the phase behaviour of broad family, its effect on the lattice dynamics is an equally important consideration. The field would surely gain from experimental studies of the lattice dynamics in molecular framework analogues (noting, for example, the transformative role played by inelastic neutron scattering in developing the soft-mode theory of phase transitions in conventional perovskites).\cite{Cowley1964,Shirane1974,Dove2002} Our approach here, however, is to develop an extremely simple computational lattice-dynamical model, from which we calculate the corresponding phonon dispersion curves. Through interrogation of the corresponding eigenvectors, we are able to explore the role of shift modes in the phonon spectrum for this representative model. We proceed to calculate the corresponding Gr{\"u}neisen parameters---a measure of the role of individual modes in the thermal expansion behaviour of a material\cite{Gruneisen1912}---and demonstrate that dynamic shifts may play an as-yet under-appreciated role in the NTE properties of some molecular perovskites. \subsection{Lattice-dynamical model} The essential features of the simple lattice-dynamical model we develop to study shift distortions are: (i) a perovskite topology, (ii) molecular linkers within the perovskite framework, (iii) rigid metal--linker and intra-linker bonds, (iv) rigid linker--metal--linker bond angles, and (v) flexible metal--linker--metal bond angles. We satisfy these criteria with a simple cubic cell (symmetry $Pm\bar3m$) containing a single atom (`B') at the cell origin, and a linker atom (`X') at the $6e$ site $(x,0,0)$ with $x=0.4$. This model has nominal composition B(X$_2$)$_3$. Because we are primarily concerned with deformations of the framework lattice, and because we want to keep our model as simple as possible, we do not include an A-site cation, and we treat both B and X atoms as charge neutral. Our model is made elastically stable through the introduction of harmonic bond-length and bond-angle interactions, as represented in Fig.~\ref{fig9}. Consequently, the lattice enthalpy of our model is given by \begin{equation} E_{\textrm{latt}}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\textrm{bonds}}k_{\textrm{harm}}(r-r_0)^2+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\textrm{angles}}k_{\textrm{angle}}(\theta-\theta_0)^2. \end{equation} The relevant parameters for a stable implementation of this model within the GULP program (Ref.~\citenum{Gale1997}) are given in Table~\ref{table2}. Calculations were carried out at fixed volume and checked thoroughly for convergence. Our use of a model for which the equilibrium B--X--X angle is 180$^\circ$ is entirely intentional: this is our mechanism of ensuring shift degrees of freedom are reflected in the phonons rather than in static distortions. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig9.png} \caption{Representation of the simplified molecular perovskite structure used in our lattice dynamical model. B atoms (shown in green) are located at the origin of the $Pm\bar3m$ cell, and X atoms (shown in blue) are located on the $6e$ site. The network is held together by a combination of harmonic bond stretching potentials (relevant pairs highlighted in red) and bond angle potentials (relevant triplets highlighted in black).\label{fig9}} \end{figure} \begin{table}[b] \small \caption{\ Parameter values for the lattice dynamical model described in the text and implemented in GULP.\cite{Gale1997}} \label{table2} \begin{tabular}{0.48\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lll} \hline Parameter&value\\ \hline Space group&$Pm\bar3m$\\ $a$ (\AA)&5.0\\ $m$(B) (a.m.u.)&54.94\\ $m$(X) (a.m.u.)&16.00\\ $k_{\textrm{harm}}$(B--X) (eV/\AA$^2$)&1.0\\ $r_0$(B--X) (\AA)&2.0\\ $k_{\textrm{harm}}$(X--X) (eV/\AA$^2$)&1.0\\ $r_0$(X--X) (\AA)&1.0\\ $k_{\textrm{harm}}$(X$\ldots$X) (eV/\AA$^2$)&1.0\\ $r_0$(X$\ldots$X) (\AA)&2.828\\ $k_{\textrm{angle}}$(X--B--X) (eV/rad$^2$)&1.0\\ $\theta_0$(X--B--X) ($^\circ$)&90.0\\ $k_{\textrm{angle}}$(X--X--X) (eV/rad$^2$)&0.01\\ $\theta_0$(X--B--X) ($^\circ$)&135.0\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} We proceeded to calculate the harmonic phonon dispersion relation for this simple lattice-dynamical model, making use of a $k$-grid of roughly 0.025 reciprocal lattice units. The corresponding phonon dispersion curves along specific high-symmetry directions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig10}(a). We do not attach any significance to the absolute energy scale of these excitations, since we have not aimed to replicate experimental values in our choice of harmonic spring constants. What is significant is the partitioning of the spectrum into a low-energy regime (which we will come to show dominates NTE behaviour) and a higher-energy regime. With respect to the low-energy component, we note the anomalous slope of the transverse acoustic branch along the $\Gamma$--X direction that is diagnostic of a shear instability, the existence of multiple dispersionless bands (evidence of localised degrees of freedom), and also the presence of zone-boundary soft modes. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics{fig10.png} \caption{Phonon dispersion curves for our lattice dynamical model and their interpretation in terms of shift degrees of freedom. (a) The entire phonon dispersion across selected high-symmetry directions in reciprocal space, as determined using GULP.\cite{Gale1997} The shaded region at frequencies below 100\,cm$^{-1}$ contains the modes responsible for NTE behaviour. (b) The low-frequency region of the phonon dispersion (as shown in (a)) where the branches have been broadened according to the corresponding value of $\rho(\mathbf k,\nu)$. Consequently, those branches that appear bold in this representation correspond to modes with significant translational components. (c) The same low-frequency region of the phonon spectrum now coloured and broadened according to the value of the mode Gr{\"u}neisen parameter: blue values correspond to $\gamma>0$ and red to $\gamma<0$. The branches that appear bold and red are the most important for NTE; our key result is that these include the shift modes as discussed in the text. \label{fig10}} \end{figure} In order to better understand the distribution of shift modes throughout this phonon dispersion, we exploited the observation that shifts are associated with eigenvectors $\mathbf e(\mathbf k,\nu)$ uniformly polarised along a single Cartesian axis. Consequently, the projections \begin{equation} \rho(\mathbf k,\nu)=\sum_{\alpha}\left\|\sum_j\frac{1}{\sqrt{m_j}}e_{j\alpha}(\mathbf k,\nu)\right\|^2 \end{equation} are proportional to the extent to which each mode $\nu$ at wave-vector $\mathbf k$ corresponds to collective translations. Here $\alpha$ indexes the Cartesian axes and $j$ indexes the atoms in the unit cell. In Fig.~\ref{fig10}(b) we show the same low-energy phonon dispersion curves as in Fig.~\ref{fig10}(a) but where we have broadened the curves according to the corresponding value of $\rho$. This highlights visually the distribution of shifts throughout the low-energy phonon spectrum. What is immediately clear is that shifts play an active role in the low-energy dynamics for those branches along which they are allowed. For the $\Gamma$--X direction, by way of example, the soft acoustic branch is almost entirely accounted for in terms of shift distortions. This branch is doubly degenerate; its low energy reflects the ease with which planar shifts can be accommodated in this simple model. As $\mathbf k\rightarrow$ X, this branch anti-crosses with a rotational RUM branch, such that at the X point itself the shifts correspond to the set of modes with the second lowest phonon frequencies. Note that the longitudinal acoustic branch has increased significantly in energy at this point, such that translations polarised along the same direction as $\mathbf k$ have very much higher energies. Across the X--M direction, one of the two shift degrees of freedom accessible at X becomes increasingly stiff, such that at M itself there is only one shift degree of freedom remaining at the lowest energies. This degree of freedom couples strongly with the rotational RUMs such that it contributes to all three lowest-energy phonon branches. These observations are entirely consistent with the RUM analysis of section~\ref{rums}. \subsection{Negative thermal expansion} The phonon spectrum is directly linked to NTE behaviour via the Gr{\"u}neisen parameters \begin{equation} \gamma(\mathbf k,\nu)=-\frac{\partial\ln\omega}{\partial\ln V}, \end{equation} where $\omega$ is the frequency of mode $\nu$ at wave-vector $\mathbf k$, and $V$ is the unit cell volume. NTE is driven by those modes for which $\gamma$ is large and negative, especially if these also occur at the very lowest energies.\cite{Evans1999a} We determined the variation in $\gamma$ across our phonon spectrum by applying a 1\% strain to our lattice-dynamical model and recalculating the corresponding $\omega(\mathbf k,\nu)$ values. In Fig.~\ref{fig10}(c) we show the low-frequency region of the phonon dispersion where we have coloured (and broadened) the dispersion curves according to the magnitude and sign of $\gamma$. We find the vast majority of low-energy modes are capable of driving NTE, including the branches associated with shift degrees of freedom. In fact it is possible to count the number of key NTE modes at each of the high-symmetry points (taking care to account for branch degeneracy as appropriate): there are six for $\mathbf k\rightarrow\Gamma$, five at X, four at M, and three at R. In each case, three of these modes correspond to rotational degrees of freedom. So the tilt modes usually used to explain NTE behaviour in perovskite analogues (\emph{e.g.}\ the Prussian Blues\cite{Goodwin2005a,Chapman2006,Adak2011}) are certainly relevant. But our analysis here shows definitively that they need not be the only modes contributing strongly to NTE, and instead correlated shifts can also play a key role. This result reflects our current understanding of NTE in the canonical metal--organic framework MOF-5,\cite{Rimmer2014} the structure of which might reasonably be considered analogous to an A-site deficient molecular perovskite. The combination of large negative Gr{\"u}neisen parameters and low phonon frequencies also suggests shift-type vibrational modes are likely to show strongly anharmonic behaviour. Hence, the soft mode instabilities normally associated with octahedral tilts and/or ferroelectric displacements may also involve correlated shifts in perovskite analogues. The equilibrium geometry of the B--X--X angle and the presence and charge distribution of A-site cations will help shape the phonon dispersion and---by virtue of the close match in A-site geometry and perovskite deformation noted in the various case studies above---might also be expected to drive phonon softening in suitable cases. Molecular dynamics studies, such as those used to interrogate negative thermal expansion in Zn(CN)$_2$,\cite{Trousselet2015,Fang2013} would provide valuable insight into the possible existence and phenomenology of displacive transitions involving shift degrees of freedom. \section{Concluding remarks} So our study has demonstrated that shift distortions are \emph{bona fide} structural degrees of freedom in molecular perovskite analogues: they influence the crystal structures of a number of known compounds, and they are likely to play a key role in the low-energy dynamics of these systems, including anomalous thermal responses such as NTE. We have shown the potential for interplay between shift and tilt degrees of freedom, and again between shift and A-site orientational (multipolar) degrees of freedom; consequently, variation in cation size and geometry might be expected to allow control over the selective activation of specific shift distortions. A crucial result of our study has been to show that shift distortions can give rise to symmetry-lowering processes inaccessible through \emph{e.g.}\ octahedral tilt mechanisms. The importance of this result lies in the emerging interest in exploiting compound distortions as indirect mechanisms of driving polarisation:\cite{Oh2015,Stroppa2011,Stroppa2013} these are the strategies of so-called ``tilt engineering'', which is allowing access to entirely new families of multiferroic materials.\cite{Pitcher2015} The new symmetry-breaking mechanisms we identify here allow in principle for analogous ``shift engineering'' approaches, where combinations of various correlated shifts---perhaps coupled with tilt or cation order---might be used to break inversion symmetry. For instance, we find that the combination of $a^{\rm X}b^0c^0$ shifts characterised by the matrix \begin{equation} \left[\begin{array}{ccc} +&+&-\\ 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\end{array}\right] \end{equation} acting together with $[001]$ tilts propagating at $\mathbf k=[0, 0, \frac{1}{2}]$ gives a distorted structure with polar space group symmetry $Pma2$ [Fig.~\ref{fig11}]. This mechanism of breaking inversion symmetry is strongly reminiscent of the effect of A-site cation order in some AA$'$B$_2$O$_6$ double perovskites;\cite{Rondinelli2012} the key difference of course is that shift or tilt distortions might readily be inverted under the influence of an alternating electric field, whereas cation order is much more difficult to influence. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=8.3cm]{fig11.png} \caption{Representation of a hypothetical polar $Pma2$ molecular perovskite phase, where the polarisation is indirectly induced via superposition of shift and tilt distortions. Here the blue rods signify molecular bridging units of indeterminate composition. The polarisation direction is indicated by the red arrow.\label{fig11}} \end{figure} \section{Acknowledgements} J.A.H. and A.L.G. gratefully acknowledge funding through the European Research Council (Grant 279705) and the E.P.S.R.C. \balance
\section{Introduction} Current-Voltage (\emph{I--V}) curves are routinely used to give synthetic graphical information of non-ohmic electronic devices such as semiconductor diodes. Moreover, a lot of information about the properties of conducting materials and devices is obtained through the analysis of the current-voltage dependence both in DC and in AC regimes. In the literature there is a large amount of \emph{I--V} based studies for a wide variety of devices, encompassing homogeneous, composite materials and even biological structures. It is worth mentioning that \emph{I--V} characteristic measurements are used for the assessment of the performances of conventional photovoltaic cells\cite{Zhang} and non conventional photodevices such as a single carbon nanotube exhibiting the peculiar behaviour of a photodiode\cite{Barkelid}; in the investigation of the collective conduction of charge observed in suitable materials and originating in the formation, through a quantum mechanism, of a coherent travelling charge wave\cite{Thorne}; in electrophysiology\cite{Johnston}; in the study of the properties of electrical conduction of a few or even single biomolecules such as short strings of DNA adherent across the segments of conducting surfaces\cite{Fink}. We limit ourselves to cite only these few examples, with the aim to stress the importance and spreading of the \emph{I--V} characteristic tool in many different fields, and to support the call of a wide use of this technique in the education of scientists and engineers toward experimental practice. The \emph{p-n} semiconductor junction, one of the simplest elements with a non linear response, is still the first choice starting point in the study of semiconductor devices which is a primary goal of modern labs for science and engineering undergraduate students\cite{Meehan}. In Ref. \cite{Neudeck} the introduction states: \emph{``The \emph{p-n} junction diode is the most fundamental of all the semiconductor devices (...). So basic is the theory of operation that many engineers have stated that to understand the \emph{p-n} junction qualitatively and quantitatively helps one to understand the majority of all solid state devices.''} In educational literature there are several examples of experimental papers studying the \emph{p-n} junction both in diode devices or in transistors\cite{Inman}, focusing on the conformity of the measured \emph{I--V} characteristics with the modelling equations\cite{Martil} or on particular aspects, such as the possibility to measure the energy band-gap in diodes\cite{Canivez} or in light emitting diodes\cite{Precker}. In this paper we present an apparatus, used in a class fractionated into small groups of two-three students, to investigate the \emph{I--V} characteristics of a commercial diode at controlled temperatures, in order to test the compliance of the well-known Shockley equation with the behaviour of a real device. Temperature control, data collection and analysis are directed into a LabVIEW environment. We present a detailed data analysis in order to invite students to appreciate the caution necessary to avoid some common pitfalls of the fitting procedures and to better appreciate the meaning and limits of a physical model. We also show how a deeper insight into the physical basis of the \emph{p-n} junction could be obtained by examining the dependence of the basic diode model parameters from surroundings temperature. As an example, we report the exponential dependence of the saturation current on the inverse of the temperature and we show how the constants involved give information on the barrier height of the junction. \section{Terms of the model} The main objective of a laboratory session dedicated to the rectifying diode consists in the evaluation of the according degree of the measured curve with the models. The ideal \emph{I--V} characteristic of a \emph{p-n} junction is not commonly treated in a general physics textbooks, and it is usually approximated by the popular Shockley equation, omitting its considerably complex theoretical origin\cite{Neudeck}: \begin{equation} \label{eq1} I = I_S\left[\exp{\left(\frac{V}{nV_T}\right)}-1\right] \end{equation} The properly called Shockley equation has the \emph{non ideality factor} $n=1$, and is appropriate only for ideal junctions. For real junctions, $n$ is greater than 1. The \emph{thermal voltage} $V_T = kT/e$ has a value of 25.8 mV at room temperature. The saturation current $I_S$ describes the level of conductivity of the diode, and ideally it coincides with the value of the current when a large reverse voltage is applied to the junction. It depends (in a very complex way) on the constructive parameters of the diode, such as the area and the depth of the junction, or the doping spatial uniformity. It is possible to reasonably express its main dependence on the temperature following the argument that $I_S$ grows with the population of the conducting level of the semiconductor carriers and that this follows a stationary thermodynamic distribution, so that: \begin{equation} I_S = I_0\exp{\left(-\frac{E_G}{kT}\right)} \label{issempl} \end{equation} where $E_G$ is the energy gap of the bulk semiconductor.\\ Using a similar argument adopted normally to introduce the non-ideality factor $n$ in the Shockley equation, the same factor must be taken into account in the exponential dependence of $I_S$: \begin{equation} I_S = I_0\exp{\left(-\frac{E_G}{nkT}\right)} \label{isconn} \end{equation} Although in the real diode the value of $n$ is only approximately constant with V, in a quite large interval of direct currents eq. (\ref{eq1}) reproduce well the \emph{I--V} curve with constant values of $I_S$ and $n$, and these two parameters can be easily determined with some fitting procedure, even graphical. In fact, when $V \gg nV_T$, the logarithmic graph of the current show a clear initial linear trend. The dependence of the fitted value of $n$ on the portion of the characteristic curve analyzed has already been discussed previously\cite{Chand}. To increase the quality of the fit of experimental data, some authors \cite{Kami} proposed junction models consisting of a sum of exponentials, each with different $I_S$ and $n$ parameters. Each contribution is considered valid in different regions of the \emph{I--V} curve and some kind of connection in the contiguous regions is required. The weakness of these strategies is the lack of an underlying simple physical picture and the increase of the number of model parameters. Finally, it is easy to observe significant deviation from the behaviour predicted by the model of eq. (\ref{eq1}) on both sides, of large and very low currents. In the first case the observed direct current is lower than that predicted by the model, and the exponential trend is weakened so that the logarithmic graph stays under the straight line calculated in the range of intermediate current. At the lowest current a larger direct current is observed with respect to that calculated with the parameter estimated in the region of intermediate currents. The origin of the large current deviation could be justified at an elementary level as the lowering of the voltage difference across the junction with respect to the applied \emph{fem} due to ohmic voltage drop in the semiconductor bulk hosting the junction. On the other hand, the low current regime originates from the presence of alternative paths for the current. When the junction current is very low, these parallel paths give a comparable contribution to the total current with a different dependence on $V$ which is rapidly overcome from the exponential term of the junction. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{modello2.eps} \caption{Electrical circuit corresponding to the four parameters model of the real diode.} \label{modello} \end{figure} Then, a more accurate model for the stationary \emph{I--V} characteristic of the diode can be formulated introducing a series resistance $R_s$, accounting for the ohmic voltage drop across the semiconductor bulk, and a parallel resistance $R_p = 1/G$, accounting for alternative paths: Fig. (\ref{modello}) shows the equivalent electrical circuit; this model has four parameters, and eq. (\ref{eq1}) modifies into: \begin{equation} \label{model2} I = I_p + I_J = GV + I_S\left[\exp{B\left(V-R_sI_J \right)}-1\right] \end{equation} Where $I_J$ is the current flowing into the junction, and $I_p = GV$ is the current flowing into the parallel resistance; a similar modeling has been proposed in ref. \cite{Mika}. Parallel and series resistances are normally introduced in the modelization of the photovoltaic cells and in the evaluation of its performance, so that the comparison of this model to the experimental data of a diode is also valuable as an introduction to the parametrization of the photovoltaic devices. A good discussion of the state of the art of the applied numerical methods is found in a recent paper\cite{Hansen}. \section{Experimental} \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{schema.eps} \caption{Schematic view of the experimental setup.} \label{setup} \end{figure} A small (4 $\times$ 4 $\times$ 4 cm$^3$) brass cube is placed between two 30 W thermoelectric power sources/sinks assembled with commercial Peltier modules. It hosts both the device being tested, a commercial 1N4148 silicon \emph{p-n} diode, and a calibrated thermistor. The direction of the heat flux can be selected through the polarity of the electric power supply connected to the modules. The heat exchanged is regulated through the duration of the power pulse in proportion to the difference between the requested temperature and the temperature registered by the thermistor. The system stabilizes the temperature of the central volume of the cube in a few tens of seconds to the value set by the operator in the range 10-100 $^\circ$C with an accuracy better than 1 $^\circ$C. The \emph{I--V} characteristic is then measured with two differential channels of a National Instruments NI6221 data acquisition board equipped with multiplexed 16-bit ADC with selectable bipolar full scales. One of the ADC channels samples the voltage $V$ across the electrodes of the diode with a resolution of 0.3 mV and the other channel senses the current $I$ crossing the diode by measuring the potential drop on a calibrated resistor $R$ in series with the diode, with a nominal resolution of 0.02 $\mu$A. $V$ is varied applying to the series diode-$R$ the variable signal of a digital-to-analog channel (DAC) of the NI6221 board. The control of the thermal cycle and of the data taking is programmed devising a LabVIEW virtual instrument. Initially, a set of temperatures is selected by the operator. After this, the controlled thermal cycles operate until the value of each $T$ is stable into a few tenths of $^\circ$C. The couples [V,I] are saved in a file and are labelled with the temperature measured just before and just after the voltage scan. The difference of two readings of the temperature is ever less than 0.5 $^\circ$C in absolute value, the sign being dependent on the direction of the last heat flux cycle. Thereby, we can evaluate that the value of the diode temperature is known with a precision of 0.2 $^\circ$C on average. \section{Results and Discussion} \subsection{Shockley model} \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura1.eps} \caption{I-V pairs taken at six different temperatures (20.7 , 29.7, 39.3, 47.8, 57.2 and 66.3 $^\circ$C, from right to left), in linear scale (a) and in $\log_{10}$ scale (b) of the currents; it is evident the alignment of the experimental points, suggesting the exponential dependence of $I$ on $V$.} \label{fig1} \end{figure} Fig. \ref{fig1} shows a set of \emph{I--V} curves taken at different temperatures, plotted both on linear and logarithmic scale: it is evident in the right panel the alignment of the experimental points, which is so much better for the higher temperatures and at the higher value of $V$. The entire set of data required a time of less than ten minutes so that the measurements could be made in a standard lab session of 2-3 hours leaving time for a preliminary data analysis and a possible reiteration of the data collection. The linearity of the experimental \emph{I--V} characteristic in the logarithmic current scale reported in Fig. \ref{fig1}b indicates, at a glance, the region where an exponential dependence of $I$ on $V$ is likely. A first analysis of data can be done by using eq. (\ref{eq1}), limiting the measurements to the region of moderate injection current where $I$ is dominated by diffusion. Consequently, we can neglect non-linear effects on the current, reducing the number of parameters to the two appearing in eq. (\ref{eq1}). \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura2.eps} \caption{Exponential fit of data corresponding to the temperature T= 47.8$\pm$0.2 $^\circ$C in linear scale (a) and semi-logarithmic scale (b). Normalized $\chi^2$ is of the order of unity for uncertainties of the current of the order of 0.05 $\mu A$ which is three times larger than the instrumental resolution and can be attributed to the experimental variability.} \label{fig2} \end{figure} We write the eq. (\ref{eq1}) in the more compact form: $$I = A \, [\exp{(BV)}-1]$$ where $B=e/nkT$. Fig. \ref{fig2}a shows a non linear fit of this equation, through a standard least square routine\cite{Matlab}, which gives a value of $B=e/nkT=19.48\pm 0.03\, V^{-1}$, largely different from the ideal diode constant at the same temperature $T = 47.8\pm 0.2 ^\circ C$ - $B_{id} = e/kT=36.20 \, V^{-1}$. The agreement of the model with the data requires a value: $$ n = \frac{B_{id}}{B} = 1.86\pm 0.01$$ which is lower than the value of the SPICE models for 1N4148\cite{NXP} diode but agrees with other experiments \cite{Su}, pointing out the variability of this parameter due to constructive tolerance or data analysis. A different treatment of data, often encountered in literature, considers the large value of the product $BV$ in the range investigated. In this case, one can neglect the term -1 in the parenthesis and can take the natural logarithm of the measured current, finding: $$ \log{I} = \log{A}+BV$$ The linear fit of the logarithm of the data gives $\log{A} = -4.29\pm 0.02$ with the current $A$ expressed in $\mu$A and $B=19.63\pm 0.04\, V^{-1}$ (see Fig. \ref{fig2}b). The differences between these values and those obtained with the complete equation are rather small, confirming the feasibility of this common and straightforward processing of data, even if a simple analysis of residuals of the two models shows that the linearized one is less accurate in the full range investigated. \subsection{Deviations from the Shockley model} \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura3.eps} \caption{\emph{I--V} data at $T= 47.8\, ^\circ C$ plotted in semi-logarithmic scale. The continuous line is the best fit curve obtained with the Shockley model with two parameters applied to the data with $2\, \mu A < I < 120\, \mu A$. The inset is a zoom of the high current data. It is evident that at very low currents ($I <1\, \mu A$) and at high current ($I > 1\, mA$) the \emph{minimal} model is not accurate.} \label{figura3} \end{figure} Fig.(\ref{figura3}) shows the plot of $\log(I)$ \emph{vs.} $V$ for a larger range of $V$. The curve superimposed to the experimental data is the best fit obtained with the eq. (\ref{eq1}), and it is evident that the two parameters model systematically underestimates lower values of the current and overestimates its higher values. A more realistic comprehension of the nature of the different contributions to the diode current, therefore, requires a study of these limiting regimes. As explained above, besides the two parameters of the Shockley equation $I_S$ and $n$, two supplementary parameters must be taken into account: $G$ and $R_s$. \\ If the series resistance is neglected, eq. (\ref{model2}) simplifies into: \begin{equation} \label{3parlow} I = GV + I_S\left(\exp{BV}-1\right) \end{equation} with $I$ and $V$ being the current and the voltage sensed at the diode leads, as before. In ref. \cite{Mika} the authors declare the unsuitability of the analysis of the forward \emph{I--V} curve to find $G$ and suggest the extraction of this parameter through a graphical treatment of the reverse biased diode characteristic. Indeed, for $V << nV_T$ the linear approximation of the exponential brings a linear relation between the current and the voltage: \begin{equation} \label{nose} I = (G+BI_S)V \end{equation} which is not useful to calculate $G$ unless $I_S$ and $B$ are known or if the second term of the function of eq. (\ref{nose}) is negligible, as in this case ($B I_S \simeq 0.2 \mu S$). As a matter of fact, we find it suitable to apply the same least square nonlinear fitting routine using eq. (\ref{3parlow}) as the model equation. As the first term $GV$ gives an appreciable contribution only at very low values of $V$ we limit the experimental data up to a guess threshold current $I_0$. The value of the small signal conductance $G$ can be determined executing the corresponding numerical fit with three parameters, $I_s$, $B$ and $G$. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura4b.eps} \caption{\emph{I--V} data corresponding to the temperature $T= 47.8\, ^\circ C$ limited to $I < 20\, \mu A$. The continuous line is the result of the fit of experimental data (black square) with the model of eq. (\ref{3parlow}). The fitted parameters are $Is = 9.72\pm 0.17\, nA$ and $B = q/nkT = 20.30\pm 0.05 \,V^{-1}$ and $G= 2.75 \pm 0.01\, \mu S$.} \label{figura4} \end{figure} The result of the fitting procedure are shown graphically in Fig.~(\ref{figura4}) and the found values for parameters are reported in the caption. It is worth noting that $I_S$ and $B$ values are not in accordance with those extracted with the minimal model in the central range of the currents. This confirms that the calculated ideality factor $n$ depends on the part of the \emph{I--V} curve used in its evaluation. At the higher values of the diode current, the series resistance $R_s$ becomes important, while the admittance $G$ gives a negligible contribution. We may then rewrite eq. (\ref{model2}) as: \begin{equation} \label{3parhi} V(I) = \frac{1}{B}\log\left(\frac{I }{I_S}+1\right) + R_s I \end{equation} and it can be used as a fit model for the \emph{I--V} data at higher currents, giving the best values of the three parameters $I_S$, $B$ and $R_s$. The result is shown in Fig. (\ref{figura5}), and the found values for parameters are reported in the caption. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura5b.eps} \caption{\emph{I--V} data corresponding to the temperature $T= 47.8\, ^\circ C$ selected with $I > 20\, \mu A$. The continuous line is the result of the fit of experimental data (black square) with the model of eq. (\ref{3parhi}). The fitted parameters are $Is = 13.4\pm 0.12\, nA$ and $B = 19.78\pm 0.02 \, V^{-1}$ and $R_s= 2.32 \pm 0.03\, \Omega$.} \label{figura5} \end{figure} The values of the parameter $B$ are approximately coincident, by few percent, in the two parts of the curve and the coincidence is maintened by varying the value of $I_0$. The values of the saturation currents differ by the order of ten percent, and the agreement is better for higher temperatures. The value of $R_s$ is comparable with other measurements found in literature \cite{Omar}, although there the data is rather different from different sources (e.g. \cite{NXP}). We were not able to find a reliable value of $G$ for the 1N4148 diode in the literature. In conclusion, the two sets of parameters obtained by fitting data with model eq. (\ref{3parlow}) for the region $I<I_0$ and with model eq. (\ref{3parhi}) for the region $I>I_0$, where $I_0$ is of the order of tens of $\mu$A, show some discrepancies, so a better analysis for the complete range of current is needed. \subsection{Single iterative fitting procedure} The analysis presented in the previous paragraph clearly shows that the first term of eq. \ref{model2} is significant only in the very low current region (see Fig. (\ref{figura4})), while at higher currents the exponential term dominates and the second term alone is able to describe the experimental data well (see Fig. (\ref{figura5})). This physical argument is the starting point of a numerical procedure which allows us to consider all the data together, using an iterative calculation. We point out that by substituting $I_J = I - GV$ in the argument of the exponential of eq. \ref{model2}, an equation $I = f(I,V)$ could be written as the objective function of a fitting procedure suitable for models expressed in an implicit form. Nevertheless, this kind of algorithms is very complex and frequently suffer from numerical instabilities. Here we describe an alternative method, based on an iterative fitting procedure for models expressed in an explicit form, leading to the simultaneous determination of four parameters necessary to reproduce the DC diode characteristic in a large region of currents. This method can be summarized in a few steps, including the iteration described in the loop section, where $i$ is the flowing index, $I$, $I^i$ and $I_J^i$ are respectively the experiment values, computed values and computed junction values of the current: \begin{itemize} \item[\textbf{1}] The first few data at very low currents are used to compute a first guess $G^i$ ($i=0$) of the parallel conductance with a linear fit of the model $I = GV$. \item[\textbf{2}] \textbf{ BEGIN LOOP} Computing $I_J^i = I - G^i V$ gives the estimate of the junction current. \item[\textbf{3}] The explicit model $V=V(I_J)$ of eq. (\ref{3parhi}) is fitted with the data calculated at step 2 and the estimate of $I_s^i$, $B^i$ and $R_s^i$ is found. \item[\textbf{4}] Updated values of the junction current $I_J^{i+1}$ are found solving numerically eq. (\ref{3parhi}) with the measured $V$ and assuming the estimate of the three parameters $I_S^i$, $B^i$ and $R_s^i$. \item[\textbf{5}] Updated values of total current $I^{i+1}$ are computed as $I^{i+1} = G^i V + I_J^{i+1}$. \item[\textbf{6}] The first few data of $I^{i+1}$ are compared to $I$ to obtain the new value $G^{i+1}$: $I - I^{i+1} = \delta G V$, $G^{i+1} = G^i + \delta G $. \item[\textbf{8}] \textbf{END LOOP} The four parameters with index $i+1$ are compared to previous values: if the change is much less than the estimate of their errors the loop ends, otherwise it continues, returning to step 2. \end{itemize} After a few iterations the four parameters converge toward stable values and the procedure may be stopped. The final result is shown in the Fig.~(\ref{figfit}) where the agreement of the model with the experimental data is very good over the entire range. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura6.eps} \caption{\emph{I--V} data corresponding to the temperature $T= 47.8\, ^\circ C$. The line is the result of the iterative fitting procedure described in the text. The agreement is good in the full range of the currents considered with $Is = 10.5\pm 0.2\,$, $B =20.2 \pm 0.1 V^{-1}$, $R_s= 2.75 \pm 0.05\, \Omega$ and $G = 2.80 \pm 0.05\, \mu Si$.} \label{figfit} \end{figure} Table \ref{parmod} shows the extracted parameters with the different models presented, using data of a specific current region when needed. The last set is obtained by using the iterative fitting procedure. \begin{table}[!ht] \caption{Experimental parameters of the models for the \emph{I--V} data at $T= 47.8\, ^\circ C$} \label{parmod} \centering \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \bfseries &\bfseries G ($\mu$S)& \bfseries $R_s (\Omega)$& \bfseries $I_S$ (nA)& \bfseries B (V$^{-1}$) & \bfseries n \\ \hline Minimal model & - & - & 14.63 (0.16) & 19.48 (0.03) & 1.856 \\ Low $I$ (eq. (\ref{3parlow})) & 2.75 (0.01) & - & 9.72 (0.17) & 20.30 (0.05) & 1.783 \\ High $I$ (eq. (\ref{3parhi})) & - & 2.32 (0.03)& 13.4 (0.12) & 19.78 (0.02) & 1.830 \\ Full curve (eq. (\ref{model2})) & 2.80 (0.05) & 2.75 (0.05)& 10.5 (0.2) & 20.2 (0.1) & 1.790 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \subsection{Determination of energy band gap from temperature dependence of parameters} In this section we extract energy band gap from temperature dependence of $I_S$ parameter, fitting \emph{I--V} data taken at temperature between 10 and 100 $^\circ$C. $E_G$ is not explicitly present in the Shockley equation as it is enclosed only in the saturation current $I_S$; a more detailed expression of eq. (\ref{isconn}) is given by: \begin{equation} I_S = A T^2\exp{\left(-\frac{E_G}{nkT}\right)} \label{Richa} \end{equation} where $A$ depends on the geometry of the junction and the doping densities in the device. There are two counteracting effects of an increase of $n$ on the diode current. An increase of $n$ causes a decrease of the current $I$ in eq. (\ref{eq1}) the other parameters being fixed but, on the other hand, the same increase determines an increase of $I_S$, at a given temperature. Because of the larger value of $E_G$ with respect to the voltage across the junction, the effect on $I_S$ prevails and at fixed parameters, an increase of $n$ entails an increase of $I$. The need to consider the factor $1/n$ in the exponential in eq. (\ref{Richa}) can be justified by our data, by tracing the graph of $I_S$ as a function of temperature, as determined by the exponential fit. The result is shown in Fig.~(\ref{fig7}) where a large set of curves \emph{I--V}, taken in a two hour period, are analysed. The weak power dependence on $T$ can be neglected with respect to the exponential and the fit of the data is performed with the simplified model: $$ I_S = I_A\exp{\left(-E_G B\right)}$$ keeping the $B$ parameter defined above in the place of $e/nkT$ and expressing $E_G$ in $eV$. With this position the resulting parameters are $I_A = 68\pm 2\, A$ and $E_G = 1.117\pm 0.002\, eV$. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura7fra.eps} \caption{$I_S$ as a function of $B$ for 100 \emph{I--V} curves analysed with the iterative fitting procedure, described in the past subsection. The continuous curve represents the exponential \emph{fit} with the simplified dependence $I_S = I_A e^{-BE_G}$. The agreement is rather good and the best value of the parameters are $I_A = 68 \pm 2\, A$ and $E_G = 1.117 \pm 0.002\, eV$. The latter is in very close agreement with the tabulated value of the gap energy in Silicon at a temperature around 300 K.} \label{fig7} \end{figure} Other experiments using different data processing methods on Si \emph{p-n} junction assert a close agreement with the accepted \emph{band-gap} value of 1.12\, eV at 300 K. For example, \cite{Coll} report a value of 1.13 $\pm$ 0.02 eV, operating with the base-emitter junction of a Si bipolar transistor (2N3645 model), in the temperature interval $(-75, 25)\, ^\circ C$. It is not easy to find fabrication details of the 1N4148 diode and particularly information on the doping levels. Based exclusively on \cite{Orvis}, the 1N4148 is fabricated by growing a slightly doped ($<10^{16} \, cm^{-3}$) $n-type$ Si micro-metric layer onto an heavily doped substrate $n^+$ at dopant concentration of $10^{19}\, cm^{-3}$. On the other side of $n$-layer an acceptor dopant is then diffused forming a $p$ layer with doping density of $10^{19}\, cm^{-3}$. With these levels of dopant a \emph{band-gap narrowing} of several tens of meV is predicted and observed \cite{Lanyon} and could conveniently be taken into account to adjust the expected value of $E_G$. Our determination of $E_G$ is based on an approximate model but conceivably the $T^\delta$ factor in the $I_S(T)$ relation should be considered. It is easy to understand that as this factor increases with temperature, the simplified model underestimates diode current at higher temperatures and the characteristic constants of the exponential in function of $T$ lowers with respect to the value calculated without the exponential model: $$I_S(T) = AT^\delta e^{-BE_G}$$ We take $\delta = 1.5$, which is the common choice for many different diodes, and the best fit gives the value of 1.040 $\pm$ 0.005 eV for $E_G$. The best fit $A$ value results $A = 2.5\pm 0.2\, mA/K^{1.5}$. The two parameters are strongly correlated so that an overestimation of the exponential characteristic constant involves an underestimation of the factor $A$ and the $E_G$ value is 80 meV lower than the one expected and with the disposable literature data \cite{Dhari}. This could be explained in terms of a high doping level at $2$ to $3$ x $\, 10^{19}\, cm^{-3}$. \subsection{Determination of the band gap from \emph{V--T} data} For the evaluation of the energy band-gap, a different experimental procedure is more frequently followed (and also data analysis), consisting in the recording of $V$ at different temperatures at a fixed current $I$. It is possible to extract from our set of \emph{I--V} curves the $V\, vs. \, T$ pairs at fixed diode current $\overline{I}$. The data processing consists in a linear interpolation of the value of $V$ between adjacent experimental pairs $(V_i,I_{i})$ and $(V_{i+1},I_{i+1})$ with $I_i<\overline{I}<I_{i+1}$. It is customary to choose $\overline{I}$ in a region where the Shockley characteristic curve can be approximated by \[ \overline{I} = I_A\exp{\frac{V-eE_G}{nkT}} \] Taking the logarithm of both sides, a linear relation $T(V)$ is obtained: \begin{equation} \label{eq3} T = -aV+b \end{equation} with \[ a = \frac{1}{nk \log{\frac{I_A}{\overline{I}}}} \] and \[ b= \frac{eE_G}{nk\log{\frac{I_A}{\overline{I}}}} \] so that with a simple linear fit the best values of $a$ and $b$ are calculated and: \[ E_G (eV) = -\frac{b}{a} \] where the possible dependencies of $n$ and $I_A$ cancel each other out. The final result of this analysis is shown in Fig.(\ref{fig8}) where the linearity of $T(V)$ is corroborated and the best fit values give $E_G=1.161\pm 0.002$ eV for $\overline{I} = 20 \mu A$. The values do not depend significantly on the choice of $\overline{I}$ in the region of moderate currents. \begin{figure}[!ht] \centering \includegraphics{figura8.eps} \caption{$T$ as a function of $V$ as calculated interpolating (see text) the 100 \emph{I--V} curves analysed. The continuous curve represents the linear \emph{fit} $T = -aV + b$. $E_G =-b/a = 1.161\pm 0.002$ eV.} \label{fig8} \end{figure} The overestimation of the expected value of $E_G$ is quite common in experiments driven at constant current and based on the analysis of the $T-V$ dependence. For example, \cite{Fischer} reports a value of 1.18 $\pm$ 0.02 eV at 300 K for the 1N4007 Si diode and \cite{Precker2} a value of 1.23 eV for the 1N4181. A good agreement with the accepted values of $E_G$ extrapolated at 0 K is reported by \cite{Canivez} which reports 1.19 $\pm$ 0.02 eV for the base emitter junction in a 2N2222 transistor and \cite{Kirkup} (1.165 $\pm$ 0.002 eV) in a 2N930 transistor. Finally, in \cite{Ocaya2} the authors analyze the $(T,V)$ data of a diode 1N4148, taken at different values of $I$ with a reciprocal procedure that extracts the temperature dependence of the saturation current. Assuming a pure exponential model for $I_S$ they find a value $E_G = 1.04\pm 0.02$ eV in very good agreement with the result found with our first method. \section{Conclusion} We have presented a detailed analysis of the direct current-voltage characteristic of a silicon diode 1N4148. A simple numerical method, based on the standard non linear fitting algorithms used by MatLab or Octave languages, is used with models of increasing complexity. The entire procedure of measurement and modelling can be easily automated integrating the data collection performed in a LabVIEW environment with suitable numerical packages. The methodology used is relatively simple, and is suitable for an undergraduate science and engineering laboratory. The four parameters of the modified Shockley, represented in eq.(\ref{3parhi}), are extracted and their values are found in quite good agreement with the literature. The uncertainty analysis suggests that the accuracy of the approach presented here is comparable with other methods, and it is derived mainly from theoretical model than the statistical uncertainties, defect common to the majority of methods based on \emph{I--V} analysis and adopted in the current scientific and educational literature. The advantages of the method presented here rely on the possibility to extract model parameters from data collected on a large span of $I$ values, and to easily compare simpler models, normally adopted in undergraduate laboratories. Moreover, this analysis allows us to extract a value for $E_G$ within a few per cent in accordance with the accepted one, and the method is much more simple than the spectroscopic techniques which, furthermore, are also very difficult to be applied in a laboratory course. Finally, we showed that different methods of analysis of the data bring results which do not coincide with the expected one and are sometimes inconsistent. From an educational point of view, this is valuable as it warns the student against the pitfalls hidden in the choice of the fit procedures even with the same model and the same data. \section*{References}
\section{\hf INTRODUCTION} In their constant struggle with the environment, living cells of contemporary organisms employ a variety of highly sophisticated molecular mechanisms to deal with sudden changes in their surroundings. One often encountered environmental assault on cells is osmotic stress, where the amount of dissolved molecules in the extracellular environment drops suddenly \cite{christensen1987, hoffmann2009}. If left unchecked, this perturbation will result in a rapid flow of water into the cell through osmosis, causing it to swell, rupture, and die. To avoid this catastrophic outcome, even bacteria have evolved complex molecular machineries, such as mechanosensitive channel proteins, which allow them to release excess water from their interior \cite{berrier1996, blount1997, levina1999, wood1999}. This then raises an intriguing question of how might primitive cells, or cell-like artificial constructs, that lack the sophisticated protein machinery for osmosensing and osmoregulation, respond to such environmental insults and preserve their structural integrity. Using rudimentary cell-sized giant unilamellar vesicles (GUVs) devoid of proteins and consisting of amphiphilic lipids and cholesterol as models for simple protocells, we showed previously that vesicular compartments respond to osmotic assault created by the exposure to hypotonic media by undergoing a cyclical sequence of swelling and poration \cite{oglecka2014}. In each cycle, osmotic influx of water through the semi-permeable boundary swells the vesicles and renders the bounding membrane tense, which in turn, opens a microscopic transient pore, releasing some of the internal solutes before resealing. This swell-burst process, \revise{depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(A), }repeats multiple times producing a pulsating pattern in the size of the vesicle undergoing osmotic relaxation. From a dynamical point of view, this autonomous osmotic response results from an initial, far-from-equilibrium, thermodynamically unstable state generated by the sudden application of osmotic stress. The subsequent evolution of the system, characterized by the swell-burst sequences described above, occurs in the presence of a global constraint, namely constant membrane area, during a dissipation-dominated process \cite{peterlin2008, ho2016}. The study of osmotic response of lipid vesicles has a rich history in theoretical biophysics, beginning with the pioneering work by Koslov \& Markin \cite{koslov1984}, who provided some of the early theoretical foundations of osmotic swelling of lipid vesicles. In this work, they predicted that the response of a sub-micrometer sized vesicles to osmotic stress is likely pulsatile and due to the formation of successive transient pores (see Fig.~9, in \cite{koslov1984}, for a schematic for the volume change of the vesicle over time). They further approximated the characteristic quantities of swell-burst cycles (e.g. swelling time, critical volumes), based on the probability of the membrane overcoming the nucleation energy barrier to form a pore. Independently, the dynamics of a single transient pore in a tense membrane were first theorized by Litster \cite{litster1975}, and later investigated theoretically and experimentally by Brochard-Wyart and coworkers \cite{sandre1999, brochard-wyart2000}. Idiart \& Levin \cite{idiart2004} combined the osmotic swelling theory and pore dynamics, and calculated the dynamics of a pulsatile behavior assuming a constant lytic tension. These modeling efforts made great strides in our understanding of some of the essential physics underlying vesicle responses to osmotic stress. Previously, we used these ideas to provide a qualitative interpretation of pulsatile behavior of GUVs (see schematics in \cite{oglecka2014} Fig.~7h,i). However a general framework that quantitatively describes the response of pulsatile vesicles to osmotic stress at all relevant time scales is still missing. The success of such a model must rely on (a) the integration of vesicle dynamics, pore dynamics with nucleation, and long-time solute concentration dynamics within a unified framework, and (b) the assessment of the model predictions with respect to experimental measurements, in order to establish the physical relevance of the essential parameters that govern the system dynamics. Here, we build on the findings and theories reported previously \cite{ litster1975, koslov1984, brochard-wyart2000, idiart2004, evans2003, ryham2011} to develop such a quantitative model for the dynamics of swell-burst cycles in giant lipid vesicles subject to osmotic stress. In analyzing the pulsatile dynamics of GUVs, a number of general questions naturally arise: (i) Is the observed condition for membrane poration deterministic or stochastic? (ii) Is poration controlled by a unique value of membrane tension (\textit{i.e.} lytic tension) introduced by the area-volume changes, which occur during osmotic influx, or does it involve coupling of the membrane response to thermal fluctuations? (iii) Does the critical lytic tension depend on the strain rate, and thus the strength of the osmotic gradient? Such questions arise beyond the present context of vesicle osmoregulation in other important scenarios where the coupling between the dissipation of osmotic energy and cellular compartmentalization has important biological ramifications \cite{rand2004, diz-munoz2013, stroka2014, porta2015}. Motivated by these considerations, we carried out a combined theoretical-experimental study integrating membrane elasticity, continuum transport, and statistical thermodynamics. We gathered quantitative experimental data to address the questions above, and developed a general model that recapitulates the essential qualitative features of the experimental observations, emphasizes the importance of dynamics, and places the heretofore neglected contribution of thermal fluctuations in driving osmotic response of stressed vesicular compartments. \section{\hf MATERIALS AND METHODS} The detailed materials and methods used in this work are available in Supporting Materials and Methods in the Supporting Material. The experimental configuration is similar to that already described \cite{angelova1992, oglecka2014}. Briefly, we prepared GUVs consisting essentially of a single amphiphile, namely 1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-1-glycero-3-phosphocholine (POPC), doped with a small concentration (1~mol$\%$) of a fluorescently labeled phospholipid (1,2-dipalmitoyl -sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-(lissamine rhodamine B sulfonyl)) or Rho-DPPE using standard electroformation technique \cite{angelova1992}. The GUVs thus obtained were typically between 7 and 20~$\mu$m in radius, encapsulated 200~mM sucrose, and were suspended in the isotonic glucose solution of identical osmolarity. Diluting the extra-vesicular dispersion medium with deionized water produces a hypotonic bath depleted in osmolytes, subjecting the GUVs to osmotic stress. Shortly ($\sim$1~min delay) after subjecting the GUVs to the osmotic differential, GUVs were monitored using time-lapse epifluorescence microscopy at a rate of 1~image per 150~ms, and images were analyzed using a customized MATLAB code to extract the evolution of the GUV radii with time, with a precision of about 0.1~$\mu$m. We developed a mathematical model predicting the pulsatile behavior of GUVs in hypotonic environment. Essentially, the model couples pore nucleation by thermal fluctuations, osmotic swelling, and solute transport. These aspects are represented by Eqs.~\ref{eq:sde_r}, \ref{eq:ode_R} and \ref{eq:ode_c} respectively, and discussed below. Details regarding the theory and its numerical implementation are reported in Model Development and Simulations in the Supporting Materials. \section{\hf RESULTS} \subsection{\hf Homogeneous GUVs display swell-burst cycles in hypotonic conditions} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig_cycles_exp} \caption{Homogeneous giant unilamellar vesicles (GUVs) made of POPC with 1 mol $\%$ Rho-DPPE exhibit swell-burst cycles when subject to hypotonic conditions. (A) Schematic of a swell-burst cycle of a homogeneous GUV under hypotonic conditions. Blue arrows represent the leak-out of the inner solution through the transient pore. (B) Micrographs of a swelling (left), ruptured (middle) and resealed (right) GUVs. Scale bar represents 10 $\mu$m. Pictures extracted from Movie~S1 in the Supporting Material. (C) Typical evolution of a GUV radius with time during swell-burst cycles in 200~mM sucrose hypotonic conditions. The GUV radius increases continuously during swelling phases, and drops abruptly when bursting events occur. Pore opening events are indicated by red triangles. Dashed line represents the estimated initial radius $R_0$. See also Movie~S2 in the Supporting Material. More GUV radius measurements are shown in Fig.~S\ref{figS_exp} in the Supporting Material. (D) Experimental area strain \revise{$\epsilon_\text{exp}$ as a function of time}. } \label{fig1} \end{figure} A selection of snapshots, revealing different morphological states, and a detailed trace showing \revise{the time-dependence of the vesicle radius $R$ and corresponding area strain ($\epsilon_\text{exp}=(R^2-R_0^2)/R_0^2$, where and $R_0$ is the resting initial vesicle radius) are shown} in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(B, C, and D), for a representative GUV. Swelling phases are characterized by a quasi-linear increase of the GUV radius, while pore openings cause a sudden decrease of the vesicle radius. We outline here three key observations about the dynamics of swell-burst cycles from these experiments. \begin{enumerate} \item The period between two consecutive bursting events increases with each cycle, starting from a few tenths of a second for the early cycles, to several hundreds of seconds after the tenth cycle. \item The maximum radius and therefore the maximum strain at which a pore opens decreases with cycle number, suggesting that lytic tension is a dynamic property of the membrane. \item The observed transient pores are short lived, stay open for about a hundred milliseconds, and reach a maximum radius of up to 60~$\%$ of the GUV radius. \end{enumerate} We seek to explain these observations through a quantitative understanding of the pulsatile GUVs in hypotonic conditions. To do so, we first investigate the mechanics of pore nucleation and its relationship to the GUV swell-burst dynamics. \subsection{\hf Thermal fluctuations drive the dynamics of pore nucleation} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig_fluctuations} \caption{Lytic tension is a dynamic quantity governed by thermodynamic fluctuations. (A) The energy required to open a pore of radius $r$ in a GUV without fluctuations, for various membrane tensions. The energetic cost to open a pore in a tense GUV shows a local maximum, which has to be overcome in order for a pore to open. (B) For a given strain $\epsilon$, the energy barrier is located at a pore radius \revise{$r_b=\gamma/\sigma(\epsilon)=\gamma/(\kappa_\text{eff}\epsilon)$ (where $\kappa_\text{eff}=2\times 10^{-3}$ N/m as discussed in the text)}. (C and E) If the critical strain is fixed at a constant value, $\epsilon^$, as in the deterministic approach, then a pore is nucleated whenever the strain reaches $\epsilon^$, regardless of the the strain rate. Prescribing various linear strain rate ($\epsilon = \dot{\epsilon}t + \epsilon_0$, with $\dot{\epsilon}=10^{-2}$, $10^{-3}$, and $10^{-4}$ s$^{-1}$, $\epsilon_0=0.05$) does not alter the strain at which a pore will form (C) and the pore nucleation radius $r_b$ will be constant (E). (D and F) In the stochastic approach however, the nucleation threshold is replaced by a fluctuating pore \revise{(blue line in (F) as computed by Eq.~\eqref{eq:sde_r})}, inducing a dependence of the lytic strain on the strain rate (D). This is due to the fact that, for lower strain rates, the probability of a large pore fluctuation to reach $r_b$ is higher (F), producing a lower lytic tension on average.} \label{fig2} \end{figure} \revise{ In the framework of classical nucleation theory \cite{litster1975}, the energy potential $V(r,\epsilon)$ of a pore of radius $r$ in a lipid membrane under surface tension $\sigma$, is the balance of two competitive terms: $V_s(\epsilon)$, the strain energy, and $V_p(r)$, the pore energy. The strain energy tends to favor the opening and enlargement of the pore while the pore closure is driven by the pore line tension $\gamma$. Accordingly, the energy potential reads} \begin{align} V(r,\epsilon)=&V_s(\epsilon) + V_p(r) \nonumber\\ =&\dfrac{1}{2}\kappa_\text{eff} A_0 \epsilon^2 + 2\pi r \gamma \;. \end{align} \revise{The area strain is defined as $\epsilon=(A-A_0)/A_0$, where $A=4\pi R^2-\pi r^2$ is the surface of the membrane, and $A_0=4\pi R_0^2$ is the resting vesicle area. Here $V_s(\epsilon)$ is assumed to have a Hookean form, where $\kappa_\text{eff}$ is the effective stretching modulus, which relates the surface tension to the strain as $\sigma=\kappa_\text{eff}\epsilon$ (see next section for a discussion on $\kappa_\text{eff}$). These two energetic terms oppose each other, resulting in an energy barrier that the system has to overcome in order for a pore to nucleate. The competition between the strain and pore energy is expressed by the ratio $r_b=\gamma/\sigma$, which is the critical radius associated with the crossing of the energy barrier. That is, if a pore in a tensed membrane has a radius $r<r_b$, the pore energy $V_p(r)$ dominates and the pore closes. On the contrary, for $r>r_b$, the strain energy $V_s(\epsilon)$ prevails and the pore grows. The energy required to open a pore of radius $r$ in a tensed GUV is given by $\Delta V(r,\epsilon) = V(r,\epsilon)-V(0,\epsilon)$ and is represented in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(A). The corresponding critical radius of the the energy barrier $r_b$ is shown as a function of the strain $\epsilon$ in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(B). The height of the energy barrier and its critical radius are dependent on the membrane strain; the more the membrane is stretched, the lower the energy barrier is, and the smaller the amount of energy required to nucleate a pore. } The amplitude of this energy barrier is strictly positive for finite strain values, making pore nucleation impossible without the addition of external energy. This issue has been often resolved by assuming a predetermined and \textit{constant} lytic \revise{strain ($\epsilon^$)} corresponding to a critical energy barrier under which the pore opens (Fig.~\ref{fig2}(C and E)). However, this approach is in contradiction with our experimental observations that the lytic strain in the membrane varies with each swell-burst cycle (Fig.~\ref{fig1}(D)), due to a dependence on the strain rate \cite{evans2003}. In order to account for this variation, we included thermal fluctuations associated with the pore nucleation barrier in our analysis \cite{ting2011, bicout2012}. In this scenario, increasing the membrane tension of the vesicle reduces the minimum pore radius $r_b$ at which a pore opens (Fig.~\ref{fig2}(A and B)), lowering the energy barrier down to the range of thermal fluctuations, eventually letting the free energy of the system to overcome the nucleation barrier (Fig.~\ref{fig2}(D and F)). The stochastic nature of the fluctuations can then explain a distribution of pore opening tensions, eliminating the need to assume constant lytic tension. A direct consequence of the fluctuation-mediated pore nucleation is that the membrane rupture properties become dynamic. Indeed, fluctuations naturally cause the strain at which the membrane ruptures to be dependent on the \textit{strain rate}, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(D). In order to understand this dynamic nucleation process, consider stretching the membrane at different strain rates $\dot{\epsilon}$. Doing so decreases the radius of the nucleation barrier at corresponding speeds, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(F). For slow strain rates, as $r_b$ tends to zero, it spends more time in the accessible range of the thermal pore fluctuations, increasing the probability that a fluctuation will overcome the energy barrier. On the other hand, at faster strain rates, $r_b$ decreases quickly, reaching small values in less time, lowering the probability for above average fluctuations to occur during this shorter time. We use a Langevin equation to capture the stochastic nature of pore nucleation and the subsequent pore dynamics. This equation includes membrane viscous dissipation, a conservative force arising from the membrane potential, friction with water, and thermal fluctuations for pore nucleation (see Model Development and Simulations in the Supporting Material for detailed derivation). This yields the stochastic differential equation for the pore radius $r$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:sde_r} \overbrace{\left(h \eta_m + C \eta_s r\right)}^{\mathclap{\text{viscous drag}}} \underbrace{\frac{d}{dt}(2\pi r)}_{\mathclap{\text{change of pore radius}}} = \overbrace{2\pi \left(\sigma r-\gamma\right)}^{\mathclap{\substack{\text{surface and}\\\text{line tension}}}} + \underbrace{\xi(t)}_{\mathclap{\substack{\text{thermal}\\\text{pore fluctuations}}}} \;, \end{equation} where the noise source $\xi(t)$ has zero mean and satisfies, $\langle \xi(t)\xi(t^\prime) \rangle = 2\left(h \eta_m + C \eta_s r\right) k_B T \delta(t-t^\prime)$ according to the fluctuation dissipation theorem \cite{kubo1966}. Here, $\eta_m$ and $\eta_s$ are the membrane and solute viscosities respectively, $h$ is the membrane thickness, $C$ is a geometric coefficient \cite{ryham2011, aubin2016}, $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant and $T$ is the temperature. \revise{We assume here that the pore nucleation probability is independent on the total membrane surface area.} The values of the different parameters used in the model are given in Table~S\ref{tab_parameters} in the Supporting Material. \subsection{\hf Model captures experimentally observed pulsatile GUV behavior} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig_cycles_num} \caption{Dynamics of swell-burst cycles from the model for a GUV of radius 14~$\mu$m in 200 mM hypotonic stress. (A and C) GUV radius and (B and D) pore radius as a function of time. The model captures the dynamics of multiple swell-burst cycles, in particular the decrease of maximum GUV radius and increase of cycle period with cycle number (A). Looking closely at a single pore opening event corresponding to the grey region, the model predicts three stage pore dynamics (C and D), namely opening, closing, and resealing, with a characteristic time of a few hundred milliseconds. Numerical reconstruction of the GUV is shown in Movies~S3 and~S4 in the Supporting Material. Results for $R_0=8$ and 20~$\mu$m are shown in Fig.~S\ref{figS_R} in the Supporting Material.} \label{fig3} \end{figure} In addition to pore dynamics (Eq.~\ref{eq:sde_r}), we need to consider mass conservation of the solute and the solvent. We assume that the GUV remains spherical at all times and neglect spatial effects. The GUV volume changes because of osmotic influx through the semi-permeable membrane and the leak-out of the solvent through the pore. The osmotic influx is the result of two competitive pressures, the osmotic pressure driven by the solute differential ($\Delta p_{osm} = k_B T N_A \Delta c$), and the Laplace pressure, arising from the membrane tension ($\Delta p_L = 2\sigma / R$), resulting in the following equation for the GUV radius $R$: \begin{equation} \label{eq:ode_R} \underbrace{\frac{d}{dt}\left( \frac{4}{3}\pi R^3 \right)}_{\mathclap{\text{change of GUV volume}}} = \overbrace{\frac{P \nu_s }{k_B T N_A} \left( \Delta p_{osm} - \Delta p_L \right) A}^{\substack{\text{influx of solvent}\\\text{ through the membrane} }} - \underbrace{ v_L \pi r^2}_{\mathclap{\substack{\text{leak-out}\\\text{through the pore}}}} \;. \end{equation} Here $A=4\pi R^2$ is the membrane area, $P$ is the membrane permeability to the solvent, $\nu_s$ is the solvent molar volume, and $N_A$ is the Avogadro number. Assuming low Reynolds number regime, the leak-out velocity is given by $ v_L = \Delta p_L r / (3\pi\eta_s)$ \cite{happel1983, aubin2016}. Mass conservation of solute in the GUV is governed by the diffusion of sucrose and convection of the solution through the pore, which gives the governing equation for the solute concentration differential $\Delta c$: \begin{equation} \label{eq:ode_c} \underbrace{\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{4}{3}\pi R^3 \Delta c \right)}_{\mathclap{\substack{\text{molar differential}\\\text{of solute}}}} = -\pi r^2 \bigg( \overbrace{D \frac{\Delta c}{R}}^{\mathclap{\substack{\text{diffusion through}\\\text{the pore}}}} + \underbrace{v_L\Delta c}_{\mathclap{\substack{\text{convection}\\\text{through the pore}}}} \bigg) \;, \end{equation} where $D$ is the solute diffusion coefficient. These three coupled equations (Eqs.~\ref{eq:sde_r} to \ref{eq:ode_c}) constitute the mathematical model. In order to completely define the system, we need to specify the relationship between the membrane surface tension $\sigma$ and the area strain of the GUV. We note that the GUV has irregular contours during the pore opening event and for a short time afterwards, when ``nodules" are observed at the opposite end from the pore, indicating accumulation of excess membrane generated by pore formation (Fig.~\ref{fig1}(B) middle and right panels). In the low tension regime, GUVs swell by unfolding these membrane nodules, and the stretching is controlled by the membrane bending modulus $\kappa_b$ and thermal energy, yielding an effective ``unfolding modulus" $\kappa_u = 48\pi\kappa_b^2 / (R_0^2k_BT)$ of the order of 10$^{-5}$ N/m \cite{brochard1976}. In contrast, in the high tension regime, elastic stretching is dominant, and the elastic area expansion modulus $\kappa_e$ is roughly equal to 0.2 N/m \cite{evans1990}. Since the maximum area strain plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(D), is about 15~$\%$, significantly larger than the expected 4~$\%$ for a purely elastic membrane deformation, the experimental data suggests the occurrence of two stretching regimes: an unfolding driven stretching, and an elasticity driven stretching \cite{ertel1993, hallett1993, karatekin2003a}. \revise{Therefore, for simplicity, we assume an effective stretching modulus $\kappa_\text{eff}$, which takes into account both unfoldoing and elastic regimes \cite{evans1990, bloom1991} through a linear dependence between the membrane tension and the strain ($\sigma = \kappa_\text{eff} \epsilon$). Note that $\kappa_\text{eff}$ is the only adjustable parameter of the model.} We solved the three coupled equations (Eqs.~\ref{eq:sde_r} to \ref{eq:ode_c}) for an initial inner solute concentration of $c_0=200$~mM, and different GUV radii of $R_0=8$, 14 and 20~$\mu$m. All the results presented here are obtained for $\kappa_\text{eff}=2 \times10^{-3}$N/m, the value that best fits the experimental observations (see Supplemental Fig.~\ref{figS_kappa} for the effect of this parameter on the GUV dynamics). Dynamics of the GUV radius and the pore radius are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3} for a typical simulation with $R_0=14$~$\mu$m (see Supplemental Fig.~\ref{figS_R} for simulations with different values of $R_0$). Our model qualitatively reproduces the dynamics of the GUV radius during the swell burst cycle (compare Figs.~\ref{fig1}(C) and \ref{fig3}(A)). Importantly, we recover the key features of the swell-burst cycle -- namely an increase of the cycle period with each bursting event (point 1), and a decrease of the maximum radius with time (point 2). The stochastic nature of the thermodynamic fluctuations leads to variations and irregularities in the pore opening events, and therefore, the cycle period and maximum strain. The dynamics of a single cycle is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(C and D). Our numerical results show an abrupt drop in the GUV radius, followed by a slower decrease, suggesting a sequence of two leak-out regimes: a fast-burst releasing most of the membrane tension, and a low tension leak-out. This two-step tension release is confirmed by the pore radius dynamics, which after suddenly opening (release of membrane tension), reseals quasi-linearly due to dominance of line tension compared to membrane tension in Eq.~\ref{eq:sde_r}. Furthermore, the computed pore amplitude and lifetime are in agreement with experimental observations (point 3). Overall, our model is able to reproduce the quantitative features of GUV response to hypotonic stress over multiple time scales. If thermal fluctuations are ignored, the strain to rupture needs to be adjusted to roughly 15$\%$ in order to match the range of maximum GUV radius observed experimentally (Fig.~S\ref{figS_det} in the Supporting Material). However such a deterministic model does not capture the pulsatile dynamics as well as the stochastic model in terms of cycle period and strain rate (Fig.~S\ref{figS_comparison} in the Supporting Material), and fails to reproduce a strain rate dependent maximum stress (Fig.~S\ref{figS_det}). \subsection{\hf Solute diffusion is dominant during the low tension regime of pore resealing} \begin{figure}[tbp] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig_efflux} \caption{\revise{Diffusion of sucrose through the transient pore produces a step-wise decrease of the inner solute concentration. (A) In hypotonic conditions, the model predicts a step-wise decrease of solute concentration differential with time (blue line), which is solely due to diffusion of solute through the transient pore. In comparison, when diffusion is neglected in the model (grey line), the solute concentration differential decreases smoothly (also see Fig.~S\ref{figS_D} in the Supporting Material for further analysis on the effect of diffusion). In isotonic conditions (dashed line), the solute concentration differential is constant with time. (Here $t_0=$ 40 s).} (B) Time evolution of the normalized fluorescence intensity of a GUV in hypotonic condition, encapsulating fluorescent glucose analog. $\Delta I$ is the difference in mean intensity between the inside of the GUV and the background. In hypotonic conditions (solid lines) the normalized intensity decreases with time due to the constant influx of water through the membrane, and shows sudden drops in intensity at each pore opening (indicated by arrows), due to diffusion of sucrose through the pore (see Movie~S5 in the Supporting Material). In comparison, GUVs in an isotonic environment (dashed lines) exhibit a rather constant fluorescence intensity (see Movie~S6 in the Supporting Material). (C) Micrographs of a GUV in hypotonic condition, encapsulating fluorescent glucose analog, just prior to bursting (left panel), with an open pore (middle panel), and just after pore resealing (right panel). The leak-out of fluorescent dye is observed in the middle frame, coinciding with a drop of the GUV radius. Frames extracted from Movie~S7 in the Supporting Material. (D) Same as panel (C), with the images processed to increase contrast and attenuate noise. The blue, red, and white lines are the isocontours of the 90, 75, and 60 grey scale values respectively, highlighting the leak-out of fluorescent dye.} \label{fig4} \end{figure} The concentration differential of sucrose decreases exponentially and drops from 200 mM to about 10 mM in about 1000 seconds (Fig.~S\ref{figS_R} in the Supporting Material). Even after 2000 s when the concentration differential is as low as 10~mM, the osmotic influx is still large enough to maintain the dynamics of swell-burst cycles (Fig.~\ref{fig1}(C), Fig.~S\ref{figS_R}). We further observe that every pore opening event produces a sudden drop in inner solute concentration (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(A), blue line). This suggests that diffusion of sucrose plays an important role in governing the dynamics of solute. In the absence of diffusive effects, the model does not show the abrupt drops in concentration but a rather smooth exponential decay (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(A), grey line). To experimentally verify the model predictions of sucrose dynamics, we quantified the evolution of fluorescence intensity in GUVs encapsulating 200 mM sucrose plus 58.4 $\mu$M 2-NBDG, a fluorescent glucose analog (see Supporting Material and Methods). Fig.~\ref{fig4}(B) presents the evolution of fluorescent intensity of sucrose in time. GUVs in isotonic conditions (dashed lines) do not show a significant change in fluorescence intensity. GUVs in hypotonic conditions (solid lines) exhibit an overall decrease of intensity due to permeation of water through the membrane. Strikingly, consecutive drops of fluorescence intensity are observed coinciding with the pore opening events (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(C and D) middle panels), and point out the importance of sucrose diffusion through the pore. While the quantitative dynamics of sucrose depends on the value of the diffusion constant (Fig.~S\ref{figS_D}), the qualitative effect of diffusion on the dynamics remains unchanged. On the other hand, leak-out induced convection does not influence the inner concentration of sucrose, as both solvent and solute are convected, conserving their relative amounts. These observations are in agreement with the existence of the low tension pore closure regime discussed above, where Laplace pressure produces negligible convective transport compared to solute diffusion though the pore. \subsection{\hf Cycle period and strain rate are explicit functions of the cycle number and GUV properties} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig_comparison_1} \caption{Cycle period and strain rate are exponential functions of cycle number, and power-law functions of solute concentration. (A, C) Cycle period and (B, D) strain rates as functions of cycle number ($n$) (A, B) and solute concentration (C, D). Insets show the same data in log scale. Each model point is the mean of 10 numerical experiments, error bars represent $\pm$ standard deviations. The analytical expressions for the \revise{cycle period and strain rate (Eq.~\eqref{eq:cycle_period})} with $\epsilon^=0.15$, are plotted in (C, D) for comparison. } \label{fig5_1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig_comparison_2} \caption{The pulsatile dynamics is characterized by the characteristic time-scale $\tau$. The data from Fig.~\ref{fig5_1} are scaled by the characteristic time associated with swelling defined as \revise{$\tau$}. Insets show the same data in log scale. The non-dimensionalization by $\tau$ allows cycle periods and the strain rates to collapse onto a single curve. (C, D) The analytical expressions for the \revise{cycle period and strain rate (Eq.~\eqref{eq:cycle_period})} with $\epsilon^=0.15$, are plotted for comparison. } \label{fig5_2} \end{figure} Given that lytic tension is a dynamic quantity, we asked how cycle period and strain rate evolve along with the cycles. We analyzed the simulated dynamics of GUVs with resting radii of 8, 14 and 20$\mu m$, each data point representing the mean and the standard deviation of 10 simulations with identical parameters (the variations being due to the stochastic nature of the model). \revise{The details of this burst cycle analysis is reported in the Supporting Material}. Cycle periods and strain rates show a dependence on the GUV radius, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig5_1} where larger GUVs have slower dynamics, resulting in smaller strain rates and longer cycle periods (Fig.~S\ref{figS_R}). To verify this experimentally, a total of eight GUVs were similarly analyzed with resting radii ranging from 7.02 to 18.76 $\mu$m (Fig.~S\ref{figS_exp} in the Supporting Material). The measured cycle period and strain rate as a function of the cycle number (corrected for the lag between the application of the hypotonic stress and the beginning of the observations) are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5_1}(A) and (B), respectively. Experimental and model results quantitatively agree, and show a exponential dependence of the cycle period and strain rate on cycle number (Insets Fig.~\ref{fig5_1}(A and B)). Two further questions arise: How can we relate the cycle number to the driving force of the process, namely the osmotic differential? And, is there a scaling law that governs the GUV swell-burst dynamics? To answer these questions we computed the cycle solute concentration (defined as the solute concentration at the beginning of each cycle) as a function of the cycle number (Fig.~S\ref{figS_cn} in the Supporting Material). We found that the solute concentration follows an exponential decay function of the cycle number, and is independent of the GUV radius. Additionally, plotting the cycle period and strain rate against the cycle solute concentration (Fig.~\ref{fig5_1}(C and D)), we observe that the cycle period increases as $\Delta c$ decreases, while the strain rate is a linear function of $\Delta c$. The data presented in Fig.~\ref{fig5_1} suggest that the dynamics of GUVs swell-burst cycle can be scaled to their size. From the non-dimensional form of Eq.~\ref{eq:ode_R}, we extracted a characteristic time associated with swelling, defined by $\tau = R_0 / (P \nu_s c_0)$, and scaled the cycle period and strain rates with this quantity. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5_2}, all the scaled experimental and model data collapse onto the same curve, within the range of the standard deviations. The scaled relationships can be justified analytically, by estimating the cycle period and strain rates as \revise{ \begin{equation} \label{eq:cycle_period} \frac{ T_n}{\tau} \simeq \frac{\epsilon^}{\left( 2\sqrt{\epsilon^+1} \Delta c/c_0 \right)} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \tau \dot{\epsilon} \simeq \frac{2\sqrt{\epsilon^+1} \Delta c}{c_0} \end{equation} } respectively (see Supporting Material for full derivation). These analytical expressions are plotted in Figs.~\ref{fig5_1}(C, D) and \ref{fig5_2}(C, D) for a characteristic lytic strain of $\varepsilon^=0.15$, showing good agreement with the numerical data. Taken together, these results suggest that the GUV pulsatile dynamics is governed by the radius, the membrane permeability, the solute concentration, and importantly the stochastic pore nucleation mechanism which determines the strain to rupture. \section{\hf DISCUSSION} Explaining how membrane-enclosed compartments regulate osmotic stress is a first step towards understanding how cells control volume homeostasis in response to environmental stressors. In this work, we have used a combination of theory, computation, and experiments in a simple model system to study how swell-burst cycles control the dynamics of GUV response to osmotic stress. Using this system, we show that the pulsatile dynamics of GUVs under osmotic stress is controlled through thermal fluctuations that govern pore nucleation and lytic tension. The central feature of a GUV's osmotic response is the nucleation of a pore. Even though Evans and coworkers \cite{evans2003, evans2011} identified that rupture tension was not governed by an intrinsic critical stress, but rather by the load rate, the idea of a constant lytic tension has persisted in the literature \cite{idiart2004, popescu2008, peterlin2008}. By coupling fluctuations to pore energy, we have now reconciled the dynamics of the GUV over several swell-burst cycles with pore nucleation and dependence on strain rate. Our model is not only able to capture the experimentally observed pulsatile dynamics of GUV radius and solute concentration (Figs.~\ref{fig3} and \ref{fig4}), but also predicts pore formation events and pore dynamics (Fig.~\ref{fig3}(B and D)). We also found that during the pore opening event, a low-tension regime enables a diffusion dominated transport of solute through the pore (Fig.~\ref{fig4}), a feature that has been until now neglected in the literature. Specifically, we have identified a scaling relationship between (a) the cycle period and cycle number and (b) the strain rate and the cycle number, highlighting that swell-burst cycles of the GUVs in response to hypotonic stress is a dynamic response (Fig.~\ref{fig5_2}). One of the key features of the model is that we relate the cycle number, an experimentally observable quantity, to the concentration difference of the solute, a quantity that is hard to measure in experiments (Fig.~S\ref{figS_cn}). This allows to interpret the scaling relationships described above in terms of solute concentration differential. The cycle period increases as the solute concentration difference decreases, while the strain rate is a linear function of the concentration difference. Both relationships are derived theoretically in the Supplemental material. These features indicate long time scale relationships of pulsatile vesicles in osmotic stress. Thermal fluctuations and stochasticity are known to play diverse roles in cell biology. Well-recognized examples include Brownian motors and pumps \cite{julicher1997, oster2002}, noisy gene expression \cite{elowitz2002}, and red blood cell flickering \cite{turlier2016}. The pulsatile vesicles presented here provide yet another example of how fluctuations can be utilized by simple systems to produce dynamical adaptive behavior. Given the universality of fluctuations in biological processes, it appears entirely reasonable that simple mechanisms similar to these pulsatile vesicles may have been exploited by early cells, conferring them with a thermodynamic advantage against environmental osmotic assaults. On the other hand, if such swell-burst mechanisms were at play, the chronic leak-out of inner content could have led protocells to evolve active transport mechanisms to compensate for volume loss, and endure osmotic stress without a high energetic cost. In this study, we experimentally measure the dynamics of swell-burst cycles in GUVs, and provide for the first time a model that captures quantitatively the pulsatile behavior of GUVs under hypotonic conditions for long time scales. In order to do so, we developed a general framework which integrated parts of existing models \cite{koslov1984, brochard-wyart2000, ryham2011}, with novel key elements: (a) the explicit inclusion of thermal pore fluctuations, which enables dynamic pore nucleation; (b) the definition of an effective stretching modulus, which combines membrane unfolding and elastic stretching; (c) the incorporation of solute diffusion through the pore, which results in a non-trivial contribution to the evolution of the osmotic differential. The coupling of these key features results in a unified model that is valid in all regimes of the vesicle, pore, and solute dynamics. While we have been able to explain many fundamental features of the pulsatile GUVs in response to osmotic stress, our approach has some limitations and there is a need for further experiments. We have assumed a linear relationship between stress and strain. Although this assumption is reasonable and appears to work well for the present experimental conditions, a more general expression should be considered to include both membrane (un)folding and elastic deformation \cite{helfrich1984}. Another important aspect of biological relevance is membrane composition, where the abundance of proteins and heterogeneous composition leading to in-plane order and asymmetry across leaflets influence the membrane mechanics \cite{alberts2014, rangamani2014}. We have previously found experimentally that the dynamics of swell-burst cycles is related to the compositional degrees of freedom of the membrane \cite{oglecka2014}. Future efforts will be oriented toward the development of theoretical framework and quantitative experimental measures that provide insight into how the membrane's compositional degrees of freedom influence the pulsatile dynamics of cell-size vesicles. \revise{In addition to osmotic response and membrane composition, we will focus on how membrane components such as aquaporins and ion channels may couple thermal fluctuations with membrane tension to regulate their functions. Additionally, we are also investigating how the properties of the encapsulated bulk fluid phase may affect the response of the GUV in response to osmotic shock. The current work is a first and critical step in these directions. } \section{\hf AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS} J.C.S.H. and A.N.P. designed the experiments; J.C.S.H. performed the experiments; M.C. and P.R. derived the model; M.C. performed the simulations; M.C. and J.C.S.H. analyzed the data; all authors discussed and interpreted results; all authors wrote and agreed on the manuscript. \section{\hf ACKNOWLEDGMENTS} We are grateful to Prof. Wouter-Jan Rappel and Prof. Alex Mogilner for insightful comments on the manuscript. We also thank Prof. Daniel Tartakovsky for enriching discussions. This work was supported in part by the FISP 3030 for the year 2015-2016 to M.C., NTU provost office to J.C.S.H., AFOSR FA9550-15-1-0124 award to P.R., and NSF PHY-1505017 award to P.R. and A.N.P. \bibliographystyle{biophysj}
\section{Introduction} The uniformization theorem says that if $G$ is a split semisimple group over a field $k$ then any $G$ bundle on a smooth affine curve is trivial. In this form the result goes back to a 1967 result of Harder \cite{HarMR0225785} which proves it for $G$ bundles over a Dedekind domain. In more recent work, Beauville and Laszlo \cite{BeaLasMR1289330} and Drinfeld and Simpson \cite{DSMR1362973} generalized the result to triviality of bundles over families of smooth affine curves; see also Teleman \cite{TelMR1646586} for $k = \mathbb{C}$. There is also a version of uniformization for torsors for a non constant group scheme due to Heinloth. Recently Belkale and Fakhruddin have generalized the result to singular curves \cite{BelFak}. In this paper we first prove a special case of uniformization for nodal curves, theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect}. We apply \ref{thm:trivNodalSect} to construct a relative compactification of the moduli of $G$-bundle over a family of smooth curves degenerating to a nodal curve. Theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect} is implied by \cite[thm\;1.4]{BelFak} thus the main contribution of this work is to the application of compactification of moduli of $G$-bundles on nodal curves. To explain the application we give some more background on uniformization. The families version of uniformization relates three important objects in geometry and representation theory: the loop group $L G$, the affine Grassmannian $Gr_G$ and the moduli stack $\mathcal{M}_G(C)$ of $G$ bundles on $C$. There is a sequence of morphisms \[ L G \to Gr_G \to \mathcal{M}_G(C) \] and arguably {\it the} main corollary of Drinfeld and Simpson's uniformization theorem is that the morphism $Gr_G \to \mathcal{M}_G(C)$ is surjective. This leads to among other results a computation of $Pic(\mathcal{M}_G(C))$ and a proof that $\mathcal{M}_G(C)$ is irreducible. Typically one is in the setting of a family of proper or projective smooth curves $C \to S$ equipped with a principal $G$-bundle $E$ and the uniformization theorem comes in order to ensure $E$ is trivial on the complement of a section. In our setting we work over $\mathbb{C}$ and our base $S$ is a smooth curve with a special point $s_0 \in S$ and the curve $C \to S$ is smooth when restricted to $S- s_0$. The singular fiber $C_0$ has a unique node $p_0$. In general the total space $C$ could be smooth or $p_0$ could be a singular point. In the former case a ramified base change $S' \to S$ is necessary to ensure a section passing through $p_0$. Let $U_S$ denote the complement of such a section. Theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect} shows when $G$ is simply connected that $G$ bundles on $U_S$ are trivial. We combine this with a degeneration $X$ of the loop group constructed in \cite{Solis}. The space $X$ is only a partial compactification but it gives an interesting compactification of the moduli stack of bundles on the nodal fiber $C_0$; see proposition \ref{p:mainApp}. Further we give a description of the boundary in terms of compactifications of finite dimensional groups. Specifically, over a fixed nodal curve $C_0$ the stack of bundles $\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)$ is a (non principal) fiber bundle with fiber $G$ over $\mathcal{M}_G(\widetilde{C_0})$. We explain how to compactify the fibers using an equivariant compactification $\ol{G}$ of $G$ yeilding a stack $\ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)}$ which is universally closed. The compactification one obtains from $X$ is a union of stacks of the form $\ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)}$ however only one component uses a compactification of $G$. The other components use compactifications of groups which appear as Levi factors for parahoric subgroups in the loop group. We do not know if the simply connectedness assumption can be dropped. It would be interesting to know if nodal uniformization holds for non-simply connected semisimple groups, or more generally for singular curves. \section{Versions of Uniformization} Here we state various versions of uniformization in part to review the literature and also in part to raise the question of what is the correct generality to pursue uniformization theorems. To utilize the result for moduli stacks of bundles one needs a uniformization theorem {\it in families}. In their 1994 paper on conformal blocks \cite{BeaLasMR1289330}, Beauville and Laszlo prove \begin{lemma}[$SL_r$ Uniformization]\label{l:SLrCase} Let $S$ be defined over an algebraically closed field of characteristic $0$. Let $C \to S$ be a connected projective curve and $D \subset C$ a relatively ample Cartier divisor and set $C^* = C - D$. Then for any $S$-scheme $T$ and any $SL_r$-bundle $E$ on $C_T = C\times_S T$ there is a Zariski cover $T = \cup_i T_i$ such that $E\| _{C^_{T_i}}$ is trivial. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} \cite[lemma\;3.5]{BeaLasMR1289330}. The results is stated for smooth constant families $C \times S$ and for $D$ the image of a section but the proof works more generally. See also \cite[prop.\;3.2]{BelFak}. In outline, one applies induction on the rank of $E$. As $D$ is ample, after a large twist $E(n D)$ one can find a section non vanishing on $C^$ yielding an exact sequence \[ 0\to \mc{O}_{C'} \to E(n D)\|_{C^} \to E' \to 0. \] Each $C^_{T_i}$ is affine (see paragraph before thm \ref{thm:trivNodalSect}) hence the sequence splits and by induction we are done. \end{proof} The generalization from $SL_r$ to other semi simple groups was handled by Drinfeld and Simpson. \paragraph{Smooth Setting}\label{smooth} Let $S$ be a scheme and $C$ a proper smooth scheme over $S$ with connected geometric fibers of pure dimension $1$. Let $G$ be a split reductive group over $\mathbb{Z}$ and $B$ a Borel subgroup. \begin{thm}[Smooth Uniformization]\label{thm:DSU} Assume \ref{smooth}. Suppose further $G$ is semisimple, $E$ a $G$ bundle on $C$ and let $\sigma \colon S\to X$ be a section and set $U = C - \sigma(S)$. There is a faithfully flat base change $S'\to S$ of finite presentation such that $E$ becomes trivial on $U\times_S S'$. If $S$ is a scheme over $\mathbb{Z}[n^{-1}]$ with $n = \|\pi_1(G(\mathbb{C}))\|$ then $S'$ can be taken to be an etale base change. \end{thm} \begin{proof} \cite[Thm\;3]{DSMR1362973} \end{proof} \begin{rmk} In this paper we are primarily in the case $G$ is simply connected and defined over $\mathbb{C}$ in which case we can always take an etale base change in the theorem. \end{rmk} Theorem \ref{thm:DSU} is deduced by showing any $G$ bundle admits a reduction to a Borel: \begin{thm}[Smooth $B$-structures] \label{thm:DSB} Assume \ref{smooth} and $E$ a $G$ bundle on $C$. Then there is an etale base change $S' \to S$ such that $E$ admits reduction to $B$ on $C\times_S S'$. \end{thm} In subsection \ref{DSargument} we give a sketch of the proof of theorem \ref{thm:DSU} and how it is used to prove \ref{thm:DSU}. The argument uses the theory of Hilbert schemes together with the Riemann-Roch theorem for curves. Even though the statement of theorem \ref{thm:DSU} is very general the argument itself is in fact more general in the sense that various key ideas of the proof hold more generally. As evidence, Belkale and Fakhruddin have generalizations of \ref{thm:DSU},\ref{thm:DSB} for singular curves. \paragraph{Singular Setting}\label{singular} Let $S$ be any scheme and $C$ a proper, flat and finitely presented curve over $S$ and $G,B$ as in \ref{smooth}. \begin{thm}[Singular $B$-structures]\label{BFB} Assume \ref{singular} and $E$ a $G$ bundle on $C$. Then there is an etale base change $S' \to S$ such that $E$ admits reduction to $B$ on $C\times_S S'$. \end{thm} \begin{thm}[Singular Uniformization]\label{BFU} Assume \ref{singular}. Let $D \subset C$ be a be a relatively ample effective Cartier divisor which is flat over $S$, and let $U=C-D$. Assume $G$ is semisimple and simply connected. There is an etale base change $S'\to S$ such that $E$ becomes trivial on $U\times_S S'$. \end{thm} Belkale and Fakhruddin also have a version of theorem \ref{BFU} that doesn't require $G$ to be simply connected but more assumptions are needed \cite[thm\;1.5]{BelFak}. \subsection{$B$-structures on $G$-bundles and local triviality}\label{DSargument} Here we give in outline the ideas of \cite{DSMR1362973}. Let $S$ be a scheme and $X \to S$ a proper morphism. Let $G$ be a split reductive group and $B$ a Borel subgroup and $\pi \colon E \to X$ a principal $G$ bundle. For any $S$-scheme $T$ let $X_T = X\times_S T$ and $E_T = E\times_X X_T$ and $\pi_T \colon E_T \to X_T$. A {\it $B$-reduction over $T$} is a section $\sigma$ of $E_T/B \to X_T$. Set $E^B_T = \sigma^E_T$; this is $B$-bundle whose associated $G$ bundle is isomorphic to $E_T$. Define $\Phi \colon Sch/S \to Set$ by setting $\Phi_E(T)$ to be the set of $B$-reductions of $E$ over $T$. By identifying $\sigma$ with its graph $\Gamma_\sigma \subset X_T \times_T E_T/B$ it follows that $\Phi_E$ is a subfunctor of the Hilbert scheme of subschemes of $X\times_S E/B$ and therefore representable by a scheme $\phi \colon M_E \to S$ of finite presentation over $S$. Also let $\mc{T}_{\pi/B}$ denote the relative tangent bundle of $E/B$ over $X$. So in summary we have: \[ \xymatrix{E \ar[d]^{\pi} & \mc{T}_{\pi/B}\ar[d] & M_E \ar[d]^{\phi}\\ X_S \ar[r]^{\sigma} & E/B & S}. \] For a point $s\in S$ let $\sigma$ be a $B$ reduction of $E_s$. Standard deformation theory shows that the obstruction to lifting $\sigma$ to an infinitesimal thickening of $X_s$ lies in $H^1(X_s, \sigma^\mc{T}_{\pi/B})$. Therefor by setting \[ M^+_E =\{\sigma \in M_E\| H^1(X_{\phi(\sigma)}, \sigma^\mc{T}_{\pi/B}) = 0\}\] we get a scheme $M^+_E$ which is smooth over $S$. Because any smooth morphism has etale local sections we obtain \begin{prop}\label{p:phiMap} Let $E$ be a $G$-bundle on $X$ and let $s\in S$. If $s$ lies in the image of $M^+_E$ then $E$ admits a $B$-reduction etale locally at $s$. \end{prop} Assume now $X = C$ is a smooth curve. Let $E^B$ be a $B$ reduction of $E$. For each positive root $\alpha$ we have a line bundle $E^B\times^\alpha \mathbb{G}_m$; set $d_\alpha(E^B) = \deg(E^B\times^\alpha \mathbb{G}_m).$ One can use the Riemann-Roch theorem to show when that if all $d_\alpha(E^B)$ are sufficiently negative then $E^B$ corresponds to a point of $M^+_E$. Drinfeld and Simpson prove \begin{prop}\label{p:DSdegAlpha} Let $C$ be a smooth projective curve over an algebraically closed field $k$ and $E$ a $G$-bundle on $C$. Then for any number $N$ there is a $B$-reduction $E^B$ such that $\deg_\alpha(E^B) < −N$ for all positive roots $\alpha$. \end{prop} \begin{proof} \cite[prop\;3]{DSMR1362973} \end{proof} \begin{rmk}\label{r:d_a} An analogue of this result is proved in the singular case in \cite{BelFak}. \end{rmk} The previous two propositions prove theorem \ref{thm:DSB}. The following result together with lemma \ref{l:SLrCase} proves theorem \ref{thm:DSU}. \begin{prop}\label{p:UniFromGL2case} Suppose $U \to S$ is an affine morphism and suppose any two $GL_2$ bundles are isomorphic on a cover of $S$ provided they have the same determinant. Let $G$ be semisimple and simply connected. Let $E$ be a $B$-bundle on $U$. Then $E$ reduces to a maximal torus $T\subset B$ and the associated $G$-bundle $E(G)$ is trivial on some cover of $S$. \end{prop} \begin{proof} We can assume $S$ and hence $U$ are affine. Let $B_u$ be the unipotent radical of $B$. As $B_u$ is a successive extension of $\mathbb{G}_a$s and $H^1(U,\mathbb{G}_a)=0$ there are no $B_u$ bundles on $U$. Thus $ i \colon H^1(U,B) \to H^1(U,T)$ is injective. Also the inclusion $T \subset B$ provides a section to $i$. The key to reducing from general $G$ to the $GL_2$ case is to introduce the twisting of a $T$ bundle by pair $(\mc{L},\lambda)$ where $\mc{L}$ is line bundle and $\lambda \in \hom(\mathbb{G}_m,T)$ is a 1 parameter subgroup. Let $\cup_i U_i$ be a Zariski cover of $U$ that trivializes $E$ and $\mc{L}$. Let $t_{ij}$ be the transition functions for $\mc{L}$. The twisted bundle is denoted $E\otimes\mc{L}(\lambda)$ and has transition functions given by those of $E$ multiplied by $U_i \cap U_j \xrightarrow{t_{ij}} \mathbb{G}_m \xrightarrow{\lambda} T$. Any $T$ bundle on $U$ is obtained by a finite number of twistings of the trivial bundle. Moreover, because $G$ is simply connected $\hom(\mathbb{G}_m,T)$ is generated by the simple co-roots $\alpha^\vee$ of $G$. Thus we are reduced to showing if $E' = E\otimes \mc{L}(\alpha^\vee)$ then $E(G),E'(G)$ are isomorphic locally over $S$. In fact we can show this with $G$ replaced by the group $G'$ generated by $G_\alpha$ and $T$ where $G_\alpha\cong SL_2$ is a principal $SL_2$ subgroup corresponding to $\alpha$. It is routine to verify that $G' \cong SL_2 \times T'$ or $G' = GL_2 \times T'$ for $T'$ a torus. Clearly this reduces to the question to $G = SL_2,GL_2$ and, in the $GL_2$ case, twisting by $\alpha^\vee$ doesn't change the determinant thus we are done by hypothesis. \end{proof} \begin{rmk} It is explained in \cite{DSMR1362973} how to reduce the general case to the non simply connected case. Also the hypothesis of the proposition follow in the smooth curve case from lemma \ref{l:SLrCase}. \end{rmk} We should also mention the work of Heinloth \cite{HeinMR2640041}. He has generalized the results of Drinfeld and Simpson to torsors for nonconstant semisimple group schemes $\mc{G}$ over a smooth curve $C$. His approach is quite different from the ideas presented here. The key in Heinloth's approach is to use that the morphism $Gr_{\mc{G}} \to \mc{M}_{\mc{G}}(C)$ is smooth. Given that uniformization works for the constant group scheme over singular curves it is tempting to wonder about uniformization for non constant group schemes over singular curves. \section{Uniformization and $B$-reductions for Nodal Curves} Here we quickly establish results of uniformization and reduction to a Borel for a fixed nodal curve and for a family of smooth curves degenerating to a nodal curve. The results in this section are either special cases or implied by results in \cite{BelFak} which deals with arbitrary singular curves. The proofs given here are streamlined for nodal curves which is sufficient for our main application in section \ref{s:compact} on compactifications of moduli spaces. \begin{lemma}\label{l:G(affNodal)} Let $C = \ec A$ be an affine nodal curve and $p,q \in C$ distinct smooth points. Let $G$ be a semisimple group and $g\in G(\mathbb{C})$. Then there is a $\gamma\in G(A)$ such that $\gamma(p) = 1$ and $\gamma(q) = g$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $G^{sc}$ be the universal cover of $G$. Let $g'$ be a lift of $g \in G(\mathbb{C})$ to $G^{sc}(\mathbb{C})$. Verifying the lemma for $G^{sc}$ and $g'$ implies it for $G$ and $g$. So we can assume $G = G^{sc}$ and $G = \langle U_\alpha \rangle_{\alpha \in R}$ where $R$ is the set of roots and $U_\alpha$ the corresponding root subgroups. Using isomorphisms $\mathbb{G}_a \xrightarrow{\phi_\alpha} U_\alpha$ write $g = \prod_i \phi_{\alpha_i}(t_i)$. Let $m_p,m_q$ be the maximal ideals of $p,q$. As $p \neq q$ there is an $f\in m_p$ such that $f(q) = 1$. We can take $\gamma = \prod_i \phi_{\alpha_i}(t_i f).$ \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{l:affineNodal} Let $C$ be a nodal affine curve and $G$ a semisimple group. Then any $G$ bundle on $C$ is trivial. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Use induction on the number of nodes; the base case being handled by \cite{HarMR0225785}. Assume $C$ has $n$-nodes, $\nu \colon C' \to C$ is the partial normalization at $n$th node $x$ and let $p,q = \nu^{-1}(x)$. By induction, $E' = \nu^E$ is trivial and obtained by an identifying isomorphism $\phi \colon E'_p \to E'_q$. Fixing a global trivialization of $E'$ allows us to consider $\phi \in G$. We can change $\phi$ by applying an element of $Aut(E') = G(\mathbb{C}[C'])$. Therefore by lemma \ref{l:G(affNodal)}, we can take $\phi = id$. \end{proof} \begin{cor}\label{c:NodalBstr} Let $C$ be nodal projective curve and $G$ a reductive group and $B$ a Borel subgroup. Any $G$-bundle reduces to $B$ and consequently any $G$-bundle is Zariski locally trivial. \end{cor} \begin{proof} Write $G$ as an extension $1\to G^{ss} \to G \to T\to 1$ with $G^{ss}$ semisimple and $T$ a torus. This gives rise to an exact sequence \begin{equation}\label{eq:exactH1} H^1_{et}(C,G^{ss}) \to H^1_{et}(C,G) \to H^1_{et}(C,T). \end{equation} Let $E$ be a $G$ bundle and $E(T)$ the associated $T$ bundle. As $Pic(C)$ is generated by $C^{sm}$ we have $E(T)$ is trivial $U = C-\{p_1, \dotsc, p_n\}$ with $p_i$ smooth. Hence by \eqref{eq:exactH1}, $E\|_U$ comes from an $G^{ss}$-bundle and hence trivial on $U$. In particular $E$ has a reduction to $B$ on $U$. As $E/B \to C$ is projective, the valuative criterion implies the reduction extends over the $p_i$. \end{proof} \begin{rmk} If $G$ is any linear algebraic group then by using the exact sequence $1\to G_u \to G \to G_{red} \to 1$ where $G_u$ is the unipotent radical one can show any $G$-bundle on $C$ is Zariski locally trivial. But we do not use this. \end{rmk} \subsection{Nodal Degeneration} We assume the following in this section \paragraph{Nodal Degeneration}\label{mycase} Let $S$ be a smooth curve with a base point $s_0 \in S$ and $C$ a proper scheme over $S$ with connected geometric fibers of pure dimension $1$. We further assume $C \to S$ is finitely presented and $C$ is smooth on $S -s_0$ and $C_0:=C_{s_0}$ is a nodal curve with a unique node $p_0$. These assumptions imply that $C_0 - p_0$ is smooth, affine and either irreducible or the disjoint union of two smooth affine curves. Let $\ec A$ be an etale neighborhood of $s_0 \in S$ and $t \in m_{s_0}$ a local coordinate at $s_0$. A neighborhood of the node is etale locally $\ec A[x,y]/(x y - t^k)$. In the special case $k = 1$ we need to pass to a double cover $t \mapsto t^2$ to ensure there is a section passing through $p_0$. With that special case in mind we let $D_{S'} \subset C\times_S S'$ be the image of a section passing through $p_0$. We now prove analogues of Drinfeld and Simpson's theorems \ref{thm:DSB},\ref{thm:DSU}. Proposition \ref{p:BstrNodal} which addresses $B$-reductions is not new, it is covered by Belkale and Fakhruddin's theorem \ref{BFB}; however because we are only interested in the nodal case we can give a more direct argument that establishes the result as a corollary of prop \ref{p:DSdegAlpha}. In turn this gives a quick proof of theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect}; we note theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect} is implied by \cite[Thm\;1.4]{BelFak}. \begin{prop}\label{p:BstrNodal} Assume \ref{mycase} and let $G$ be reductive and $E$ a $G$ bundle on $C$. Then there is an etale base change $S' \to S$ such that $E$ admits reduction to $B$ on $C\times_S S'$. \end{prop} \begin{proof} As $C$ is smooth on $S - s_0$ it suffices to verify proposition \ref{p:phiMap} at $s_0$. This will follow if there are $B$-reductions satisfying \ref{p:DSdegAlpha} on the normalization $\nu \colon \widetilde{C_0} \to C_0$ that descend to $C_0$. By proposition \ref{p:BstrNodal}, $G$ bundles are trivial in a Zariski neighborhood of $p_0$ hence any two $G$-bundles are isomorphic on an open set of $p_0$ and a $B$-reduction on one induces one on the other changing $\deg_\alpha(E_B)$ by a bounded amount; see paragraph before \ref{p:DSdegAlpha} for the definition of $\deg_\alpha$. Thus we can reduce to $E$ being the trivial bundle on $C_0$. Let $F = (\nu^E)^B$ be a $B$-reduction of $\nu^E$. If $F$ is trivial on an open set containing $\{p_1,p_2\}=\nu^{-1}(p_0)$ then $F$ descends to $C_0$. Also $F = \sigma^* G$ for a map $\sigma \colon \widetilde{C_0} \to G/B$, as $\nu^E$ is trivial. Moreover $G \to G/B$ is trivial over the image $V$ of $B^-B$. We claim there is $g \in G$ such that $\widetilde{C_0} \xrightarrow{\sigma} G/B \xrightarrow{g} G/B$ sends $p_i$ to $V$; the resulting $B$-reduction descends to $C_0$. To prove the claim translate in $G/B$ so $\sigma(p_1)$ is the base point. Let $g\in G$ be any lift of $\sigma(p_2)$. As $B^-B \cap B^-B g^{-1} \neq \emptyset$, there is an $h \in B^-B$ such that $h \sigma(p_2) \in V$. So $F$ descends to $C_0$; call the resulting $B$-bundle $E^B$. Because $F$ is trivial in a neighborhood of $p_1,p_2$ we have $\nu^ (E^B \times^\alpha \mathbb{G}_m) = F \times^\alpha \mathbb{G}_m$ and $\deg L = \deg \nu^* L$ for any line bundle hence the result follows from \ref{p:DSdegAlpha}. \end{proof} We can now prove theorem \ref{thm:trivNodalSect}. We note again that theorem 1.4 from \cite{BelFak} implies theorem 3.5 below, since a multiple of the section is Cartier, and ample. Specifically, we can directly compute the Picard group in a neighborhood of the singularity $p_0$. It suffices to do this etale locally as for any scheme $Pic_{et}\cong Pic_{Zar}$ (see e.g. \cite[cor.\;11.6]{Milne}). It is well known $Cl(A[x,y]/(x y - t^k)) =\mathbb{Z}/k$ hence a large multiple is Cartier. \begin{thm}\label{thm:trivNodalSect} Assume \ref{mycase} and let $G$ be semisimple and let $E$ be a $G$ bundle on $C$. Let $D$ be a section passing through $p_0$ and let $U = C - D$. Then there is an etale base change $S' \to S$ such that $E$ is trivial on $U \times_S S'$. \end{thm} \begin{proof} We can apply \ref{thm:DSU} on $C_{S - s_0}$ thus we need only prove the result for an etale neighborhood of $s_0$. Thus we can assume $S$ is affine. Moreover replacing $S$ with an etale cover $S'$ by \ref{p:BstrNodal} we can assume $E$ reduces to a $B$-bundle. We aim to apply \ref{p:UniFromGL2case} and first check the affine hypothesis. To show the morphism $U_S \to S$ is affine if suffices to show $U_S$ is affine. Some multiple $n D$ is Cartier, if it is ample then $U_S$ can be realized as a closed subscheme of the complement of a hyperplane section in some $\mathbb{P}^n_S$. The map $C \to S$ is finitely presented and proper so by \cite[9.6.4]{MR0217086} it suffices to check $n D$ is ample on each fiber. This is immedite on $C_{S - s_0}$ and on $C_{s_0}$ the restriction to each component of $C_{s_0}$ is positive hence ample. To apply \ref{p:UniFromGL2case} it remains check the case $G=SL_2$ and to check that any two $GL_2$ bundles with the same determinant are isomorphic Zariski locally on $S'-s_0$. This last step is handled by \ref{l:SLrCase}. Note to apply \ref{l:SLrCase} is essential that some multiple $nD$ is relatively ample. The $GL_2$ case is proved mutatis mutandis. \end{proof} \section{Compactification}\label{s:compact} Recall the setup in \ref{mycase}. I'll abbreviate $C_{s_0}$ to $C_0$. To warm up we first describe how to use a $G \times G$ equivariant compactification $\ol{G}$ of $G$ to compactify $\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)$. If $p_1, \dotsc, p_n\in C$ then $\mathcal{M}_G^{p_1, \dotsc, p_n}(C)$ denotes the stack $G$ bundles $E$ equipped with trivializations $\tau_i \in E_{p_i}$. Let $q \in C_0$ be the node, $\nu \colon \widetilde{C_0} \to C_0$ the normalization and $\nu^{-1}(q) = \{p_1,p_2\}$. Then $\mathcal{M}_G^q(C) \to \mathcal{M}_G(C)$ is a $G$ bundle and $\mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0}) \to \mathcal{M}_G(\widetilde{C_0})$ is a $G \times G$ bundle and we have an equivalence $\mathcal{M}_G^q(C_0) \cong \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})$ and a diagram \[ \xymatrix{ G \ar[d]^{\Delta}\ar[r] & \mathcal{M}_G^q(C_0)\ar[r]^{f_q}\ar[d]^{\cong} & \mathcal{M}_G(C_0)\ar[d]^{\nu^} \\ G\times G\ar[r] & \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})\ar[r]^{f_{1,2}} & \mathcal{M}_G(\widetilde{C_0}) } \] Here $f_q,f_{1,2}$ are principal bundles for $G$,$G\times G$ whereas $\nu^$ is a fiber bundle with fiber the homogeneous space $\frac{G \times G}{\Delta(G)}$. In particular, $\nu^$ does not make $\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)$ into a {\it principal} $G$ bundle over $\mathcal{M}_G$. Indeed, if we try to make $g \in G$ act on $E \in \mathcal{M}_G(C_0)$ we could first lift and $E$ to $(E,\tau_q) \in \mathcal{M}_G^q(C_0)$ then represent $(E,\tau_q) \cong (\nu^E, \tau_1,\tau_2)$ and then take $g E = f_q(\nu^E, \tau_1 g ,\tau_2)$. This is not well defined because if we instead chose the lift $(\nu^E, \tau_1h,\tau_2h)$ then $g E = f_q(\nu^E, \tau_1 h g ,\tau_2 h) = f_q(\nu^E, \tau_1 h g h^{-1} ,\tau_2)$ which in general is not equal to $f_q(\nu^E, \tau_1 g ,\tau_2)$. In any case we have \[ \mathcal{M}_G(C_0) \cong \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})\times^{(G \times G)} \frac{G \times G}{\Delta(G)}. \] and we obtain a compactifcation as \[ \ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)}:= \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})\times^{(G \times G)} \ol{G}. \] \begin{lemma} The stack $\ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)}$ is universally closed over $\ec \mathbb{C}$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The map $\ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)} \to \ec \mathbb{C}$ factors as \[ \ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)} \xrightarrow{c} \mathcal{M}_G(\widetilde{C_0}) \to \ec \mathbb{C}. \] So we just need that $c$ is universally closed. So assume we have a diagram \[ \xymatrix{\ec \mathbb{C}((t)) \ar[d] \ar[r]^{l} & \ar[d] \ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)} & \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2} \ar[dl]^{f}\\ \ec \mathbb{C}[[t]] \ar[r]^{j} & \mathcal{M}_G(\widetilde{C_0}) & } \] Denote by $t$ the closed point of $\ec \mathbb{C}[[t]]$ and let $W$ be an etale neighborhood of $j(t)$ over which $f$ is a trivial fibration. Then $c$ is trivial over $W$ and to extend $l$ is to extend a map $\ec \mathbb{C}((t)) \to \ol{G}$ to $\ec \mathbb{C}[[t]] \to \ol{G}$ which is always possible. \end{proof} The generalization to families of curves is more complicated. One must pass from $G$ to the loop group $L G$. We briefly review loop groups. Let $\mathbf{Aff}_\mathbb{C}$ denote the category of $\mathbb{C}$-algebras, $\mathbf{Set}$ the category of sets and $\mathbf{Grp}$ the category of groups. Let $G$ be an affine algebraic group over $\mathbb{C}$. \begin{definition} The loop group $LG\colon \mathbf{Aff}_\mathbb{C} \to \mathbf{Grp}$ is the functor given by $LG(R):= G(R((z)))$ where $R((z))$ is the ring of formal Laurent series with coefficients in $R$. \end{definition} It is known that $LG$ is represented by an ind-scheme; an increasing union of infinite dimensional schemes. Elements $g(z) \in LG(R)$ are called loops. We also have positive loops $L^+G(R):= G(R[[z]])$ and polynomial versions $L_{pol}G(R) = G(R[z^\pm])$ and $L^{+}_{pol}G = G(R[z])$. In fact a more relevant group is the semidriect product $\mathbb{G}_m^{rot} \ltimes L_{pol}G$. This is defined by letting $u \in \mathbb{G}_m^{rot}$ act on a loop $g(z)$ by $g(z)\xrightarrow{u} g(u z)$. We abbreviate $\mathbb{G}_m^{rot} \ltimes L_{pol}G$ to $L^\ltimes_{pol}G$. We consider $L^\ltimes_{pol}G$ as a $(L^\ltimes_{pol}G)^{\times 2}$ space via left and right multiplication. In \cite{Solis} a $(L^\ltimes_{pol}G)^{\times 2}$ equivariant partial compactification $X$ of $L^\ltimes_{pol}G$ is constructed inspired by the wonderful compactification of an adjoint group. It fits into a diagram \begin{equation}\label{eq:LGdegen} \xymatrix{L^\ltimes_{pol}G \ar[r] \ar[d] & X\ar[d] & \ar[l]\partial X \ar[d]\\ 1 \ar[r] & \mathbb{A}^1/\mathbb{G}_m & \ar[l] 0/\mathbb{G}_m} \end{equation} In general $X$ is an ind-DM stack; in some cases it is actually an ind-scheme. In \cite{Solis} an explicit description is given to $\partial X$. To set up the description let $G$ be simple, simply connected or rank $r$, $T\subset G$ a maximal torus let $\alpha_0, \dotsc, \alpha_r$ be the simple roots of $LG$. To each root $\alpha_i$ we can associate a {\it maximal} parahoric subgroup $P_i \subset L G$ and moreover we can pick a Levi decomposition $P_i = L_i U_i$. \begin{prop}\label{p:descriptFibers} Let $G$ be simple, simply connected or rank $r$. The boundary $\partial X$ is a union of $r+1$ components $X_0 \cup \dotsb \cup X_r$ which can be labeled such that $X_i$ is a fibration over a product of flag varieties $\pi_i \colon X_i \to (LG/P_i)^{\times 2}$. For $i\neq 0$ the fibers of $pi_i$ are the wonderful compactification of $L_{i,ad}$ and the fiber of $pi_0$ is a $G^{\x2}$-equivariant compactification of $G$. \end{prop} The diagram \eqref{eq:LGdegen} suggests viewing $X$ as a degeneration of $L^\ltimes_{pol}G$. By taking an appropriate quotient we turn $X$ into a degeneration of the affine grassmannian $Gr_G$. Specifically let $H = L^{+}_{pol}G$ and let $\mc{H}$ be the sheaf of groups over $\mathbb{A}^1/\mathbb{G}_m$ given by sections of $H \times \mathbb{A}^1/\mathbb{G}_m \to \mathbb{A}^1/\mathbb{G}_m$. Then there is an evaluation map $\mc{H} \xrightarrow{ev_0} H$ and let $\mc{H}_1 = \ker ev_0$. This acts on the right of $X$ and we let $X^{Gr} = X/\mc{H}_1$. The generic fiber is now $Gr_G$ and the special fiber remains unchanged and retains a left action of $L G$ on the generic fiber and an $LG\times LG$ action on the special fiber. Now we return to our curve $C\to S$. We take $S$ to be affine and $t \in m_{s_0}$ a local coordinate at $s_0$. We view $t$ as a section of $\mc{O}_S(-s_0)$ which we consider as a morphism to $\mathbb{A}^1/\mathbb{G}_m$. Using this morphism we pull back $X^{Gr}$ to obtain an ind-stack over $S$. Let $D$ be a section passing through $p_0$ and $U= C-D$. We now define a fiber wise set theoretic action of $G(U)$ on $X^{Gr}$. For each $g \in G(U)$ and $s \in S$ we can Taylor expand the restriction $g_s \in G(U_s)$ in a formal neighborhood of $D_s$. For $s \neq s_0$ this gives an element in $LG$ and for $s=s_0$ we obtain an element in $LG \times LG$. In this way we get an action of $G(U)$ on $X^{Gr}$. It is desirable to have a more functorial construction which would realize $G(U)$ acting algebraically on $X^{Gr}$. Currently we can prove: \begin{prop}\label{p:mainApp} Let $G$ be simple, simply connected of rank $r$. For each $s \in S$ the group $G(U_s)$ acts algebraically on $X^{Gr}_s$. For $s \neq s_0$ the stack quotient $G(U_s)\backslash X^{Gr}$ is $\mathcal{M}_G(C_s)$. For $s=s_0$ we have the union $G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_{s_0}^{Gr} = \bigcup_{i=0}^r G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_i$ and \[ G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_0 \cong \ol{\mathcal{M}_G(C_0)}:= \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})\times^{(G \times G)} \ol{G}. \] \end{prop} \begin{proof} The first statement that the action is fiberwise algebraic holds because the original space $X$ has a fiberwise algebraic action of $L G$. The identification $G(U_{s_0})\backslash X^{Gr}_s \cong \mathcal{M}_G(C_s)$ follows from Drinfeld and Simpson's uniformization theorem. For the final statement, consider the moduli space $\mc{M}_G^U(C_0)$ of pair $(E,\tau)$ where $E$ is a bundle, $\tau$ is a trivialization of $E$ over $C_0 - p_0$. Fixing an isomorphism $\widehat{\mc{O}}_{p_0} \cong \mathbb{C}[[x,y]]/x y$ yields $\mc{M}_G^U(C_0) \cong\frac{L_xG \times L_yG}{G[[x,y]]/x y}$. Moreover defining $N_x = \ker(G[[x]] \xrightarrow{x\to 0} G)$ and $N_y$ similarly we have \[ \frac{L_xG \times L_yG}{G[[x,y]]/x y} = \frac{L_xG \times L_yG}{\Delta(G)\ltimes (N_x \times N_y)} \] which realizes $\mc{M}_G^U(C_0)$ as a $G^{\times 2}/\Delta(G) \cong G$ fibration over $Gr_G^{\times 2}$. By proposition \ref{p:descriptFibers} we have \[ X_0 = \mc{M}_G^U(C_0) \times^{G \times G} \ol{G}. \] Now we give a different presentation of $\mc{M}_G^U(C_0)$. Namely consider $\mc{M}^{U,p_1,p_2}_G(\widetilde{C_0})$ which consists of tuples $(E,\tau, t_1,t_2)$ where $E,\tau$ are as before and $t_i$ are framing of $E$ at $p_i$. The pair $(t_1,t_2)$ means $E$ descends to a bundle on $C_0$ with a single framing $t$ at $p_0$ giving rise to the moduli space $\mc{M}_G^{U,p_0}(C_0)$. We have \begin{align} \mc{M}_G^{U}(C_0) &= \mc{M}_G^{U,p_0}(C_0)/G = \mc{M}^{U,p_1,p_2}_G(\widetilde{C_0}) \times^{G \times G} G^{\times 2}/\Delta(G)\\ X_0 &\cong \mc{M}^{U,p_1,p_2}_G(\widetilde{C_0}) \times^{G \times G} \ol{G}\\ G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_0 &\cong \mathcal{M}_G^{p_1,p_2}(\widetilde{C_0})\times^{(G \times G)} \ol{G}. \end{align*} \end{proof} We can give a similar description for the other components $G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_i$ with $i\neq 0$. For each $i\neq 0$ define a sheaf of groups $\mc{G}_i$ on $C_0$ which has $\mc{G}_i(\widehat{\mc{O}}_q) = G(\widehat{\mc{O}}_q)$ for $q \neq p_0$ and $\mc{G}_i(\widehat{\mc{O}}_{p_0}) = \Delta(L_{i,ad}) \ltimes (U_i \times U_i)$ where $L_{i,ad}$ is the adjoint form of $L_i$. Let $\mc{M}_{\mc{G}_i}(C_0)$ denote the moduli stack of torsors for $\mc{G}_i$ on $C_0$. As $\mc{G}_i$ is the sheaf of groups associated to the constant group scheme away from $p_0$, all $\mc{G}_i$ torsors are just $G$-bundle on $U_{s_0} = C_0 - p_0$ and are trivial. In particular we have \[ \mc{M}_{\mc{G}_i}(C_0) = G(U_0)\backslash LG \times LG/\mc{G}_i(\widehat{\mc{O}}_{p_0}). \] Arguing as in the previous proposition we can also obtain \[ G(U_{s_0}) \backslash X_i \cong \mc{M}_{\mc{G}_i}^{p_1,p_2} \times^{L_i \times L_i} \ol{L_{i,ad}}. \] In particular the special fiber $G(U_{s_0})\backslash X_{s_0}^{Gr}$ in proposition \ref{p:mainApp} is a union of components each of which is universally closed. A construction of a relative compactification which is not only fiberwise is work in progress. \bibliographystyle{plain}
\section{Introduction} Typical $S$-matrix computations involving quantum field theories with massless particles lead to infrared divergent probability amplitudes. These divergences cancel in inclusive cross sections and are therefore often dubbed unphysical. Indeed, the amplitudes cannot be measured directly and experimentally relevant quantities are always IR finite. This has been known for a long time and consequently rather little attention was paid to the fact that even in such a simple theory as QED there is no $S$ matrix. \\ The authors of the present paper found the need to revise this old issue for two closely connected reasons. First: a particle with an energy $\omega$ typically interacts on time scales of $1/\omega$. Consequently, one would expect particles of zero energy to interact on infinite time scales only, or in other words not to interact at all. Thus, the probability of emitting or absorbing a photon of frequency $\omega$ in some physical process - say a scattering process - should vanish as $\omega\rightarrow 0$; infinitely soft photons should decouple from all processes. Instead however, using standard perturbation theory one finds that the probability for soft photons to participate in scattering diverges. The second reason is a recent line of papers in which this divergent probability of soft emission/absorption was connected to invariance of the theory under large gauge transformations (LGT in the following) (insert citations). While it is always good to find new symmetries, one should be worried if these turn out to imply divergences: is there a symmetry reason for the non-existence of the $S$ matrix in QED and gravity?\\ The origin of IR divergent probability amplitudes is very clear: the usual definition of the $S$-matrix, or equivalently the LSZ formalism, assumes that the asymptotic dynamics of the theory is free. This assumption is clearly wrong when massless particles are around, hence the divergences. Several authors have tried to overcome this issue by finding the correct, non-free, asymptotic dynamics and defining a new, IR safe $S$ matrix \cite{FK, Zwanziger, Rohrlich}. In \cite{FK} it is mentioned that soft photons indeed decouple from the IR safe $S$-matrix of QED (no calculation of this result is presented and we are not aware of another source presenting it). In fact, this is still not quite true: as we show, they only decouple to leading order, resulting in non-divergent but still non-zero amplitudes. We show how to rectify this by including the subleading soft theorem into the asymptotic dynamics. This simultaneously solves an ambiguity in the construction of the latter. \\ With the IR safe $S$-matrix in our hands, the decoupling of soft photons of arbitrary direction can be interpreted as an infinite family of dynamical symmetries. Hence, it is natural to ask about the meaning and origin of these symmetries. It turns out, maybe a bit surprisingly, that the invariance of the theory under LGT follows from the decoupling of soft modes once the special role of null infinity in the framework of non-trivial asymptotic dynamics is recognized.\\ The main purposes of the present paper are the following: We improve on the methodology of \cite{FK} through a reexamination of the meaning of asymptotic dynamics and inclusion of subleading terms. Then a very simple calculation showing that soft photons decouple from the IR finite $S$-matrix is presented. After that, we show the connection between this decoupling and invariance of the theory under LGT. Before doing so, in order to avoid possible confusion, we stress the difference between invariance, matching and symmetry.\\ In spite of its intrinsic beauty, the interest in these results for QED or for linear gravity is mostly academic and invariance under LGT simply reflects the decoupling of soft modes. However, the whole story is richer and extends to other cases. One of the lessons lies in the way the theory implements its invariance under LGT through soft decoupling. The realisation of this symmetry is in the form of a spontaneously broken symmetry with a large vacuum degeneracy and with different vacua differing by a finite number of soft modes that play the role of Goldstone modes. This is, as stressed in \cite{us1}, a generic phenomenon in theories with soft modes \footnote{In particular, in the simplest case of a free massless scalar field there is an infinite degeneracy and we can identify the corresponding soft modes playing the role of Goldstone bosons. The nontrivial aspect appears when the vacuum degeneracy coexists with nontrivial asymptotic dynamics. Similarly, in linearized gravity one obtains the formal vacuum degeneracy of Minkowski, as discussed in reference \cite{us1}.}. Although this vacuum degeneracy corresponds to infinite entropy of asymptotically-Minkowski vacuum, the differences among the vacua cannot be resolved in {\it finite time}. This is a different way of expressing the essence of the soft decoupling.\\ Several of the questions that we address here have recently been raised in \cite{amit} and \cite{porrati}. While we largely agree with the conclusions reached there, the methodology that we use is quite different. We put a special emphasis to deriving all results from a priori arguments and carefully differentiating between the many different notions that necessarily appear in the context of non-trivial asymptotic dynamics. In particular, the special role of null infinity is recognized. A spacial slice approach to LGT was followed in \cite{Balachandran}, it would be interesting to see the precise connection to it. In \cite{Conde, Campiglia} the subleading soft theorem was put on a similar footing as the leading one, the same happens in the present paper. \\ The outline of the paper is as follows. First, we address the origin of infrared divergences and their disappearance once the appropriate asymptotic dynamics is chosen. Furthermore, we discuss ambiguities in the definition of the IR safe $S$ matrix and conjecture the correct choice of $S$. This will be done in sections \ref{AsHam}-\ref{section4}. The main result is that in the IR safe scenario zero energy modes decouple from the $S$-matrix. In section \ref{SymAndMatch} we discuss the connection between matching, invariances and symmetries. After that, we consider the role of LGT in the IR safe theory in section \ref{ScriExpansion}. We show that the charge of a LGT is simply an asymptotic soft photon. A key ingredient in this analysis dwells in the distinction between true asymptotic operators and what we will call \textit{free asymptotic operators}. Finally, in section \ref{WhyScri} we discuss the issue of normalizability of scattering states. In the appendix \ref{app2} we will shortly review the standard treatment of infrared divergences and compare it to the present approach. For concreteness, throughout the paper we focus on the case of QED. However, the arguments are in principle more general and can be applied to different quantum field theories. \section{The S matrix and asymptotic dynamics}\label{AsHam} Generically, in theories with massless modes the asymptotic dynamics differs from the one defined by the free Hamiltonian. The correct identification of the asymptotic dynamics is necessary in order to define the $S$ matrix. In this section we shall briefly review the discussion on how to define the asymptotic dynamics. \subsection{What is an S matrix?}\label{Smat} In principle, a scattering amplitude is just the overlap of two states. Typically, one is interested in the overlap of scattering states, i.e. true eigenstates of the full Hamiltonian. Since these are usually unavailable, one resorts to \textit{descriptor states} and an operator on such states - the $S$ matrix - that describes scattering and can be expanded in a perturbative series. The descriptor states and the $S$ matrix are ideally obtained through the following procedure: \\ Let $W(t)=\ee^{-\iu H t}$ be the full time evolution operator and let $U(t)$ be some other unitary evolution. We can match the dynamics governed by the two different time evolutions at any fixed point of time. For that let $\ket{g}, \ket{f_g}$ be two different states such that \begin{equation} W(t_1)\ket{g}=U(t_1)\ket{f_g} \Longleftrightarrow \ket{g}= \Omega(t_1)\ket{f_g} \end{equation} where $\quad \Omega(t):=W(-t)U(t)$. Obviously this can be done for any $U(t)$. We could now try to define an $S$ matrix via \begin{equation} \braket{h_{out}}{g_{in}}=\lim_{t_\pm\rightarrow\pm\infty}\bra{f_h}\Omega^\dagger(t_+)\Omega(t_-)\ket{f_g} = \bra{f_h}S\ket{f_g} \end{equation} with $S=\Omega^\dagger(\infty)\Omega(-\infty)=\Omega_+^\dagger\Omega_-$. For this procedure to work, the convergence of the M\o ller operators $\Omega(t)$ is of crucial importance. Indeed, it is only this need of convergence what forbids us to use an arbitrary $U(t)$ in the definition of $S$. We shall call the ``correct" evolution operator $U_{as}(t)$. \\ The convergence of $\Omega_\pm(t)$ is not the only criterion for the correct definition of $U_{as}$. Since we want to make contact with real experiments, $U_{as}$ should be such that for chosen descriptor states $\ket{f_g}$ the asymptotics, as governed by $U_{as}$, corresponds to the asymptotics of the ``real" state $\ket{g_{in/out}}$ as governed by $W$, i.e. \begin{equation}\label{mapping1} \lim_{t_\mp\rightarrow\infty}\left( W(t)\ket{g_{in/out}}-U_{as}(t)\ket{f_g} \right)=0 \quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad \Omega_\pm\ket{f_g}=\ket{g_{in/out}} \end{equation} where the convergence is with respect to an appropriate norm. If that is the case, one can be sure that $\Omega(t)$ has strong limits and that the scattering amplitude $\bra{f_h}S\ket{f_g}$ is equal to the physically meaningful quantity $\braket{h_{out}}{g_{in}}$. For instance, in quantum mechanical potential scattering, descriptor states are eigenstates of the momentum operator $\ket{p}$ and a correctly chosen $U_{as}(t)$ must lead to \begin{equation}\label{mapping2} \lim_{t_\mp\rightarrow\infty}\Omega(t)\ket{p}=\ket{p_{in/out}}, \end{equation} where $\ket{p_{in/out}}$ are the (typically known) in/out stationary scattering states. Only in that case does the $S$ matrix reproduce the usual formula for the scattering amplitude. Note that this $S$ matrix can be written as $W_{I_{as}}(\infty,-\infty)$ where the interaction picture is defined with the $U_{as}$, i.e. \begin{align} \ket{\psi(t)}_{I_{as}} &=U_{as}^{-1}(t)\ket{\psi(t)}_S \Longrightarrow \iu \partial_t\ket{\psi(t)}_{I_{as}}\xrightarrow{\,\abs{t}\rightarrow\infty\,} 0 \\ A_{I_{as}}(t)&=U_{as}^{-1}(t)\, A\, U_{as}(t)\, . \end{align} For short range interactions (i.e. only massive particles) the asymptotic dynamics is governed by the (renormalized) free Hamiltonian, hence $U_{as}(t)=\ee^{-\iu H_0 t}$ is a good choice and the correspondingly defined $S$ matrix leads to correct results. For long range interactions (like QED) this is not the case and one must choose a different $U_{as}(t)$ as was first shown by Dollard \cite{Dollard} for Coulomb potential scattering and subsequently applied to QED by Kulish and Faddeev in \cite{FK}. In what follows, we shall show how to find the asymptotic dynamics and how to construct the correct $S$ matrix from it. \subsection{Finding the asymptotic dynamics} Finding the correct asymptotic dynamics for theories with long range interactions is a difficult task. While the descriptor states can still be conveniently chosen to be eigenstates of the free Hamiltonian, one usually does not have any kind of expression for the true scattering states (or equivalently incoming/outgoing particles). In principle, if the scattering states $\ket{p_{in/out}}$ are known, the goal is to find an operator $U_{as}(t)$ that fulfills two requirements: \begin{enumerate} \item The M\o ller operators $\Omega_{\pm}=\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\pm\infty} \ee^{-\iu \,H\,t} U_{as}(t)$ exist, or equivalently the $S$-matrix $\Omega_+^\dagger\Omega_-$ is finite on the Hilbert space of the descriptor states. \item The operators $\Omega_{\pm}$ map descriptor states to true scattering states, i.e. $\Omega_\pm \ket{p}=\ket{p_{out/in}}$. \end{enumerate} In most situations the scattering states are unknown and the second requirement is ignored, i.e. one is happy to obtain just some finite $S$ matrix. As we will see, it is the second requirement which forces us to include the subleading soft factors into the asymptotic dynamics. \\ In the literature there are (as far as we know) two ways for obtaining a $U_{as}(t)$ that fulfills the first requirement, both generically leading to the same results. As we will need both of them, we shall give a short summary here. \subsection{Ansatz I: asymptotic dynamics from leading order terms} This trick for finding $U_{as}(t)$ was (to our knowledge) first used in \cite{FK}. It goes as following: first use the following trivial identity \begin{equation} H=H_0+V = H_0+\ee^{-\iu H_0t}\,V_I(t) \,\ee^{\,\iu H_0t}, \end{equation} where the subscript $I$ refers to the usual interaction picture. Now compute $V_I(t)$ to highest order in $t$ and neglect subleading terms; call the resulting operator $V_{I \, as}(t)$. Finally define $V_{as}(t):=\ee^{-\iu H_0t}\,V_{I \,as}(t) \,\ee^{\iu H_0t}$ and \begin{equation}\label{Has} H_{as}(t):=H_0+V_{as}(t). \end{equation} By construction, $H_{as}(t)$ will converge to $H$ for large $t$. Hence, the asymptotic dynamics in the Schr\"odinger picture can be described as: \begin{equation} H_{as}(t)\ket{\psi}_S\xrightarrow{\,\abs{t}\rightarrow\infty\,}\iu \partial_t \ket{\psi}_S \end{equation} or in other words, for asymptotic times: \begin{equation}\label{Uas} \iu \partial_t U_{as}(t)=H_{as}(t) U_{as}(t). \end{equation} This leads to a differential equation for $U_{as}(t)$. The resulting Dyson series for $U_{as}(t)$ can now be computed order by order. Nevertheless, there is a subtlety: equation \ref{Uas} is only meaningful for asymptotic times and hence we cannot demand $U_{as}(t_0)=\mathbb{1}$ for some $t_0$. In other words, the general solution for $U_{as}(t)$ takes the form \begin{equation}\label{Uassol} U_{as}(t)=\mathcal{T}\,\ee^{-\iu \int_{t_0}^t H_{as}(\tilde{t}) d\tilde{t}} \cdot C, \end{equation} where $C$ is some time-independent unitary operator.\\ The unknown $C$ has to be fixed by the choice of descriptor states and the condition (\ref{mapping1}), we will come back to its role in section \ref{C}. \subsection{Ansatz II: asymptotic dynamics from classical solutions} This method for determining $U_{as}(t)$ was used e.g. by \cite{Zwanziger} for QED. Here, instead of finding $U_{as}$ directly, one makes an Ansatz for some operators in the Heisenberg picture to fulfill a ``classically inspired" time evolution for large times. Then, by plugging this Ansatz into the e.o.m. for other operators in the Heiseberg picture, the asymptotic dynamics of the entire system is solved. Alternatively, one can look for an evolution operator $U_{as}(t)$ that gives the classically inspired dynamics. In this procedure, the above unknown operator $C$ is fixed by subleading terms in the Ansatz. This might sound a bit obscure at first, but is in fact both conceptually and technically quite simple. In order for the reader to become familiar with the two ways of finding asymptotic dynamics, we will treat a completely understood example below - the Coulomb potential scattering in quantum mechanics. \section{Worked out example: Coulomb scattering} We consider the Coulomb potential in three dimensions: \begin{equation} H=\frac{p^2}{2m}+\frac{g}{r} = H_0+V. \end{equation} \subsection{Ansatz I} Let us follow Ansatz I first. With \begin{equation} \vec{r}_I(t) = \vec{r}+\vec{p}\frac{t}{m}\approx \vec{p}\frac{t}{m} \quad \text{ for large }\abs{t}. \end{equation} we find: \begin{equation} V_{as}(t)= \frac{g\,m}{\abs{t} p} \end{equation} Then equations \ref{Has} and \ref{Uassol} result in \begin{equation}\label{UCoul} U_{as}(t)=\ee^{-\iu\left(\frac{p^2}{2m}(t-t_0)+\frac{g\,m}{p}\text{sign}(t)\log(\,\abs{\frac{t}{t_0}}) \right)} \, C. \end{equation} \subsection{Ansatz II}\label{ansatz2} Now to the Ansatz inspired by classical Coulomb scattering. We want to find approximate solutions to the classical e.o.m. \begin{equation} \dot{\vec{r}}=\frac{1}{m}\vec{p} \quad, \quad \ddot{\vec{r}}=\frac{g}{m\,r^3}\vec{r} \end{equation} for large $\abs{t}$ and $r$. The momentum $\vec{p}$ must be conserved to leading order in $t$ in this regime. One can check that the following expressions fulfill these requirements \begin{align} &\vec{r}(t)\approx \vec{p}\frac{t}{m}-\vec{p}\frac{g\,m}{p^3}\text{sign}(t)\log(\abs{t}) +\text{const.} \\ &\vec{p}(t) \approx \vec{p} \end{align} One can include a constant term since the solution is valid only for very large $r$ and $t$ anyway. Note that the equation for $r$ is simply the movement of free particles corrected by a subleading (in $\abs{t}$) term coming from the Coulomb interaction. The idea is now to assume that in the Heisenberg picture the operators $\vec{r}(t)$ fulfills the same equation for asymptotic times (we do not write hats over operators, it should be clear from the context when the variables are classical and when quantum). Then the asymptotic time evolution can be found from \begin{align} &U_{as}(t)^\dagger\, \vec{p}\, U_{as}(t) = \vec{p} \\ &U_{as}(t)^\dagger \, \vec{r} \, U_{as}(t) = \vec{p}\frac{t}{m}-\vec{p}\frac{g\,m}{p^3}\text{sign}(t)\log(\abs{t}) +\text{const.} \end{align} It is easy to see that \ref{UCoul} gives precisely that (where $C$ must commute with $p$), hence both Ansatzes lead to the same result. \subsection{The role of C}\label{C} The operator $C$ is mostly ignored in discussions of asymptotic dynamics. In the present paper, however, it plays a central role and this section is therefore quite important. $C$ can be found by fixing the descriptor states for Ansatz I or by fixing the constant term in Ansatz II. Let us see how the first part works. For the Coulomb potential the scattering states $\ket{\vec{p}_{in/out}}$ are well known, see e.g. \cite{Shankar}. As descriptor states we choose, as usual, the eigenstates of $\vec{p}$, call them $\ket{\vec{p}}$. With the help of $U_{as}(t)$ we define the (now converging) M\o ller operators as in section \ref{Smat}. $C$ is now fixed by the requirement \begin{equation}\label{requirement} \Omega_{\pm}\ket{\vec{p}}=\ket{\vec{p}_{out/in}} \end{equation} If we ignore that requirement and e.g. set $C = 1$, the M\o ller operators defined through $U_{as}(t)$ will still converge and the S-matrix will be finite. However, the matrix element $\bra{p'} S \ket{p}\neq \braket{p'_{out}}{p_{in}}$ and calculations using this $S$ matrix will in general lead to wrong results. The choice of $C$ can be viewed as a renormalization of the $S$ matrix, i.e. a modification of the LSZ prescription for asymptotic states. Since the asymptotic dynamics cannot depend on $t_0$, $C$ also eliminates the dependence on $t_0$ in $U_{as}(t)$. See \cite{Rohrlich} for a nice discussion of why this must happen. It seems that the unphysical and non-existent dependence on $t_0$ plays a crucial role in the work \cite{amit}, we strongly disagree with their point of view on that.\\ It turns out that the with the right choice for $C$\footnote{In fact, one has to choose two different $C$'s - one for future times and one for fast times. They merely differ by a sign, in order to shorten the presentation we ignore this subtlety.} the asymptotic evolution is given by: \begin{equation} U_{as}(t)=\ee^{-\iu\left(\frac{p^2}{2m}t+\frac{g\,m}{p}\text{sign}(t)\log(\,\abs{t} \frac{p^2}{2m}) \right)}. \end{equation} This was proven in \cite{Dollard}, where it was shown that with this choice equation \ref{requirement} holds. Note that even in this simple case the operator $C$ is nontrivial!\\ Now as for the second Ansatz, we see that the correct asymptotic dynamics leads to \begin{equation} \vec{r}_{as}(t)=\vec{p}\frac{t}{m}-\vec{p}\frac{g\,m}{p^3}\text{sign}(t)\log(\abs{t}\frac{p^2}{2m})+\vec{r}+2\vec{p}\frac{g\,m}{p^3}. \end{equation} The asymptotic expression for $r(t)$ has a constant piece containing the operator $\vec{p}$. While we have no intuition for the meaning of this piece in potential scattering, its analogue in QED will be played by universal subleading soft factors. \section{The infrared safe S-matrix in QED}\label{section4} In this section the program of finding the correct asymptotic dynamics is applied to QED. We largely follow the ideas of \cite{FK} and \cite{Zwanziger}, although with a different emphasis and some extension. The main point of the present discussion is the decoupling of soft modes from the IR safe $S$-matrix. For the modes to decouple completely, subleading effects have to be taken into account. This is where the previously ignored operator $C$ enters the stage. Admittedly, the presented construction is a bit ad hoc - although a classical argument for the inclusion of subleading terms is given, the main reason for them is the demanded decoupling. It would be nice to find a more natural argument that leads to the subleading dressing. The section is structured as follows: in \ref{softphot} the leading and subleading soft photon theorems are reformulated as operator identities. Then, in \ref{asdym}, after a short recap of known results the decoupling of soft photons is demonstrated to leading order. Our approach here differs from the usual. We do not modify the descriptor states, as was done in previous work, but rather treat the dressing operators with more care. Certainly, the free Fock space has to be extended in some way in order to make sense of the dressing, but the space of descriptor states should still be unchanged if we are to follow the philosophy of Dollard in \cite{Dollard}. In particular, the IR safe $S$ matrix should be a well defined and finite operator on the free Fock space. In the remaining sections \ref{subleading} and \ref{explanation} the subleading effects are taken into account and a short note about soft theorems is given. \subsection{The soft photon theorem in QED}\label{softphot} Assuming trivial asymptotic dynamics in QED and performing computations with the usual Dyson $S$ matrix, let us call it $S_D$, leads to the well known problem of IR divergences. One very particular type of such divergences is known under the name \textit{soft photon theorem}. It is usually stated as an equation for matrix elements of $S$, namely \begin{align} \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0}\bra{p'_i}a_\mu(k)S_D\ket{p_j}= &\left( \lim_{k^0\rightarrow0}\sum \frac{e_i}{p'_i\cdot k}\left(\,p'_\mu-\iu \,k^\nu \,J_{\mu\nu}(p')\right)- \text{ same for p } \right) \cdot \nonumber \\ &\bra{p'_i}S_D\ket{p_j} \end{align} where we have included the non-divergent subleading part with the angular momentum operator $$J_{\mu\nu}(p)= \iu \left( p_\mu \frac{\partial}{\partial p^\nu}-p_\nu \frac{\partial}{\partial p^\nu} \right).$$ The operators $a_\mu$ create the Fock space of all polarizations, the physical Fock space being a subspace of it.\\ Let us only consider matrix elements with no arbitrarily soft photons in $\ket{p_j}$ and $\ket{p'_i}$ . Then we get $$ \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0}\bra{p'_i}a^\mu(k)S_D\ket{p_j}=\lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0}\bra{p'_i}[a^\mu(k),S_D]\ket{p_j}. $$ Since this is true for all matrix elements, we can promote the soft photon theorem into an operator equality: \begin{equation}\label{soft} \lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0}[a_\mu(k),S_D] = \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0} e \int \frac{1}{p\cdot k}\,[\left( \,p_\mu -\iu \,k^\nu \,J_{\mu\nu}(p) \, \right) \,\rho(p) \, , \, S_D] \,d^3p. \end{equation} where $\rho(p)$ is the charge density operator. Obviously, the above equation can be written as a symmetry, i.e. as \begin{equation} [Q,S_D]=0 \end{equation} where the conserved charge is \begin{align}\label{soft2} Q=&\lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0} \,a_\mu(k) - e \lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0}\int \frac{d^3p}{p\cdot k}\,\left(p_\mu \,-\iu \,k^\nu \,J_{\mu\nu}(p)\right)\rho(p) \nonumber \\ &=: Q_{soft}+Q_{hard}. \end{align} Note that this is not quite a symmetry yet since the charge is not hermitian. If one wants to make the statement about hermitian charges only, one can use the operators $a+a^\dagger$ and $\iu(a-a^\dagger)$. They will pick out only the leading and subleading parts of the soft theorems respectively. \subsection{Asymptotic dynamics and soft decoupling in QED to leading order}\label{asdym} The reason for the IR divergences in the Dyson S matrix is the wrong assumption of trivial asymptotic dynamics. In fact, for QED a completely analogous analysis to the one presented for the Coulomb potential can be done. As was shown in \cite{FK} and \cite{Zwanziger} (although $C$ was set to the identity there), the real asymptotic dynamics is governed by: \begin{equation} U_{as}(t)=\ee^{-\iu H_0 t} \ee^{R(t)} \ee^{\iu \Phi(t)} \, C \end{equation} with \begin{align} &R(t)=\frac{e}{(2\pi)^3}\int \frac{p^\mu}{p\cdot k}\,\rho(p)(a^\dagger_\mu\ee^{\iu\frac{k\cdot p t}{p_0}}-h.c.)\frac{d^3k}{2 k_0} d^3p \\ & \Phi(t) \sim \int \, : \rho(p)\, \rho(q) : \frac{p\cdot q}{((p\cdot q)^2-m^4)^\frac{1}{2}} \,\text{sign}(t) \ln (\,\abs{t}) \,d^3p\,d^3q \end{align} There, for the Ansatz of the type \ref{ansatz2} one assumes a classical form for the asymptotic current in the Heisenberg picture: \begin{equation}\label{jas} J_\mu^{as}(x)=\int d^4p\, \rho(p) \int\limits_{-\infty}^\infty d\tau\,\delta^4(x-p\tau), \end{equation} this is the current of particles of momentum p flying on straight lines through the origin. This leads to \begin{equation}\label{aas} A_\mu^{as}(x)=A_\mu^{in}(x)+\int d^4y\, \Delta^{ret}(x-y) J_\mu^{as}(y), \end{equation} which is the incoming electromagnetic field and the Lienard-Wiechert field of the asymptotic charged particles; and then ultimately to the same $U_{as}(t)$.\\ Note that the time-dependent phase $\ee^{\iu\frac{k\cdot p t}{p_0}}$ in the dressing operator $R(t)$ suppresses the contribution of any finite $k$ modes in the $\abs{t}\rightarrow \infty$ limit. Hence, the dressing is purely soft. The phase operator $\Phi(t)$ is the direct analogue of the phase for non-relativistic Coulomb scattering, it commutes with photons and is irrelevant for the present discussion. We will ignore it in the following.\\ Since the analogue of the Coulomb potential scattering states is unavailable in QED, we need, in order to fix $C$, to come up with a physical argument. Before doing that and in order to highlight the physical meaning of $C$ let us just take for the moment $C=1$.\\ The definition of $U_{as}$ implies the following $S$ matrix as acting on the free Fock space (where we ignore the phase operator): \begin{equation} S_{KF}=\lim_{t_\pm\rightarrow\pm\infty} \, \ee^{R(t_+)^\dagger}\, S_D(t_+,t_-) \,\ee^{R(t_-)} =: \lim_{t_\pm\rightarrow\pm\infty} S_{KF}(t_+,t_-) \end{equation} where $KF$ stands for Kulish-Faddeev and $S_D$ is the standard Dyson $S$ matrix in the free interaction picture, i.e. $S_D(t_+,t_-)=U_I(t_+,t_-)$.\\ The leading order of the soft photon theorem, as stated in (\ref{soft}), implies that \begin{equation}\label{decoupling1} \lim_{k\rightarrow 0} [k_0\,a^\mu(k),S_{KF}]\, = 0 . \end{equation} This relation can be easily proved. First note that \begin{small} \begin{align} &[a^\mu(k),S_{KF}(t_+,t_-)]=\\[2mm] [a^\mu(k),\ee^{R(t_+)^\dagger}]\, S_D(t_+,t_-) \,\ee^{R(t_-)} + & \ee^{R(t_+)^\dagger}\,[a^\mu(k), S_D(t_+,t_-)] \,\ee^{R(t_-)} + \ee^{R(t_+)^\dagger}\, S_D(t_+,t_-) \,[a^\mu(k),\ee^{R(t_-)}] \end{align} \end{small} We can now use standard formulas for displacement operators and take the $k\rightarrow0$ limit before the $t_\pm\rightarrow\pm\infty$ limit finding (schematically): \begin{align} &\quad\lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0} [k_0\,a^\mu(k),S_{KF}] = \nonumber\\ \ee^{R^\dagger(\infty)} \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0} \, k_0\, &\left( e \int \frac{p^\mu}{p\cdot k}\,[-\rho(p),S_D] dp+[a_\mu(k),S_D] \right) \ee^{R(-\infty)}. \end{align} The soft photon theorem \ref{soft} implies that the expression in between the dressing operators vanishes and hence equation (\ref{decoupling1}) follows. It is important to notice that the limits of $k_0\rightarrow 0$ and $t_\pm\rightarrow \pm\infty$ do not commute, therefore the above calculation should be rather viewed as a guide to a more careful and rigorous one. However, the conclusion of the more careful analysis (where $t_\pm$ is kept large but finite with the limit being taken at the very end) is the same. In general, for all the following calculations of this type we will take $k_0\rightarrow 0$ before the infinite time limit.\\ Equation (\ref{decoupling1}) implies that amplitudes with participation of soft photons are no longer IR divergent. The next question is how to fix the constant operator $C$ and what is its meaning at the level of soft theorems. The answer is that $C$ contains information about the {\it subleading part of the soft theorems}. \subsection{Including the subleading dressing}\label{subleading} Once we include $C$ the $S$ matrix becomes \begin{equation} S_{KF} =\lim_{t_\pm\rightarrow\pm\infty}C^\dagger \, \ee^{R(t_+)^\dagger}\, S_D(t_+,t_-) \,\ee^{R(t_-)} C, \end{equation} In order to identify $C$ we shall use two different arguments which lead to the same conclusion: \begin{enumerate} \item The insertion of soft photons must be a symmetry of scattering, i.e. soft photons decouple to all orders and not just to the leading one. \footnote{A similar philosophy was followed in reference \cite{porrati}} \item The asymptotic expression for the electromagnetic field $A_\mu(\vec{x})$ states must reduce to its ``classical value''. \end{enumerate} Let us define \begin{equation} \ee^{R(t)}C=:\ee^{\tilde{R}(t)} \end{equation} and make the following Ansatz: \begin{equation} \tilde{R}(t)=R(t)+\left( \int\, d^3p\, d^3k\, a_\mu(k) C^\mu(k,p) -h.c. \right) \end{equation} where we impose that $C^\mu$ are Lorentz covariant operators that do not contain photon operators, as well as the condition \begin{equation} [C^\mu(p,k),\rho(p')]=0 \qquad \forall k,p\neq p'. \end{equation} In other words, we demand that the asymptotic states $U_{as}(t)\ket{p}$ are ``coherent" (in the sense of section \ref{ScriExpansion} below) and do not involve other momenta $p'\neq p$ even if $C$ is chosen to be nontrivial.\\ Then we obtain, in analogy to the leading order calculation: \begin{align} &\lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0} [a^\mu(k),S_K] = \nonumber \\ &\ee^{\tilde{R}(\infty)^\dagger} \lim_{k_0\rightarrow 0}\left( e \int \frac{p^\mu}{p\cdot k}\,[-\rho(p)+ C^\mu(k,p),S_D] dp+[a_\mu(k),S_D] \right) \ee^{\tilde{R}(-\infty)}, \end{align} Again the limit $k_0\rightarrow 0$ must be taken before the limit $t_\pm\rightarrow \pm\infty$. Note that if we were to take the limit at the beginning of the calculation, the dressing operator $\ee^{R(t)}$ would appear to become trivial (as was already noted in \cite{FK}).\\ Now let us fix $C$ by demanding that soft photon insertions are a symmetry of the infrared finite $S$ matrix, i.e. \begin{equation}\label{fulldecoupling} \lim\limits_{k^0\rightarrow 0} [a^\mu(k),S_{KF}]=0. \end{equation} Note that we need this to hold if normalized zero energy photons are to have zero probability of being created or absorbed in physical processes, see the discussion in the introduction. Decoupling to leading order is not enough for this. This assumption together with (\ref{soft}) implies that (to order $\mathcal{O}(k)$): \begin{align}\label{R(t)} \tilde{R}(t)=R(t)+\frac{\iu}{(2\pi)^3}\int\, d^3p\, d^3k\,\frac{1}{2k_0} \,\frac{h(k)}{p\cdot k}\left(a_\mu(k)+a^\dagger_\mu(k)\right) k_\nu \, J^{\mu\nu}(p)\rho(p) = \nonumber \\ \frac{e}{(2\pi)^3} \int \frac{1}{p\cdot k} \left(\ee^{\iu\frac{k\cdot p t}{p_0}}\,p^\mu\,-\iu \, h(k)\, k_\nu \, J^{\mu\nu}(p) \right)\rho(p) \, a^\dagger_\mu(k) \, \, \frac{d^3k}{2 k_0} d^3p -h.c. \end{align} Here $h(k)$ is some window function with $h(0)=1$ which we cannot determine a priori. Realistic experiments with imperfect detectors can determine $h$ up to a dependence on the detector resolution. In any case, we will only perform calculations in the $k\rightarrow 0$ limit, hence the exact form of $h(k)$ will never enter.\\ In summary, we observe that the subleading soft photon theorem fixes the factor $C$ of the dressing operator. In the following we will omit the tilde in the notation and whenever we say $R(t)$ the full operator $\tilde{R}(t)$ is meant.\\ Let us now discuss how $C$ can be constructed from classical arguments. We have already seen in equation \ref{aas} that the leading order asymptotic dynamics gives for the potential $A_\mu^{as}$ the electromagnetic field of point particles flying on straight lines through the origin. The subleading dressing gives the following addition to it: \begin{align} \tilde{A}_\mu^{as}(x)=A_\mu^{as}(x)+A_\mu^{sub}(x) \nonumber \\ A_\mu^{sub}(x) = \frac{\iu}{(2\pi)^3} \int \frac{d^3k}{2k_0} \,d^3p\, h(k) \, k^\nu J_{\mu\nu}(p) \rho(p) \frac{\ee^{\iu \,px}}{p\cdot k} +\, h.c. \end{align} The asymptotic electromagnetic field operator (in the Feynman gauge) consists of the incoming field, the Lienard-Wiechert field and a part depending on the angular momentum of the asymptotic charged particles. In other words, it corrects the previous expression for the presence of non-zero angular momentum which should certainly influence the electromagnetic field. Note that the asymptotic current is unchanged since \begin{equation} \Box\, A_\mu^{sub}=0. \end{equation} \subsection{Soft theorems and dressing}\label{explanation} In order to avoid a possible misunderstanding, we think it is worth to make explicit the following straightforward result. Whenever one has \textit{any kind of soft theorem} in the IR divergent theory, i.e. some operator $Q_{soft}$ consisting out of purely soft photons and a corresponding hard part that is consistent with the soft photon theorem so that $Q=Q_{soft}+Q_{hard}$ commutes with $S_D$ - the following equation holds: \begin{equation}\label{soft3} \ee^{R(t)}\,Q_{soft}\,\ee^{R(t)\dagger}= Q_{soft}+Q_{hard}. \end{equation} This follows from the usual properties of the coherent dressing as a displacement operators and from formulas (\ref{R(t)}) and (\ref{soft2}). \section{Symmetries and matching conditions}\label{SymAndMatch} \subsection{Two different S matrices} In order to clarify the following discussion, let us introduce some notation and distinctions. For scattering the relevant quantity is the amplitude $\braket{p_{out}}{p'_{in}}$ where $\ket{p_{in}},\ket{p_{out}}$ corresponds to stationary scattering states, i.e. true eigenstates of the full Hamiltonian. There are two different strategies for describing a scattering process: \begin{enumerate} \item To use ``free" descriptor states $\ket{p}$ and M\o ller operators $\Omega_{\pm}$ that map them into true scattering states, i.e. $\Omega_\pm\ket{p}=\ket{p_{out/in}}$. In this case the relevant Fock space is the free Fock space, $\F_{free}$, and the amplitude becomes: \begin{equation} \braket{p_{out}}{p'_{in}}=\bra{p}S\ket{p'} \quad,\quad S = \Omega_+^\dagger \Omega_- \,. \end{equation} \item Use either $\ket{p_{in}}$ or $\ket{p_{out}}$ to construct the Fock spaces $\F_{in/out}$. For concreteness, let us work with $\F_{in}$. In that case the states $\ket{p_{out}}$ must be described as a superposition of in states $\ket{p_{in}}$. We introduce a \textit{different} $S$ matrix, say $\tilde{S}$, via $\bra{p_{out}}=\bra{p_{in}}\tilde{S}$. The scattering amplitude then becomes: \begin{equation}\label{Stilde} \braket{p_{out}}{p'_{in}}=\bra{p_{in}}\tilde{S}\ket{p'_{in}} \quad,\quad \tilde{S} = \Omega_-\Omega_+^\dagger \,. \end{equation} \end{enumerate} If the assumption of trivial asymptotic dynamics is made, the M\o ller operators are defined via \begin{equation} \Omega_\pm=\lim_{t\rightarrow\pm\infty}\ee^{\iu \,H\,t}\,\ee^{-\iu\,H_0\,t} \Longrightarrow S = U_I(\infty,-\infty). \end{equation} \subsection{Symmetries and conservation laws} It is easy to find useful expressions for conserved charges with the first approach to scattering. Indeed, conserved charges $Q$ typically commute with the M\o ller operators and with $S$. Therefore, the action of the charge on $\ket{p_{in/out}}$ is fully determined by the action of $Q$ on $\ket{p}$: \begin{equation} Q\ket{p_{out/in}}=\Omega_\pm \,Q \,\ket{p}. \end{equation} Hence, for all calculations it is enough to know how $Q$ acts on descriptor states. Since the descriptor Fock space is built out of field operators at a fixed time $t=0$, explicit expressions for $Q\ket{p}$ can be found immediately - one just needs to express $Q$ in terms of operators at $t=0$.\\ For the second approach the situation is slightly more complex. In fact, the charge operators $Q$ are normally not expressed in terms of the asymptotic fields. In particular, let us consider generic operators $Q$ that \textit{do not} commute with $\tilde{S}$ and try to get useful information out of them. Later on we shall see how this procedure works for LGT.\\ First note that for any operator $Q$ acting on the ``free" Fock space of descriptor states we can define the corresponding in and out operator as \begin{equation}\label{Qin} Q_{in}:=\Omega_-\,Q\,\Omega_-^\dagger \quad, \quad Q_{out} = \Omega_+ \, Q \,\Omega_+^\dagger = \tilde{S}^\dagger\,Q_{in}\,\tilde{S}. \end{equation} If $Q$ is expressed in terms of creation/annihilation operators of free states, say $a(k)$, then $Q_{in/out}$ is the same operator with $a(k)$ replaced by $a_{in/out}(k)$ - the creation/annihilation operators of the true scattering states. By definition we get \begin{equation}\label{Qout} \tilde{S}\,Q_{out}-Q_{in}\,\tilde{S}=0. \end{equation} Note that the above equation (\ref{Qout}) is a trivial identity holding for all $Q$. \\ Let us now consider how LGT become a symmetry. For that let us construct the Fock spaces of incoming and outgoing states separately $\F_{in}=\F_{out}$. For each construction we can get explicit expressions for the charges of LGT as acting on $\ket{p_{in}}\in \F_{in}$ and $\ket{p_{out}}\in \F_{out}$, let us call them $Q_-(\varepsilon_-)$ and $Q_+(\varepsilon_+)$ where $\varepsilon_\pm$ are arbitrary functions on a sphere. Note that the explicit action of $Q_-$ is known on in-states and that of $Q_+$ is known on out-states only. Let us fix some function $\varepsilon_-$. In principle there is no guarantee that there exists an $\varepsilon_+$ such that \begin{equation}\label{LGTinvarience} Q_-(\varepsilon_-)=Q_+(\varepsilon_+) \end{equation} is fulfilled. What is meant by \textit{invariance of scattering under LGT} is precisely the existence of a $\varepsilon_+$ given an $\varepsilon_-$ such that (\ref{LGTinvarience}) is fulfilled, i.e. the existence of a {\it matching}. Once the matching is known, nontrivial results can be derived from it, e.g. by using equations (\ref{Qout}) and (\ref{Qin}). In references \cite{strominger1, strominger2, strominger3} antipodal identification of the gauge parameters $\varepsilon_+$ and $\varepsilon_-$ was shown to be equivalent to the soft photon theorem and therefore it proves the equivalence between the soft photon theorem and the invariance under LGT. It is, however, important to notice that what is meant here by invariance under LGT does not necessarily correspond to symmetries in the conventional sense. Indeed, nowhere in the calculation was demanded that $[Q,\tilde{S}]=0$ for any charge $Q$. \subsection{Large gauge transformations and fluxes} As we have pointed out in the introduction, in those cases where the asymptotic dynamics is nontrivial, gauge transformations that are non vanishing at infinity lead to nontrivial transformations of asymptotic states. The way these transformations become a real symmetry of the theory is through the decoupling of soft modes underlaying the infrared finiteness of the theory. In classical physics we are used to associate real symmetries with conserved Noether charges. These charges are defined by integrating the corresponding conserved current on a space-like hypersurface and the charges are conserved in time. However, if instead of a space-like surface we use a null Cauchy surface what we define by integrating the corresponding conserved current is the flux through the null surface, we shall denote these fluxes {\it Noether fluxes}. In the case of the soft decoupling symmetry of the $S$ matrix the relevant {\it Noether flux} associated with the symmetry should count the flux of soft modes going through null infinity for any given asymptotic state defined by the momentum and charges of ingoing and outgoing charged particles. The soft decoupling symmetry of the infrared finite $S$ matrix implies the decoupling of this flux of soft modes. The way this is done at the level of the infrared finite $S$ matrix is by effectively reabsorbing the flux of soft modes into the asymptotic coherent state dressing. Equivalently, this decoupling can be achieved if the $S$ matrix, without the dressing, commutes with the Noether flux of soft modes. Although the {\it Noether flux} of soft modes is the relevant charge to implement the $S$ matrix symmetry associated with decoupling of soft modes, we can define standard charges on space-like hypersurfaces that correspond to adding a soft mode of certain polarisation and direction. These are actually the charges that we can think of as being spontaneously broken and creating an effective Goldstone boson. The quantum mechanical aetiology of these charges lies again in the infrared physics, namely in the dressing by a coherent state of {\it infinite} number of soft modes. In summary, soft decoupling is associated with LGT Noether fluxes while vacuum degeneracy is associated with standard charges on space-like hypersurfaces. A typical example of LGT with important physical implications appears in those gauge theories where topologically nontrivial gauge transformations exist. In those cases it is the nontrivial topology that provides the possibility of LGT. In the case of infrared symmetries, what replaces the nontrivial topology are the infrared divergences. \subsection{The soft photon theorem from matching} In reference \cite{strominger1} it was shown, assuming trivial asymptotic dynamics, that the charges for LGT in massless QED can be written in terms of out/in operators as \begin{align}\label{LGTcharges} Q_+(\varepsilon_-)=-\frac{2}{e^2}\int _{\mathscr{I}^+}\,\partial_{\bar{z}}\,\varepsilon_+(z,\bar{z})F_{uz} + \int _{\mathscr{I}^+} \,\varepsilon_+(z,\bar{z}) \,\gamma_{z\bar{z}}\,j_u \\ Q_-(\varepsilon_-)=-\frac{2}{e^2}\int _{\mathscr{I}^+}\,\partial_{\bar{z}}\,\varepsilon_-(z,\bar{z})G_{vz} + \int _{\mathscr{I}^+} \,\varepsilon_-(z,\bar{z}) \,\gamma_{z\bar{z}}\,j_v. \end{align} More explicit expressions for $Q_\pm$ will be derived in the appendix. For Minkowski spacetime the matching is \begin{equation}\label{matching} Q_+(\varepsilon)=Q_-(\varepsilon), \end{equation} i.e. $\varepsilon_+=\varepsilon_-$. Note that the charge $Q_+$ is expressed in terms of out operators.\\ According to the philosophy of asymptotic quantization, it is assumed that Fourier components of field operators near the null infinity $\mathscr{I}$ create true eigenstates of the theory; in this case the incoming and outgoing scattering states of QED. With the non-trivial asymptotic dynamics in mind, this assumption has to be reviewed. In fact, below we will argue that the states created by field operators on $\mathscr{I}$ \textit{differ} from the true, dressed scattering states. As will be shown, it is precisely this difference that gives the connection between the decoupling of soft modes as in \ref{fulldecoupling} and the invariance under LGT. In order to highlight this difference, we will label the ``bare'' operators on $\mathscr{I}$ and states created by these with an additional $0$. This will be discussed in more detail in \ref{ScriExpansion}, we introduce the unusual notation here to avoid confusion in the rest of the paper. The identity \begin{equation} \bra{p^0_{out}}Q_+(\varepsilon)-Q_-(\varepsilon)\ket{p'^0_{in}}=0 \end{equation} implies (schematically) \begin{align} \int _{\mathscr{I}^+}\,\partial_{\bar{z}}\,\varepsilon\,\bra{p^0_{out}}\left(F_{uz}-G_{vz}\right)\ket{p'^0_{in}}= \nonumber \\ \frac{e^2}{2}\left(\gamma_{z(p)} \, \varepsilon(z(p))-\gamma_{z(p')} \, \varepsilon(z(p'))\right) \braket{p^0_{out}}{p'^0_{in}}, \end{align} where we used the fact that $\ket{p^0_{in/out}}$ are eigenstates of $\int\, du\,j_u(u,z,\bar{z})$ and $\int\, dv\,j_v(u,z,\bar{z})$ respectively.\\ This is still not the end of the story since the operator $F_{uz}=F_{uz}(a^0_{out})$ is expressed in terms of (bare) out creation/annihilation operators. This is easy to amend using the identity \begin{equation}\label{inout} a^0_{out}=\tilde{S}^\dagger\, a^0_{in} \, \tilde{S}. \end{equation} Since we are dealing with bare operators, here $\tilde{S}$ is the IR diverging $S$-matrix. With that we finally obtain the scattering amplitude as originally written in \cite{strominger1} (but in a more extended notation): \begin{align}\label{finally} \int _{\mathscr{I}^+}\,\partial_{\bar{z}}\,\varepsilon\,\bra{p^0_{in}}\left( F_{uz}(a^0_{in})\,\tilde{S}-\tilde{S}\,G_{vz}(a^0_{in})\right)\ket{p'^0_{in}} = \nonumber \\ \frac{e^2}{2}\left(\gamma_{z(p)} \, \varepsilon(z(p))-\gamma_{z(p')} \, \varepsilon(z(p'))\right) \bra{p^0_{in}}\tilde{S}\ket{p'^0_{in}}. \end{align} Now everything is written in a single Fock space in terms of operators whose action is explicitly known. By using $\varepsilon(z)=\frac{1}{z-\zeta}$ one fishes out a single soft photon of a particular direction and polarization - then equation (\ref{finally}) reduces to the leading order soft photon theorem. \subsection{Matching and symmetries} In principle, the matching procedure can work and be useful even if there is no underlying symmetry - the identification of how one and the same operator acts on both in and out states can encode a lot of nontrivial information about a theory. However, in the above case the matching does correspond to a symmetry. The reason is simply the identity (\ref{inout}) which implies: \begin{equation} \tilde{S}^\dagger\,Q_-(\varepsilon)\tilde{S}=Q_+(\varepsilon). \end{equation} Then, using the matching condition \ref{matching}, we find: \begin{equation} \tilde{S}^\dagger\,Q_-(\varepsilon)\tilde{S}=Q_-(\varepsilon) \Longleftrightarrow [Q_-(\varepsilon),\tilde{S}\,]=0. \end{equation} In fact, the matching can be immediately derived from the soft symmetry as stated in (\ref{soft}). The same situation is present for massive Fermions, where the construction of the asymptotic Fock spaces and the charges of LGTs is more complicated, see \cite{strominger2, strominger3} for a detailed treatment. We want to stress again that in principle there can exist a matching that does not correspond to a symmetry but still gives rise to interesting identities encoding the explicit breaking of the would be symmetry. For example, if we consider a process where an initial state gives rise to the formation of a black hole that subsequently evaporates completely, we can think of LGT charges defined independently on the in state and on the out state. Here the matching between the charges encodes the existence of the intermediate black hole resonance. If this matching is nontrivial, it will imply that the $S$ matrix controlling the whole process of creation and evaporation is not commuting with LGT or in other words that those LGT are explicitly broken for the $S$ matrix accounting for the evaporation. The scenario of a nontrivial matching that encodes information about the black hole was recently advocated in\cite{Hawking} and \cite{HPS}. We will address this question in more detail in a future publication. \section{The role of large gauge transformations}\label{ScriExpansion} We have seen that for the correctly dressed $S$ matrix the soft theorem is simply the statement that soft photons decouple from scattering. However, for the undressed dynamics the soft photon theorem seems less trivial and is in fact equivalent to the statement that LGT are symmetries of the scattering. How are the two sides of the story reconciled? \\ As announced above, in order to answer this question we need to revise the derivation of $Q_\pm(\varepsilon)$, in other words the expansion of fields next to null infinity $\mathscr{I}$. In the standard treatment, see \cite{Ashtekar1, Frolov}, it is assumed that fields evolve like free fields close to $\mathscr{I}$ and that their Fourier coefficients create true stationary scattering states. The existence of a nontrivial asymptotic dynamics should lead to a reexamination of this assumption. In order to do that let us first introduce some notation:\\ We denote the Fourier coefficients of the fields at a fixed spacial slice (say at t=0) by $a$ for the photon field and by $b, \, c$ for matter particles and antiparticles. They create the descriptor states of the ``free" Fock space by acting on the perturbative vacuum $\ket{0}$ . The dressed M\o ller operators are \begin{equation} \Omega(t) = \ee^{\iu\, H\, t}\,U_{as}(t) = \ee^{\iu\, H \, t}\ee^{-\iu\,H_0\,t}\ee^{R(t)} \quad ,\quad \Omega_{\pm}=\lim_{t\rightarrow \pm \infty} \Omega(t), \end{equation} with $R(t)$ as defined in (\ref{R(t)}). They accomplish: \begin{equation} \Omega_{\pm}\, a \, \Omega_{\pm}^\dagger = a_{in/out} \quad , \quad \Omega_{\pm}\ket{0}=\ket{0}_{in}=\ket{0}_{out} \end{equation} and the same for matter operators (we assume that the in and out vacua coincide for space-times without black holes). Obviously, this implies that for a descriptor state, say $ \ket{p}=b^\dagger(p)\ket{0}$ we get the corresponding stationary scattering state by applying M\o ller operators: \begin{equation} b^\dagger_{out/in}(p)\ket{0}_{out/in} \,=\,\ket{p_{out/in}}\,=\,\Omega_{\pm} \ket{p}. \end{equation} The key question now is the following: {\it are the Fourier coefficients of field operators close to null infinity $\mathscr{I}^-$ the creation/annihilation operators of true incoming particles, in particular $a_{in}$ for the photon field}? We shall argue that the Fourier coefficients of the photon field at $\mathscr{I}^-$ are {\it not} the full creation/annihilation operators of {\it true} incoming particles but rather the operators obtained assuming {\it trivial asymptotic dynamics}, let us call them $a_{in}^0$. In formulas the operators $a_{in}^0(k)$ are formally defined through \begin{equation} a^0_{in}(k)=\Omega^0_- \, a(k) \, \left(\Omega^0_-\right)^\dagger \quad, \quad \text{where } \Omega^0(t):=\ee^{\iu\, H \, t}\ee^{-\iu\,H_0\,t} . \end{equation} Note that by the definition of $R(t)$ the (leading order) difference between $a_{in}(k)$ and $a_{in}^0(k)$ appears only in the $k\rightarrow 0$ limit and also that for the matter density \begin{equation} \rho^0_{in}(p)=\rho_{in}(p) \end{equation} because $R(t)$ commutes with $\rho$. In fact we have \begin{align} &\lim_{k\rightarrow0}\,a_{in}(k) =\lim_{t\rightarrow -\infty}\Omega^0(t) \lim_{k\rightarrow0}\ee^{R(t)} \, a(k) \, \ee^{R(t)^\dagger} \left(\Omega^0(t)\right)^\dagger = \nonumber \\ &\lim_{t\rightarrow -\infty}\Omega^0(t) \, \lim_{k\rightarrow0} \frac{e}{(2\pi)^3} \left( a(k) - \int \, \frac{d^3p}{p\cdot k} \left(\,p\,-\iu \, k\, J(p) \right) \rho(p) \right) \left(\Omega^0(t)\right)^\dagger = \nonumber \\ &\lim_{k\rightarrow 0} \left( a^0_{in}(k) - \int \, \frac{d^3p}{p\cdot k} \left(\,p\,-\iu \, k\, J(p) \right) \rho_{in}(p) \right) , \end{align} so in short: \begin{equation}\label{ain} \lim_{k\rightarrow0}a_{in}(k) =\lim_{k\rightarrow 0} \left( a^0_{in}(k)- \int \, \frac{d^3p}{p\cdot k} \left(\,p\,-\iu \, k\, J(p) \right) \rho_{in}(p) \right). \end{equation} All indices were dropped in the above equations for a shorter notation. \\ With the former relations at hand the role of LGT is surprisingly simple and clear and can be summarized by saying that even for the dressed dynamics the invariance under LGT's is still the soft photon theorem. Let us demonstrate how the proof works. First notice the following trivial identity: \begin{equation}\label{symmetries} [S,Q]=0 \Longleftrightarrow [\tilde{S},Q_{in}] =0 \end{equation} with $\tilde{S}$ and $Q_{in}$ as in (\ref{Stilde}) and (\ref{Qin}). The form of the generators of LGTs is: \begin{equation} Q_-(\varepsilon)=Q_{soft}\left(a^0_{in}\right)+Q_{hard}\left(\rho_{in} \right), \end{equation} where in our notation we suppressed the dependence on $\varepsilon$ on the right hand side. For the explicit form see (\ref{LGTcharges}). Now from (\ref{ain}) and the linearity of $Q_{soft}$ in $a$ follows: \begin{align} Q_{soft}(a_{in})=Q_{soft}(a_{in}^0)+Q_{hard}(\rho_{in}) = Q_-(\varepsilon). \end{align} See also section \ref{explanation}. As the notation suggests, $Q_{soft}$ consists purely out of soft photons, so it commutes with the dressed $S$ matrix: \begin{equation} [S_{KF}, Q_{soft}(a)]=0. \end{equation} Therefore relation (\ref{symmetries}) immediately implies that LGT's are conserved, i.e. $$[\tilde{S},Q_-(\varepsilon)]=0$$ (which in turn implies the antipodal matching). What we observe is that the conserved charge associated with the soft photon theorem, that for the undressed $S$ matrix is given by $Q_{soft}(a_{in}^0)+Q_{hard}(\rho_{in})$, becomes simply $Q_{soft}(a_{in})$ in the context of non-trivial asymptotic dynamics.\\ The physical meaning of the operators $a^0_{in}(k)$ can be understood by computing their action on a true incoming particle, say $b^\dagger(k)_{in}\ket{0}_{in}$, where $b^\dagger(k)$ creates an electron. Since by definition $a_{in}(k)\,b^\dagger_{in}\,(p)\ket{0}_{in}=0$ we can use (\ref{ain}) to find: \begin{equation}\label{coherent} \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0} a^0_{in}(k)\,b^\dagger_{in}\,(p)\ket{0}_{in}=\, \lim_{k^0\rightarrow 0}\frac{1}{p\cdot k}\,\left( \,p -\iu \,k\, \,J(p) \, \right) \, \,b^\dagger_{in}\,(p)\ket{0}_{in}. \end{equation} which is telling us that \textit{true scattering states of QED} are coherent states (but only with respect to the ``free asymptotic'' photon operators $a^0_{in}(k)$) with infinitely many soft quanta \cite{Chung, Ashtekar1} .\\ Note that the operators of {\it true} incoming photons, $a_{in}$, in fact do {\it annihilate} the scattering state $\,b^\dagger_{in}\,(k)\ket{0}_{in}$ by definition. In summary, we always need to keep in mind that ``true" incoming photons states do not correspond to the operators $a^0_{in}$ but rather to the $a_{in}$. While working with the dressed $S$ matrix we don't need to use the null infinity operators $a^0_{in}$; they can be used as a bridge between soft decoupling and LGT.\\ The dressing cloud reflects the electric field of the charged particle. This dressing is coherent and its {\it "constituents"} are the free asymptotic photon operators and not the true asymptotic photons of the infrared finite $S$ matrix. \section{The role of null infinity and normalizable states}\label{WhyScri} Let us imagine that we ignore the existence of nontrivial asymptotic dynamics and consequently the difference between the soft operators $a^0_{in}$ and $a_{in}$ discussed in the previous section. Incidentally, this point of view is the one usually pursued in the literature. Since the polarization is not important for this discussion, we shall not write out the index $\mu$ and all numerical factors will be ignored. The commutation relations of creation/annihilation operators on a spacial slice in spherical coordinates are: \begin{equation} \left[a(\omega,\vec{e}_{k}) \, ,\,a^\dagger(\omega',\vec{e}_{k'}) \right] = \frac{1}{\omega}\,\delta(\omega - \omega')\,\delta^2(\vec{e}_k-\vec{e}_{k'}) \end{equation} where $\vec{e}_k$ is a unit vector in $\R^3$ and we use the notation $a(\omega,\vec{e}_k)=a(\vec{k}=\omega \cdot\vec{e}_k)$ with $\delta^2(\vec{e}_k-\vec{e}_{k'})$ being the delta function on $S^2$. A normalized 1-photon state in the free Fock space can be written as: \begin{equation} \ket{f}:=\int d\omega\,d^2\vec{e}_{k} \,f(\omega,\vec{e_k}) \,a^\dagger(\omega,\vec{e}_{k}) \ket{0} \end{equation} with \begin{equation} 1=\braket{f}{f}=\int d\omega\,d^2\vec{e}_{k}\, \frac{\abs{f}^2}{\omega}. \end{equation} Let us focus on the frequencies and consider states of the type $f(\omega,\vec{e}_k)=f(\omega)g(\vec{e}_k)$ with $\int \, d^2 \vec{e}_k \,\abs{g}^2 =1$. The normalization condition for them becomes \begin{equation}\label{norm} 1=\int d\omega\ \frac{\abs{f(\omega)}^2}{\omega}. \end{equation} We see that $f(w)$ must vanish sufficiently fast as $\omega\rightarrow 0$ for all normalizable states. The issue of normalizability becomes more important once the discussion is taken to $\mathscr{I}$ without first developing an IR-finite scattering theory. This can be reformulated by saying that the charge $Q^{soft}_{in}(\varepsilon)$ is non-zero in general. Indeed, the explicit expression for this charge contains the term $\omega \,\delta(\omega)\, a_{in}(\omega,\vec{e}_k)$ and clearly vanishes on all normalizable states, which satisfy (\ref{norm}). This situation creates a puzzle since classically the corresponding charge operator does not vanish in general, see \cite{Ashtekar1}. The solution to this puzzle lies in the realization that the classical non-vanishing soft factors are absorbed into the dressing of true scattering states through the non-trivial asymptotic dynamics. When working with the infrared finite $S$ matrix, non-normalizable states never enter. However, normalizable scattering states as created by superpositions of $b^\dagger_{in}$ appear as non-normalizable when they are written in terms of the $\mathscr{I}$ Fock space that is built with $a_{in}^0$. \\ This discussion explains why the matching of LGT was found by looking at $\mathscr{I}$ and not by the usual application of Noether's theorem to spacial slices. Indeed, e.g. on the spacial slice at $t=0$ (where the field operators create the descriptor Fock space) the soft symmetry of the dressed $S$ matrix is simply the {\it vacuum degeneracy} of the free Maxwell theory. In general, for every theory with quantum mechanically protected massless particles soft modes decouple from the infrared finite $S$ matrix and the vacuum degeneracy of the interacting theory coincides with the vacuum degeneracy of the free theory \footnote{Note that the former statement is also true for infrared finite theories with massless modes. A nice example is the Euler Heisenberg theory for photons obtained by integrating out fermion loops in standard QED. In this case, the asymptotic dynamics is trivial and the vacuum degeneracy is the one of the free theory.}. \section{Summary and outlook} In theories with infrared divergences the corresponding asymptotic soft modes with $k=0$ are decoupled from the infrared finite $S$ matrix. These leads to a set of infrared symmetries parametrized by all possible polarizations and directions of these soft modes. Moreover, these symmetries can be mapped into LGT acting on the asymptotic states and commuting with the $S$ matrix. The soft components of these full fledged infrared symmetries are normally realized as spontaneously broken symmetries and account for vacuum degeneracy or hair, while the hard part accounts for the nontrivial asymptotic dynamics. \\ In the black hole case, the role of the soft modes and corresponding symmetries depends on the particular approximation used. In a full quantum treatment in which black hole formation (say in a two particle collision) and a subsequent evaporation process is treated as an $S$-matrix scattering process, say of the sort $2\rightarrow N$ \cite{2N}, the only relevant asymptotic symmetries are the ones of Minkowski. On the other hand, if we try to describe some scattering process as an $S$-matrix process in the fixed classical background metric of an eternal black hole, the new soft (Goldstone-type) modes - corresponding to new symmetries that are spontaneously-broken by the black hole geometry - will enter the game. The candidates for such modes could be for example the $A$-modes identified in \cite{Amodes}. \\ The decoupling of soft modes is exact in the approximation where self-interactions among them are ignored. The effect of self interactions is to modify the coherent state nature of the asymptotic states defining the infrared finite $S$ matrix. Indeed, self interactions among the soft modes will generate cascades of soft modes where interaction can lead to new collective phenomena. The effects of soft self interaction for the dressing in theories like gravity could be possibly controlled by classicalization. From a more formal point of view, a lot of work remains to be done, in particular a useful and IR safe diagrammatics that includes the dressing should be developed. This question has already been partially addressed, see e.g. \cite{Catana} and references therein. The results agree with the usual cross sections as calculated in the IR divergent theory, see also the discussion in appendix \ref{app2}. \newpage \begin{center} \large \textbf{Appendix} \normalsize \end{center} \begin{appendix} \section{Generators of LGT} We will derive an explicit expression for the hard part of the charges \ref{LGTcharges} using the saddle point approximation and assuming free asymptotic dynamics. The soft part has been derived with great care in \cite{strominger1} and the hard part for massive QED in \cite{strominger3}. We were unable to find a similar calculation for massless matter and that explains why we present it here. We shall derive the charges for a scalar field $\phi$, the derivation for spinors is completely analogous. Factors of $2\pi$ will be ignored and for convenience we will only write out the particle part, the antiparticle part being included implicitly. The first step is to assume free dynamics, in which case the Fourier components of $\phi$ close to $\mathscr{I}$ generate real scattering states. In other words, we write \begin{equation} \phi(t,r,\vec{e}_x)=\int \, p \,\ee^{\iu(t-r\vec{e}_x\cdot \vec{e}_p)p}\, b^\dagger(p,\vec{e}_p) \, dp\, d^2\vec{e}_p. \end{equation} Using advanced coordinates $u=t-r$ we obtain: \begin{equation} \phi(u,r,\vec{e}_x)=\int \, p \,\ee^{\,\iu\,u\,p}\,\ee^{\,\iu \,r\,p(1-\vec{e}_x\cdot \vec{e}_p)}\, b^\dagger(p,\vec{e}_p) \, dp\, d^2\vec{e}_p. \end{equation} For large $r$ we can use the saddle point approximation and perform the integration over the angles $d^2\vec{e}_p$. The relevant saddle is at $\vec{e}_p=\vec{e}_x$ and we obtain: \begin{equation} \phi(u,r\gg 1, \vec{e}_x)\sim \frac{1}{r} \int \, \,\ee^{\,\iu\,u\,p}\,\, b_{out}^\dagger(p,\vec{e}_x) \, dp \, , \end{equation} where we replace $b$ by $b_{out}$. The hard part of the LGT on $\mathscr{I}^+$ is: \begin{equation}\label{saddlepoint} Q_{hard}(\varepsilon)=\int \varepsilon(\vec{e}_x) \,j_u(u,\vec{e}_x) \, du \, d^2\vec{e}_x \, , \end{equation} see equations 2.10 and 3.2 in \cite{strominger1}. Plugging (\ref{saddlepoint}) and a similar expression for the conjugated momentum $\pi(u,r\gg 1, \vec{e}_x)$ (including the antimatter part) into the expression for $j_u$ and integrating over $u$ one finds: \begin{equation} Q_{hard}(\varepsilon)= \int \, d^3p \; \varepsilon(\vec{e}_p)\, \rho_{out}(\vec{p}), \end{equation} from which immediately follows \begin{equation} Q_{hard}(\varepsilon)\, b^\dagger_{out}(p) \ket{0}_{out}=\varepsilon(\vec{e}_p)\, b^\dagger_{out}(p) \ket{0}_{out}. \end{equation} A similar procedure can be done at $\mathscr{I}^-$ for incoming states. This is nothing but equation 7.2 from \cite{strominger1} where it was derived by semiclassical methods. \section{A comparison to the usual treatment of IR divergences}\label{app2} After the former discussion, the reader might wonder why a reexamination of such an old issue as the infrared structure of QED is necessary at all. The problem of IR divergences in QED was reasonably well understood after the seminal work of Bloch and Nordsiek in 1937 \cite{Bloch}, and of Yennie, Frautschi and Suura in 1961 \cite{YFS}. In order to highlight the difference between the dressing approach and the usual strategy for dealing with infrared divergences, we will briefly review the key ingredients of the old approach in this appendix. The present discussion closely follows \cite{YFS}. \subsection{Factorization and resummation} Let us start by considering the simplest amplitude in QED, an initial one electron state $\|p\rangle$ going over into a final state $\|p'\rangle$, call it $M(p,p')$. This amplitude is a sum of diagrams that we can characterize in terms of the number of internal virtual photon lines. Thus, generically we have $M(p,p')= \sum_nM_n(p,p')$. Here $n$ is the number of virtual photons and $M_n$ is the sum of all diagrams ( contributing to the process ) with $n$ internal virtual photon lines. These diagrams are infrared divergent. A careful analysis of the infrared divergences allows to obtain the infrared divergent part of $M_{n+1}$ recursively in terms of that of $M_{n}$. After imposing symmetrization over the involved virtual photons, an infrared resummation can be performed leading to a factorized form of the amplitude: \begin{equation} M(p,p') = e^{\alpha B(p,p')} \tilde M(p,p'), \end{equation} with $\tilde M$ being infrared finite. The infrared divergent part $B$ can be written in terms of an infrared regulator, e.g. non-zero photon mass $m$. The behavior of $B$ for this simplest process with just one electron in the in and out states and for very large $p$ and $p'$ is (to leading order in $m$): \begin{equation} B\approx- \frac{1}{2\pi}\left( \ln\frac{2p\cdot p'}{m_e^2} \left(\ln\frac{m_e^2}{m^2} -1/2 +1/2 \ln\frac{2p.p'}{m_e^2}\right) - \ln\frac{m_e^2}{m^2}\right). \end{equation}One can immediately observe that the regularized infrared divergent part goes like \begin{equation} B\sim - \left(\ln\frac{2p\cdot p'}{m_e^2} -1\right)\ln \frac{m_e^2}{m^2} \, \xrightarrow{m\rightarrow 0} \, -\infty \end{equation} and therefore leads to zero amplitudes in the limit of zero mass photon. The fact that the infrared divergent part factorizes after resummation, allows to define a sort of infrared ``renormalization'' by simply defining the physical amplitude to correspond to the finite part. This common sense recipe is essentially correct, but it needs a physical justification. \subsection{Real photon emission and unitarity} Let us now consider the same amplitude as above with an additional real photon of momentum $k$ in the in or out state. This amplitude is infrared divergent in the $k\rightarrow0$ limit. Contrary to the divergences associated to virtual photon lines, this is a divergence for an a priori perfectly well defined amplitude where the in and out states are fixed. If we take this infrared divergence seriously (i.e. do not speak about imperfect detectors), we could conclude that the corresponding amplitude violates unitarity for soft emission. In order to understand this apparent violation of unitarity, one can compute the physically meaningful quantity \begin{equation} \int d^3k \frac{1}{\omega(k)} \delta(\epsilon-k)\abs{ \bra{p, E} S_D \ket{p',E',k}}^2 \end{equation} where $\epsilon = E'-E$. This is the probability to emit a real photon with total energy $\epsilon$. Using the soft photon theorem and the integral representation of the delta function, the infrared divergent part of the previous integral can be written as \begin{equation} \tilde B = \int_{0}^{\epsilon} d^3k \frac{1}{\omega(k)} (\frac{p'}{k.p'} - \frac{p}{k.p})^2 \end{equation} Introducing an infrared cutoff $K$ in the integral one obtains \begin{equation} \left(\ln\frac{2p.p'}{m_e^2} -1\right) \ln\frac{\epsilon^2}{K^2} \end{equation} In this expression there are two types of problems: There is an infinity when the IR cutoff $K$ is sent to zero and there is an UV problem even for finite $K$ due to the logarithmic growth of $\ln\frac{2p.p'}{m_e^2}$ with the energy. This UV growth is in principle a real problem even for a theory with a natural IR cutoff, like a finite photon mass. So what to do with this unitarity problem?\\ The standard solution comes from a resummation of \textit{different} processes (contrary to the resummation of different diagrams for the same process, as mentioned above). Indeed, let us consider amplitudes with $n$ real soft photons in the external lines. For each value of $n$ the corresponding differential cross section is defined by integrating over the phase space of the emitted photons and symmetrizing. An interesting fact is that for these differential cross section we can, as we did for the amplitudes before, perform a resummation over $n$. After this resummation is done at the level of the cross section, one finds that the infrared divergent part again factorizes. The philosophy of imperfect detectors suggests that only inclusive cross sections are relevant, so the exponential factors for a particular process coming from virtual and real photons must be combined into the form \begin{equation} e^{\alpha (B + \tilde B)} \end{equation} with $B$ and $\tilde B$ exactly canceling the infrared divergent parts. So we see that thanks to the resummation (i.e. imperfect detectors),the divergent parts can be exponentiated in such a way that the virtual and real components cancel each other. \\ In the above solution \textit{unitarity is lost for individual processes} and is re-obtained only for inclusive cross sections. Complementary to that, in the dressing scenario, as advocated in the present paper, every process is IR safe and inclusive cross sections become unnecessary since soft particles decouple from scattering. \subsection{The dressing interpretation of the resummation over real emission} We now want to comment on the connection between the standard resummation approach to IR diverges and the dressing approach. The fact that a resummation (at the level of the differential cross section) over the number of real emitted photons can be performed, allows to reinterpret the IR divergences by defining a new charged asymptotic state as a {\it dressed state} of real soft emitted photons. One can hope that with a correct dressing the unitarity problem for fixed processes disappears since the dressing should already account for resummation. The strategy of Kulish and Faddeev \cite{FK} in 1970, which is also our strategy in the present paper, was to find the correct dressing from asymptotic dynamics and not from the IR divergences in the Dyson $S$ matrix. Nevertheless, these issues are clearly intertwined. Loosely speaking, one can think of the Dyson $S$ matrix containing the infrared part $e^B$, while the part $e^{\tilde B}$ accounting for the resummation over real emitted photons is absorbed into the coherent state definition of the asymptotic states. The fact that the infrared divergent parts of $B$ and $\tilde B$ cancel explains why the matrix $S_{KF}$ is infrared finite. \\ It is the universality of infrared physics that allows for the amazing simplicity of the resummation. This universality appeared in different forms throughout the present paper. It was seen in the soft theorem, the definition of asymptotic dynamics, the decoupling of soft modes and finally the matching and the invariance under LGT. In the present work we have tried to illuminate the connections between (and the equivalence of) these seemingly different manifestations of infrared physics. The former discussion sheds also light on the roots of LGT and infrared symmetries of QED. The resummation and exponentiation of the infrared divergences associated with real emitted soft photons promotes the soft photon theorem ( and its subleading component ) into the formal {\it generator} of a transformation. On the other hand the infrared cancellation between real and virtual divergences makes this transformation a symmetry of the $S$ matrix. \end{appendix} \section*{Acknowledgements} We want to thank Gia Dvali for the many fruitful discussions and ongoing collaboration. We also thank Kepa Sousa, Daniel Flassig, Claudio Bunster, Raoul Letschka and Artem Averin for valuable discussions and comments. The work of C.G. was supported in part by Humboldt Foundation and by Grants: FPA 2009-07908, CPAN (CSD2007-00042) and by the ERC Advanced Grant 339169 "Selfcompletion'' . The work of M.P. was supported by the ERC Advanced Grant 339169 "Selfcompletion''.
\section{Introduction} Given a locally compact group $G$ and compact subgroup $K\subseteq G$, the pair $(G,K)$ is called a Gelfand pair if $L^{1}(G//K)$, the space of integrable, $K$-bi-invariant functions on $G$, is commutative. Perhaps the best known examples are those defining symmetric spaces, that is, when $G$ is a connected semisimple lie group of finite center, and $K$ is a maximal compact subgroup. The analysis associated with such pairs plays an important role in the representation theory of semisimple lie groups and has been extensively developed in the last four decades.(cf.e.g.[2],[3]).In sharp contrast to this case, one might begin by assuming that $G$ is a solvable lie group. But then, if $G$ is simply connected for example, there maybe no non-trivial compact subgroups. One can, however, consider pairs of the form $(K\rtimes G, K)$, where $K$ is a compact subgroup of Aut($G$), the group of automorphism of $G$. We study the connected, simply connected free two-step nilpotent lie groups $F(n)$ for two reasons. Firstly, for any nilpotent lie group $N$ and a compact group $K\in Aut(N)$, $(K\rtimes N, K)$ is a Gelfand pair if and only if $N$ is at most two step. Secondly, every two-step nilpotent lie group is a quotient of a free two step nilpotent lie group. Therefore, the connected, simply connected free two-step nilpotent lie group $F(n)$ is defined in Section 2. We construct an isomorphism between the heisenberg group and some group with respect to $F(n)$. Then we get the "type 1" and "type 2" bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions. Note that for the 2-step nilpotent lie group $N$, and the Gelfand pair $(K,N)$, the bounded $K$-spherical functions are the same as the positive definite $K$-spherical functions[4]. In fact, this is not true in general for the semisimple case. Our focus here is on the topology of the bounded "type 1", "type 2" $O(n)$-spherical functions respectively, where the usual weak-topology coincides with the compact-open topology on $\Delta (O(n),F(n))$. Our main result is stated as Theorem 4.1. It asserts that a "type 1" bounded $O(n)$-spherical sequence $(\psi_{N})_{N}^{\infty}$ converges to a "type 1" bounded $O(n)$-spherical funtion $\psi$ if and only if $\widehat{L_{\gamma_{j}}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L_{\gamma_{j}}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})$, where $i=1,\cdots d$;$\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})$;$\gamma_{N}\rightarrow \gamma$.Here ${L_{\gamma_{1}},\cdots L_{\gamma_{d}},T}$ is a generator of the algebra $D_{k}(H_{n})$, which means the left-$H_{n}$-invariant and $K$-invariant differential operators on $H(n)$. And $\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}$, $\omega_{\lambda,\alpha}$ are the "type 1"bounded $K$ spherical functions on $H(n)$.$\gamma_{N},\gamma$ are the parameters that will be introduced later. We require a careful analysis of the behavior of such eigenvalues, and these results are described in Section 3. We refine our description of the topology on the Gelfand space by proving two final results. Theorem 4.5 asserts that $\Delta (K,F(n))$ is complete. That is, if a sequence of bounded $K$-spherical functions converge to some function in the compact-open topology, then the limit is necessary a bounded $K$-spherical function. Later, we will asserts the the "type 1" bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions are dense in $\Delta (O(n),F(n))$. Section 5 contains a description of the Godemental-Plancherel measure and the $O(n)$-spherical transform and then gives a definition for the Fouier transform induced by the "type 2" bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions. Also, we obtain some important properties about it. \section{Notation and Preliminaries} In this section, we will introduce some basic knowledge and significant results about the free two-step nilpotent lie group. First Definition. Let $\mathcal{N}_{p}$ be the (unique up to isomorphism) free two-step nilpotent Lie algebra with p generators. The definition using the universal property of the free nilpotent Lie algebra can be found in [7, Chapter V §5]. Roughly speaking, $\mathcal{N}_{p}$ is a (nilpotent)Lie algebra with $p$ generators $X_{1},\cdots X_{p}$, such that the vectors $X_{1},\cdots X_{p}$ and $X_{i,j}=[X_{i},X_{j}],i<j$ form a basis; we call this basis the canonical basis of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$. We denote by $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$, the vectors spaces generated by the families of vectors $X_{1},\cdots X_{p}$ and $X_{i,j}=[X_{i},X_{j}], 1\leqslant i<j \leqslant p$ respectively; these families become the canonical base of $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$. Thus $\mathcal{N}_{p}=\mathcal{V}\bigoplus \mathcal{Z}$, and $\mathcal{Z}$ is the center of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$. With the canonical basis, the vector space $\mathcal{Z}$ can be identified with the vector space of antisymmetric $p\times p$-matrices $\mathcal{A}_{p}$. Let $z=dimZ=p(p-1)/2$. The connected simply connected nilpotent Lie group which corresponds to $\mathcal{N}_{p}$ is called the free two-step nilpotent Lie group and is denoted $N_{p}$. We denote by exp:$\mathcal{N}_{p}\rightarrow N_{p}$the exponential map. In the following, we use the notations $X+A\in \mathcal{N}$,$exp(X+A)\in N$ when $X\in \mathcal{V},A\in \mathcal{Z}$. We write $p=2p^{'} or 2p^{'}+1$. A Realization of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$. We now present here a realization of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$, which will be helpful to define more naturally the action of the orthogonal group and representations of $N_{p}$. Let $(\mathcal{V},<,>)$ be an Euclidean space with dimension $p$. Let $O(\mathcal{V})$ be the group of orthogonal transformations of $\mathcal{V}$, and $SO(\mathcal{V})$ Its special subgroup. Their common Lie algebra denoted by $\mathcal{Z}$, is identified with the vector space of antisymmetric transformations of $\mathcal{V}$. Let $\mathcal{N}=\mathcal{V}\bigoplus \mathcal{Z}$ be the exterior direct sum of the vector spaces $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$. Let $[,]:\mathcal{V}\times \mathcal{V}\rightarrow \mathcal{Z}$ be the bilinear application given by: $[X,Y].(V)=<X,V>Y-<Y,V>X \\ where X,Y,V\in \mathcal{V}$ We also denote by $[,]$ the bilinear application extended to $\mathcal{N}\times \mathcal{N}\rightarrow \mathcal{N}$ by: $[.,.]_{\mathcal{N}\times \mathcal{Z}}=[.,.]_{\mathcal{Z}\times \mathcal{N}}=0$ This application is a Lie bracket. It endows $\mathcal{V}$ with the structure of a two-step nilpotent Lie algebra. As the elements $[X,Y],X,Y\in \mathcal{V}$ generate the vector space $\mathcal{Z}$, we also define a scalar product $<，>$ on $\mathcal{Z}$ by: $<[X,Y],[X^{'},Y^{'}]>=<X,X^{'}><Y,Y^{'}>-<X,Y^{'}><X^{'},Y>$ where $X,Y,X^{'},Y^{'}\in \mathcal{V}$. It is easy to see $\mathcal{V}$ as a realization of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$ when an orthonormal basis $X_{1},\cdots X_{p}$ of $(\mathcal{V},<,>)$ is fixed. We remark that $<[X,Y],[X^{'},Y^{'}]>=<[X,Y]X^{'},Y^{'}>$, and so we have for an antisymmetric transformation $A\in \mathcal{Z}$, and for $X,Y\in \mathcal{V}$: $<A,[X,Y]>=<A.X,Y>$ This equality can also be proved directly using the canonical basis of $\mathcal{N}_{p}$. Actions of Orthogonal Groups. We denote by $O(\mathcal{V})$ the group of orthogonal linear maps of $(\mathcal{V},<,>)$, and by $O_{p}$ the group of orthogonal $p\times p$-matrices. On $\mathcal{N}_{p}$ and $N_{p}$. The group $O(\mathcal{V})$ acts on the one hand by automorphism on $\mathcal{V}$, on the other hand by the adjoint representation $Ad_{\mathcal{Z}}$ on $\mathcal{Z}$. We obtain an action of $O(\mathcal{V})$ on $\mathcal{N}=\mathcal{V}\bigoplus \mathcal{Z}$. Let us prove that this action respects the Lie bracket of $\mathcal{N}$. It suffices to show for $X,Y,Z\in \mathcal{V}$ and $k\in O(\mathcal{V})$: \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &[k.X,k.Y](V)=<k.X,V>k.Y-<k.Y,V>k.X\\ &k.(<X,k^{t}.V>Y-<Y,k^{t}.V>X\\ &=k.[X,Y](k^{-1}.V)=Ad_{\mathcal{Z}}k.[X,Y]. \end{split} \end{equation} We then obtain that the group $O(\mathcal{V})$ and also its special subgroup $SO(\mathcal{V})$. acts by automorphism on the Lie algebra $\mathcal{N}$, and finally on the Lie group $N$. Suppose an orthonormal basis $X_{1},\cdots X_{p}$ of $(\mathcal{V},<,>)$ is fixed; then the vectors $X_{i,j}=[X_{i},X_{j}],1\leq i<j\leq p$, form an orthonormal basis of $\mathcal{V}$ and we can identify: the vector space $\mathcal{Z}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{p}$. the group $O(\mathcal{V})$ with $O_{p}$. the adjoint representation $Ad_{\mathcal{Z}}$ with the conjugate action of $O_{p}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{p}: k.A=kAk^{-1}$, where $k\in O_{p}, A\in\mathcal{A}_{p}$. Thus the group $O_{p}\sim O(\mathcal{V})$ acts on $\mathcal{V}\sim \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $\mathcal{Z}\sim \mathcal{A}_{p}$, and consequently on $\mathcal{N}_{p}$. Those actions can be directly defined; and the equality $[k.X,k.Y]=k.[X,Y],k\in O_{p},X,Y\in \mathcal{V}$, can then be computed. On $\mathcal{A}_{p}$. Now we describe the orbits of the conjugate actions of $O_{p}$ and $SO_{p}$ on $\mathcal{A}_{p}$. An arbitrary antisymmetric matrix $A\in \mathcal{A}_{p}$ is $O_{p}$-conjugated to an antisymmetric matrix $D_{2}(\wedge)$ where $\wedge=(\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\lambda_{p^{'}})\in \mathbb{R^{'}}$ and: $D_{2}(\wedge)=\begin{bmatrix} \ \lambda_{1}J & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \ddots & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 &\lambda_{p^{'}}J & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & (0) \end{bmatrix}$ where $J:=\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}$ ((0) means that a zero appears only in the case $p=2p^{'}+1$) Furthermore, we can assume that $\wedge$ is in $\overline{\mathcal{L}}$, where we denote by $\mathcal{L}$ the set of $\wedge=(\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\lambda_{p^{'}})\in \mathbb{R^{'}}$ such that $\lambda_{1}\geq \cdots \lambda_{p^{'}}\geq 0$. Parameters. To each $\wedge\in \overline{\mathcal{L}}$, we associate:$p_{0}$ the number of $\lambda_{i}\neq0$, $p_{1}$ the number of distinct $\lambda_{i}\neq0$, and $\mu_{1},\cdots \mu_{p^{1}}$ such that: $\{\mu_{1}> \mu_{2}> \cdots >\mu_{p_{1}}>0\}=\{\lambda_{1}\geq \lambda_{2}\geq \cdots \geq \lambda_{p_{0}}>0\}$ We denote by $m_{j}$ the number of $\lambda_{i}$ such that $\lambda_{i}=\mu_{j}$, and we put $m_{0}:=m_{0}^{'}:=0$ and for $j=1,\cdots p_{1} \ m_{j}^{'}:=m_{1}+\cdots+m_{j}$. For $j=1,\cdots p_{1}$, let $pr_{j}$ be the orthogonal projection of $\mathcal{V}$ onto the space generated by the vectors $X_{2i-1},X_{2i}$, for $i=m_{j-1}^{'}+1,\cdots m_{j}^{'}$. Let $\mathcal{M}$ be the set of $(r,\wedge)$ where $\wedge \in \mathcal{L}$, and $r\geq 0$, such that $r=0$ if $2p_{0}=p$. Expression of the bounded spherical functions. The bounded spherical functions of $(N_{p},K)$ for $K=O_{p}$, are parameterized by $(r,\wedge)\in \mathcal{M}$ (with the previous notations $p_{0},p_{1},\mu_{i},pr_{j}$ associated to $\wedge$), $l\in \mathbb{N}^{p_{1}}$ if $\wedge\neq 0$, otherwise $\varnothing$. Let $(r,\wedge)$,$l$ be such parameters. Then we have the following two types of bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions: For $n=exp(X+A)\in N$. Type 1:$\phi^{r,\wedge,l}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(k.n)))dk$. Type 2:$\phi^{\upsilon}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk$. Here $X_{p}^{}$ is the unit $K_{\rho}$-fixed invariant vector. For a Gelfand pair $(H^{p_{0}},K(m;p_{1};p_{0}))$, we have $\omega_{\wedge,l}$ is the "type 1" bounded $K(m;p_{1};p_{0})$-spherical functions for the Heisenberg group $H^{p_{0}}$. We will introduce it next. $\Psi_{2}$ is an isomorphism between $H^{p_{0}}$ with a group with respect to $F(n)$, which will be introduced later. We use the following law of the Heisenberg group $\mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}$: $\forall h=(z_{1},\ldots ,z_{p_{0}},t)$ , $h^{'}=(z_{1}^{'},\ldots ,z_{p_{0}}^{'},t^{'})\in \mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}=\mathbb{C}^{p_{0}}\times \mathbb{R}$ $h.h^{'}=(z_{1}+z_{1}^{'},\ldots ,z_{p_{0}}+z_{p_{0}}^{'},t+t^{'}+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{p_{0}}\mathfrak{F}z_{i}\overline{z}_{i}^{'})$ The unitary $p_{0}\times p_{0}$ matrix group $U_{p_{0}}$ acts by automorphisms on $\mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}$. Let us describe some subgroups of $U_{p_{0}}$. Let $p_{0},p_{1}\in \mathbb{N}$, and $m=(m_{1},\ldots ,m_{p_{1}})\in \mathbb{N}^{p_{1}}$ be fixed such that $\sum_{j=1}^{p_{1}}m_{j}=p_{0}$. Let $K(m;p_{1};p_{0})$ be the subgroup of $U_{p_{0}}$ given by: $K(m;p_{1};p_{0})=U_{m_{1}}\times \ldots \times U_{m_{p_{1}}}$. The expression of spherical functions of $(\mathbb{H}^{p_{0}},K(m;p_{1};p_{0}))$ can be found in the same way as in the case $m=(p_{0})$, $p_{1}=1$ i.e. $K=U_{p_{0}}$. Stability group $K_{\rho}=\{k\in K: k.\rho=\rho\}=\{k\in K\subset G: k.f\in N.f\}$. The aim of this paragraph is to describe the stability group $K_{\rho}$ of $\rho\in T_{rX_{p}}^{}+D_{2}(\wedge)$. Before this, let us recall that the orthogonal $2n\times 2n$ matrices which commutes with $D_{2}(1,\ldots ,1)$ have determinant one and form the group$Sp_{n}\bigcap O_{2n}$. This group is isomorphism to $U_{n}$; the isomorphism is denoted $\psi_{1}^{(n)}$, and satisfies: $\forall k,X$: $\psi_{c}^{(n)}(k.X)=\psi_{1}^{(n)}(K)\psi_{c}^{(n)}(X)$, where $\psi_{c}^{(n)}$ is the complexification : $\psi_{c}^{(n)}(x_{1},y_{1};\ldots ;x_{n},y_{n})=(x_{1}+iy_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}+iy_{n})$. Now, we can describe $K_{\rho}$: \begin{prop} Let $(r,\Lambda)\in \mathcal{M}$. Let $p_{0}$ be the number of $\lambda_{i}\neq 0$, where $\wedge=(\lambda_{1},\ldots ,\lambda_{p^{'}})$, and $p_{1}$ the number of distinct $\lambda_{i}\neq 0$. We set $\widetilde{\wedge}=(\lambda_{1},\ldots ,\lambda_{p_{0}})\in \mathbb{R}^{p_{0}}$. Let $\rho\in T_{f}$ where $f=rX_{p}^{}+D_{2}(\wedge)$. If $\wedge=0$, then $K_{\rho}$ is the subgroup of $K$ such that $k.rX_{p}^{}=rX_{p}^{}$ for all $k\in K_{\rho}$. If $\wedge\neq 0$, then $K_{\rho}$ is the direct product $K_{1}\times K_{2}$, where: $K_{1}=\{k_{1}=\begin{bmatrix} \widetilde{k_{1}} & 0 \\ 0 & Id \end{bmatrix} \mid \widetilde{k_{1}}\in SO(2p_{0}) \ D_{2}(\widetilde{\wedge})\widetilde{k}_{1}=\widetilde{k}_{1}D_{2}(\widetilde{\wedge})\}$ $K_{2}=\{k_{2}=\begin{bmatrix} Id & 0 \\ 0 & \widetilde{k_{1}} \end{bmatrix} \mid \widetilde{k_{2}}.rX_{p}^{}=rX_{p}^{}\}$. Furthermore, $K_{1}$ is isomorphism to the group $K(m;p_{0};p_{1})$. \begin{proof} We keep the notations of this proposition, and we set $A^{}=D_{2}(\wedge)$ and $X^{}=rX_{p}^{}$. It is easy to prove: $K_{\rho}=\{k\in K: kA^{}=A^{}k \ and \ kX^{}=X^{}k\}$. If $\wedge=0$, since $K_{\rho}$ is the stability group in $K$ of $X^{}\in \mathcal{V}^{}\sim \mathbb{R}^{p}$. So the first part of Proposition 2.2 is proved. Let us consider the second part. $\wedge\neq 0$ so we have $A^{}=\begin{bmatrix} D_{2}(\widetilde{\wedge}) & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}$ \ with \ $D_{2}(\widetilde{\wedge})=\begin{bmatrix} \mu_{1}J_{m_{1}} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \ddots & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \mu_{p_{1}}J_{m_{p_{1}}} \end{bmatrix}$ Let $k\in K_{\rho}$. From above computation, the matrices $k$ and $A^{}$ commute and we have: $k=\begin{bmatrix} \widetilde{k}_{1} & 0 \\ 0 & \widetilde{k}_{2} \end{bmatrix}$ \ with \ $\widetilde{k}_{1}\in O(2p_{0})$ \ and \ $\widetilde{k}_{2}\in O(p-2p_{0})$ furthermore, $\widetilde{k}_{2}.X^{}=X^{}$, and the matrices $\widetilde{k}_{1}$ and $D_{2}(\widetilde{\wedge}^{})$ commute. So $\widetilde{k}_{1}$ is the diagonal block matrix, with block $[\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{j}\in O(m_{j})$ for $i=1, \ldots ,p_{1}$. Each block $[\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{j}\in O(m_{j})$ commutes with $J_{m_{j}}$. So on one hand, we have det$[\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{j}=1$, det$\widetilde{k}_{1}=1$, and one the other hand, $[\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{j}\in O(m_{j})$ corresponds to a unitary matrix $\psi_{1}^{(m_{j})}([\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{j})$. Now we set for $k_{1}\in K_{1}$: $\Psi_{1}(k_{1})=(\psi_{1}^{(m_{j})}([\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{1}),\ldots ,\psi_{1}^{(m_{j})}([\widetilde{k}_{1}]_{p_{1}}))$ $\Psi_{1}:K_{1}\longrightarrow K(m;p_{0};p_{1})$ is a group isomorphism. \end{proof} \end{prop} Quotient group $\overline{N}=N/ker\rho$. In this paragraph, we describe the quotient groups $N/ker\rho$ and $G/ker\rho$, for some $\rho\in \widehat{N}$. This will permit in the next paragraph to reduce the construction of the bounded spherical functions on $N_{p}$ to known questions on Euclidean and Heisenberg groups. For a representation $\rho\in \widehat{N}$, we will denote by: $ker\rho$ the kernel of $\rho$. $N/ker\rho$ its quotient group and $\overline{N}$ its lie algebra. $(\mathcal{H},\overline{\rho})$ the induced representation on $\overline{N}$. $\overline{n}\in \overline{N}$ and $\overline{Y}\in \overline{\mathcal{N}}$ the image of $n\in N$ and $Y\in \mathcal{N}$ respectively by the canonical projections $N\rightarrow \overline{N}$ and $\mathcal{N}\rightarrow \overline{\mathcal{N}}$ Now, with the help of the canonical basis, we choose $E_{1}=\mathbb{R}X_{1}\bigoplus \cdots \bigoplus \mathbb{R}X_{2p_{0}-1}$ as the maxiamal totally isotropic space for $\omega_{D_{2}(\wedge),r}$. The quotient lie algebra $\overline{\mathcal{N}}$ has the natural basis: . You can refer to [6]. Here, we have denoted $\left \|\wedge \right \|=(\sum_{j=1}^{p^{'}}\lambda_{j}^{2})^{\frac{1}{2}}=\left \|D_{2}(\wedge) \right \|$ (for the Euclidean norm on $\mathcal{Z}$. Let $\overline{\mathcal{N}_{1}}$ be the Lie sub-algebra of $\overline{\mathcal{N}}$, with basis $\overline{X_{1}},\cdots ,\overline{X_{2p_{0}}},\overline{B}$, and $\overline{N_{1}}$ be its corresponding connected simply connected nilpotent lie group. We define the mapping : $\Psi_{2}:\mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}\rightarrow \overline{\mathcal{N}_{1}}$ for $h=(x_{1}+iy_{1},\cdots ,x_{p_{0}}+iy_{p_{0}},t)\in \mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}$ by: $\Psi_{2}(h)=exp(\sum_{j=1}^{p_{0}}\sqrt{\frac{\left \|\wedge \right \|}{\lambda_{j}}}(x_{j}\overline{X_{2j-1}}+y_{j}\overline{X_{2j}})+t\overline{B})$ We compute that each lie bracket of two vectors of this basis equals zeros, except: $[\overline{X_{2i-1}},\overline{X_{2i}}]=\frac{\lambda_{i}}{\left \|\wedge \right \|}\overline{B},\ i=1, \cdots ,p_{0}$. From this, it is easy to see: \begin{theorem}\label{equal} $\Psi_{2}$ is a group isomorphism between $\overline{N_{1}}$ and $\mathbb{H}^{p_{0}}$ \end{theorem} Finally, we note that $\overline{q_{1}}:N\rightarrow \overline{N_{1}}$ is the canonical projection. \section{some analysis on the heisenberg group $H_{n}$} The whole parts of this section can be referred from [7]. A result due to Howe and Umeda (cf. [8]) shows that $\mathbb{C}[v_{R}]^{K}$ is freely generated as an algebra. So there are polynomials $\gamma_{1},\cdots ,\gamma_{d}\in \mathbb{C}[v_{R}]^{K}$ so that $\mathbb{C}[v_{R}]^{K}=\mathbb{C}[\gamma_{1},\cdots ,\gamma_{d}]$. We call $\gamma_{1},\cdots ,\gamma_{d}$ the fundamental invariants. Invariant different operators. The algebra $\mathbb{D}(H_{n})$ of left-invariant differential operators on $H_{n}$ is generated by $\{Z_{1},\cdots ,Z_{n},\overline{Z_{1}},\cdots ,\overline{Z_{n}},T\}$. We denote the subalgebra of $K$-invariant differential operators by $\mathbb{D}_{K}(H_{n}):=\{D\in \mathbb{D}(H_{n})\mid D(f\circ k)=D(f)\circ k \ for \ k\in K,f\in C^{\infty}(H_{n})\}$ From now on, we always suppose $(K,H_{n})$ is a Gelfand pair, and if this is true, $\mathbb{D}_{K}(H_{n})$ is an abelian algebra. We define $p(Z,\overline{Z})$ as follows: $p(Z,\overline{Z}):=\sum c_{a,b}Z^{a}\overline{Z^{b}}=\sum c_{a,b}Z_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots Z_{n}^{a_{n}}\overline{Z_{1}}^{b_{1}}\cdots \overline{Z_{n}}^{b_{n}}$ belongs to $\mathbb{D}_{k}(H_{n})$. Note that the operator $L_{p}$ is intrinsically defined, whereas $p(Z,\overline{Z})$ depends on the basis used to identify $V$ with $\mathbb{C}^{n}$. One has $L_{p}=Sym(p(Z,\overline{Z}))$, where Sym is the linear map characterized by $Sym(Z^{a}\overline{Z^{b}})=\frac{1}{(\left \|a \right \|+\left \|b \right \|)!}\sum_{\sigma\in S_{(\left \|a \right \|+\left \|b \right \|}}\sigma(Z^{a}\overline{Z}^{b})$. Here, as usual, $\left \|a \right \|=a_{1}+\cdots a_{n}$ and $\sigma(Z^{a}\overline{Z^{b}})$ denotes the result of applying the permutation $\sigma$ to the $\left \|a \right \|+\left \|b \right \|$ terms in $Z^{a}\overline{Z}^{b}$. For a d-multi-index $a$, let $\gamma^{a}:=\gamma_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots \gamma_{d}^{a_{d}}$, $\left \\|a \right \\|:= a_{1}\left \|\delta_{1} \right\|+\cdots +a_{d}\left \|\delta_{d} \right\|$ (the homogeneous degree of $\gamma^{a}$), and $L_{\gamma}^{a}:=L_{\gamma_{1}}^{a_{1}}\cdots L_{\gamma_{d}}^{a_{d}}$. Using the definition of the map $\sim_{\mathcal{S}}$, together with the fact that $[Z_{j},\overline{Z}_{j}]=-2iT$, one sees that $L_{\gamma^{a}}=L_{\gamma}^{a}+\sum_{\left \\|b \right \\|<\left \\|a \right \\|}c_{a,b}L_{\gamma}^{b}T^{\left \\|b \right \\|-\left \\|a \right \\|}$ for some coefficients $c_{a,b}\in \mathbb{C}$. Since $\gamma_{1},\cdots ,\gamma_{d}$ generates $\mathbb{C}[v_{R}]^{K}$, it follows easily that $\{L_{\gamma^{1}},\cdots ,L_{\gamma^{d}},T\}$ generates the algebra $\mathbb{D}_{K}(H_{n})$. Therefore, For any $H_{n}$-spherical function $\psi$. $\psi$ is an eigenfunction for every $D\in \mathbb{D}_{K}(H_{n})$ if and only if $\psi$ is an eigenfunction for each of $L_{\gamma^{1}},\cdots ,L_{\gamma^{d}},T$. We write $\widehat{D}(\psi)$ for the eigenvalue of $D\in \mathbb{D}_{K}(H_{n})$, that is $D(\psi)=\widehat{D}(\psi)\psi$. Note that since $\psi(0,0)=1$, one has $\widehat{D}(\psi)=D(\psi)(0,0)$. \begin{theorem}\label{equal} The bounded $K$-spherical functions on $H_{n}$ are parametrized by the set $(\mathbb{R}^{\times}\times \wedge)\cup (V/K)$ via $\bigtriangleup(K,H_{n})=\{\phi_{\lambda,\alpha }\mid \lambda\in \mathbb{R}^{\times},\alpha\in \wedge\}\cup \{\eta_{K_{\omega}}\mid \omega\in V\}$ Note that, for $\psi\in \bigtriangleup(K,H_{n})$, one has $\psi(z,t)=e^{i\lambda t}\psi(z,0)$, where $\lambda=-i\widehat{T}(\psi)\in \mathbb{R}$. \end{theorem} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} For $p\in \mathbb{C}[v_{R}]^{K}$ and $\psi\in \bigtriangleup(K,H_{n})$, one has $\widehat{L}_{p}(\psi)=\partial_{p}(\psi)(0,0)$, where $\partial_{p}=p(2\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}},2\frac{\partial}{\partial z})$. That is $\partial_{p}$ is the operator obtained by replacing each occurrence of $z_{j}$ in $p$ by $2\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z_{j}}}$ and each $\overline{z_{j}}$ by $2\frac{\partial}{\partial z_{j}}$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} $\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\eta_{\omega})=(-1)^{\left \|\alpha \right \|}P_{\alpha}(\omega)$ \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} $\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\phi_{\lambda, \beta})=\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\phi_{\beta}) \ for \ \alpha, \beta\in \wedge, \lambda\in \mathbb{R}^{\times}$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} $\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}$ is a real number with sign $(-1)^{\left \|\alpha \right \|}$ for all $\alpha\in \wedge$ and $\psi \in \bigtriangleup(K,H_{n})$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} The eigenvalues for $L_{\gamma_{0}}$ on the $U(n)$-spherical functions of type 1 are $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{0}}(\phi_{\lambda,r})=-\left \|\lambda \right \|(2r+n)$ \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} $\left \|\widehat{L}_{p_{m}}(\phi_{r}) \right \|\leq \begin{pmatrix} n+r+m-1\\ m \end{pmatrix}$ where $p_{m}$ is the $U(n)$-invariant polynomial obtained from $P_{m}(V)$ \end{lemma} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} $For \psi\in \bigtriangleup(K,H_{n})$, one has $\psi(z,0)=\sum_{\delta\in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{p_{\delta}}(\psi)}{dim(P_{\delta})}p_{\delta}(z)$, where the series converges absolutely and uniformly on compact subsets in $V$. Thus we have the following series expansions for the $K$-spherical functions of types 1 and 2 respectively: $\phi_{\lambda, \alpha}(z,t)=e^{i\lambda t}\sum_{\delta\in \wedge}\frac{\left \|\lambda \right \|^{\left \|\delta \right \|}\widehat{L}_{p_{\delta}}(\phi_{\delta})}{dim(P_{\delta})}p_{\delta}(z)$ $\eta_{w}(z,t)=\sum_{\delta\in \wedge}\frac{(-1)^{\left \|\delta \right \|}\widehat{L}_{p_{\delta}}(\omega)}{dim(P_{\delta})}p_{\delta}(z)$. Here, convergence is absolute and uniform on compact subsets in $H_{n}$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The expansions for $\phi_{\lambda, \alpha}(z,t)$ and $\eta_{w}(z,t)$ follow immediately from that for $\psi(z,0)$ together with Lemmas 3.4 and 3.3. It is a general fact that the spherical functions for a Gelfand pair $(G,K)$ are real analytic (cf. Proposition 1.5.15 in [1]). For pairs of the form $(K,H_{n})$, one can see this directly from the functional forms of the two types of $K$-spherical functions. Write the Taylor series expansion of $\psi(z,0)$ centered at $z=0$ as $\psi(z,0)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}h_{m}(z)$, where $h_{m}(z)$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree $m$ on $V_{\mathbb{R}}$(i.e. in the variables $(z,\overline{z})$). Since $\psi$ is $K$-invariant, one sees by $K$- averaging this expression that each $h_{m}$ is $K$-invariant. As $\{p_{\delta}\mid \delta\in \wedge\}$ is a basis for $\mathbb{C}[V_{\mathbb{R}}]^{K}$, we can rewrite the Taylor series as $\psi(z,0)=\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}c_{\delta}p_{\delta}(z)$ for some coefficients $c_{\delta}$. Note that since Taylor series converge absolutely, it is not necessary to specify an ordering on the set $\wedge$ of indices for this sum. We use Lemma 3.2 and perform term-wise differentiation of this Taylor series to obtain $\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\psi)=\partial_{p_{\alpha }}(\psi)(0,0)=\sum_{\delta\in \wedge}c_{\delta}\partial_{p_{\alpha}}(p_{\delta})(0)$. Let $\{v_{1},\cdots ,v_{dim(P_{\alpha})}\}$ be an orthonormal basis for $P_{\alpha}$ and $\{u_{1},\cdots ,u_{dim(P_{\alpha})}\}$ be an orthonormal basis for $P_{\delta}$. Thus $p_{\alpha}=\sum v_{j}(z)\overline{v}_{j}(\overline{z})$, $p_{\delta}=\sum u_{j}(z)\overline{u}_{j}(\overline{z})$ and \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\partial_{p_{\alpha}}(p_{\delta})(0)=\sum_{i,j}v_{j}(2\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})\overline{u}_{i}(\overline{z})\overline{v}_{j}(2\frac{\partial}{\partial z})u_{i}(z)\mid _{z=0}\\ &=\sum_{i,j}\left \|<v_{j},u_{i} >_{\mathcal{F}} \right \|^{2}= \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if }\delta \neq \alpha \\ dim(P_{\alpha}), & \mbox{if }\delta =\alpha \end{cases}. \end{split} \end{equation} Hence $\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\psi)=c_{\alpha}dim(P_{\alpha})$ and $c_{\delta}=\widehat{L}_{p_{\alpha }}(\psi)/dim(P_{\delta})$. Since this is a Taylor series, the convergence is absolute and uniform on compact sets. \end{proof} \section{The proof of the main theorem} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} Let $(\psi_{N})_{N=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions of type 1, and $\psi$ is a bounded $O(n)$-spherical function of type 1. Then $\psi_{N}$ converges to $\psi$ in the topology of $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$(i.e.uniformly on compact sets) if and only if $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{i}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L}_{\gamma_{i}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})$ \ for \ $i=1,\cdots d$; $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})$ and $r_{N}\rightarrow r$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Suppose that $(\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(n))_{N=1}^{\infty}$ converges uniformly to $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(n)$ on compact sets of $F(n)$. Form [6], we can find a $K$-fixed vector $X\in \mathcal{N}_{p}$(i.e.$k.X=X, \ \forall k\in K$). Let $n_{t}=exp(tX)$,$-\infty <t< \infty$. From Theorem 3.8, we obtain \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(n_{t})=\int_{K}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},k.X >t}\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tX))}))dk \\ &=\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))t^{2\left \|\delta \right \|} \end{split} \end{equation} Similarly, $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(n_{t})=\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))t^{2\left \|\delta \right \|}$ Since $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(n_{t})\rightarrow \phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(n_{t})$, We have $\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))\rightarrow \ \sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))$. Differentiate with respect to $t$ respectively we have $ir_{N} \cdot <X_{p}^{},X> \sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))\rightarrow$ ir $\cdot <X_{p}^{},X> \sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(exp(X))}))$. Therefore, $r_{N}\rightarrow r$. Next, we choose a skew symmetric matrix $A$ such that $\int_{K}\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A))})dk\neq 0$. Since $\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tA))})=\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A))}t)$ $=e^{\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}})\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A)))}t}$ and $\omega_{\lambda, \alpha}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tA))})=e^{\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A)))}t}$. Therefore, $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(exptA)=\int_{K}\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tA))})dk=$ $\int_{K}e^{\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}})\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A)))}t}dk$. $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda, \alpha}^{\nu}(exptA)=\int_{K}\omega_{\lambda, \alpha}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tA))})dk=$ $\int_{K}e^{\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A)))}t}dk$. Since $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(exptA)$ converges to $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda, \alpha}^{\nu}(exptA)$ uniformly for all $-\infty <t<\infty$. Differentiate with respect to t respectively and let $t=0$, we obtain $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}})\int_{K}\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A))})dk\rightarrow \widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})\int_{K}\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(A))})dk$. Therefore, $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$. Finally, suppose $\left \|\wedge \right \|=n$, we find $X_{1},\cdots ,X_{n}\in \mathcal{N}_{p}$ such that $<X^{}_{p},X_{1}>,\cdots ,<X^{}_{p},X_{n}>$ are different from each other as well as $\begin{vmatrix} \int_{K}P_{\delta_{1}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk & \cdots & \int_{K}P_{\delta_{n}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk \\ \vdots & \cdots & \vdots \\ \int_{K}P_{\delta_{1}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{n}))}))dk & \cdots & \int_{K}P_{\delta_{n}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{n}))}))dk \end{vmatrix}\neq 0$ Then $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(exptX_{m})=\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tX_{m}))}))dk$. Similarly, $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(exptX_{m})=\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(tX_{m}))}))dk$. Here $m=1,\cdots n$. Since $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(exptX_{m})$ converges uniformly to $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(exptX_{m})$ and $\gamma_{N}\rightarrow \gamma$. We obtain: $\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{m}))}))dk$ converges uniformly to $\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>t}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{m}))}))dk$. Here $m=1,\cdots ,n$. Differentiate with respect to $t$ $j$ times, where $j=1,\cdots ,n-1$ and let $t=0$, we get $\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}(P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{m}))}))dk)i^{j}r^{j}<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>^{j}$ converges uniformly to $\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda,\alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\int_{K}(P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{m}))}))dk)i^{j}r^{j}<X_{p}^{},X_{m}>^{j}$. Therefore, if $N$ large enough, for any $\varepsilon >0$, we have $\begin{bmatrix} -\frac{\varepsilon}{M_{1}} \\ \vdots \\ -\frac{\varepsilon}{M_{1}} \end{bmatrix}< \begin{bmatrix} 1 & \cdots & 1\\ \vdots & \cdots & \vdots \\ i^{n-1}r^{n-1}<X_{p}^{},X_{1}>^{n-1}& \cdots & i^{n-1}r^{n-1}<X_{p}^{},X_{n}>^{n-1}dk \end{bmatrix}$ $\times$ $\begin{bmatrix} \sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk\\ \vdots\\ \sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{n}))}))dk \end{bmatrix}<\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\varepsilon}{M_{1}} \\ \vdots \\ \frac{\varepsilon}{M_{1}} \end{bmatrix}$ Therefore, if $M_{1}$ large enough, we have $\left \|\sum_{\delta \in \wedge}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}P_{\delta}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk\right \|<\frac{\varepsilon}{M_{2}}$, where $m=1,\cdots n$. Therefore, $\begin{bmatrix} -\frac{\varepsilon}{M_{2}} \\ \vdots \\ -\frac{\varepsilon}{M_{2}} \end{bmatrix}< \begin{bmatrix} \int_{K}P_{\delta_{1}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk & \cdots & \int_{K}P_{\delta_{n}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{1}))}))dk \\ \vdots & \cdots & \vdots \\ \int_{K}P_{\delta_{1}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{n}))}))dk & \cdots & \int_{K}P_{\delta_{n}}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.exp(X_{n}))}))dk \end{bmatrix} \times \begin{bmatrix} \frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{1}}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{1}}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta})}\\ \vdots\\ \frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{n}}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{n}}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})}{dim(P_{\delta_{n}})} \end{bmatrix}<\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\varepsilon}{M_{2}} \\ \vdots \\ \frac{\varepsilon}{M_{2}} \end{bmatrix}$ Therefore, if $M_{2}$ large enough, we have $\frac{\left \|\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{m}}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})-\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{m}}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})\right \|}{dim(P_{\delta_{m}})<\varepsilon}$ where $m=1,\cdots n$. Thus, $\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{m}}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L}_{P_{\delta_{m}}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$, for $m=1,\cdots n$. Since $\{\gamma_{1},\cdots ,\gamma_{d}\}\subset \{P_{\delta }\mid \delta \in \wedge\}$, this shows in particular that $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{j}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L}_{\gamma_{j}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$, for $j=1,\cdots d$. Conversely, suppose $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{j}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L}_{\gamma_{j}}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$, for $j=1,\cdots d$; $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$ and $r_{N}\rightarrow r$. It follows that $\widehat{L}_{P}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\rightarrow \widehat{L}_{P}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})$ for every $P\in \mathbb{C}[V_{R}]^{K}$. Indeed, each $P\in \mathbb{C}[V_{R}]^{K}$ is a linear combination of monomials $\gamma^{a}$ in the fundamental invariants, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty }(L_{\gamma^{a}})^{\land}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})=\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty }(L_{\gamma}^{a}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})+\sum_{\left \\|b \right \\|<\left \\|a \right \\|}c_{a,b}\widehat{L}_{\gamma}^{b}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})^{\left \\|a \right \\|-\left \\|b \right \\|})\\ &=\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty }(L_{\gamma}^{a}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})+\sum_{\left \\|b \right \\|<\left \\|a \right \\|}c_{a,b}\widehat{L}_{\gamma}^{b}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})^{\left \\|a \right \\|-\left \\|b \right \\|})\\ &=(L_{\gamma^{a}})^{\land}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha}). \end{split} \end{equation} Suppose that $\psi_{N}=\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}$ and $\psi_{N}\rightarrow \psi$, where $\psi=\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}$ is a bounded $O(n)$-spherical function. Since $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda_{N}, \alpha_{N}})=i\lambda_{N}$ converges to $\widehat{T}(\omega_{\lambda, \alpha})=i\lambda$, we have $\lambda_{N}\rightarrow \lambda$. Since $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{0}}(\omega_{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})=\left \|\lambda_{N} \right \|\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{0}}(\omega_{1,\left \|\alpha_{N}\right\|})=\left \|\lambda_{N} \right \|(2\left \|\alpha _{N} \right \|+n)$ converges to $\widehat{L}_{\gamma_{0}}(\omega_{\lambda,\alpha})=\left \|\lambda \right \|(2\left \|\alpha \right \|+n)$. Also, $r_{N}:=\left \|\alpha_{N} \right \|$ must converges to $ \left \|\alpha \right \|$. Thus, both $(\lambda_{N})$ and $(\gamma_{N})$ are bounded sequences and we choose constants $C_{1},C_{2}$ with $\left \|\lambda_{N} \right \|\leq C_{1}$, $0\leq \gamma_{N}\leq C_{2}$ for all $N$. Therefore, $\left \|\lambda \right \|\leq C_{1}$,$0\leq \gamma\leq C_{2}$. Choose constant $C_{3}$ and $C_{4}$ with $\gamma_{0}(Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))}))=\left \|Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))}) \right \|^{2}\leq C_{3}$ for all $n\in S$ and let $\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))})\in S^{'} \ \forall k\in K$. Since $S$ is a compact set, $K$ is also a compact set, $S^{'}$ is a compact set. Here $Pr_{V}:(z,t)\rightarrow z$ and $Pr_{T}:(z,t)\rightarrow t$. Thus, we have $\frac{\gamma_{0}(Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))}))^{m}\left \|\lambda_{N} \right \|^{m}}{m!}\leq \frac{(c_{3}c_{1})^{m}}{m!}\leq \frac{c_{4}}{2^{m}}$. for all $m,N$ and all $Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))})\in S^{'}$, $\forall k\in K$. And therefore, for $Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))})\in S^{'}$, $\forall k\in K$, we have $\left \|e^{i\lambda_{N}Pr_{T}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))})}\sum_{\delta \in \wedge, \left \|\delta \right \|\geq M}\frac{\widehat{L}_{P_{\delta}}(\omega _{\lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}})}{dim(P_{\delta})}P_{\delta}(Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n}))) \right \|$ $\leq \sum_{m=M}^{\infty}\left \|\widehat{L}_{P_{m}}(\omega _{1,\alpha_{N}}) \right \|\sum_{\left \|\delta \right \|=m}P_{\delta}(Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n})))\left \|\lambda_{N} \right \|^{m}$ $\leq \sum_{m=M}\binom{m+n+\gamma_{N}-1}{m}\frac{1}{2^{m}m!}\gamma_{0}^{m}(Pr_{V}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}(k.n))}))\left\|\lambda_{N} \right \|^{m}$ $\leq \frac{c_{4}}{2^{M}}\sum_{m=M}^{\infty}\binom{m+n+\gamma_{N}-1}{m}(\frac{1}{2})^{m}$ $\leq \frac{c_{4}}{2^{M}}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\binom{m+n+\gamma_{N}-1}{m}(\frac{1}{2})^{m}$ $\leq \frac{c_{4}}{2^{M}}2^{n+\gamma_{N}}$ $\leq \frac{c_{5}}{2^{M}}$, where $c_{5}=c_{4}.2^{n+c_{2}}$. Remember we have $\lambda_{N}\rightarrow \lambda$, $\gamma_{N}\rightarrow \gamma$, therefore, we have $\phi_{\gamma_{N}, \lambda_{N},\alpha_{N}}^{\nu}(n)$ converges uniformly to $\phi_{\gamma, \lambda,\alpha}^{\nu}(n)$ on the compact set $S$. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} Let $(\psi_{N})_{N=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions of type 2, and $\psi$ is a bounded $O(n)$-spherical function of type 2. Then $\psi_{N}$ converges to $\psi$ in the topology of $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$(i.e.uniformly on compact sets) if and only if $r_{N}\rightarrow r$, where $\psi_{N}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk$,$\psi(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk$,$n=exp(X+A)$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} If $\psi_{N}^{\upsilon}(n)$ converges uniformly to $\psi^{\upsilon}(n)$. Take $X\in \mathcal{N}_{p}$, such that $\int_{K}<X_{p}^{},k.X >dk\neq 0$. Then $\psi_{N}(exptX)=\int_{K}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},k.X >t}dk\rightarrow \psi(exptX)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >t}dk$ uniformly, where $-\infty<t<\infty$. Differentiate with respect to $t$ and let $t=0$, we obtain $ir_{N}\int_{K}<X_{p}^{},k.X >dk\rightarrow ir\int_{K}<X_{p}^{},k.X >dk$. Therefore, $r_{N}\rightarrow r$. Conversely, if $r_{N}\rightarrow r$, its obvious that $\psi_{N}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir_{N}<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk\rightarrow \psi(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk$. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ is a complete metric space.That is, if $(\psi_{N})_{N=1}^{\infty}$ is a sequence of bounded-$O(n)$-spherical functions that converges uniformly to $\psi$ on compact subset in $F(n)$, then $\psi$ is a bounded $O(n)$-spherical function. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} It is clear that $\psi$ is continuous, $O(n)$-invariant and bounded and $\psi(e)=1$. Moreover, if $f,g \in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ have compact support then \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\int_{F(n)}\psi(n)(fg)(n)dn=\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty}\int_{F(n)}\psi_{N}(n)(fg)(n)dn\\ &=\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty}\int_{F(n)}\psi_{N}(n)f(n)dn\int_{F(n)}\psi_{N}(n)g(n)dn \\ &=\int_{F(n)}\psi(n)f(n)dn\int_{F(n)}\psi(n)g(n)dn \end{split} \end{equation} Thus, $f\rightarrow \int_{F(n)}\psi(n)f(n)dn$ defines a continous non-zero algebra homomorphism $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$. It follows that $\psi\in \bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$. \end{proof} \section{The second main theorem and some other results} The $O(N)$-Spherical transform for $f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ is the function $\widehat{f}:\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))\rightarrow \mathbb{C}, \widehat{f}(\psi)=\int_{F(n)}f(n)\psi(n^{-1})dn$. Here dn denote the haar measure for the group $F(n)$. One has \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} (fg)^{\wedge}(\psi)=\widehat{f}(\psi)\widehat{g}(\psi) \end{equation} and \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} (f^{})^{\wedge}(\psi)=\overline{\widehat{f}(\psi)} \end{equation} for $f,g\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$, $\psi\in \bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$, $f^{}(n)=\overline{f(n^{-1})}$. Let's compute equation (5.2) for example, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &(f^{})^{\wedge}(\psi)=\int_{F(n)}f^{}(n)\psi(n^{-1})dn\\ &=\int_{F(n)}\overline{f(n^{-1})}\psi(n^{-1})dn=\int_{F(n)}\overline{f(n)}\psi(n)dn \\ &=\int_{F(n)}\overline{f(n)}\times \overline{\psi(n^{-1})}dn=\int_{F(n)}\overline{f(n)\psi(n^{-1})}dn \\ &=\overline{\widehat{f}(\psi)} \end{split} \end{equation} The compact open topology is the smallest topology makes all of the maps $\{\widehat{f}\mid f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\}$ continuous. Since $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\}$ is a Banach, $$-algebra with respect to the involution $f\rightarrow f^{}$, it follows that $\widehat{f}$ belongs to the space $C_{0}(\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n)))$ of continuous functions on $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ that vanish at infinity. Moreover, we have $\left \\|\widehat{f} \right \\|_{\infty}\leq \left \\|f \right \\|_{1}$ for $f\in \bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$. This follows immediately from the fact that for $\psi\in \bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ one has $\left \|\psi(n) \right \|\leq \psi(e)=1$, since $\psi$ is positive definite. Godement's Plancherel Theory for Gelfand pairs (cf.[9] or Section 1.6 in [1]) ensures that there exists a unique positive Borel measure $d\mu$ on the space $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ for which \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \int_{F(n)}\left \|f(n) \right \|^{2}dn=\int_{\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))}\left \|\widehat{f}(\psi) \right \|d\mu(\psi) \end{equation} for all continous functions $f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\cap L_{K}^{2}(F(n))$. If $f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\cap L_{K}^{2}(F(n))$ is continuous and $\widehat{f}$ is integrable with respect to $d\mu$, then one has the Inversion Formula. \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} f(n)=\int_{\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))}\widehat{f}(\psi)\overline{\psi(n^{-1})}d\mu(\psi) \end{equation} In particular, this formula holds when $f$ is continuous, positive definite and $K$-invariant. Moreover, the spherical transform $f\rightarrow \widehat{f}$ extends uniquely to an isomorphism between $L_{K}^{2}(F(n))$ and $L^{2}(\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n)),d\mu)$. Let $\mathcal{L}$ be the set of $\wedge=(\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\lambda_{p^{'}})\in \mathbb{R}^{p^{'}}$ such that $\lambda_{1}>\cdots >\lambda_{p^{'}}>0$. We define the following measure on $\mathcal{L}$: $d\wedge=d\lambda_{1}\cdots d\lambda_{p^{'}}$ is the restricted Lebesgue measure on $\mathcal{L}$, $d\eta^{'}(\wedge)=\begin{cases} c\prod_{i=1}^{p^{'}}\lambda_{i}\prod_{j<k}(\lambda_{j}^{2}-\lambda_{k}^{2})^{2}d\lambda_{1}\cdots d\lambda_{p^{'}} & \mbox{if }p=2p^{'} \\ c\prod_{i=1}^{p^{'}}\lambda_{i}^{3}\prod_{j<k}(\lambda_{j}^{2}-\lambda_{k}^{2})^{2}d\lambda_{1}\cdots d\lambda_{p^{'}}, & \mbox{if }p=2p^{'}+1 \end{cases}$. where the constant $c$ is some constant. Over $\mathbb{R}^{+}$, we define the measure $\tau$ given as the Lebesgue measure if $p=2p^{'}+1$, and the Dirac measure in 0, if $p=2p^{'}$. $c(p)=\begin{cases} (2\pi)^{-\frac{p(p-1)}{2}+p^{'}}& \mbox{if }p=2p^{'} \\ 2(2\pi)^{-\frac{p(p-1)}{2}+p^{'}-1}, & \mbox{if }p=2p^{'}+1 \end{cases}$. \begin{theorem}\label{equal} $m^{}$ is the radial Plancherel measure for $(N_{p},O_{p})$,i.e. for a $K$-invariant function $\psi\in L^{2}(N)$, we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \left \\|\psi \right \\|^{2}_{L^{2}(N)}=\int \left \|<\psi,\phi^{r,\wedge,l}>\right \|^{2}dm^{}(r,\wedge,l). \end{equation} \end{theorem} Note that $m^{}$ is given as the tensor product of $\eta^{'}$ on $\mathcal{L}$, and the counting measure $\sum$ on $\mathbb{N}^{p^{'}}$, and the measure $\tau$ on $\mathbb{R}^{+}$, up to the normalizing constant $c(p)$. According to the definition of $d\eta^{'}$, the second type of the bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions has no compact on the above formula. \begin{theorem}\label{equal} The bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions of "type 1" are dense in the space $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Take a point $r\in R^{+}$, and suppose that $\phi^{r,0}$ is not in the closure of $\{\phi^{r,\left \|\lambda \right \|,\alpha}\mid r\in R^{+},\left \|\lambda \right \|\in R^{+}, \alpha\in \wedge\}$. $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ is metrizable, hence it is completely regular. So we can find a continuous function $J:\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ with $J(\phi^{r,0})=1$, $J(\phi^{r,\left \|\lambda \right \|,\alpha})=0$ for all $r\in R^{+},\left \|\lambda \right \|\in R^{+}, \alpha\in \wedge$. We can assume that $J$ has compact support. \\The equation (5.2) ensures that $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ is a symmetric banach $$-algebra. It follows that $\{\widehat{f}\mid f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ is dense in $(C_{0}(\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))),\left \\|\cdot \right \\|_{\infty})$. (See for example, $\S$ 14 in chapter 3 of [12].) Thus we can find a sequence $(j_{N})$ in $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ with $\widehat{j_{N}}\rightarrow J$ uniformly on $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$. We can assume that each $j_{N}$ is continous and compactly supported. Moreover, since $J$ is real-valued, we can assume that $j_{N}^{}=j_{N}$. Similar to the proof of Proposition 3 in [10] shows that one can find an approximate identity $(a_{s})_{s>0}$ in $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ with $\widehat{a_{s}}$ compactly supported in $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ for all $s>0$. For $s$ sufficiently small, one has $\widehat{a_{s}}(\phi^{r,0})>\frac{3}{4}$. moreover, for each $s$ one sees that $(a_{s}j_{N})^{\wedge}=\widehat{a_{s}}\widehat{j_{N}}$ converges uniformly to $\widehat{a_{s}}J$ as $N\rightarrow \infty$. Thus we can choose $s_{0}$ sufficiently small and $N_{0}$ sufficiently large that $g=a_{s_{0}}j_{N_{0}}$ satisfies $\widehat{a_{s}}(\phi^{r,0})>\frac{1}{2}$ and $\left \|\widehat{a_{s}}(\phi^{r,\left \|\lambda \right \|,\alpha}) \right \|<\frac{1}{4}$ for all $r\in R^{+},\left \|\lambda \right \|\in R^{+}, \alpha\in \wedge$ Note that $g$ is continuous, integrable, square-integrable and $g^{}=g$. Dixmier's functional Calculus (cf.[11]) ensures that "sufficiently smooth functions operate on $L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$." Thus if $\zeta: \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is sufficiently smooth with $\zeta$ and its derivatives integrable and $\zeta(0)=0$, then there is a function $f:=\zeta \{g\}\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))\cap L_{K}^{2}(F(n))\cap C(F(n))$ with the property that $\widehat{f}=\zeta{\widehat{g}}$. We choose a $\zeta$ with $\zeta(t)=1$ for $t>\frac{1}{2}$ and $\zeta(t)=0$ for $t<\frac{1}{4}$. Then $F=\widehat{f}=\widehat{\zeta \{g\}}$ satisfies $F(\phi^{r,0})=1$ and $F(\phi^{r,\left \|\lambda \right \|,\alpha})=0$ for all $r\in R^{+},\left \|\lambda \right \|\in R^{+}, \alpha\in \wedge$. Now theorem 5.6 shows \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\left \\|\psi \right \\|^{2}_{L^{2}(N)}=\int \left \|<\psi,\phi^{r,\wedge,l}>\right \|^{2}dm^{}(r,\wedge,l)\\ &=\int \left \|\int_{F(n)}\psi(x)\overline{\phi^{r,\wedge,l}(x)} \right \|^{2}dxdm^{}(r,\wedge,l) =\int \left \|\int_{F(n)}\psi(x)\phi^{r,\wedge,l}(x^{-1}) \right \|^{2}dxdm^{}(r,\wedge,l)\\ &=\int \left \|\widehat{\psi}(\phi^{r,\wedge,l})\right \|^{2}dm^{}(r,\wedge,l) \end{split} \end{equation} From this and equation (5.4), we obtain $F=0$ a.e. on $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$. In particular, $F$ is integrable on $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$ and we apply formula (5.5) to conclude $f\equiv 0$ on $F(n)$. This implies that $F=\widehat{f}$ is identically zero on $\bigtriangleup(O(n),F(n))$, which contradicts $F(\phi^{r,0})=1$. \end{proof} We define the Fourier transform $\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)$: $\mathcal{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ of $f\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$ by \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} {F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w)=\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz \end{equation} where dz denotes Euclidean measure on $\mathcal{N}_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $\mathcal{N}$ is the lie algebra of $N_{p}$. With this normalization, one has $\left \\|\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f) \right \\|_{2}=(2\pi)^{n}\left \\|f \right \\|_{2}$. This is because \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\left \\|\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f) \right \\|_{2}=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}\overline{f(z^{'})}e^{ir<z^{'},w>}dzdz^{'}dw\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)\overline{f(z^{'})}\int_{\mathcal{N}}e^{ir<z^{'}-z,w>}dzdz^{'}dw\\ &=(2\pi)^{n}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)\overline{f(z)}dz=(2\pi)^{n}\left \\|f \right \\|_{2} \end{split} \end{equation} There are several properties about the Fourier transform, they are as follows: (a)$\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(c_{1}f_{1}+c_{2}f_{2})=c_{1}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f_{1})+c_{2}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f_{2})$, for $c_{1}，c_{2}\in \mathbb{C}$ and $f_{1}，f_{2}\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$. (b)$\left \|\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w) \right \|\leq \int_{\mathcal{N}}\left \|f(z) \right \|dz=\left \\|f \right \\|_{1}$ for all $f\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$. (c)$\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(fg)(w)=\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w)\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(g)(w)$ for all $f,g\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$. (d)$\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(\tilde{f})=\overline{\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)}$ for all $f\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$. (e)Let $(L_{z^{'}}f)(z)=f(z-z^{'})$, then $(L_{z^{'}}f)(w)=e^{-ir<z^{'},w>}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w)$. Conversely, $\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(e^{ir<z^{'},z>}f(z))(w)=L_{Z^{'}}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w)$ for all $f\in L^{1}(\mathcal{N})$. \begin{proof} (a)\begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(c_{1}f_{1}+c_{2}f_{2})=\int_{\mathcal{N}}(c_{1}f_{1}+c_{2}f_{2})(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=c_{1}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f_{1}(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz+c_{2}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f_{2}(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=c_{1}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f_{1})+c_{2}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f_{2}) \end{split} \end{equation} (b)$\left \|\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w) \right \|=\left \|\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz \right \|$ $\leq \int_{\mathcal{N}}\left \|f(z) \right \|dz=\left \\|f \right \\|_{1}$. (c) \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(fg)(w)\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z-x)g(x)e^{-ir<z,w>}dzdx\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(y)g(x)e^{-ir<x+y,w>}dxdy\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(y)g(x)e^{-ir<y,w>}e^{-ir<x,w>}dxdy\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(y)e^{-ir<y,w>}dy\int_{\mathcal{N}}g(x)e^{-ir<x,w>}dx\\ &=\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w)\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(g)(w) \end{split} \end{equation} (d) \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(\tilde{f})(\omega)=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\tilde{f}(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}\overline{f(-z)}\times \overline{e^{-ir<-z,w>}}dz\\ &=\overline{\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz}\\ &=\overline{\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)}(\omega) \end{split} \end{equation} (e) \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &(L_{z^{'}}f)(w)\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}(L_{z^{'}}f)(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z-z^{'})e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z+z^{'},w>}dz\\ &=e^{-ir<z^{'},w>}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w) \end{split} \end{equation} conversely, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(e^{ir<z^{'},z>}f(z))(w)\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}e^{ir<z^{'},z>}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w>}dz\\ &=\int_{\mathcal{N}}f(z)e^{-ir<z,w-z^{'}>}dz\\ &=\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w-z^{'})\\ &=L_{Z^{'}}\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{N}}(f)(w) \end{split} \end{equation} Finally, since we know the two different types bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions, we compute the spherical transform of them respectively. Remember the two different types bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions are as follows: For $n=exp(X+A)\in N$. Type 1:$\phi^{r,\wedge,l}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(k.n)))dk$. Type 2:$\phi^{\upsilon}(n)=\int_{K}e^{ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dk$. For any $f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ and ”type 1” bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions,we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\hat{f}(\phi^{r,\wedge,l})=\int_{N}f(n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(k.n^{-1})))dkdn\\ &=\int_{N}f(k.n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(k.n^{-1})))dkdn\\ &=\int_{K}\int_{N}f(n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(n^{-1})))dndk\\ &=\int_{N}f(n)e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},X >}\omega_{\wedge,l}(\Psi_{2}^{-1}(\overline{q_{1}}(n^{-1})))dn \end{split} \end{equation} For any $f\in L_{K}^{1}(F(n))$ and ”type 2” bounded $O(n)$-spherical functions,we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\hat{f}(\phi^{\upsilon})=\int_{N}f(n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dkdn\\ &=\int_{N}f(k.n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},k.X >}dkdn\\ &=\int_{K}\int_{N}f(n)\int_{K}e^{-ir<X_{p}^{},X >}dndk\\ &=\int_{N}f(n)e^{-ir<X_{p}^{*},X >}dn \end{split} \end{equation} \end{proof}
\section{Introduction} Approximately half of all solar type stars reside in binary systems \citep{Duquennoy1991,Raghavan2010}. Recent exoplanet detections have shown that planet formation in these systems is possible. Planets can orbit one of the stars in the so-called S type configuration, such as $\gamma$ Cephei \citep{Hatzes2003} HD41004b \citep{Zucker2004} and GJ86b \citep{Queloz2000}. If the binary semimajor axis is sufficiently small, then the planet can orbit the system centre of mass in the circumbinary or P type configuration. Planets in this configuration were first detected around post-main sequence stars, in particular the binary pulsar B160-26 \citep{Thorsett1993,Sigurdsson2003}. The Kepler space telescope has been pivotal in detecting circumbinary planets orbiting main sequence stars, such as Kepler-16 \citep{Doyle2011}, Kepler-34 and Kepler-35 \citep{Welsh2012}, and Kepler-47 \citep{Orosz2012}. Planets in binary systems are sufficiently common that we should consider their habitability seriously. As of July 2016, 112 exoplanets have been detected in binary star systems\footnote{http://www.univie.ac.at/adg/schwarz/multiple.html}, giving an occurrence rate of around 4\% (previous estimates on a much smaller exoplanet population by \citealt{Desidera2007} placed the fraction of planets in S type systems at 20\%). At gas giant masses, the occurrence rate of planets around P type binaries is thought to be similar to that of single stars \citep{Armstrong2014}. However, theoretical modelling indicates that the dynamical landscape of the binary significantly affects the planet formation process, both for S-type \citep{Wiegert1997,Quintana2002,Quintana2007,Thebault2008,Thebault2009,Xie2010,Rafikov2014,Rafikov2014a} and P-type systems \citep{Doolin2011,Rafikov2013,Martin2013,Marzari2013,Dunhill2013, Meschiari2014,Silsbee2015}. Therefore, when considering the prospects for habitable worlds in the Milky Way, one must take care to consider the effects that companion stars will have on the thermal and gravitational evolution of planets and moons. The habitable zone (HZ) concept \citep{Huang1959,Hart_HZ} is often employed to determine whether a detected exoplanet might be expected to be conducive to surface liquid water (that is, if its mass and atmospheric composition allow it). Initially calculated for the single star case using 1D radiative transfer modelling of the layers of an Earthlike atmosphere \citep{Kasting_et_al_93}, this quickly establishes a range of orbital distances that produce clement planetary conditions. Over time, line radiative transfer models have been refined, leading to improved estimates of the inner and outer habitable zone edges \citep{Kopparapu2013,Kopparapu2014}. In the case of multiple star systems, the presence and motion of extra sources of gravity and radiation have two important effects: \begin{enumerate} \item The morphology and location of the system's HZ changes with time, and \item Regions of the system are orbitally unstable \end{enumerate} \noindent These joint thermal-dynamical constraints on habitability have been addressed in a largely decoupled fashion using a variety of analytical and numerical techniques. The thermal time dependence of the HZ can be evaluated by combining the flux from both stars, taking care to weight each contribution appropriately, and applying the single star constraints to determine whether a particular spatial location would receive flux conducive to surface water. \citet{Kane2013} use the aggregate flux to find a peak wavelength of emission. Assuming the combined spectrum resembles a blackbody, Wien's Law provides an effective temperature for the total insolation, and hence the limits of \citet{Kopparapu2013} can be applied. This approximation is acceptable for P type systems, where the distance from each star to the planet is similar. \citet{Haghighipour2013} and \citet{Kaltenegger2013} weight each star's flux by its effective temperature, and then determine the regions at which this weighted flux matches that of a 1 $M_{\rm \odot}$ star at the habitable zone boundaries. This approach is suitable for both S type and P type systems. A detailed analytic solution for calculations of this nature has been undertaken by \citet{Cuntz2014}. \citet{Mason2013} take a similar approach, but they also note that for P type systems, the tidal interaction between primary and secondary can induce rotational synchronisation, which can reduce extreme UV flux and stellar wind pressure, improving conditions in the habitable zone compared to the single star case (see also \citealt{Zuluaga2016}). The dynamical constraints on habitability rely heavily on N Body simulation, most prominently the work of Dvorak \citep{Dvorak1984,Dvorak1986} and \citet{Holman1999a}. By integrating an ensemble of test particles in a variety of orbits around a binary, regions of dynamical instability can be determined. \citet{Holman1999a} used these simulations to develop empirical expressions for a critical orbital semimajor axis, $a_c$. In the case of a P type system, this represents a minimum value - anything inside $a_c$ is orbitally unstable, as given by the following expression: \begin{multline} a_p > a_c = a_{bin}\left((1.6 \pm 0.04) + (5.1 \pm 0.05) e_{bin} \right. \\ \left. + (4.12 \pm 0.09) \mu - (2.22 \pm 0.11) e^2_{bin} - (4.27 \pm 0.17) \mu e_{bin}\right. \\ \left. - (5.09 \pm 0.11) \mu^2 + (4.61 \pm 0.36) \mu^2 e^2_{bin}\right). \label{eq:stable_amin} \end{multline} \noindent In the case of an S-type system, $a_c$ represents a maximum value: \begin{multline} a_p < a_c = a_{bin}\left( (0.464 \pm 0.006) - (0.38 \pm 0.01) \mu \right. \\ \left. - (0.631 \pm 0.034) e_{bin} + (0.586 \pm 0.061) \mu e_{bin} \right. \\ \left. +(0.15 \pm 0.041) e^2_{bin} - (0.198 \pm 0.074) \mu e^2_{bin} \right) \label{eq:stable_amax} \end{multline} \noindent where $a_{bin}$ is the binary semimajor axis, $e_{bin}$ is the binary orbital eccentricity, and $\mu$ represents the binary mass ratio: \begin{equation} \mu = \frac{M_2}{M_1+M_2} \end{equation} \noindent The majority of binary habitability calculations rely on the above dynamical constraints. Notable exceptions include \citet{Eggl2012}'s use of Fast Lyapunov Indicators for chaos detection, which yield slightly smaller values of $a_c$ for S type systems \citep{Pilat-Lohinger2002}, and \citet{Jaime2014}'s use of invariant loops to discover non-intersecting orbits \citep{Pichardo2005}. There is a good deal of research into spin-orbit alignments of extrasolar planets under the influence of inclined stellar companions (e.g. \citealt{Anderson2016}), but this work rarely pertains to terrestrial planet habitability. On the other hand, the evolution of planetary rotation period has been studied intently with regards to habitability of planets in single star systems \citep[e.g.][]{Bolmont2014,Brown2014,Cuartas-Restrepo2016}. All the above approaches to determining habitability in binary systems rely on an initial 1D calculation of the atmosphere's response to radiative flux, where the key dimension is atmospheric depth. Equally, 1D approaches can consider the latitudinal variation of flux on a planet's surface, giving rise to the so-called latitudinal energy balance models or LEBMs, which have been used both in the single star case \citep{Spiegel_et_al_08,Dressing2010, Vladilo2013} and for multiple stars \citep{Forgan2012,Forgan2014}. These are better suited to capture processes that depend on atmospheric circulation, such as the snowball effect arising from ice-albedo feedback \citep{Pierrehumbert2005, Tajika2008}, which is likely to occur in systems where the orbits undergo Milankovitch cycles and other secular evolution \citep{Spiegel2010}. However, all these approaches typically decouple the thermal from the dynamical. The orbital constraints on the HZ are considered separately from the radiative transfer calculations. While they are eventually combined, the binary habitable zones that are constructed do not incorporate the effects of coupled gravito-thermal perturbations. Indeed, \citet{Holman1999a} admit that their empirical limits on semimajor axis ignore the potential for stable resonances inside the instability region, as well as unstable resonances in stable regions (cf \citealt{Chavez2014}). It is likely that planets on stable orbits in binary systems will experience relatively strong orbital element evolution. For example, circumbinary planets can undergo rapid precession of periapsis, which affects their ability to be detected via transit \citep{Kostov2014,Welsh2014}. Presumably the spin evolution of planets in this situation can proceed with similar rapidity. Crucially, climate systems are nonlinear, and can alter their state on very short timescales compared to the planet's orbital period. In this work, we consider coupled gravito-thermal perturbations on the climate of exoplanets in binary systems. To do so, we present a LEBM directly coupled to an N-Body integrator and an obliquity evolution model. We use this combined code to investigate the spin-orbital-climate dynamics of putative planets in two archetypal binary systems: the P-type system Kepler-47, a multi-planet circumbinary system which possesses one exoplanet inside the habitable zone \citep{Orosz2012}; and Alpha Centauri, the nearest star system to the Sun, an S type binary system which \emph{was} thought to possess a short period, Earth-mass exoplanet \citep{Dumusque2012}\footnote{This detection is no longer considered to be credible by some groups, due to concerns with how stellar activity is filtered out of radial velocity data \citep{Hatzes2013}. Recent attempts to detect $\alpha$ Cen Bb via transit show a null result \citep{Demory2015}, and re-analysis of the radial velocity data suggests that $\alpha$ Cen Bb does not exist \citep{Rajpaul2015}.}. By evolving the orbits of the bodies in tandem with the climate, we are able to detect climate variations that are directly linked to the binary's orbit, and the secular evolution of the planet's orbit and spin. In section \ref{sec:Method}, we describe the LEBM, and how the N Body model is coupled to it. In section \ref{sec:Results} we describe the simulation setup and results on dynamical and secular timescales, in section \ref{sec:Discussion} we discuss the implications for habitability, and in section \ref{sec:Conclusions} we summarise the work. \section{Method} \label{sec:Method} \subsection{Latitudinal Energy Balance Modelling} \label{sec:LEBM} \noindent Typically, LEBMs solve the following diffusion equation: \begin{equation} C \frac{\partial T(x,t)}{\partial t} - \frac{\partial }{\partial x}\left(D(1 - x^2)\frac{\partial T(x,t)}{\partial x}\right) = S(1-A(T)) - I(T). \label{eq:LEBM} \end{equation} \noindent Where $T(x,t)$ is the surface temperature, $C$ is the effective heat capacity of the atmosphere, $S$ is the insolation flux, $I$ is the IR cooling and $A$ is the albedo. In the above equation, $C$, $S$, $I$ and $A$ are functions of $x$ (either explicitly, as $S$ is, or implicitly through $T$). The latitude $\lambda$ appears through $x\equiv \sin \lambda$. This equation is evolved with the boundary condition $\frac{dT}{dx}=0$ at the poles (where $\lambda=[-90,90] ^{\circ}$), and requires the assumption that the planet rotates rapidly relative to its orbital period. Our implementation of the LEBM follows that of \citet{Spiegel_et_al_08}, and has been used previously in studying the climate evolution of planets in binary systems on timescales of order a few hundred years \citep{Forgan2012,Forgan2014}. In our approach, we consider a given latitude to be habitable if its temperature resides within $273 K < T < 373$ K, i.e. that surface water is liquid. The diffusion coefficient $D$ determines the efficiency of heat redistribution across latitudes. Its value is defined such that a fiducial Earthlike planet, rotating with period 1 day, orbiting at 1 au around a star of $1 M_{\rm \odot}$, produces the correct average temperature profile (see e.g. \citealt{Spiegel_et_al_08, Vladilo2013}). If the planet's rotation is more rapid, the Coriolis effect will inhibit latitudinal heat transport (see \citealt{Farrell1990}): \begin{equation} D=5.394 \times 10^2 \left(\frac{\Omega_{rot}}{\Omega_{rot,\oplus}}\right)^{-2},\label{eq:D} \end{equation} \noindent where $\Omega_{rot}$ is the rotational angular velocity of the planet, and $\Omega_{rot,\oplus}$ is the rotational angular velocity of the Earth. This is a necessarily simple expression, but can be made more rigorous through including terms for atmospheric pressure and mean molecular weight (e.g. \citealt{Williams1997a}, but see also \citealt{Vladilo2013}'s attempts to introduce a latitudinal dependence to $D$ to mimic the Hadley convective cells on Earth). Beyond this, full global circulation modelling is needed to explore the effects of rotation \citep{DelGenio1993,DelGenio1996}. As in previous work, we solve equation (\ref{eq:LEBM}) using an explicit forward time, centre space finite difference algorithm. A global timestep is used, with standard constraint \begin{equation} \Delta t_{LEBM} < \frac{\left(\Delta x\right)^2C}{2D(1-x^2)}. \end{equation} \noindent The atmospheric heat capacity $C$, is a function of the planet's surface ocean fraction and how much of that is frozen, $f_{ice}$: \begin{equation} C = f_{land}C_{land} + f_{ocean}\left((1-f_{ice})C_{ocean} + f_{ice} C_{ice}\right), \end{equation} \noindent where $f_{land}=1-f_{ocean}$. The heat capacities of land, ocean and ice covered areas are \begin{align} C_{land} & =5.25 \times 10^9 \mathrm{erg \, cm^{-2}\, K^{-1}} \\ C_{ocean} & = 40.0C_{land} \\ C_{ice} & = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l } 9.2C_{land} & \quad \mbox{263 K $< T <$ 273 K} \\ 2C_{land} & \quad \mbox{$T<263$ K}. \\ \end{array} \right. \end{align} \noindent The infrared cooling function $I$ is \begin{equation} I(T) = \frac{\sigma_{SB}T^4}{1 +0.75 \tau_{IR}(T)}, \end{equation} \noindent with the optical depth of the atmosphere given as \begin{equation} \tau_{IR}(T) = 0.79\left(\frac{T}{273\,\mathrm{K}}\right)^3. \end{equation} \noindent The albedo function is \begin{equation} A(T) = 0.525 - 0.245 \tanh \left[\frac{T-268\,\mathrm K}{5\, \mathrm K} \right]. \end{equation} \noindent This correctly reproduces the ice-albedo feedback phenomenon, which allows a rapid non-linear increase in albedo as the ice coverage increases. At any instant, for a single star, the insolation received at a given latitude at an orbital distance $r$ is \begin{equation} S = q_0\cos Z \left(\frac{1 AU}{r}\right)^2, \end{equation} \noindent where $q_0$ is the bolometric flux received from the star at a distance of 1 AU, and $Z$ is the zenith angle: \begin{equation} q_0 = 1.36\times 10^6\left(\frac{M}{M_{\rm \odot}}\right)^4 \mathrm{erg \,s^{-1} cm^{-2}} \end{equation} \begin{equation} \cos Z = \mu = \sin \lambda \sin \delta + \cos \lambda \cos \delta \cos h. \end{equation} The solar hour angle is $h$, and $\delta$ is the solar declination, which is calculated by computing the scalar product of the spin-axis vector $\mathbf{s}$ and the planet-star separation vector $\mathbf{r}$. We obtain the spin-axis vector by rotation of the angular momentum vector in the x-axis by $\delta_0$, followed by a rotation around the axis defined by the angular momentum vector by $p_a$, the axial precession angle (or longitude of winter solstice). Our rapid rotation assumption requires that we use diurnally averaged quantities, so we also diurnally average $S$: \begin{equation} S = q_0 \bar{\mu}. \end{equation} \noindent We do this by integrating $\mu$ over the sunlit part of the day, i.e. $h=[-H, +H]$, where $H(x)$ is the radian half-day length at a given latitude. Multiplying by $H/\pi$ (as $H=\pi$ if a latitude is illuminated for a full rotation) gives the total diurnal insolation as \begin{equation} S = q_0 \left(\frac{H}{\pi}\right) \bar{\mu} = \frac{q_0}{\pi} \left(H \sin \lambda \sin \delta + \cos \lambda \cos \delta \sin H\right). \end{equation} \noindent The radian half day length is calculated as \begin{equation} \cos H = -\tan \lambda \tan \delta. \end{equation} \noindent The total insolation is a simple linear combination of the contributions from both stars. If one star is eclipsed by the other, then we set its contribution to $S$ to zero. We ensure that the simulation can accurately model an eclipse by adding an extra timestep criterion, ensuring that the transit's duration will not be less than ten timesteps. We fix the parameters of the model to those of the Earth: the initial obliquity is set to 23.5 degrees, and the ocean fraction $f_{ocean} = 0.7$. The rotation period of the body is 1 day. It is important to note that altering these parameters will alter the strength of climate fluctuations, especially if orbits are eccentric. Indeed, \citet{Forgan2012} showed that reducing the planet's ocean fraction can significantly boost temperature fluctuations in S-type binary systems with fixed orbits, and that increasing obliquity while holding other parameters fixed typically increases the average temperature of the planet. The following results should be considered with these facts in mind. \subsection{The N-Body Model}\label{sec:NBody} \noindent The dynamical evolution of the system utilises a standard 4th-order Hermite integrator with an adaptive shared timestep. We calculate this N Body timestep for all bodies$\{i\}$, $\Delta t_{N}$, by finding the minimum value of $\Delta t_{i}$: \begin{equation} \Delta t_{i} = \left(\eta \frac{\frac{a_i}{j_i}+ \frac{j_i}{s_i} }{\frac{c_i}{s_i} + \frac{s_i}{j_i}}\right)^{1/2} . \end{equation} \noindent Here, $a$ represents the magnitude of the body's acceleration, $j_i$ $s_i$ and $c_i$ are the magnitudes of the first, second and third derivatives of the acceleration of particle $i$ respectively, and $\eta$ is a tunable parameter which we set to 0.002. This is a fairly strict timestep condition, and as such the error in angular momentum is typically one in $10^6$ or better throughout. \subsection{Obliquity Evolution}\label{sec:obliq} \noindent We adopt the obliquity evolution model of \citet{Laskar1986,Laskar1986a}, developed for the Solar System and subsequently used for putative exoplanet systems \citep{Armstrong2004,Armstrong2014a}. In this paradigm, the evolution of the obliquity $\delta_0$ and precession $p_a$ are functions of the inclination variables \begin{align} p &= \sin \left(\frac{i}{2}\right) \sin \Omega \\ q &= \sin \left(\frac{i}{2}\right) \cos \Omega \end{align} \noindent Where $i$ is the inclination, and $\Omega$ is the longitude of the ascending node. The obliquity and precession evolve according to the following: \begin{align} \frac{d\delta_0}{dt} & = -B \sin p_a + A \cos p_a \\ \frac{d p_a}{dt} & = R(\delta_0) - \cot \delta_0 \left( A \sin p_a + B \cos p_a \right) -2C -p_g. \end{align} \noindent $A,B$ and $C$ are all functions of $p$ and $q$: \begin{align} A(p,q) & = \frac{2}{\sqrt{1-p^2-q^2}}\left(\dot{q} - pC(p,q)\right) \\ B(p,q) & = \frac{2}{\sqrt{1-p^2-q^2}}\left(\dot{p} - qC(p,q)\right) \\ C(p,q) & = \dot{p}q - \dot{q}p \end{align} Note that these $A,B,C$ terms ensure increases in inclination mediate changes in obliquity. Equivalently, if the inclination of a planet's orbit is increased, the obliquity decreases, as the angle between the orbital plane and the fundamental plane defined by the planet's spin axis decreases (see Figure 1 of \citealt{Armstrong2014a}). That being said, the spin axis of the planet can change regardless of the inclination, due to either direct torques from the star ($R(\delta_0)$) or from the relativistic precession term $p_g$. \citet{Laskar1986} give the direct torque from a single host star as \begin{equation} R(\delta_0) = \frac{3k^2M_}{a^3 \Omega_{rot}} E_D S_0 \cos \delta_0 \end{equation} Where $E_D$ is the dynamical ellipticity (i.e. the non-sphericity) of the planet (which we set equal to 0.00328005 for the remainder of this work), \begin{equation} S_0 = \frac{1}{2}\left(1-e^2\right)^{-3/2} -0.422 \times 10^{-6} \end{equation} and $k^2 = \frac{GM_}{4\pi^2}$ (where the units of $G$ must be selected to be appropriate for comparison with $\Omega_{rot}$). For a single star, the relativistic precession is \begin{equation} p_g = \frac{k_r}{2(1-e^2)} \end{equation} \noindent where \begin{equation} k_r = \frac{n^3 a^2}{c^2\left(1 + M_p/M\right)} \end{equation} \noindent The mean motion $n$ can be determined by considering $k$ in the context of Kepler's third law: \begin{equation} n^2 a^3 = \frac{k^2}{\left(1+M_p/M\right)} \end{equation} \noindent In this work, we make the following assumptions about these equations in their use for binary stars. In the S type case, we assume that direct torques and precession is generated by the host star only. The secondary can influence the obliquity only through modification of the planet's orbital elements $e,i,\Omega$. In the case of a P type system, we assume that the torques from both stars co-add. The planet's orbital elements relative to the system centre of mass are employed in both cases for simplicity. Given the distance of both stars from the centre of mass is small relative to the planet's semi-major axis, this seems a reasonable assumption (although we do note the need for further investigation of this problem, see Discussion). \subsection{Coupling the Models} \noindent To couple the LEBM to the N Body integrator and obliquity evolution model, we elect the simplest route, by forcing all systems to evolve according to a shared timestep. In practice, this means comparing the LEBM and N Body timesteps, i.e. \begin{equation} \Delta t = min \left(\Delta t_{N}, \Delta t_{LEBM}\right). \end{equation} \noindent Typically the obliquity evolution timestep is much larger than the other two. This does limit the code's efficacy when evolving systems with either short dynamical timescales, or short thermal timescales. In the case of a fiducial Earth-Sun model, we are able to evolve the coupled LEBM-N Body system with similar runtime to a LEBM using fixed Keplerian orbits. We will see that in the S type configuration, the addition of N Body physics makes little appreciable difference to computational speed. However, in the P type configuration, the short dynamical timescale of the binary increases the runtime significantly. This could be alleviated by other timestepping approaches, which we address in the Discussion. We emphasise that correctly resolving the LEBM is crucial - it is a nonlinear system, with positive feedback mechanisms that can operate rapidly compared to the system's spin-orbit dynamical time. It is this property that requires the models to be fully coupled in order to truly understand the climate of planets in dynamically rich systems over secular timescales. We have tested the N Body integrator and obliquity evolution model against the results of \citet{Armstrong2014a} (their System 1), and find a good match for their orbital elements and spin parameters. In a companion paper (Forgan and Mead, in prep) we test the spin-orbit-climate evolution of the Earth under the influence of the Solar System planets, and find that appropriate Milankovitch cycles in the planet's spin-orbit parameters do indeed arise. \section{Results} \label{sec:Results} \noindent We now apply our combined model to the two archetypal P and S type binary systems. We will be comparing runs with obliquity evolution switched on and off to investigate what climate features are due to either orbital or spin evolution. \subsection{Kepler-47} \subsubsection{Setup} \noindent The Kepler-47 system contains a 1.043 $M_{\rm \odot}$ star and an 0.362 $M_{\rm \odot}$ star orbiting each other with a period of around 7.5 days. We adopt the orbital parameters of \citet{Orosz2012}, with a semi-major axis of 0.0836 AU and eccentricity 0.0234, and assume that the stars' luminosities are determined by standard main sequence relations. Kepler-47c orbits inside the circumbinary habitable zone at 0.989 AU, with an eccentricity upper limit of 0.41. As we are using the Kepler-47 system as an archetype for terrestrial habitability in P type systems, we replace Kepler-47c with an Earth mass planet orbiting at the same semi-major axis, and investigate both low and high eccentricity orbits. Kepler-47b orbits interior to Kepler-47c with a semimajor axis of 0.2956 AU with eccentricity 0.034, and period 49.5 days. We investigate the climate of our terrestrial planet both with and without Kepler-47b's presence. \subsubsection{Zero Eccentricity, Without Kepler-47b} \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_ecc_inc.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_obliq_prec.png}\\ \end{array}$ \caption{The dynamical evolution of the terrestrial planet with Kepler-47c's semimajor axis, and zero eccentricity. Left, the orbital evolution of the body, as given by its eccentricity and inclination. Right, the spin evolution as given by the obliquity and precession angles. \label{fig:Kepler47c_e0_orbit}} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_T.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_fourierT.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_compareT_obliq.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e0_fourierT_obliq.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{The climate evolution of the Kepler-47c terrestrial planet, with obliquity evolution switched off (top row) and switched on (bottom row). Left: The global maximum, minimum and mean temperatures on the surface over 10,000 years. Right: Periodograms for the mean temperature. The red dashed lines indicate the planet's orbital period of 0.829 years, and its harmonics ($1/2$, $1/3$... of the period). \label{fig:Kepler47c_e0_climate}} \end{center} \end{figure} \noindent Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_orbit} shows the orbital evolution of a terrestrial planet orbiting the Kepler-47 binary at $a_p=0.989$ AU with zero eccentricity and an initial inclination of 0.5$^\circ$ relative to the binary plane. We run the simulation for 10,000 years, with sufficiently high snapshot frequency that the orbital period of the binary (0.0205 years) is well resolved. The planet's orbit is relatively stable, undergoing small eccentricity and inclination variations of around 800 and 400 year periods respectively (note also that the argument of periapsis precesses on a similar timescale). In the case where the obliquity is fixed, the planet's climate settles to a stable state, with mean temperatures fluctuating by around 0.1 K (top row of Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_climate}). We can see in the periodogram for fixed obliquity that the major contribution to temperature fluctuation is seasonal variation over the orbital period of 0.829 years (and its harmonics at $1/n$ of the period), closely followed by a contribution at the binary period of 0.0205 years as the relative insolation from each object varies. Finally, we see a significantly weaker contribution from eccentricity variation at 800 years. There are no low order mean motion resonances between the binary and planet period - the system is closest to a 80:2 resonance. There is no evidence of such a resonance in the temperature data, which would result in a peak at approximately 1.66 years in the periodogram. In the case where obliquity is allowed to vary (bottom row of Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_climate}), we can immediately detect climatic variations from inspecting the maximum, mean and minimum temperature curves. The presence of an extra peak at around 400 years in the temperature periodogram (bottom right of Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_climate}) shows that the inclination is forcing similar variations in obliquity and precession angle (Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_orbit}). Generally speaking, the planet's climate now shows a richer set of resonant features in the periodogram with periods greater than that of the orbital periods in play. \subsubsection{Zero Eccentricity, with Kepler-47b} \noindent The previous section has shown that single planets in P type systems will undergo secular evolution quite similar to that of Milankovitch cycles (albeit at a much reduced timescale). We now add Kepler-47b to the system (with zero eccentricity and inclination) to gauge what effect neighbouring planets might have on the secular evolution of circumbinary habitable climates. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_ecc_inc.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_obliq_prec.png}\\ \end{array}$ \caption{The dynamical evolution of the terrestrial planet with Kepler-47c's semimajor axis, and zero eccentricity, in the presence of Kepler-47b. Left, the orbital evolution of the body, as given by its eccentricity and inclination. Right, the spin evolution as given by the obliquity and precession angles. \label{fig:Kepler47c_b_e0_orbit}} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_T.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_fourierT.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_compareT_obliq.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_b_e0_fourierT_obliq.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{The climate evolution of the Kepler-47c terrestrial planet in the presence of Kepler-47b, with obliquity evolution switched off (top row) and switched on (bottom row). Left: The global maximum, minimum and mean temperatures on the surface over 10,000 years. Right: Periodograms for the mean temperature. The red dashed lines indicate Kepler-47b's orbital period of 0.1355 years, and its harmonics ($1/2$, $1/3$... of the period). \label{fig:Kepler47c_b_e0_climate}} \end{center} \end{figure} \noindent Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_b_e0_orbit} shows the orbital evolution of the Kepler-47c substitute. Comparing to the previous section (Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e0_orbit}), we see that the eccentricity variation has not changed much, but the inclination variation has decreased its period by a factor of roughly two. Interestingly, no such changes are seen in the obliquity and precession evolution, indicating that stellar torques are presumably dominant. The periodograms for both cases (Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_b_e0_climate}) show little change in the climate by adding a neighbour planet. The periodograms show no signs of Kepler-47b's influence at its orbital period of 0.1355 years. The features seen at 0.1355 years with obliquity evolution exist in the previous run without Kepler-47b. The planets are not in mean motion resonance - they are closest to a 49:8 mean motion resonance, which would indicate a peak at approximately 6.63 years, which is not seen in either case. \subsubsection{High Eccentricity, no b} We now remove Kepler-47b from the system, and increase the eccentricity of our habitable planet to 0.4. The dynamical evolution (Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e04_orbit}) is more rapid, with small eccentricity and inclination oscillations about the original value with a period of around 550 years, and similar obliquity and precession evolution. Note the amplitude modulation of the inclination, which coincides with peak eccentricity. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_ecc_inc.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_obliq_prec.png}\\ \end{array}$ \caption{The dynamical evolution of the terrestrial planet with Kepler-47c's semimajor axis, and eccentricity 0.4. Left, the orbital evolution of the body, as given by its eccentricity and inclination. Right, the spin evolution as given by the obliquity and precession angles. \label{fig:Kepler47c_e04_orbit}} \end{center} \end{figure} Naturally, the climate of the body experiences stronger temperature oscillations even with obliquity switched off (top row of Figure \ref{fig:Kepler47c_e04_climate}). The periodogram shows greater importance for the seasonal variation, as well as the eccentricity variation peak at 550 years. As the planet and binary are not in mean motion resonance, the contribution of the binary to the planet's eccentricity periodogram is smeared between 0.02 and 0.03 years due to the planet's increased eccentricity. Note that this increased eccentricity raises the maximum temperature beyond the runaway greenhouse limit of 340K. The runaway greenhouse effect is not modelled by the LEBM, and we should be careful when making statements about this configuration's habitability. Some weak modes appear around the planet's orbital period of 0.829 years, but their origin is unclear - presumably they are linked to the precession of the planet's periapsis relative to that of the binary. Allowing obliquity to vary allows other oscillations to assume greater importance. Indeed, the variations caused by binary motion are close to negligible in this case, especially compared to variations in the year-decade range. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_T.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_fourierT.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_compareT_obliq.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Kepler47c_e04_fourierT_obliq.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{The climate evolution of the Kepler-47c terrestrial planet at high eccentricity, with obliquity evolution switched off (top row) and switched on (bottom row). Left: The global maximum, minimum and mean temperatures on the surface over 10,000 years. Right: Periodograms for the mean temperature. The red dashed lines indicate the planet's orbital period of 0.829 years, and its harmonics ($1/2$, $1/3$... of the period). \label{fig:Kepler47c_e04_climate}} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Alpha Centauri B} \subsubsection{Setup} \noindent The Alpha Centauri system is in fact a hierarchical triple system, with Alpha Centauri A and B orbiting each other at 23.4 AU with eccentricity 0.5179. We neglect the third component, Proxima Centauri, as it orbits at great distance and is of sufficiently low mass \citep{Wertheimer2006}. We consider $\alpha$ Cen B as the host star for a planetary system. The stellar masses are $M_A=1.1 M_{\rm \odot}$, $M_B = 0.934 M_{\rm \odot}$, and their luminosities are $L_A=1.519 L_{\rm \odot}$ and $L_B=0.5 L_{\rm \odot}$ respectively \citep{Thevenin2002}. This modifies the location of the habitable zone as was previously measured by \citet{Forgan2012}, as they used main sequence relations for the luminosity. We do not model the presence of $\alpha$ Cen Bb, as its 3 day orbit would place it extremely close to $\alpha$ Cen B, and hence is unlikely to produce a significant perturbation on any planets within the habitable zone. Instead, we place a single Earthlike planet in the system near the outer edge of the habitable zone, on a circular orbit at $0.7095$ AU , where the effects of $\alpha$ Cen A are maximal. To ensure obliquity evolution occurs, we give our planet a small inclination of $0.5^\circ$ relative to the binary plane. However, we do wish to consider the relative strength of Milankovitch cycles resulting from the binary compared to those induced by neighbouring planets (cf Figure 8 of \citealt{Andrade-Ines2014}). We attempt to maximise this effect by running another set of models with a second Earth-mass body orbiting in 3:2 resonance with our habitable world (with a zero inclination orbit). \subsubsection{Single Planet Runs} \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_ecc.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_obliq_prec.png}\\ \end{array}$ \caption{The dynamical evolution of the terrestrial planet orbiting $\alpha$ Cen B. Left, the orbital evolution of the body, as given by its eccentricity. We refrain from plotting the inclination, as its fluctuations are extremely low with no obvious periodic oscillation. Right, the spin evolution as given by the obliquity and precession angles. \label{fig:alphacen_e0_orbit}} \end{center} \end{figure} Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_orbit} shows the dynamical evolution of the planet around $\alpha$ Cen B. The initially zero eccentricity is forced to a maximum of 0.05 on a cycle of approximately 14,500 years. The obliquity and precession evolve with a slightly longer period, resulting in the eccentricity and obliquity cycles drifting in and out of phase. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale = 0.4]{alphacen_e0_T.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_fourierT.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale = 0.4]{alphacen_e0_compareT_obliq.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_fourierT_obliq.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{The climate evolution of the $\alpha$ Cen B terrestrial planet, with obliquity evolution switched off (top row) and switched on (bottom row). Left: The global maximum, minimum and mean temperatures on the surface over 100,000 years (obliquity evolution off) and over approximately 300,000 years (obliquity evolution on). Right: Periodograms for the mean temperature. The red dashed lines indicate the binary's orbital period of 79 years, and its harmonics ($1/2$, $1/3$... of the period). \label{fig:alphacen_e0_climate}} \end{center} \end{figure} This phase drift results in markedly different climate evolution of the body, compared to the case where obliquity is held fixed (Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_climate}). In the fixed obliquity case, the eccentricity cycle induces a temperature oscillation of approximately 2K (to add to the radiative oscillation of 5K due to the changing proximity of $\alpha$ Cen A). The periodogram shows the two dominant oscillation modes at 79.9 and 14,500 years. Their strength is indicated by the strength of their subsequent harmonics, which can be seen down to the tenth level! A quite different picture emerges if obliquity evolution is activated (bottom row of Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_climate}). The temperature oscillations are now modulated by the phase drift between eccentricity and obliquity, which is periodic over $\sim$ 200,000 year timescales. When the two cycles are in phase, we see the largest temperature oscillations (e.g. at $t\sim$ 200,000 years). \subsubsection{Adding a planet in 3:2 mean motion resonance} \noindent We now consider joint planetary-binary Milankovitch cycles by adding an Earth mass planet on a circular orbit at 0.9293 AU, placing it in 3:2 mean motion resonance with the habitable planet. Test runs with $\alpha$ Cen A absent show the additional planet induces regular eccentricity oscillations in the habitable planet with amplitude of approximately 0.01, and a period of approximately 500 years. Incidentally, the absence of $\alpha$ Cen A would also place both planets outside the habitable zone. With $\alpha$ Cen A present, the combination of stellar and planetary forcings produces eccentricity oscillations of maximum amplitude 0.08 (left panel of Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_32_orbit}) and with a mix of dominant periods, as opposed to the distinct 14,500 year period observed in the single planet case. The inclination varies with a period of approximately 30,000 years, with a distinctive shift in mean inclination of around 0.001 radians (i.e. 0.05$^\circ$). The obliquity and precession continue to evolve at close to the eccentricity oscillation period, but the amplitude of their oscillations varies on approximately twice this timescale. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_32_ecc_inc.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_32_obliq_prec.png}\\ \end{array}$ \caption{The dynamical evolution of the terrestrial planet orbiting $\alpha$ Cen B. Left, the orbital evolution of the body, as given by its eccentricity and inclination. Right, the spin evolution as given by the obliquity and precession angles. \label{fig:alphacen_e0_32_orbit}} \end{center} \end{figure} The uniform temperature evolution cycles seen in Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_climate} are now more confused with the addition of a neighbour planet (Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_32_climate}). With obliquity evolution switched off (top row), the extra structure introduced into the eccentricity and inclination oscillations leaves an imprint on the temperature curves. This can be seen in its periodogram (top right panel of Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_32_climate}), which shows a relatively weak feature at the perturbing planet's orbital period, and at the resonant period of twice the perturber's period (or equivalently, three times the habitable planet's period). The perturbations induced by the additional planet produce temperature variations of up to 2K compared to the single planet case. With obliquity evolution turned on (bottom panel), the eccentricity/obliquity relationship seen in the previous case is preserved, resulting in phase drift between the two oscillations. However, the extra structure in the eccentricity oscillation prevents the smooth amplitude modulation of temperature that we saw in the bottom right panel of Figure \ref{fig:alphacen_e0_climate}. It is broadly present, but heavily modified by the presence of the neighbouring planet. The periodogram still reveals weak signals at the perturbing planet's period, and the strong peak feature at approximately 14,500 years is now split in two. There is also a significant increase in signal for periods of order 100-1000 years. Additional giant planets in a system like this might be expected to produce even larger excursions from circular orbits and stronger Milankovitch cycling. Given that planet formation models disfavour the creation of Jupiter mass bodies in this system \citep{Xie2010} and are ruled out by observations of the $\alpha$ Cen system, at least at periods less than $\sim$ 1 year \citep{Endl2001,Dumusque2012, Demory2015} this is not a particular concern. But, one might imagine that undetected Neptune mass bodies could be present in this system on relatively long period orbits, and such bodies would be responsible for longer period Milankovitch cycles similar to that of Earth's. \begin{figure} \begin{center}$\begin{array}{cc} \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_32_T.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_32_fourierT.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_32_compareT_obliq.png} & \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{alphacen_e0_32_fourierT_obliq.png} \\ \end{array}$ \caption{The climate evolution of the $\alpha$ Cen B terrestrial planet, with obliquity evolution switched off (top row) and switched on (bottom row). Left: The global maximum, minimum and mean temperatures on the surface over 100,000 years (obliquity evolution off) and over approximately 300,000 years (obliquity evolution on). Right: Periodograms for the mean temperature. The red dashed lines indicate the binary's orbital period of 79 years, and its harmonics ($1/2$, $1/3$... of the period). \label{fig:alphacen_e0_32_climate}} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} \label{sec:Discussion} \subsection{Limitations of the Model} \noindent LEBM modelling is by its definition a compromise between the granularity of a climate simulation and computational expediency. This compromise is stretched further by the coupling of the N-Body integrator and obliquity evolution. We have adopted a very simple coupling where both the N-Body and LEBM components are constrained to follow the same global timestep. This timestep system works extremely well for systems where the dynamical timescale is relatively long, such as the S type binary systems. In this scenario, the system timestep is limited only by the LEBM, and as such we can run simulations with similar wallclock times as that of a LEBM using fixed Keplerian orbits. However, in the P type scenario, the dynamical timescale is relatively short, and the system is limited by the N Body timestep required to resolve the binary. There are several possible strategies for mitigating this timestep issue. The most straightforward solution is to adopt a non-shared timestep for the N-Body component, allowing some of the bodies to possess shorter N Body timesteps. This would reduce the computational load of evolving all the bodies (and the LEBM) at what can be very short timesteps. Another solution would require the interpolation of body motions (in the case where the LEBM timestep is small compared to the N Body timestep), but this would likely produce only marginal gains in speed. Perhaps the best solution for P type systems would be chain regularisation of the tight binary orbit \citep{Mikkola1990,Mikkola1993}. Aside from the new challenges arising from the adoption of the N-Body integrator, there are the usual limitations that many LEBMs are subject to. Our implementation of the LEBM is among the most simple available which can still broadly reproduce the seasonal temperature profiles of a fiducial Earth model. The principal advantage of this simplicity is its ease of interpretation, but we must acknowledge that more advanced models may produce features we cannot. For example, we do not model the carbonate-silicate (CS) cycle, which moderates fluctuations in atmospheric temperature by increasing and reducing the partial pressure of carbon dioxide. The timescale on which we expect $CO_2$ levels to vary depends on the planet's geochemical properties, especially its ocean circulation. For Earthlike planets, the equilbriation timescale of $CO_2$ is approximately half a million years \citep{Williams1997a} which is far shorter than the Milankovitch cycles experienced by the planetary bodies in this analysis. However, our understanding of the CS cycle is rooted firmly in our understanding of the Earth, which orbits a single star. It remains unclear whether a planet in a binary star system would possess a similar equilibriation timescale, even if the planet was effectively identical to the Earth. While we have taken the first steps towards coupling celestial dynamics and LEBM climate modelling here, there are still several steps ahead of us. For example, the tidal interactions between bodies will also modify orbits of habitable worlds, in particular reducing their eccentricity and modifying their rotational period \citep{Bolmont2014,Cunha2014}. While this is unlikely to be an issue for the orbital configurations adopted in this analysis, it remains the case that while the tidal interactions between the binary stars is well characterised (e.g. \citealt{Mason2013, Zuluaga2016}), the tidal evolution of \emph{planets} in P type systems remains relatively unexplored. Also to be explored in full are the obliquity variations felt by planets in binary systems. We have adopted a set of equations designed for a single star planetary system, and assumed they are valid when there are two stars present. In effect we have assumed that in S type systems, the secondary's direct tidal torque on planetary spin is negligible, and that in P type systems the direct torques always co-add. Is this always the case? More investigation is needed. We should also note that the strength of Milankovitch cycles measured by the LEBM will be an underestimate. Tests conducted using Solar system parameters (Forgan \& Mead, in prep.) give Milankovitch cycles for the Earth that are an order of magnitude smaller in temperature variation than observed in paleoclimate data \citep{Zachos2001,Lisiecki2005}. Paradoxically, stochastic EBMs, with additional random noise, can enhance periodic variations through the phenomenon of stochastic resonance \citep{Imkeller2001, Benzi2010}. Obliquity variation does produce a much richer set of temperature variations on decadal timescales, which may be forced into stochastic resonant behaviour under appropriate circumstances. Future investigations should consider adding a random noise term to the LEBM equation to permit this behaviour. \subsection{Implications for Habitability} So what have we gained by this coupling of N Body and LEBM integrators? Initially, we are able to confirm that in general, the decoupled approach of considering the radiative and gravitational perturbations separately is \emph{broadly} acceptable. Previous work in this field is not invalidated by our results, but it makes explicit some general principles that are already known implicitly. Firstly, the habitable zone of a planetary system is defined by more than where the radiation sources are in the system. The gravitational sources are equally important. We know this on Earth thanks to our understanding of Milankovitch cycles, and the Earth's orbital and spin cycles are relatively weak when compared to measured cycles for Earthlike planets in typical exoplanet system configurations around a single star (\citealt{Spiegel2010}, Forgan \& Mead, in prep.). Secondly, the habitable zone of binary systems is even more sensitive to the gravitational field than single star systems. This is already demonstrated implicitly by the N-Body simulations of orbital stability discussed in the Introduction. Our results clearly identify the effect of orbital and spin stability on climate. We show that relatively strong Milankovitch cycles exist in binary systems, even if there is only one planet present. The periods of these cycles are in general shorter than that of single star systems, but of similar amplitudes. Even on short timescales, the radiative perturbations induced over the orbital period of the binary are detectable in the mean temperature of the planet. Thirdly, the circadian rhythms of life on planets in binary systems will be forced to adapt to the rhythms present in the binary system, as is evidenced by analogous studies of lunar photoperiodism in terrestrial organisms (\citealt{O'Malley2012a,Forgan2014b} and references within). Temperature fluctuations of several K on timescales ranging from less than a year to almost a century (depending on whether the system is P or S type) is likely to produce significant fluctuations in surface coverage of biomes. The rapid Milankovitch cycles are likely to play a stronger role also. More sophisticated climate models coupled to N-Body physics (for example, 3D global circulation models) may show potential for more, shorter Ice Ages, and briefer interglacial periods. The presence of such rapid changes to environmental selection pressure will have an indelible effect on the evolution of organisms in binary planetary systems. Future work should build on recent attempts to produce 3D General Circulation Models of circumbinary planets (cf \citealt{May2016}), incorporating the systems' gravitational evolution to determine these effects in detail. \section{Conclusions }\label{sec:Conclusions} \noindent We have investigated Milankovitch cycles both circumbinary (P type) and distant binary (S type) systems, using Kepler-47 and $\alpha$ Centauri as archetypes. To do this, we coupled a 1D latitudinal energy balance climate model (LEBM) with an N-Body integrator to follow the orbital evolution, and an obliquity evolution algorithm to study the spin-axis evolution. We find that the combined spin-orbit-radiative perturbations induced by a companion star on a habitable planet produce Milankovitch cycles for both types of binary system, even when other planets are not present. Periodogram analysis identifies both dynamical and secular oscillations in the mean temperature of planets in these systems, over a variety of short and long periods, as well as the presence of radiative perturbations directly linked to the period of the binary. The strength of these oscillations is sensitive to the orbital configuration of the system. The relative phase between eccentricity, precession and obliquity cycles is important, just as it is for the Earth. In general, we find these Milankovitch cycles are significantly shorter than comparable cycles on the Earth (in some cases shorter than 1000 years), although the amplitude of the changes they produce in the planets' orbital elements are comparable to those experienced by Earth. This work demonstrates the need to consider joint dynamics-climate simulations of habitable worlds in binary systems, if we are to truly assess the potential for the birth and growth of biospheres on worlds with two suns. \section*{Acknowledgments} DHF gratefully acknowledges support from the ECOGAL project, grant agreement 291227, funded by the European Research Council under ERC-2011-ADG. This work relied on the compute resources of the St Andrews MHD Cluster. The author thanks both Nader Haghighipour and James Gilmore for insightful comments on an early version of this manuscript. This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services. The code used in this work is now available open source as OBERON, which can be downloaded at \texttt{github.com/dh4gan/oberon}. \bibliographystyle{mnras}
\section{Introduction} \label{s:intro} Dense real-valued word representations (embeddings) have become ubiquitous in NLP, serving as invaluable features in a broad range of tasks \cite{Turian:2010acl,Collobert:2011jmlr,Chen:2014emnlp}. The omnipresent \texttt{word2vec} skip-gram model with negative sampling (SGNS) \cite{Mikolov:2013nips} is still considered a robust and effective choice for a word representation model, due to its simplicity, fast training, as well as its solid performance across semantic tasks \cite{Baroni:2014acl,Levy:2015tacl}. The original SGNS implementation learns word representations from local bag-of-words contexts (BOW). However, the underlying model is equally applicable with other context types \cite{Levy:2014acl}. Recent work suggests that ``not all contexts are created equal''. For example, reaching beyond standard BOW contexts towards contexts based on dependency parses \cite{Bansal:2014acl,Melamud:2016naacl} or symmetric patterns \cite{Schwartz:2015conll,Schwartz:2016naacl} yields significant improvements in learning representations for particular word classes such as {\em adjectives (A)} and {\em verbs (V)}. Moreover, \newcite{Schwartz:2016naacl} demonstrated that a subset of dependency-based contexts which covers only coordination structures is particularly effective for SGNS training, both in terms of the quality of the induced representations and in the reduced training time of the model. Interestingly, they also demonstrated that despite the success with adjectives and verbs, BOW contexts are still the optimal choice when learning representations for {\em nouns (N)}. In this work, we propose a simple yet effective framework for selecting {\em context configurations}, which yields improved representations for verbs, adjectives, {\em and} nouns. We start with a definition of our context configuration space (Sect. \ref{ss:space}). Our basic definition of a context refers to a single typed (or labeled) dependency link between words (e.g., the \texttt{amod} link or the \texttt{dobj} link). Our configuration space then naturally consists of all possible subsets of the set of labeled dependency links between words. We employ the universal dependencies (UD) scheme to make our framework applicable across languages. We then describe (Sect. \ref{ss:pools}) our adapted beam search algorithm that aims to select an optimal context configuration for a given word class. We show that SGNS requires different context configurations to produce improved results for each word class. For instance, our algorithm detects that the combination of \texttt{amod} and \texttt{conj} contexts is effective for adjective representation. Moreover, some contexts that boost representation learning for one word class (e.g., \texttt{amod} contexts for adjectives) may be uninformative when learning representations for another class (e.g., \texttt{amod} for verbs). By removing such dispensable contexts, we are able both to speed up the SGNS training and to improve representation quality. We first experiment with the task of predicting similarity scores for the A/V/N portions of the benchmarking SimLex-999 evaluation set, running our algorithm in a standard SGNS experimental setup \cite{Levy:2015tacl}. When training SGNS with our learned context configurations it outperforms SGNS trained with the best previously proposed context type {\em for each word class}: the improvements in Spearman's $\rho$ rank correlations are 6 (A), 6 (V), and 5 (N) points. We also show that by building context configurations we obtain improvements on the entire SimLex-999 (4 $\rho$ points over the best baseline). Interestingly, this context configuration is not the optimal configuration for any word class. We then demonstrate that our approach is robust by showing that transferring the optimal configurations learned in the above setup to three other setups yields improved performance. First, the above context configurations, learned with the SGNS training on the English Wikipedia corpus, have an even stronger impact on SimLex999 performance when SGNS is trained on a larger corpus. Second, the transferred configurations also result in competitive performance on the task of solving class-specific TOEFL questions. Finally, we transfer the learned context configurations across languages: these configurations improve the SGNS performance when trained with German or Italian corpora and evaluated on class-specific subsets of the multilingual SimLex-999 \cite{Leviant:2015arxiv}, without any language-specific tuning. \vspace{-0.0em} \section{Related Work} \label{s:rw} Word representation models typically train on ({\it word, context}) pairs. Traditionally, most models use bag-of-words (BOW) contexts, which represent a word using its neighbouring words, irrespective of the syntactic or semantic relations between them \cite[inter alia]{Collobert:2011jmlr,Mikolov:2013nips,Mnih:2013nips,Pennington:2014emnlp}. Several alternative context types have been proposed, motivated by the limitations of BOW contexts, most notably their focus on topical rather than functional similarity (e.g., \textit{coffee:cup} vs. \textit{coffee:tea}). These include dependency contexts \cite{Pado:2007cl,Levy:2014acl}, pattern contexts \cite{Baroni:2010cogsci,Schwartz:2015conll} and substitute vectors \cite{Yatbaz:2012emnlp,Melamud:2015naacl}. Several recent studies examined the effect of context types on word representation learning. \newcite{Melamud:2016naacl} compared three context types on a set of intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation setups: BOW, dependency links, and substitute vectors. They show that the optimal type largely depends on the task at hand, with dependency-based contexts displaying strong performance on semantic similarity tasks. \newcite{Vulic:2016acluniversal} extended the comparison to more languages, reaching similar conclusions. \newcite{Schwartz:2016naacl}, showed that symmetric patterns are useful as contexts for V and A similarity, while BOW still works best for nouns. They also indicated that coordination structures, a particular dependency link, are more useful for verbs and adjectives than the entire set of dependencies. In this work, we generalise their approach: our algorithm systematically and efficiently searches the space of dependency-based context configurations, yielding {\em class-specific} representations with substantial gains \textit{for all three word classes}. Previous attempts on specialising word representations for a particular relation (e.g., similarity vs relatedness, antonyms) operate in one of two frameworks: (1) modifying the prior or the regularisation of the original training procedure \cite{Yu:2014acl,Wieting:2015tacl,Liu:2015acl,Kiela:2015emnlpemb,Ling:2015emnlp}; (2) post-processing procedures which use lexical knowledge to refine previously trained word vectors \cite{Faruqui:2015naacl,Wieting:2015tacl,Mrksic:2017ar}. Our work suggests that the induced representations can be specialised by directly training the word representation model with carefully selected contexts. \section{Context Selection: Methodology} \label{s:metho} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{./dep_graphs_en.pdf} \vspace{-0.2em} \includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{./dep_graphs_it.pdf} \vspace{-0.2em} \includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{./dep_graphs_arc.pdf} \vspace{-0.0em} \caption{Extracting dependency-based contexts. \textbf{Top}: An example English sentence from \cite{Levy:2014acl}, now UD-parsed. \textbf{Middle}: the same sentence in Italian, UD-parsed. Note the similarity between the two parses which suggests that our context selection framework may be extended to other languages. \textbf{Bottom}: prepositional arc collapsing. The uninformative short-range \texttt{case} arc is removed, while a ``pseudo-arc'' specifying the exact link (\texttt{prep:with}) between {\em discovers} and {\em telescope} is added.} \vspace{-0.4em} \label{fig:rex} \end{figure} The goal of our work is to develop a methodology for the identification of optimal context configurations for word representation model training. We hope to get improved word representations and, at the same time, cut down the training time of the word representation model. Fundamentally, we are not trying to design a new word representation model, but rather to find valuable configurations for existing algorithms. The motivation to search for such training context configurations lies in the intuition that the distributional hypothesis \cite{Harris:1954} should not necessarily be made with respect to BOW contexts. Instead, it may be restated as a series of statements according to particular word relations. For example, the hypothesis can be restated as: ``two adjectives are similar if they modify similar nouns'', which is captured by the \texttt{amod} typed dependency relation. This could also be reversed to reflect noun similarity by saying that ``two nouns are similar if they are modified by similar adjectives''. In another example, ``two verbs are similar if they are used as predicates of similar nominal subjects'' (the \texttt{nsubj} and \texttt{nsubjpass} dependency relations). First, we have to define an expressive context configuration space that contains potential training configurations and is effectively decomposed so that useful configurations may be sought algorithmically. We can then continue by designing a search algorithm over the configuration space. \subsection{Context Configuration Space} \label{ss:space} We focus on the configuration space based on dependency-based contexts (DEPS) \cite{Pado:2007cl,Utt:2014tacl}. We choose this space due to multiple reasons. First, dependency structures are known to be very useful in capturing functional relations between words, even if these relations are long distance. Second, they have been proven useful in learning word embeddings \cite{Levy:2014acl,Melamud:2016naacl}. Finally, owing to the recent development of the Universal Dependencies (UD) annotation scheme \cite{McDonald:2013acl,Nivre:2015ud}\footnote{http://universaldependencies.org/ (V1.4 used)} it is possible to reason over dependency structures in a multilingual manner (e.g., Fig.~\ref{fig:rex}). Consequently, a search algorithm in such DEPS-based configuration space can be developed for multiple languages based on the same design principles. Indeed, in this work we show that the optimal configurations for English translate to improved representations in two additional languages, German and Italian. And so, given a (UD-)parsed training corpus, for each target word $w$ with modifiers $m_1,\ldots,m_k$ and a head $h$, the word $w$ is paired with context elements $m_1\_r_1,\ldots,m_k\_r_k,h\_r_h^{-1}$, where $r$ is the type of the dependency relation between the head and the modifier (e.g., \texttt{amod}), and $r^{-1}$ denotes an inverse relation. To simplify the presentation, we adopt the assumption that all training data for the word representation model are in the form of such $(word, context)$ pairs \cite{Levy:2014acl,Levy:2014nips}, where $word$ is the current target word, and $context$ is its observed context (e.g., BOW, positional, dependency-based). A naive version of DEPS extracts contexts from the parsed corpus without any post-processing. Given the example from Fig.~\ref{fig:rex}, the DEPS contexts of {\em discovers} are: {\em scientist\_nsubj}, {\em stars\_dobj}, {\em telescope\_nmod}. DEPS not only emphasises functional similarity, but also provides a natural implicit grouping of related contexts. For instance, all pairs with the shared relation $r$ and $r^{-1}$ are taken as an $r$-based {\em context bag}, e.g., the pairs $\{${\em (scientist, Australian\_amod)}, {\em (Australian, scientist\_$amod^{-1}$)}$\}$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:rex} are inserted into the \texttt{amod} context bag, while $\{${\em (discovers, stars\_dobj)}, {\em (stars, discovers\_$dobj^{-1}$)}$\}$ are labelled with \texttt{dobj}. Assume that we have obtained $M$ distinct dependency relations $r_1,\ldots,r_M$ after parsing and post-processing the corpus. The $j$-th {\em individual context bag}, $j=1,\ldots,M$, labelled $r_j$, is a bag (or a multiset) of $(word, context)$ pairs where $context$ has one of the following forms: $v\_r_j$ or $v\_r_j^{-1}$, where $v$ is some vocabulary word. A {\em context configuration} is then simply a set of individual context bags, e.g., $R=\{r_i,r_j,r_k\}$, also labelled as $R$: $r_i+r_j+r_k$. We call a configuration consisting of $K$ individual context bags a $K$-set configuration (e.g., in this example, $R$ is a $3$-set configuration).\footnote{A note on the nomenclature and notation: Each context configuration may be seen as a set of context bags, as it does not allow for repetition of its constituent context bags. For simplicity and clarity of presentation, we use dependency relation types (e.g., $r_i$ = \texttt{amod}, $r_j$ = \texttt{acl}) as labels for context bags. The reader has to be aware that a configuration $R=\{r_i,r_j,r_k\}$ is not by any means a set of relation types/names, but is in fact a multiset of all $(word, context)$ pairs belonging to the corresponding context bags labelled with $r_i$, $r_j$, $r_k$.} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{./alggraph.pdf} \vspace{-0.7em} \caption{An illustration of Alg.~1. The search space is presented as a DAG with direct links between origin configurations (e.g., $r_i+r_j+r_k$) and all its children configurations obtained by removing exactly one individual bag from the origin (e.g., $r_i+r_j$, $r_j+r_k$). After automatically constructing the initial pool (line 1), the entry point of the algorithm is the $R^{Pool}$ configuration (line 2). Thicker blue circles denote visited configurations, while the gray circle denotes the best configuration found.} \vspace{-0.7em} \label{fig:alggraph} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \let\@latex@error\@gobble \begin{footnotesize} \begin{algorithm}[H] \SetKwData{Left}{left}\SetKwData{This}{this}\SetKwData{Up}{up} \SetKwFunction{Union}{Union}\SetKwFunction{FindCompress}{FindCompress} \SetKwInOut{Input}{Input}\SetKwInOut{Output}{Output} \Input{Set of $M$ individual context bags: $S=\{r'_1,r'_2,\ldots,r'_M\}$} {\bf build}: {\em pool} of those $K\leq M$ candidate individual context bags $\{r_1,\ldots,r_K\}$ for which $E(r_i) >= threshold, i \in \{1, \ldots, M\}$, where $E(\cdot)$ is a fitness function.\\ {\bf build:} $K$-set configuration $R^{Pool} = \{r_1,\ldots,r_K\}$ \; {\bf initialize:} (1) set of candidate configurations $\mathbf{R} = \{R^{Pool}\}$ ; (2) current level $l=K$ ; (3) best configuration $R_o =\emptyset$ \; {\bf search}: \\ \Repeat{$l==0$ or $\mathbf{R}==\emptyset$} { $\mathbf{R}_n \leftarrow \emptyset$ \; $R_o \leftarrow \underset{R \in \mathbf{R} \cup \{R_o\}} {\operatorname{arg\,max}} \hspace{0.3em}E(R)$ \; \ForEach{$R \in \mathbf{R}$}{ \ForEach{$r_i \in R$}{ {\bf build} new $(l-1)$-set context configuration $R_{\neg r_i}=R-\{r_i\}$ \; \If{$E(R_{\neg r_i})\geq E(R)$} { $\mathbf{R_n} \leftarrow \mathbf{R_n} \cup \{R_{\neg r_i}\}$ \; } } } $l \leftarrow l-1$ \; $\mathbf{R} \leftarrow \mathbf{R_n}$ \; } \Output{Best configuration $R_o$} \caption{\small Best Configuration Search} \end{algorithm} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.6em} \end{figure} Although a brute-force exhaustive search over all possible configurations is possible in theory and for small pools (e.g., for adjectives, see Tab.~\ref{tab:pool}), it becomes challenging or practically infeasible for large pools and large training data. For instance, based on the pool from Tab.~\ref{tab:pool}, the search for the optimal configuration would involve trying out $2^{10}-1=1023$ configurations for nouns (i.e., training 1023 different word representation models). Therefore, to reduce the number of visited configurations, we present a simple heuristic search algorithm inspired by beam search \cite{Pearl:1984}. \subsection{Class-Specific Configuration Search} \label{ss:pools} Alg.~1 provides a high-level overview of the algorithm. An example of its flow is given in Fig.~\ref{fig:alggraph}. Starting from $S$, the set of all possible $M$ individual context bags, the algorithm automatically detects the subset $S_K \subseteq S$, $\|S_K\|=K$, of candidate individual bags that are used as the initial pool (line 1 of Alg.~1). The selection is based on some fitness (goal) function $E$. In our setup, $E(R)$ is Spearman's $\rho$ correlation with human judgment scores obtained on the development set after training the word representation model with the configuration $R$. The selection step relies on a simple threshold: we use a threshold of $\rho\geq 0.2$ without any fine-tuning in all experiments with all word classes. We find this step to facilitate efficiency at a minor cost for accuracy. For example, since \texttt{amod} denotes an adjectival modifier of a noun, an efficient search procedure may safely remove this bag from the pool of candidate bags for verbs. The search algorithm then starts from the full $K$-set $R^{Pool}$ configuration (line 3) and tests $K$ $(K-1)$-set configurations where exactly one individual bag $r_i$ is removed to generate each such configuration (line 10). It then retains only the set of configurations that score higher than the origin $K$-set configuration (lines 11-12, see Fig.~\ref{fig:alggraph}). Using this principle, it continues searching only over lower-level $(l-1)$-set configurations that further improve performance over their $l$-set origin configuration. It stops if it reaches the lowest level or if it cannot improve the goal function any more (line 15). The best scoring configuration is returned (n.b., not guaranteed to be the global optimum). In our experiments with this heuristic, the search for the optimal configuration for verbs is performed only over 13 $1$-set configurations plus 26 other configurations (39 out of 133 possible configurations).\footnote{The total is 133 as we have to include 6 additional $1$-set configurations that have to be tested (line 1 of Alg.~1) but are not included in the initial pool for verbs (line 2).} For nouns, the advantage of the heuristic is even more dramatic: only 104 out of 1026 possible configurations were considered during the search.\footnote{We also experimented with a less conservative variant which does not stop when lower-level configurations do not improve $E$; it instead follows the path of the best-scoring lower-level configuration even if its score is lower than that of its origin. As we do not observe any significant improvement with this variant, we opt for the faster and simpler one.} \section{Experimental Setup} \label{s:exp} \subsection{Implementation Details} \paragraph{Word Representation Model} We experiment with SGNS \cite{Mikolov:2013nips}, the standard and very robust choice in vector space modeling \cite{Levy:2015tacl}. In all experiments we use \texttt{word2vecf}, a reimplementation of \texttt{word2vec} able to learn from arbitrary $(word, context)$ pairs.\footnote{https://bitbucket.org/yoavgo/word2vecf} For details concerning the implementation, we refer the reader to \cite{Goldberg:2014arxiv,Levy:2014acl}. The SGNS preprocessing scheme was replicated from \cite{Levy:2014acl,Levy:2015tacl}. After lowercasing, all words and contexts that appeared less than 100 times were filtered. When considering all dependency types, the vocabulary spans approximately 185K word types.\footnote{SGNS for all models was trained using stochastic gradient descent and standard settings: $15$ negative samples, global learning rate: $0.025$, subsampling rate: $1e-4$, $15$ epochs.} Further, all representations were trained with $d=300$ (very similar trends are observed with $d=100,500$). The same setup was used in prior work \cite{Schwartz:2016naacl,Vulic:2016acluniversal}. Keeping the representation model fixed across experiments and varying only the context type allows us to attribute any differences in results to a sole factor: the context type. We plan to experiment with other representation models in future work. \paragraph{Universal Dependencies as Labels} The adopted UD scheme leans on the universal Stanford dependencies \cite{Marneffe:2014lrec} complemented with the universal POS tagset \cite{Petrov:2012lrec}. It is straightforward to ``translate'' previous annotation schemes to UD \cite{Marneffe:2014lrec}. Providing a consistently annotated inventory of categories for similar syntactic constructions across languages, the UD scheme facilitates representation learning in languages other than English, as shown in \cite{Vulic:2016acluniversal,Vulic:2017eacl}. \paragraph{Individual Context Bags} \vspace{-0.0em} Standard post-parsing steps are performed in order to obtain an initial list of individual context bags for our algorithm: (1) Prepositional arcs are collapsed (\cite{Levy:2014acl,Vulic:2016acluniversal}, see Fig.~\ref{fig:rex}). Following this procedure, all pairs where the relation $r$ has the form \texttt{prep:X} (where \texttt{X} is a preposition) are subsumed to a context bag labelled \texttt{prep}; (2) Similar labels are merged into a single label (e.g., direct (\texttt{dobj}) and indirect objects (\texttt{iobj}) are merged into \texttt{obj}); (3) Pairs with infrequent and uninformative labels are removed (e.g., \texttt{punct}, \texttt{goeswith}, \texttt{cc}) Coordination-based contexts are extracted as in prior work \cite{Schwartz:2016naacl}, distinguishing between left and right contexts extracted from the \texttt{conj} relation; the label for this bag is \texttt{conjlr}. We also utilise the variant that does not make the distinction, labeled \texttt{conjll}. If both are used, the label is simply \texttt{conj=conjlr+conjll}.\footnote{Given the coordination structure {\em boys and girls}, \texttt{conjlr} training pairs are {\em (boys, girls\_conj), (girls, $boys\_conj^{-1})$}, while \texttt{conjll} pairs are {\em (boys, girls\_conj), (girls, $boys\_conj)$}.} Consequently, the individual context bags we use in all experiments are: \texttt{subj}, \texttt{obj}, \texttt{comp}, \texttt{nummod}, \texttt{appos}, \texttt{nmod}, \texttt{acl}, \texttt{amod}, \texttt{prep}, \texttt{adv}, \texttt{compound}, \texttt{conjlr}, \texttt{conjll}. \subsection{Training and Evaluation} We run the algorithm for context configuration selection only once, with the SGNS training setup described below. Our main evaluation setup is presented below, but the learned configurations are tested in additional setups, detailed in Sect.~\ref{s:results}. \paragraph{Training Data} Our training corpus is the cleaned and tokenised English Polyglot Wikipedia data \cite{AlRfou:2013conll},\footnote{https://sites.google.com/site/rmyeid/projects/polyglot} consisting of approximately 75M sentences and 1.7B word tokens. The Wikipedia data were POS-tagged with universal POS (UPOS) tags \cite{Petrov:2012lrec} using the state-of-the art TurboTagger \cite{Martins:2013acl}.\footnote{http://www.cs.cmu.edu/\textasciitilde ark/TurboParser/} The parser was trained using default settings (SVM MIRA with 20 iterations, no further parameter tuning) on the {\sc train+dev} portion of the UD treebank annotated with UPOS tags. The data were then parsed with UD using the graph-based Mate parser v3.61 \cite{Bohnet:2010coling}\footnote{https://code.google.com/archive/p/mate-tools/} with standard settings on {\sc train+dev} of the UD treebank. \paragraph{Evaluation} We experiment with the verb pair (222 pairs), adjective pair (111 pairs), and noun pair (666 pairs) portions of SimLex-999. We report Spearman's $\rho$ correlation between the ranks derived from the scores of the evaluated models and the human scores. Our evaluation setup is borrowed from \newcite{Levy:2015tacl}: we perform 2-fold cross-validation, where the context configurations are optimised on a development set, separate from the unseen test data. Unless stated otherwise, the reported scores are always the averages of the 2 runs, computed in the standard fashion by applying the cosine similarity to the vectors of words participating in a pair. \subsection{Baselines} \paragraph{Baseline Context Types} We compare the context configurations found by Alg.~1 against baseline contexts from prior work:\\ {\bf - BOW}: Standard bag-of-words contexts. \\ {\bf - POSIT}: Positional contexts \cite{Schutze:1993acl,Levy:2014conll,Ling:2015naacl}, which enrich BOW with information on the sequential position of each context word. Given the example from Fig.~\ref{fig:rex}, POSIT with the window size $2$ extracts the following contexts for {\em discovers}: {\em Australian\_-2}, {\em scientist\_-1}, {\em stars\_+2}, {\em with\_+1}. \\ {\bf - DEPS-All}: All dependency links without any context selection, extracted from dependency-parsed data with prepositional arc collapsing. \\ {\bf - COORD}: Coordination-based contexts are used as fast lightweight contexts for improved representations of adjectives and verbs \cite{Schwartz:2016naacl}. This is in fact the \texttt{conjlr} context bag, a subset of DEPS-All. \\ {\bf - SP}: Contexts based on symmetric patterns (SPs, \cite{Davidov:2006acl,Schwartz:2015conll}). For example, if the word X and the word Y appear in the lexico-syntactic symmetric pattern ``X or Y'' in the SGNS training corpus, then Y is an SP context instance for X, and vice versa. The development set was used to tune the window size for BOW and POSIT (to 2) and the parameters of the SP extraction algorithm.\footnote{The SP extraction algorithm is available online: \\ homes.cs.washington.edu/$\sim$roysch/software/dr06/dr06.html} \paragraph{Baseline Greedy Search Algorithm} We also compare our search algorithm to its greedy variant: at each iteration of lines 8-12 in Alg.~1, $R_n$ now keeps only the best configuration of size $l-1$ that perform better than the initial configuration of size $l$, instead of all such configurations. \begin{table} \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{1.0} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{l XXX} \toprule {\bf Context Group} & {Adj} & {Verb} & {Noun} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} \cmidrule(lr){2-4} {\texttt{conjlr} (A+N+V)} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.415} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.281} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.401} \\ {\texttt{obj} (N+V)} & {-0.028} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.309} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.390} \\ {\texttt{prep} (N+V)} & {0.188} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.344} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.387} \\ {\texttt{amod} (A+N)} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.479} & {0.058} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.398} \\ {\texttt{compound} (N)} & {-0.124} & {-0.019} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.416} \\ {\texttt{adv} (V)} & {0.197} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.342} & {0.104} \\ {\texttt{nummod} (-)} & {-0.142} & {-0.065} & {0.029} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.3em} \caption{2-fold cross-validation results for an illustrative selection of individual context bags. Results are presented for the noun, verb and adjective subsets of SimLex-999. Values in parentheses denote the class-specific initial pools to which each context is selected based on its $\rho$ score (line 1 of Alg.~1).} \label{tab:single} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{1.5em} \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{0.75} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{smb} \toprule {Adjectives} & {Verbs} & {Nouns} \\ \midrule \texttt{amod, conjlr, conjll} & \texttt{prep, acl, obj, comp, adv, conjlr, conjll} & \texttt{amod, prep, compound, subj, obj, appos, acl, nmod, conjlr, conjll} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.7em} \caption{Automatically constructed initial pools of candidate bags for each word class (Sect.~\ref{ss:pools}).} \label{tab:pool} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.6em} \end{table} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{cc} \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{0.9} \begin{tabularx}{0.42\linewidth}{l X} \toprule {\bf Baselines} & {\bf (Verbs)} \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.336} \\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.345} \\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {0.283} \\ {SP} & {0.349} \\ {DEPS-All} & {0.344} \\ \midrule {\bf Configurations: Verbs} & {} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {\scriptsize \texttt{POOL-ALL}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.379} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+obj+adv+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.393} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+obj+comp+conj}} & {0.344} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+obj+comp+adv+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{\em 0.391}$^\dagger$ \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+adv+conj}} (BEST) & \cellcolor{Gray}{\bf 0.409} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+obj+adv}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.392} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+adv}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.407} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{prep+acl+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.390} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{acl+obj+adv+conj}} & {0.345} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{acl+obj+adv}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.385} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.0em} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.0em} & \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{0.9} \begin{tabularx}{0.52\linewidth}{l X} \toprule {\bf Baselines} & {{\bf (Nouns)}} \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.435} \\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.437} \\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {0.392} \\ {SP} & {0.372} \\ {DEPS-All} & {0.441} \\ \midrule {\bf Configurations: Nouns} & {} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {\scriptsize \texttt{POOL-ALL}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.469} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+appos+compound+nmod+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.478} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+appos+compound+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.487} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+appos+compound+conjlr}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{\em 0.476}$^\dagger$ \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+compound+conj}} (BEST) & \cellcolor{Gray}{\bf 0.491} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+appos+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.470} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{subj+obj+compound+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.479} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+compound+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.481} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+subj+obj+compound}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.478} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+obj+compound+conj}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.481} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.0em} \end{tabular} \caption{Results on the SimLex-999 test data over (a) {\bf verbs} and (b) {\bf nouns} subsets. Only a selection of context configurations optimised for verb and noun similarity are shown. POOL-ALL denotes a configuration where all individual context bags from the verbs/nouns-oriented pools (see Table~\ref{tab:pool}) are used. BEST denotes the best performing configuration found by Alg.~1. Other configurations visited by Alg.~1 that score higher than the best scoring baseline context type for each word class are in gray. Scores obtained using a greedy search algorithm instead of Alg.~1 are in italic, marked with a cross ($\dagger$).} \vspace{-0.5em} \label{tab:verbsnouns} \end{table} \section{Results and Discussion} \label{s:results} \subsection{Main Evaluation Setup} \label{ss:main-eval} \paragraph{Not All Context Bags are Created Equal} First, we test the performance of {\em individual} context bags across SimLex-999 adjective, verb, and noun subsets. Besides providing insight on the intuition behind context selection, these findings are important for the automatic selection of class-specific pools (line 1 of Alg.~1). The results are shown in Tab.~\ref{tab:single}. The experiment supports our intuition (see Sect.~\ref{ss:pools}): some context bags are definitely not useful for some classes and may be safely removed when performing the class-specific SGNS training. For instance, the \texttt{amod} bag is indeed important for adjective and noun similarity, and at the same time it does not encode any useful information regarding verb similarity. \texttt{compound} is, as expected, useful only for nouns. Tab.~\ref{tab:single} also suggests that some context bags (e.g., \texttt{nummod}) do not encode any informative contextual evidence regarding similarity, therefore they can be discarded. The initial results with individual context bags help to reduce the pool of candidate bags (line 1 in Alg.~1), see Tab.~\ref{tab:pool}. \begin{table}[t] \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{0.9} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{l X} \toprule {\bf Baselines} & {\bf (Adjectives)} \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.489} \\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.460} \\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {0.407} \\ {SP} & {0.395} \\ {DEPS-All} & {0.360} \\ \midrule {\bf Configurations: Adjectives} & {} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} {\scriptsize \texttt{POOL-ALL: amod+conj}} (BEST) & \cellcolor{Gray}{\bf 0.546}$^\dagger$ \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+conjlr}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.527} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{amod+conjll}} & \cellcolor{Gray}{0.531} \\ {\scriptsize \texttt{conj}} & {0.470} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.5em} \caption{Results on the SimLex-999 {\bf adjectives} subset with adjective-specific configurations.} \label{tab:adj} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.3em} \end{table} \paragraph{Searching for Improved Configurations} Next, we test if we can improve class-specific representations by selecting class-specific configurations. Results are summarised in Tables~\ref{tab:verbsnouns} and \ref{tab:adj}. Indeed, class-specific configurations yield better representations, as is evident from the scores: the improvements with the best class-specific configurations found by Alg.~1 are approximately 6 $\rho$ points for adjectives, 6 points for verbs, and 5 points for nouns over the best baseline for each class. The improvements are visible even with configurations that simply pool all candidate individual bags (POOL-ALL), without running Alg.~1 beyond line 1. However, further careful context selection, i.e., traversing the configuration space using Alg.~1 leads to additional improvements for V and N (gains of 3 and 2.2 $\rho$ points). Very similar improved scores are achieved with a variety of configurations (see Tab.~\ref{tab:verbsnouns}), especially in the neighbourhood of the best configuration found by Alg.~1. This indicates that the method is quite robust: even sub-optimal\footnote{The term \textit{optimal} here and later in the text refers to the best configuration returned by our algorithm.} solutions result in improved class-specific representations. Furthermore, our algorithm is able to find better configurations for verbs and nouns compared to its greedy variant. Finally, our algorithm generalises well: the best scoring configuration on the dev set is always the best one on the test set \paragraph{Training: Fast and/or Accurate?} Carefully selected configurations are also likely to reduce SGNS training times. Indeed, the configuration-based model trains on only 14\% (A), 26.2\% (V), and 33.6\% (N) of all dependency-based contexts. The training times and statistics for each context type are displayed in Tab.~\ref{tab:speed}. All models were trained using parallel training on 10 Intel(R) Xeon(R) E5-2667 2.90GHz processors. The results indicate that class-specific configurations are not as lightweight and fast as SP or COORD contexts \cite{Schwartz:2016naacl}. However, they also suggest that such configurations provide a good balance between accuracy and speed: they reach peak performances for each class, outscoring all baseline context types (including SP and COORD), while training is still much faster than with ``heavyweight'' context types such as BOW, POSIT or DEPS-All. Now that we verified the decrease in training time our algorithm provides for the final training, it makes sense to ask whether the configurations it finds are valuable \textit{in other setups}. This will make the fast training of practical importance. \begin{table}[t] \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{1.0} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{l XX} \toprule {\bf Context Type} & {Training Time} & {\# Pairs} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){3-3} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {179mins 27s} & {5.974G}\\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {190mins 12s} & {5.974G}\\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {4mins 11s} & {129.69M} \\ {SP} & {1mins 29s} & {46.37M} \\ {DEPS-All} & {103mins 35s} & {3.165G} \\ \midrule {BEST-ADJ} & {14mins 5s} & {447.4M} \\ {BEST-VERBS} & {29mins 48s} & {828.55M} \\ {BEST-NOUNS} & {41mins 14s} & {1.063G} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.3em} \caption{Training time (wall-clock time reported) in minutes for SGNS ($d=300$) with different context types. BEST-* denotes the best scoring configuration for each class found by Alg.~1. {\em \#Pairs} shows a total number of pairs used in SGNS training for each context type.} \label{tab:speed} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.2em} \end{table} \subsection{Generalisation: Configuration Transfer} \paragraph{Another Training Setup} We first test whether the context configurations learned in Sect.~\ref{ss:main-eval} are useful when SGNS is trained in another English setup \cite{Schwartz:2016naacl}, with more training data and other annotation and parser choices, while evaluation is still performed on SimLex-999. \begin{table}[t] \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{1.0} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{l XXXX} \toprule {\bf Context Type} & {Adj} & {Verbs} & {Nouns} & {All}\\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){3-3} \cmidrule(lr){4-4} \cmidrule(lr){5-5} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.604} & {0.307} & {0.501} & {0.464}\\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {0.585} & {0.400} & {0.471} & {0.469}\\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {0.629} & {0.413} & {0.428} & {0.430} \\ {SP} & {0.649} & {\bf 0.458} & {0.414} & {0.444}\\ {DEPS-All} & {0.574} & {0.389} & {0.492} & {0.464}\\ \midrule {BEST-ADJ} & {\bf 0.671} & {0.348} & {0.504} & {0.449}\\ {BEST-VERBS} & {0.392} & {0.455} & {0.478} & {0.448}\\ {BEST-NOUNS} & {0.581} & {0.327} & {\bf 0.535} & {0.489}\\ \midrule {BEST-ALL} & {0.616} & {0.402} & {0.519} & {\bf 0.506} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.2em} \caption{Results on the A/V/N SimLex-999 subsets, and on the entire set ({\em All}) in the setup from \protect\newcite{Schwartz:2016naacl}. $d=500$. BEST-* are again the best class-specific configs returned by Alg.~1.} \label{tab:roy} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.3em} \end{table} In this setup the training corpus is the 8B words corpus generated by the \texttt{word2vec} script.\footnote{code.google.com/p/word2vec/source/browse/trunk/} A preprocessing step now merges common word pairs and triplets to expression tokens (e.g., {\em Bilbo\_Baggins}). The corpus is parsed with labelled Stanford dependencies \cite{Marneffe:2008sd} using the Stanford POS Tagger \cite{Toutanova:2003naacl} and the stack version of the MALT parser \cite{Goldberg:2012coling}. SGNS preprocessing and parameters are also replicated; we now train $500$-dim embeddings as in prior work.\footnote{The ``translation'' from labelled Stanford dependencies into UD is performed using the mapping from \newcite{Marneffe:2014lrec}, e.g., \texttt{nn} is mapped into \texttt{compound}, and \texttt{rcmod}, \texttt{partmod}, \texttt{infmod} are all mapped into one bag: \texttt{acl}.} Results are presented in Tab.~\ref{tab:roy}. The imported class-specific configurations, computed using a much smaller corpus (Sect.~\ref{ss:main-eval}), again outperform competitive baseline context types for adjectives and nouns. The BEST-VERBS configuration is outscored by SP, but the margin is negligible. We also evaluate another configuration found using Alg.~1 in Sect.~\ref{ss:main-eval}, which targets the overall improved performance without any finer-grained division to classes (BEST-ALL). This configuration ({\small \texttt{amod+subj+obj+compound+prep+adv+conj}}) outperforms all baseline models on the entire benchmark. Interestingly, the non-specific BEST-ALL configuration falls short of A/V/N-specific configurations for each class. This unambiguously implies that the ``trade-off'' configuration targeting all three classes at the same time differs from specialised class-specific configurations. \begin{table}[t] \centering \begin{footnotesize} \def1.0{1.0} \begin{tabularx}{1.0\linewidth}{l XXX} \toprule {\bf Context Type} & {Adj-Q} & {Verb-Q} & {Noun-Q} \\ \cmidrule(lr){1-1} \cmidrule(lr){2-2} \cmidrule(lr){3-3} \cmidrule(lr){4-4} {BOW (\texttt{win}=2)} & {31/41} & {14/19} & {16/19} \\ {POSIT (\texttt{win}=2)} & {\bf 32/41} & {13/19} & {15/19} \\ {COORD (\texttt{conjlr})} & {26/41} & {11/19} & {\hspace{0.5em}8/19} \\ {SP} & {26/41} & {11/19} & {12/19} \\ {DEPS-All} & {31/41} & {14/19} & {16/19} \\ \midrule {BEST-ADJ} & {\bf 32/41} & {12/19} & {15/19} \\ {BEST-VERBS} & {24/41} & {\bf 15/19} & {16/19} \\ {BEST-NOUNS} & {30/41} & {14/19} & {\bf 17/19} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabularx} \vspace{-0.2em} \caption{Results on the A/V/N TOEFL question subsets. The reported scores are in the following form: {\em correct\_answers/overall\_questions}. \textit{Adj-Q} refers to the subset of TOEFL questions targeting adjectives; similar for \textit{Verb-Q} and \textit{Noun-Q}. BEST-* refer to the best class-specific configurations from Tab.~3 and Tab.~4.} \label{tab:toefl} \end{footnotesize} \vspace{-0.3em} \end{table} \paragraph{Experiments on Other Languages} We next test whether the optimal context configurations computed in Sect.~\ref{ss:main-eval} with English training data are also useful for other languages. For this, we train SGNS models on the Italian (IT) and German (DE) Polyglot Wikipedia corpora with those configurations, and evaluate on the IT and DE multilingual SimLex-999 \cite{Leviant:2015arxiv}.\footnote{http://leviants.com/ira.leviant/MultilingualVSMdata.html} Our results demonstrate similar patterns as for English, and indicate that our framework can be easily applied to other languages. For instance, the BEST-ADJ configuration (the same configuration as in Tab.~4 and Tab.~7) yields an improvement of 8 $\rho$ points and 4 $\rho$ points over the strongest adjectives baseline in IT and DE, respectively. We get similar improvements for nouns (IT: 3 $\rho$ points, DE: 2 $\rho$ points), and verbs (IT: 2, DE: 4). \paragraph{TOEFL Evaluation} We also verify that the selection of class-specific configurations (Sect.~\ref{ss:main-eval}) is useful beyond the core SimLex evaluation. For this aim, we evaluate on the A, V, and N TOEFL questions \cite{Landauer:1997pr}. The results are summarised in Tab.~\ref{tab:toefl}. Despite the limited size of the TOEFL dataset, we observe positive trends in the reported results (e.g., V-specific configurations yield a small gain on verb questions), showcasing the potential of class-specific training in this task. \vspace{-0.0em} \section{Conclusion and Future Work} \label{s:conclusion} We have presented a novel framework for selecting class-specific context configurations which yield improved representations for prominent word classes: adjectives, verbs, and nouns. Its design and dependence on the Universal Dependencies annotation scheme makes it applicable in different languages. We have proposed an algorithm that is able to find a suitable class-specific configuration while making the search over the large space of possible context configurations computationally feasible. Each word class requires a different class-specific configuration to produce improved results on the class-specific subset of SimLex-999 in English, Italian, and German. We also show that the selection of context configurations is robust as once learned configuration may be effectively transferred to other data setups, tasks, and languages without additional retraining or fine-tuning. In future work, we plan to test the framework with finer-grained contexts, investigating beyond POS-based word classes and dependency links. Exploring more sophisticated algorithms that can efficiently search richer configuration spaces is also an intriguing direction. Another research avenue is application of the context selection idea to other representation models beyond SGNS tested in this work, and experimenting with assigning weights to context subsets. Finally, we plan to test the portability of our approach to more languages. \section*{Acknowledgments} This work is supported by the ERC Consolidator Grant LEXICAL: Lexical Acquisition Across Languages (no 648909). Roy Schwartz was supported by the Intel Collaborative Research Institute for Computational Intelligence (ICRI-CI). The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive suggestions.
\section{Introduction} Nowadays statistical thermodynamics of dielectric polymers is one of the most unexplored areas of polymer physics. Indeed, till now only several theoretical works have been published, where thermodynamic and structural properties of dielectric polymers in the bulk solution \cite{Podgornik_2004,Kumar_2009,Dean_2012,Kumar_2014,Lu2015} and under external electric field \cite{Budkov_2015} have been discussed. In ref. \cite{Podgornik_2004} Podgornik investigated within the path integrals formalism the renormalized persistence length of semi-flexible polymer chain whose segments interact via a screened Debye-H\"{u}ckel dipolar interaction potential. In ref. \cite{Kumar_2009} Kumar et al. within the Edwards-Singh method calculated the mean-square radius of gyration of polyzwitterionic molecules in aqueous solutions as a function of the chain length, electrostatic interaction strength, added salt concentration, dipole moment, and degree of ionization of the zwitterionic monomers. In ref. \cite{Dean_2012} Dean et al. showed that taking into account the polarizing many-body correlations at the level of random phase approximation (RPA) can lead to ordering of the semi-flexible anisotropic polymer chains in the solution. In ref. \cite{Kumar_2014} Kumar et al. showed within the field-theoretic formalism that dipolar interactions in polymer blends can significantly enhance the phase segregation. Lu et al. within the field-theoretic formalism analyzed the van der Waals interactions between two rigid polymers polarizable along their backbone \cite{Lu2015}. In our recent work \cite{Budkov_2015} we investigated the conformational behavior of the polarizable flexible polymer chain under the external electric field within the Flory-type mean-field theory \cite{Flory_book}. We showed that regardless the polymer chain conformation (coil or globule) electric field increase causes the swelling of polymer chain. We also showed that increasing the electric field in the regime of poor solvent can provoke the globule-coil transition. However, we fully neglected the many-body electrostatic correlations between monomers related to their molecular polarizability which cannot be accounted at the level of pure mean-field theory \cite{Dean_2012}. These polarizing correlations, related to the fluctuations of local electrostatic potential, could be accounted via the fluctuation corrections to the mean-field approximation. It is evident in advance that contribution of the latter effects to the total free energy must be important at enough large monomer polarizability. Thus, the natural question appears: {\sl How the electrostatic many-body correlations of monomers can change the polarizable polymer chain conformational behavior under the external electric field?} \section{Theory} Let us consider a polarizable flexible polymer chain immersed in a dielectric solvent which we model as a continuous dielectric medium with the dielectric permittivity $\varepsilon_{s}$. Let polymer chain has a degree of polymerization $N$ and each monomer has a molecular polarizability $\gamma$. The monomer polarizability may be related to the electronic polarizability of monomers as well as the orientational polarizability of their permanent dipoles. The first case can be realized for the synthetic glassy polymers. The second case of permanent monomer dipoles is possible for the weak polyelectrolytes in the regime of counterion condensation, when the counterions and monomers form the strongly bound ion pairs. We consider only the case of isotropic dielectric response for simplicity. We also assume that the polymer chain is under the homogeneous electric field $\bold{E}$. To study the conformations of the polymer chain in the external electric field, we use the simple Flory-type \cite{Flory_book} mean-field theory, considering the radius of gyration $R_{g}$ as a single order parameter. Therefore, we assume that the polymer chain occupies the volume which can be estimated by the gyration volume $V_{g}=4\pi R_{g}^3/3$. Using all above-mentioned model assumptions, one can write a total free energy of the polymer chain in the following form: \begin{equation} \mathcal{F}(R_{g})=\mathcal{F}_{conf}(R_{g})+\mathcal{F}_{vol}(R_{g})+\mathcal{F}_{el}(R_{g}), \end{equation} where $\mathcal{F}_{conf}(R_{g})$ is the free energy of the ideal polymer chain which can be calculated by the following interpolation formula \cite{Fixman,Grosberg,Budkov1,Budkov,Budkov2,Budkov3,Budkov4} \begin{equation} \label{eq:conf} \mathcal{F}_{conf}(R_{g})=\frac{9}{4}k_{B}T\left(\alpha^{2}+\frac{1}{\alpha^2}\right), \end{equation} where $\alpha=R_{g}/R_{0g}$ is the expansion factor, $R_{0g}^2=Nb^2/6$ is the mean-square radius of gyration of the Gaussian polymer chain, $b$ is the Kuhn length, $k_{B}$ is the Boltzmann constant, $T$ is the temperature; the contribution of pairwise interactions of monomers to the total free energy can be accounted for simplicity via the standard virial series as follows \begin{equation} \label{eq:vol} \mathcal{F}_{vol}(R_{g})=k_{B}T\left(\frac{N^2B}{2V_{g}}+\frac{N^3C}{6V_{g}^2}\right), \end{equation} where $B$ and $C$ are the second and third virial coefficients, respectively; the electrostatic contribution can be written as a sum of two contributions \begin{equation} \label{eq:electr} \mathcal{F}_{el}(R_{g})=\mathcal{F}_{el}^{(MF)}(R_{g})+\mathcal{F}_{el}^{(fl)}(R_{g}), \end{equation} where first term is a mean-field approximation for the electrostatic free energy which can be estimated as the free energy of dielectric sphere \cite{Landau_VIII} \begin{equation} \label{eq:electr1} \mathcal{F}_{el}^{(MF)}(R_{g})=-\frac{V_{g}E^2}{8\pi}\frac{3\varepsilon_{s}\left(\varepsilon_{p}-\varepsilon_{s}\right)}{2\varepsilon_{s}+\varepsilon_{p}}=-\frac{3N\varepsilon_{s}\gamma E^2}{2 \left(3\varepsilon_{s}+\frac{4\pi \gamma N}{V_{g}}\right)}, \end{equation} where the effective dielectric permittivity inside the polymer volume $\varepsilon_{p}=\varepsilon_{s}+{4\pi\gamma N}/{V_{g}}$ in the mean-field approximation is introduced \cite{Budkov_2015,Budkov2015_2}; $\gamma$ is the molecular polarizability of monomers, and $E=\|\bold{E}\|$ is the absolute value of the external electric field. The second term in eq. (\ref{eq:electr}) determines the contribution of correlations between fluctuating dipoles. This contribution can be assessed for the enough large polymer volume within the formalism proposed in \cite{Dean_2012} at the level of random phase approximation (RPA) for the case of isotropic dielectric response: \begin{equation} \label{eq:electr2} \mathcal{F}_{el}^{(fl)}\simeq\frac{V_{g}k_{B}T}{2}\int\limits_{\|\bold{k}\|<\Lambda}\frac{d\bold{k}}{(2\pi)^3}\ln\left(\frac{V_{s}(\bold{k})}{V_{p}(\bold{k})}\right)\nonumber \end{equation} \begin{equation} =\frac{2\pi V_{g}k_{B}T}{3b^3}\ln\left(1+\frac{4\pi\gamma }{\varepsilon_{s}}\frac{N}{V_{g}}\right), \end{equation} where $V_{p}(\bold{k})=4\pi/(\varepsilon_{p}\bold{k}^2)$ and $V_{s}(\bold{k})=4\pi/(\varepsilon_{s}\bold{k}^2)$ are the Fourier-images of Coulomb potentials inside the polymer volume and in the pure solvent, respectively; $\Lambda=2\pi/b$ is the parameter of ultraviolet cut-off. The choice of such value of the cut-off parameter $\Lambda$ is due to the fact that at the scales $\sim b$ fluctuations of the electrostatic potential related to the dipoles fluctuations are absent \cite{Dean_2012}. Collecting together all above mentioned expressions, we arrive at the following result for the total free energy of the polymer chain in the solution under external electric field: \begin{equation} \label{eq:total} \frac{\mathcal{F}}{k_{B}T}=\frac{9}{4}\left(\alpha^{2}+\frac{1}{\alpha^2}\right)+\frac{N^2B}{2V_{g}}+\frac{N^3C}{6V_{g}^2}\nonumber \end{equation} \begin{equation} -\frac{3N\varepsilon_{s}\gamma E^2}{2k_{B}T\left(3\varepsilon_{s}+\frac{4\pi\gamma N}{V_{g}}\right)}+\frac{2\pi V_{g}}{3b^3}\ln\left(1+\frac{4\pi\tilde{\gamma}}{\varepsilon_{s}}\frac{N}{V_{g}}\right). \end{equation} We would like to stress that in our previous work \cite{Budkov_2015} we have estimated the mean-field electrostatic contribution as the free energy of dielectric plate, whereas here we use more appropriate relation for the free energy of dielectric sphere. \section{Numerical results and discussions} To perform some analytical estimates and numerical calculations in further, it is convenient to introduce the following dimensionless variables: $\tilde{E}=E\sqrt{\varepsilon_{s}b^3/k_{B}T}$, $\tilde{B}=Bb^{-3}$, $\tilde{C}=Cb^{-6}$, and $\tilde{\gamma}=\gamma b^{-3}/\varepsilon_{s}$. Further, minimizing the total free energy (\ref{eq:total}) with respect to the expansion factor $\alpha$, after some algebra we arrive at the equation in dimensionless form \begin{equation} \label{eq:alpha} \alpha^5-\alpha=\frac{3\sqrt{6}}{2\pi }\tilde{B}\sqrt{N}+\frac{27\tilde{C}}{\pi^2\alpha^3}+\frac{2\sqrt{6}\tilde{\gamma}^2\sqrt{N}\tilde{E}^2}{\left(1+\frac{6\sqrt{6}\tilde{\gamma}} {\alpha^3\sqrt{N}}\right)^2}-\nonumber \end{equation} \begin{equation} \frac{4\sqrt{6}\pi^2N^{3/2}\alpha^6}{243}\left(\ln\left(1+\frac{18\sqrt{6}\tilde{\gamma}}{\alpha^3\sqrt{N}}\right)- \frac{\frac{18\sqrt{6}\tilde{\gamma} }{\alpha^3\sqrt{N}}}{1+\frac{18\sqrt{6}\tilde{\gamma}}{\alpha^3\sqrt{N}}}\right). \end{equation} The first and second terms in the right-hand side of eq. (\ref{eq:alpha}) determine the effect of volume interactions. The third term determines the influence of the interactions of induced dipoles with the applied electric field on the polymer swelling. As is seen, the latter always leads to swelling of the polymer chain that is related to the well known electrostriction phenomena \cite{Landau_VIII}. The forth term determines the effect of many-body correlations of the fluctuating dipoles on the polymer swelling. To understand how the electrostatic dipole correlations can affect the polymer conformation, at first we consider the case of repulsive volume interactions ($\tilde{B}>0$), when the polymer chain is in conformation of expanded coil ($\alpha\gg 1$). Thus in this limit we get \begin{equation} \label{eq:alpha2} \alpha^5-\alpha\simeq\frac{3\sqrt{6}}{2\pi}\sqrt{N}\left(\tilde{B}+\frac{4\pi}{3}\tilde{\gamma}^2\tilde{E}^2-\frac{32\pi^3}{3}\tilde{\gamma}^2\right). \end{equation} The equation (\ref{eq:alpha2}) means that correlations between fluctuating dipoles in the coil state lead to effective decreasing in the second virial coefficient. In the case when the monomer polarizability is attributed to the orientational polarizability of permanent dipoles, i.e., when $\gamma=p^2/(3k_{B}T)$ ($p$ is a permanent dipole), we get the following equation for the expansion factor at $\tilde{E}=0$ \begin{equation} \label{eq:alpha3} \alpha^5-\alpha\simeq\frac{3\sqrt{6}}{2\pi b^3}\sqrt{N}\left(B-\frac{32\pi^3p^4}{27(k_{B}T)^2\varepsilon_{s}^2b^3}\right). \end{equation} It should be noted that eq.(\ref{eq:alpha3}) is similar to that was obtained for the weak polyelectrolyte chain in the regime of counterion condensation \cite{Dua2014}. The latter equation means that when the polymer chain is in coil conformation, the electrostatic dipole correlations can be considered as pairwise. However, when the polymer chain adopts a collapsed state, the higher dipole correlations become important. In other words, when the polymer chain is in the globule state, polarizing dipole correlations have to be accounted at the many-body level. In order to elucidate a role of the many-body dipole correlations in the polymer chain conformational behavior, let us consider the dependence of the expansion factor on the monomer polarizability $\tilde{\gamma}$ at zero electric field. We assume in this case that the volume interactions are repulsive, i.e., that $\tilde{B}>0$. On fig. 1 are depicted the dependences of the expansion factor on the monomer polarizability at the different second virial coefficients $\tilde{B}$. As is seen, increasing in the monomer polarizability leads to the dramatic decrease in the expansion factor. The latter result means that the enough strong electrostatic many-body correlations of monomers can provoke the coil-globule transition. It should be noted that this effect is quite similar to the coil-globule transition of polyelectrolyte chain induced by correlations of charges \cite{DeLaCruz2000,Brilliantov_1998,Brilliantov_2016,Pincus,Cherstvy2010,Netz_2003,Netz_2003_2}. It is worth noting that in the theory (see, for instance, ref. \cite{Dua2014}), where the monomer dipole correlations were considered as pairwise, in order to compensate the attraction of the dipoles, it is needed to take into account the repulsive volume interactions up to the third term of the virial expansion. However, accounting for the dipole correlations at the many-body level, as is seen from fig. 1, allows compensate the attraction of the dipoles taking into account the repulsive volume interactions even at the level of second virial coefficient. \begin{figure} \centerline{\includegraphics[scale = 0.95]{Fig1.pdf}} \caption{The expansion factor $\alpha$ as a function of the monomer polarizability at the different second virial coefficients $\tilde{B}$. The data are shown for $N=100$, $\tilde{E}=0$, $\tilde{C}=0$.} \label{fig.1} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centerline{\includegraphics[scale = 0.95]{Fig2a.pdf}} \centerline{\includegraphics[scale = 0.95]{Fig2b.pdf}} \caption{The expansion factor $\alpha$ as a function of the electric field $\tilde{E}$ is calculated by the (a) mean-field theory and (b) theory with account for the electrostatic dipole correlations at the different monomer polarizabilities $\tilde{\gamma}$. The data are shown for $N=100$, $\tilde{B}=-0.25$, $\tilde{C}=0.1$.} \label{fig.1} \end{figure} As one can see from eq. (\ref{eq:alpha}), the presence of electric field inside the polymer coil, oppositely, leads to an effective increase in the second virial coefficient. In the case of strong electric field ($\tilde{E}\gg 1$), we get the limiting laws for the expansion factor and the radius of gyration: \begin{equation} \alpha\sim \tilde{\gamma}^{2/5}\tilde{E}^{2/5}N^{1/10}, ~~ R_{g}/b\sim \tilde{\gamma}^{2/5}\tilde{E}^{2/5}N^{3/5}, \end{equation} which were first obtained (up to numerical prefactors) and discussed in ref. \cite{Budkov_2015}. Now let us pass to the discussion of how the many-body electrostatic correlations of the fluctuating dipoles can change the conformation behavior of the polymer chain under the external electric field compared to the pure mean-field theory. Especially, we would like to focus on the influence of the electrostatic correlations of monomers on the {\sl electric field-induced globule-coil transition} which was in detail discussed in ref. \cite{Budkov_2015} in the framework of mean-field theory. We assume that $\tilde{B}=-0.25$ and $\tilde{C}=0.1$, so that polymer chain is in the globule state even at $\tilde{\gamma}=0$. Fig. 2 demonstrates the expansion factor as a function of the electric field at the different monomer polarizability $\tilde{\gamma}$ obtained within the (a) pure mean-field theory and (b) present theory with accounting for the many-body electrostatic dipole correlations. As is seen, in both cases applying the electric field exceeding some threshold value induces the globule-coil transition. Nevertheless, account for the electrostatic correlations shifts this transition to larger electric fields. It is worth noting that in the region of small electric fields, when the polymer chain is in collapsed state, electrostatic correlations lead to smaller values of the expansion factor than that are predicted by the mean-field theory. Thereby this phenomenon is reminiscent the globule-coil transition of the polyelectrolyte chain caused by the electic field \cite{Netz_2003,Netz_2003_2}. It should be noted that in the region of sufficiently large monomer polarizability in both theories globule-coil transition occurs as a first-order phase transition, i.e., as abrupt increase in the expansion factor. \section{Conclusion} In conclusion, we have formulated the simple Flory-type self-consistent field theory of the polarizable polymer chain under the external electric field with account for the many-body dipole electrostatic correlations. We have shown that when the polymer chain is in the coil state, while the monomer polarizability is small, the electrostatic dipole correlations can be considered as pairwise. In this case their effect consists of the decrease in the second virial coefficient of monomer-monomer interaction. However, at enough strong monomer polarizability, electrostatic dipole correlations can cause the coil-globule transition. When the polymer chain is in the globule state, electrostatic dipole correlations have to be considered at the many-body level. We have also shown that the account for the many-body electrostatic dipole correlations does not qualitatively change the main result of our previous pure mean-field theory \cite{Budkov_2015} -- the {\sl electric field-induced globule-coil transition}. However, in the present theory the electric field, at which the globule-coil transition takes place, shifts to higher values. Such trend is related to the fact that an availability of the polarizability on the polymer backbone leads to the additional effective attraction between monomers. So it requires to apply stronger electric field to disjoin the polymer globule. \begin{acknowledgments} This work was supported by grant from Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Grant No. 15-43-03195). \end{acknowledgments}
\section{Introduction} Consider the following classical heat equation in ${\mathbb R}^{1+d}={\mathbb R} \times {\mathbb R}^d$: $$ \partial_t u=\Delta u+f, $$ where $\Delta$ is the Laplacian in ${\mathbb R}^{d}$. It is by now a classical result that for any $p\in(1,\infty)$, there is a constant $C=C(d,p)>0$ such that for all $f (t, x) \in L^p({\mathbb R} \times {\mathbb R}^d)$, $$ \\|\Delta u\\|_{L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+d})}\leqslant C\\|f\\|_{L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+d})}, $$ which is an easy consequence of the classical Mihlin's multiplier theorem (cf. \cite{La-So-Ur}), and plays a basic role in the $L^p$-theory of second-order parabolic equations (cf. \cite{Kr}). This type of estimate has been extended to the nonlocal L\'evy operators (a class of pseudo-differential operators with non-smooth symbols) in \cite{Mi-Pr} and \cite{Zh1}. \medskip In this paper, we are concerned with the following kinetic equation in ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$: \begin{align}\label{Op} \partial_t u+{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_xu=\Delta^{\alpha/2}_{\mathrm{v}} u+f,\quad \alpha\in(0,2], \end{align} where $u(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})$ and $f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})$ are Borel measurable functions in ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, $(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})$ stands for the time, position and velocity variables, and $\Delta^{\alpha/2}_{\mathrm{v}}=-(-\Delta_{\mathrm{v}})^{\alpha/2}$ is the usual fractional Laplacian with respect to the velocity variable. When $\alpha=2$, Kolmogorov in \cite{Ko} first constructed the fundamental solution of degenerate operator $\partial_t+{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_x-\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}$. Observe that, using It\^o's formula, it is easy to verify that the infinitesimal generator of the diffusion process $$ t\mapsto \left(x_0 -\int_0^t X^{{\mathrm{v}}_0}_s {\mathord{{\rm d}}} s, X^{{\mathrm{v}}_0}_t \right) $$ where $X^{{\mathrm{v}}_0}_s$ is a Browian motion on ${\mathbb R}^d$ starting from ${\mathrm{v}}_0$ with infinitesimal generator $\Delta$, is $\Delta_{\mathrm{v}} -{\mathrm{v}}\cdot \nabla_x$. Thus for $T>0$, the solution $u(t, x, {\mathrm{v}})$ to \eqref{Op} on $(-\infty, T]\times {\mathbb R}^d \times {\mathbb R}^d$ with $\alpha=2$ and $u(T, x, {\mathrm{v}})=0$ is given by $$ u(t, x, {\mathrm{v}})= {\mathbb E} \left[ \int_0^{T-t} f \left(T-t-s, x-\int_0^s X^{\mathrm{v}}_r {\mathord{{\rm d}}} r, X^{\mathrm{v}}_s \right) {\mathord{{\rm d}}} s \right]. $$ In \cite{Ho}, H\"ormander established a famous hypoelliptic theorem for general second order partial differential operators. A more precise {\it global} hypoelliptic regularity estimates are established by Bouchut in \cite{Bo} in 2002: \begin{equation}\label{e:1.2} \\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|_2+\\|\Delta_x^{1/3} u\\|_2\leqslant C\\|f\\|_2. \end{equation} Note that for ``nice" $f(t, x, {\mathrm{v}})$ on ${\mathbb R}\times {\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d$, $$ u(t, x, {\mathrm{v}}):= -\int_t^\infty f(s, x+{\mathrm{v}}(s-t), {\mathrm{v}})ds $$ is a solution to $\partial_t u +{\mathrm{v}}\cdot \nabla_x u =f$. One can show directly (see \cite{Bo}) that for any $\alpha >0$, $$ \\| \Delta_x^{\alpha/(2(1+\alpha))} u \\|_2 \leqslant c \, \\| \Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\alpha/2} u \\|_2^{1/(1+\alpha)}\, \\| f\\|_2^{\alpha/(1+\alpha )}. $$ In particular, taking $\alpha=2$ yields $$ \\| \Delta_x^{1/3} u \\|_2 \leqslant c \, \\| \Delta_{\mathrm{v}} u \\|_2^{1/3}\, \\| f\\|_2^{2/3}. $$ This explains the mystery of 1/3 appeared in the exponent of $\Delta^{1/3}_x$ in \eqref{e:1.2}. When $p\not=2$, through establishing some weak-type $(1,1)$ estimate, Bramanti, Cupini, Lanconelli and Priola \cite{Br-Cu-La-Pr} proved the following global regularity estimate $$ \\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p,\ \ p\in(1,\infty), $$ which, together with a result of Bouchut in \cite{Bo}, also yields that $$ \\|\Delta_x^{1/3} u\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p,\ \ p\in(1,\infty). $$ It should be noted that the optimal {\it local} $L^p$-estimates for hypoelliptic differential operators have been studied by Rothschild and Stein in \cite{Ro-St}, where $\\| \Delta^{1/3}_x u \\|_2$ term first appeared. \medskip On the other hand, for $\alpha\in(0,2)$, Alexander \cite{Al} proved the following $L^2$-regularity estimate for \eqref{Op} by using Fourier's transformation, $$ \\|\Delta_x^{\alpha/(2(1+\alpha))}u\\|_2+\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\alpha/2}u\\|_2\leqslant C\\|f\\|_2. $$ A natural question arises whether the above fractional hypoellipticity estimate still holds for general $p\in(1,\infty)$. Clearly, such type estimates belong to the theory of singular integral operators. In fact, as pointed out in \cite{Al}, the main motivation of studying the above nonlocal regularity also comes from the investigation of spacially inhomogeneous Boltzmann equations. Let us explain this point in detail (see also \cite{Vi}). Denote by ${\mathrm{v}}$ and ${\mathrm{v}}_$ the velocities of two particles immediately before the collision, and ${\mathrm{v}}'$ and ${\mathrm{v}}_'$ their velocities immediately after the collision. Physics law says $$ {\mathrm{v}}'={\mathrm{v}}-\<{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>\omega, \quad {\mathrm{v}}'_={\mathrm{v}}_+\<{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>\omega,\ \omega\in{\mathbb S}^{d-1}, $$ where ${\mathbb S}^{d-1}$ is the unit sphere in ${\mathbb R}^d$. We have the following relations: $$ {\mathrm{v}}+{\mathrm{v}}_={\mathrm{v}}'+{\mathrm{v}}'_, \quad \|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_\|=\|{\mathrm{v}}'-{\mathrm{v}}'_\|, \quad \|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2+\|{\mathrm{v}}_\|^2=\|{\mathrm{v}}'\|^2+\|{\mathrm{v}}'_\|^2, $$ (i.e. conservation of velocities and conservation of energies) and $$ \<{\mathrm{v}}',\omega\>=\<{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>, \quad \<{\mathrm{v}}'_,\omega\>=\<{\mathrm{v}},\omega\>. $$ Let $f$ be the density of gases. The classical Boltzmann equation says $$ \partial_t f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})+{\mathrm{v}}\cdot \nabla_x f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})=Q(f,f)(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}), $$ where $Q(f,g)$ is the collision operator defined by $$ Q(f,g)({\mathrm{v}}):=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}(f({\mathrm{v}}'_)g({\mathrm{v}}')-f({\mathrm{v}}_)g({\mathrm{v}}))B(\|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_\|,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\omega{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}_, $$ where $$ B(\|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_\|,\omega)=\|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_\|^\gamma b(\|\<{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>\|/\|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_\|), $$ and $$ \mbox{$b(s)\asymp s^{-1-\alpha}$, $\alpha\in(0,2)$ and $\gamma+\alpha\in(-1,1)$,} $$ where $\asymp$ means that both sides are comparable up to a constant. Here and below, we drop ``$(t,x)$'' for simplicity. By an elementary calculation, the collision operator has the following Carleman's representation (see Appendix 4.1): \begin{align}\label{Bol} \begin{split} Q(f,g)({\mathrm{v}})=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}&\Big[f({\mathrm{v}}-h)g({\mathrm{v}}+w)-f({\mathrm{v}}-h+w)g({\mathrm{v}})\Big]\\ &\times B(\|h-w\|,w/\|w\|)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w. \end{split} \end{align} In particular, when $b(s)=s^{-1-\alpha}$, we can split $Q$ into two parts $$ Q(f,g)=Q_1(f,g)+Q_2(f,g), $$ where $Q_1(f,g)({\mathrm{v}}):=g({\mathrm{v}}) H_f({\mathrm{v}})$ with $$ H_f({\mathrm{v}}):=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}(f({\mathrm{v}}-h)-f({\mathrm{v}}-h+w))\frac{\|h-w\|^{\gamma+1+\alpha}}{\|w\|^{\alpha+d}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w, $$ and $$ Q_2(f,g)({\mathrm{v}}):=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(g({\mathrm{v}}+w)-g({\mathrm{v}}))\frac{K_f({\mathrm{v}},w)}{\|w\|^{\alpha+d}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w $$ with $$ K_f({\mathrm{v}},w):=2\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}f({\mathrm{v}}-h)\|h-w\|^{\gamma+1+\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h. $$ The linearized Boltzmann equation then takes the following form that involves non-local operator of fractional Laplacian type: $$ \partial_t g+{\mathrm{v}}\cdot \nabla_x g= {\rm p.v.} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d} (g(\cdot+w)-g(\cdot))\frac{K_f(\cdot,w)}{\|w\|^{\alpha+d}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w+g\,H_f. $$ Note that $K_f$ is a symmetric kernel in $w$, i.e., $K_f(\cdot,w)=K_f(\cdot,-w)$, and $g H_f$ is a zero order term in $g$. \medskip The goal of this paper is to study the following nonlocal kinetic Fokker-Planck equation: $$ \partial_s u+U_s{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_x u+\lambda u=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\Big[u(\cdot+\sigma_s w)+u(\cdot+\sigma_s w)-2u(\cdot)\Big]\nu_s({\mathord{{\rm d}}} w), $$ where $\lambda\geqslant 0$, $\nu_s: {\mathbb R}_+\to{\mathbb L}^{sym, (\alpha)}_{non}$ and $U_s, \sigma_s:{\mathbb R}_+\to{\mathbb M}^d_{non}$ are measurable functions. Here, ${\mathbb L}^{sym, (\alpha)}_{non}$ is the space of non-degenerate symmetric $\alpha$-stable L\'evy measures and ${\mathbb M}^d_{non}$ is the space of all nonsingular $d\times d$-matrices. Under suitable assumptions on $\nu,\sigma$ and $U$, we will establish in Theorem \ref{Main} of this paper the following $L^p$-maximal hypoelliptic regularity: $$ \big\\|\Delta_x^{\alpha/(2(1+\alpha))}u^\lambda\big\\|_p+\big\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\alpha/2}u^\lambda\big\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p,\ \ p\in(1,\infty). $$ \medskip The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give some preliminaries. In particular, we derive some estimates about the density of the processes associated with the nonlocal operators. We also recall Fefferman-Stein's theorem. In Section 3, we prove our main result Theorem \ref{Main} for $p\not=2$ by showing the boundedness of suitably defined operators from $L^\infty$ to $BMO$-spaces. Some useful facts needed in this paper are collected in Subsections 4.1-4.2 of the Appendix of this paper. The proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p=2$ is given in Subsection 4.3. Its proof is new and more elementary even for the time-independent case (that is, $U_s$ is independent of $s$) studied in Alexander \cite{Al}. This elementary proof is based on a direct Fourier transform. \medskip Throughout this paper we use the following convention. The letter $C$ with or without subscripts will denote an unimportant constant, whose value may change in different places. Moreover, $f\preceq g$ means that $f\leqslant C g$ for some constant $C>0$, and $f\asymp g$ means that $C^{-1}g\leqslant f \leqslant C g$ for some $C>1$. We use $:=$ as a way of definition. For two real numbers $a$ and $b$, $a\vee b:= \max \{a, b\}$, $a \wedge b:={\mathord{{\rm min}}} \{a, b\}$ and $a^+:=\max \{a, 0\}$. \section{Preliminaries} Let ${\mathbb L}^{sym}$ be the set of all symmetric L\'evy measures $\nu$ on ${\mathbb R}^d$, that is, (positive) measures $\nu$ on ${\mathbb R}^d$ such that $$ \nu(-{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x)=\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x),\ \ \nu(\{0\})=0,\ \ \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\big(1\wedge\|x\|^2\big)\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x)<+\infty. $$ We equip ${\mathbb L}^{sym}$ with the weak convergence topology. For $\alpha\in(0,2)$, let ${\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}\subset{\mathbb L}^{sym}$ be the set of all symmetric $\alpha$-stable measures $\nu^{(\alpha)}$ with form \begin{align} \nu^{(\alpha)}(A)=\int^\infty_0\left(\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\frac{1_A (r\theta)\Sigma({\mathord{{\rm d}}}\theta)}{r^{1+\alpha}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,\quad A\in{\mathscr B}({\mathbb R}^d),\label{Eq4} \end{align} where $\Sigma$ is a finite symmetric measure over the sphere ${\mathbb S}^{d-1}$ (called spherical measure of $\nu^{(\alpha)}$). We introduce the following notions. \begin{definition} \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item A symmetric $\alpha$-stable measure $\nu^{(\alpha)}\in {\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}$ is called non-degenerate if \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\|\theta_0\cdot\theta\|^\alpha\Sigma({\mathord{{\rm d}}}\theta) >0 \quad \hbox{for every } \theta_0\in{\mathbb S}^{d-1}. \label{Spe1} \end{align} The set of all non-degenerate symmetric $\alpha$-stable measures is denoted by ${\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}_{non}$. \item For $\nu_1,\nu_2\in{\mathbb L}^{sym}$, we say that $\nu_1$ is less than $\nu_2$ (simply written as $\nu_1\leqslant\nu_2$) if $$ \nu_1( A )\leqslant \nu_2(A) \quad \hbox{for any } A\in{\mathscr B}({\mathbb R}^d). $$ \end{enumerate} \end{definition} \medskip \begin{remark} \rm In this paper, for simplicity we only consider symmetric stable L\'evy measures. This assumption is not crucial. All the results of this paper can be extended to non-symmetric stable L\'evy measures. \end{remark} \medskip For a function $f\in C^2_b({\mathbb R}^{d})$, we define the difference operators of first and second orders as follows: for $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^d$, \begin{equation}\label{NB5} \begin{split} \delta^{(1)}_{x}f(y):=f(y+x)-f(y),\quad \delta^{(2)}_{x} f(y):=\delta^{(1)}_{x}f(y)+\delta^{(1)}_{-x}f(y). \end{split} \end{equation} Using the fact that $$ f(y+x)-f(y) = x \cdot \int_0^1 \nabla f (y+sx){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s, $$ we have for any $p\in[1,\infty]$ and $f\in C^2_b({\mathbb R}^d)\cap L^p({\mathbb R}^d)$ that \begin{align} &\ \\|\delta^{(1)}_{x} f\\|_p\leqslant (\\|\nabla f\\|_p\|x\|)\wedge(2\\|f\\|_p),\label{EV311}\\ &\\|\delta^{(2)}_{x} f\\|_p\leqslant (2\\|\nabla^2 f\\|_p\|x\|^2)\wedge(4\\|f\\|_p).\label{EV31} \end{align} Let ${\mathbb M}^d$ be the space of all real $d\times d$-matrices and ${\mathbb M}^d_{non}$ the set of all non-singular matrices. The identity matrix is denoted by ${\mathbb I}$, and the transpose of a matrix $\sigma$ is denoted by $\sigma^$. Let ${\mathcal S}({\mathbb R}^d)$ be the space of rapidly decreasing functions. For given $\nu\in{\mathbb L}^{sym}$, $\sigma\in{\mathbb M}^d$ and $\alpha\in(0,2)$, we consider the following L\'evy operator: \begin{align} {\mathscr L}^\nu_{\sigma} f(y):=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(2)}_{\sigma x} f(y)\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x),\ \ f\in{\mathcal S}({\mathbb R}^d).\label{Def1} \end{align} Let $\psi^\nu_\sigma$ be the symbol of operator ${\mathscr L}^\nu_\sigma$, i.e., $$ \widehat{{\mathscr L}^\nu_\sigma f}(\xi)=-\psi^\nu_\sigma(\xi) \hat f(\xi), $$ where $\hat{f}$ denotes the Fourier transform of $f$. The function $\psi^\nu_\sigma$ is also called a Fourier multiplier. It is easy to see that \begin{align} \psi^\nu_\sigma(\xi):=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(1-\cos\<\xi,\sigma x\>)\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x).\label{psi} \end{align} In particular, for given $\nu_1,\nu_2\in{\mathbb L}^{sym}$, if $\nu_1\leqslant\nu_2$, then for any $\sigma\in{\mathbb M}^d$, \begin{align} \psi^{\nu_1}_\sigma(\xi)\leqslant\psi^{\nu_2}_\sigma(\xi),\ \ \forall\xi\in{\mathbb R}^d,\label{HG1} \end{align} and by \eqref{psi}, \eqref{Eq4} and \eqref{Spe1}, for any $\nu^{(\alpha)}\in{\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}_{non}$, \begin{align} \psi^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_\sigma(\xi)\asymp \|\sigma^\xi\|^\alpha,\ \xi\in{\mathbb R}^d,\ \sigma\in{\mathbb M}^d.\label{HG2} \end{align} Moreover, if $\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} y)=\|y\|^{-d-\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} y$, then $\psi^\nu_\sigma(\xi)=c_{d,\alpha}\|\sigma^\xi\|^\alpha,$ where $c_{d,\alpha}$ is a constant only depending on $d,\alpha$. In this case, \begin{align} {\mathscr L}^\nu_{\mathbb I} f(y)=c_{d,\alpha}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}f(y),\label{Es7} \end{align} where $\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}$ is the usual fractional Laplacian. In this paper, up to a constant multiple, we always use the following definition of fractional Laplacian: \begin{align} \Delta^{{\alpha}/{2}}f(y)=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(2)}_x f(y)\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x}{\|x\|^{d+\alpha}}.\label{Def3} \end{align} We have the following commutator estimate. \begin{lemma} Let $\alpha\in(0,2), \sigma\in{\mathbb M}^d$ and $\nu\in {\mathbb L}^{sym}, \nu^{(\alpha)}\in{\mathbb L}^{sym, (\alpha)}$ with $\nu\leqslant\nu^{(\alpha)}$. For any $p,q\in[1,\infty]$ with $p\leqslant q$ and $\gamma \in ( (\alpha-1)^+,1)$, and for any $\phi\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{d})$, there is a positive constant $C_\phi$ depending on $\\| \nabla_x^2 \phi \\|_p + \\| \phi\\|_p$ and $\\|\sigma\\|, \nu^{(\alpha)},d,\alpha, p,q,\gamma$ such that for any measurable function $f$ on ${\mathbb R}^{d}$, \begin{align} \big\\|{\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}(f\phi)-({\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}f)\phi\big\\|_p\leqslant C_\phi\big([f]_{q,\gamma}+\\|f\\|_q\big),\label{EV441} \end{align} where $[f]_{q,\gamma}:=\sup_x\big(\\|\delta^{(1)}_xf\\|_q/\|x\|^\gamma\big)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By definition \eqref{Def1}, we have $$ {\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}(f\phi)-({\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma} f)\phi-f{\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}\phi=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(1)}_{\sigma x} f\,\delta^{(1)}_{\sigma x} \phi\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x). $$ Hence, by H\"older's inequality with $\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{q}+\frac{1}{r}$ and $\nu\leqslant\nu^{(\alpha)}$, \begin{align} \\|{\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}(f\phi)-({\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma} f)\phi\\|_p\leqslant\\|f\\|_q\,\\|{\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma}\phi\\|_r +2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\\|\delta^{(1)}_{\sigma x} f\\|_q\,\\|\delta^{(1)}_{\sigma x} \phi\\|_r\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} x). \end{align} Notice that $$ \\|\delta^{(1)}_{\sigma x} f\\|_q\leqslant\big ([f]_{q,\gamma}\|\sigma x\|^\gamma\big)\wedge (2\\|f\\|_q). $$ The desired estimate then follows by \eqref{Eq4}, \eqref{EV311} and \eqref{EV31}. \end{proof} \subsection{Fundamental solutions of nonlocal kinetic Fokker-Planck operator} In the following, for a function $f(x,{\mathrm{v}})\in C^2_b({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, we shall write \begin{align} \delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}'):=\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,\cdot)({\mathrm{v}}'),& \quad \delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}'):=\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,\cdot)({\mathrm{v}}'),\\ {\mathscr L}^{\nu}_{\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}f(x,{\mathrm{v}}):={\mathscr L}^\nu_\sigma f(x,\cdot)({\mathrm{v}}),& \quad \Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} f(x,\cdot)({\mathrm{v}}), \end{align} and similarly for $\delta^{(1)}_x f(x',{\mathrm{v}}),\ \delta^{(2)}_x f(x',{\mathrm{v}}),\ \Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_x f(x,{\mathrm{v}}).$ Let $\sigma, U: {\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb M}^d_{non}$ be two matrix-valued measurable functions with \begin{align} \left\{ \begin{aligned} &\kappa_0:=\\|\sigma\\|_\infty+\\|\sigma^{-1}\\|_\infty+\\|U\\|_\infty+\sup_{s<t}\Big((t-s)\\|\Pi_{s,t}^{-1}\\|\Big)<\infty,\\ &\mbox{ where }\ \ \Pi_{s,t}:=\int^t_s U_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,\ s,t\in{\mathbb R} \mbox{ with }s<t. \end{aligned}\label{Kapp} \right\} \end{align} The above assumptions correspond to the non-degeneracy on $\sigma$ and $U$. Let $\nu:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb L}^{sym}$ be a measurable map and satisfying that for some $\alpha\in(0,2)$, \begin{align} \nu^{(\alpha)}_1\leqslant\nu_s\leqslant\nu^{(\alpha)}_2,\quad \nu^{(\alpha)}_1, \nu^{(\alpha)}_2\in{\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}_{non}.\label{Con2} \end{align} Notice that by \eqref{HG1} and \eqref{HG2}, there is a constant $\kappa_1\in(0,1)$ depending on $\kappa_0$ and $\alpha$ such that \begin{align} \kappa_1\|\xi\|^\alpha\leqslant \psi^{\nu_s}_{\sigma_s}(\xi)\leqslant \kappa^{-1}_1\|\xi\|^\alpha,\ \ \xi\in{\mathbb R}^d.\label{Con1} \end{align} By the above notations, we consider the following time-dependent nonlocal kinetic Fokker-Planck operator \begin{align} {\mathscr K}_s f(x, {\mathrm{v}}):={\mathscr L}^{\nu_s}_{\sigma_s,{\mathrm{v}}} f(x, {\mathrm{v}})+(U_s{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_x) f(x,{\mathrm{v}}).\label{Eq218} \end{align} In this subsection we study the existence of smooth fundamental solutions for ${\mathscr K}_s$ by using a probabilistic approach, and establish some short time asymptotic estimates for the heat kernel. Note that the existence of smooth fundamental solution of nonlocal H\"ormander operators was studied in \cite{Zh2, Zh3, Zh4} (see also the references therein). Let $N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})$ be the Poisson random measure on ${\mathbb R}^{1+d}$ with intensity measure $\nu_t({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t$, and $\tilde N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}):=N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})-\nu_t({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t$ the compensated Poisson random measure. For $s\leqslant t$, define \begin{align} L_{s,t}:=\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant 1}{\mathrm{v}}\tilde N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})+\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>1}{\mathrm{v}} N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}),\label{ES1} \end{align} and $\Pi_{s,t}:=\int^t_s U_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r$ as well as \begin{align} \begin{split}\label{KT0} K_{s,t}:=(X_{s,t},V_{s,t}):&=\left(\int^t_s U_r\left[\int^r_s\sigma_{r'}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{s,r'}\right]{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,\int^t_s\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{s,r}\right)\\ &=\left(\int^t_s \Pi_{r,t}\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{s,r},\int^t_s\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{s,r}\right), \end{split} \end{align} where the second equality is due to Fubini's theorem. Notice that $(X_{s,t},V_{s,t})$ solves the following liner SDE: \begin{align}\label{SDE} {\mathord{{\rm d}}} (X_{s,t},V_{s,t})=(U_tV_{s,t},0){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t+(0,\sigma_t{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{s,t}),\ (X_{s,s},V_{s,s})=(0,0),\ \ t\geqslant s. \end{align} For any $s\leqslant t$ and $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, let $$ K_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}}):=K_{s,t}+(x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}},{\mathrm{v}})=(X_{s,t}+x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}}, V_{s,t}+{\mathrm{v}}), $$ which solves \eqref{SDE} with starting point $(x,{\mathrm{v}})$. In particular, $$\{K_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}}), t\geqslant s, (x,{\mathrm{v}})\in{\mathbb R}^{2d}\}$$ forms a family of time-inhomogenous Markov processes. Let ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}$ be the associated Markov operator: \begin{align} {\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}):={\mathbb E} f(K_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})),\ \ f\in {\mathcal B}_b({\mathbb R}^d),\label{TST} \end{align} where ${\mathcal B}_b({\mathbb R}^d)$ is the set of bounded measurable functions on ${\mathbb R}^d$. Clearly, for each $t\geqslant s$ and $p\in[1,\infty]$, ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}$ is a contraction operator in $L^p({\mathbb R}^{2d})$ and \begin{align} {\mathcal T}_{s,t}f={\mathcal T}_{s,r}{\mathcal T}_{r, t}f,\ \ s\leqslant r\leqslant t.\label{Sem} \end{align} Moreover, for any $f\in C^2_b({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}f$ satisfies the following backward Kolmogorov's equation (for example, see \cite{Zh0}): for Lebesgue-almost all $s\leqslant t$ and all $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, \begin{align} \partial_s{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})+{\mathscr K}_s{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})=0,\label{EQ00} \end{align} where ${\mathscr K}_s$ is defined by \eqref{Eq218}. The Fourier transform of ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}f$ is given by \begin{align}\label{TST0} \widehat{{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f}(\xi,\eta)={\mathbb E}{\mathrm{e}}^{-{\rm{i}}\<(\xi,\eta-\Pi_{s,t}^\xi), K_{s,t}\>}\hat f(\xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi). \end{align} Below, we use the following convention: If a quantity depends on $\nu$, $\sigma$ and $U$, and when we want to emphasize the dependence, we shall write them in the place of superscript. For example, there is no further declarations, we sometimes use $X^{\sigma, U}_{s,t}$, $V^\sigma_{s,t}$, $K^{\nu}_{s,t}$, ${\mathcal T}^{\nu}_{s,t}$, and so on. First of all, we have \begin{lemma} Under \eqref{Con2}, for any $q\in[0,\alpha)$, there is a constant $C=C(d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_2, q,\alpha)>0$ such that for any bounded measurable function $f:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb M}^d$ and $s<t$, \begin{align}\label{Mom} {\mathbb E}\left\|\int^t_s f_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^\nu_{s,r}\right\|^q\leqslant C\\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}(t-s)^{\frac{q}{\alpha}}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Since $\nu$ is symmetric, we can write $$ L_{s,t}=\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}{\mathrm{v}}\tilde N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})+\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}{\mathrm{v}} N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}). $$ By H\"older's inequality and the isometry of stochastic integral, we have \begin{align} {\mathbb E}\left\|\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}f_r{\mathrm{v}}\tilde N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right\|^q &\leqslant\left({\mathbb E}\left\|\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}f_r{\mathrm{v}}\tilde N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right\|^2\right)^{q/2}\\ &=\left(\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|f_r{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\nu_r({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\right)^{q/2}\\ &\!\!\stackrel{\eqref{Con2}}{\leqslant} \\|f\\|_{L^\infty(s,t)}^q\left((t-s)\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\nu^{(\alpha)}_2({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right)^{q/2}\\ &\stackrel{\eqref{Eq4}}{\preceq} \\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}(t-s)^{\frac{q}{\alpha}}. \end{align} If $q\in(1,\alpha)$, then by Burkholder's inequality (see \cite[(2.10)]{So-Zh}), \begin{align} {\mathbb E}\left\|\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}f_r{\mathrm{v}} N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right\|^q &\preceq\left(\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|f_r{\mathrm{v}}\| \nu_r({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\right)^q\\ &\quad+\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|f_s{\mathrm{v}}\|^q \nu_r({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\\ &\leqslant\\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}\left((t-s)\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\| \nu^{(\alpha)}_2({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right)^q\\ &\quad+\\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}(t-s)\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^q \nu^{(\alpha)}_2({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\\ &\stackrel{\eqref{Eq4}}{\preceq} \\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}(t-s)^{\frac{q}{\alpha}}. \end{align} If $q\in(0,1]$, then \begin{align} &{\mathbb E}\left\|\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}f_r{\mathrm{v}} N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right\|^q \leqslant {\mathbb E}\left(\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|f_s{\mathrm{v}}\|^q N({\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\right)\\ &\qquad=\int^t_s\!\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{1/\alpha}}\|f_r{\mathrm{v}}\|^q \nu_r({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r \stackrel{\eqref{Eq4}}{\preceq} \\|f\\|^q_{L^\infty(s,t)}(t-s)^{\frac{q}{\alpha}}. \end{align} Combining the above calculations, we obtain the desired estimate. \end{proof} The following is a crucial lemma of this paper. \begin{lemma} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, the random variable $K^{\nu}_{s,t}$ defined by \eqref{KT0} has a smooth density $p^{\nu}_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})$. Moreover, for any $n,m\in{\mathbb N}_0$ and $q_1,q_2\in[0,\alpha)$ with $q_1+q_2<\alpha$, there exists a positive constant $C=C(d,n,m,\kappa_0,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,q_i,\alpha)$ such that for all $s<t$, \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|x\|^{q_1}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{q_2}\|\nabla^{n}_{x}\nabla^{m}_{{\mathrm{v}}} p^{\nu}_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}\leqslant C(t-s)^{((q_1-n)(1+\alpha)+q_2-m)/{\alpha}}.\label{EV11} \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} We divide the proof into four steps. All the constants below will depend only on $d,n,m,\kappa_0,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,q_i,\alpha$. \medskip\\ {\bf (i)} First of all, we assume that $$ \nu_s=\nu^{(\alpha)}\in{\mathbb L}^{sym,(\alpha)}_{non}. $$ Let $L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}$ be an $\alpha$-stable process with the L\'evy measure $\nu^{(\alpha)}$. Since for any $s<t$, $L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}$ has the following scaling property: $$ \Big(L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_{(t-s)r}\Big)_{r\geqslant 0}\stackrel{(d)}{=} \Big((t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_r\Big)_{r\geqslant 0}, $$ by \eqref{KT0} and the change of variables, we have \begin{equation}\label{NB4} \begin{split} K^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_{s,t}&\stackrel{(d)}{=}\left((t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}+1}\int^1_0\Pi^{\tilde U}_{r,1}\tilde\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_r, (t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}\int^1_0\tilde\sigma_{r}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}_r\right)\\ &=\Big((t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}+1}X^{\tilde\sigma, \tilde U}_{0,1}, (t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}V^{\tilde\sigma}_{0,1}\Big), \end{split} \end{equation} where $\tilde U_r:=U_{(t-s)r+s}$ and $\tilde\sigma_r:=\sigma_{(t-s)r+s}$. This implies that \begin{align} p^{\nu^{(\alpha)},\sigma,U}_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})=(t-s)^{-\frac{2d}{\alpha}-d} p^{\nu^{(\alpha)},\tilde\sigma, \tilde U}_{0,1}((t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}-1}x,(t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}{\mathrm{v}}).\label{NB3} \end{align} Hence, if one can show that for any $n,m\in{\mathbb N}_0$, \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|x\|^{q_1}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{q_2}\|\nabla^n_x\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}^mp^{\nu^{(\alpha)},\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}_{0,1}(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}\leqslant C,\label{LK3} \end{align} then \eqref{EV11} for $\nu_s=\nu^{(\alpha)}$ immediately follows by \eqref{NB3}. \medskip\\ {\bf (ii)} We make the following further decomposition: \begin{align} \nu^{(\alpha)}=\nu_1+\nu_2,\ \ \nu_{1}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}):=\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}) 1_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant 1},\ \nu_{2}({\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}):=\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}) 1_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>1}. \end{align} Let $L^{\nu_i}, i=1,2$ be two independent L\'evy processes with the L\'evy measures $\nu_i$ respectively. For $i=1,2$, let $K^{\nu_i}_{s,t}=(X^{\nu_i}_{s,t},V^{\nu_i}_{s,t})$ be defined as in \eqref{KT0} with $\tilde \sigma, \tilde U$ and $L^{\nu_i}_{t-s}$ in place of $\sigma, U$ and $L^\nu_{s,t}$. In particular, \begin{align} K^{\nu^{(\alpha)},\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}_{s,t}\stackrel{(d)}{=}K^{\nu_1}_{s,t}+K^{\nu_2}_{s,t},\label{LK2} \end{align} which implies that $$ p_{0,1}^{\nu^{(\alpha)},\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}(x,{\mathrm{v}})={\mathbb E} p_{0,1}^{\nu_1}\Big(x-X^{\nu_2}_{0,1},{\mathrm{v}}-V^{\nu_2}_{0,1}\Big), $$ where $p_{0,1}^{\nu_1}(x,{\mathrm{v}})$ is the distributional density of $K^{\nu_1}_{0,1}$. In view of $q_1+q_2<\alpha$, by \eqref{KT0} and \eqref{Mom}, we have $$ {\mathbb E} \left[ (1+\|X^{\nu_2}_{0,1}\|^{q_1})(1+\|V^{\nu_2}_{0,1}\|^{q_2})\right]<\infty. $$ Thus, in order to show \eqref{LK3}, it suffices to prove that for any $n,m\in{\mathbb N}_0$, \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}(1+\|x\|^{q_1})(1+\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{q_2})\|\nabla^n_x\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}^mp^{\nu_1}_{0,1}(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}\leqslant C.\label{LK33} \end{align} \medskip\\ {\bf (iii)} Below, for simplicity of notation, we drop the tilde over $\tilde\sigma, \tilde U$. Recall for $s<t$, $ K^{\nu_1}_{s, t}=\left(\int^t_s\Pi_{r, t}\sigma_r {\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^{\nu_1}_r, \int^t_s\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^{\nu_1}_r\right). $ By step function approximation, we have \begin{align} {\mathbb E}{\mathrm{e}}^{\mathrm{i}\<(\xi,\eta), K^{\nu_1}_{s, t}\>} &={\mathbb E}\exp\left( \mathrm{i}\int^t_s\Big<\sigma^_r\Pi^_{r, t}\xi+\sigma^_r\eta, {\mathord{{\rm d}}} L^{\nu_1}_r\Big>\right) \nonumber\\ &= \exp \left( -\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_1}\left(\sigma^_r \Pi^_{r, t}\xi+\sigma^_r\eta\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\right), \label{NB9} \end{align} where $\psi^{\nu_1}$ is the characteristic exponent of $L^{\nu_1}$, that is, ${\mathbb E} {\mathrm{e}}^{{\rm i}\xi L^{\nu_1}_t}={\mathrm{e}}^{-t\psi^{\nu_1}(\xi)}$, which has the following expression \begin{align} \psi^{\nu_1}(\xi)=\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant 1}(1-\cos\<\xi, {\mathrm{v}}\>)\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}).\label{FG1} \end{align} Denote the L\'evy exponent of $L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}$ and $L^{\nu_2}$ by $\psi^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}$ and $\psi^{\nu_2}$, respectively. Then $\psi^{\nu_2}$ is bounded and $\psi^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}(\xi)\asymp \|\xi\|^\alpha$. Hence there are constants $M\geqslant 1$ and $c_0>0$ so that $$ \psi^{\nu_1}(\xi)= \psi^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}(\xi) -\psi^{\nu_2} (\xi) \geqslant c_0 \|\xi\|^\alpha \quad \hbox{for } \|\xi\| \geqslant M. $$ On the other hand, note that $$ \psi^{\nu_1}(\xi)\geqslant \int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant 1/(2M)}(1-\cos\<\xi, {\mathrm{v}}\>)\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})=:\psi^{\nu_1}_1 (\xi). $$ Since $\psi^{\nu_1}_1$ is $C^\infty$-smooth with $\nabla \psi^{\nu_1}_1 (0) =0$, we have \begin{align} \psi^{\nu_1}_1 (\xi)&=\int^1_0\!\!\!\int^1_0\!\!\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leq1/(2M)}\<\xi,{\mathrm{v}}\>^2\cos\<ss'\xi,{\mathrm{v}}\>\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s'\\ &\geqslant\cos(\tfrac{1}{2})\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leq1/(2M)}\<\xi,{\mathrm{v}}\>^2\nu^{(\alpha)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}})\geqslant c_0\|\xi\|^2 \quad \hbox{for } \|\xi \| \leqslant M. \end{align} Thus by decreasing the value of $c_0$ if needed, we have \begin{equation}\label{e:2.34} \psi^{\nu_1} (\xi) \geqslant c_0 (\|\xi\|^2 \wedge \|\xi\|^\alpha ) \quad \hbox{for } \xi \in {\mathbb R}^d. \end{equation} Hence \begin{align} &\int^t_s \psi^{\nu_1} \left(\sigma^_{r}\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\sigma^_{r} \eta\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\geqslant c_0\int^t_s \left\|\sigma^_{r} \Pi^_{r, t}\xi+\sigma^_{r} \eta\right\|^2 \wedge \left\|\sigma^_{r} \Pi^_{r, t}\xi+\sigma^_{r} \eta\right\|^\alpha {\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\nonumber\\ &\qquad\geqslant \frac{c_0 (\\|\sigma^{-1}\\|^{-\alpha}_\infty \wedge \\|\sigma^{-1}\\|^{-2}_\infty) } {(\kappa_0+1)^{2-\alpha}} \, \left( \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^2 \wedge \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^\alpha \right) \nonumber \\ & \quad \times \inf_{\|\bar\xi\|^2+\|\bar\eta\|^2=1} \int^t_s\left\|(t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi+\bar\eta\right\|^2 {\mathord{{\rm d}}} r. \label{NB8} \end{align} Fix $\delta,\varepsilon\in(0,1/2)$ being small, whose values will be determined below. For $\bar\xi,\bar\eta\in{\mathbb R}^{2d}$ with $\|\bar\xi\|^2+\|\bar\eta\|^2=1$, we have either $\|\bar\xi\|^2\geqslant 1-\delta$ or $\|\bar\eta\|^2\geqslant \delta$. Since $\|a+b\|^2 \geqslant\frac{1}{2}\|a\|^2-\|b\|^2$, in the former case, we have \begin{align} \int^t_s\left\| (t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi+\bar\eta\right\|^2 {\mathord{{\rm d}}} r &\geqslant \int^{s+\varepsilon (t-s)}_s\left\| (t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi+\bar\eta\right\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r \\ &\geqslant \int^{s+ \varepsilon (t-s)}_s\left(\tfrac{1}{2}\left\| (t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi\right\|^2-\|\bar\eta\|^2\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\\ &\geqslant \int^{s+ \varepsilon (t-s)}_s\left( \frac{\| \bar \xi\|}{2 (t-s) \\| \Pi_{r, t}^{-1} \\| } \right)^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r -\|\bar\eta\|^2 \varepsilon (t-s) \\ &\geqslant \left( \frac{1-\delta}{4 \kappa^2_0}-\delta\right) \varepsilon (t-s), \end{align} and in the later case, \begin{align} \int^t_s\left\| (t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi+\bar\eta\right\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r &\geqslant \int^t_{t-\varepsilon(t-s)}\left(\tfrac{1}{2}\|\bar\eta\|^2-\left\| (t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi \right\|^2\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\\ &\geqslant \left( \tfrac{1}{2}\delta -\\|U\\|_\infty^2\varepsilon^{2} \right) \varepsilon (t-s). \end{align} Combining the above two cases, by first choosing $\delta$ small enough and then $\varepsilon$ small enough, one finds that for some $c_2=c_2(\alpha,\kappa_0)>0$, \begin{align}\label{HJ1} \inf_{\|\bar\xi\|^2+\|\bar\eta\|^2=1} \int^t_s\left\|(t-s)^{-1} \Pi^_{r, t}\bar\xi+\bar\eta\right\|^2 \geqslant c_2 (t-s), \end{align} which together with \eqref{NB8} gives \begin{align} \int^t_s \psi^{\nu_1} \left(\sigma^_{r, t}\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\sigma^_{r, t} \eta\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s \geqslant c_3 (t-s) \left( \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^2 \wedge \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^\alpha \right). \label{NB2} \end{align} Hence by \eqref{NB9}, $$ {\mathbb E}{\mathrm{e}}^{\mathrm{i}\<(\xi,\eta), K^{\nu_1}_{s,t}\>} \leqslant\exp \left( - c_3 (t-s) \left( \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^2 \wedge \|((t-s) \xi,\eta)\|^\alpha \right) \right). $$ On the other hand, by \eqref{FG1}, one sees that $\psi^{\nu_1}$ is smooth and for any $k\in{\mathbb N}$, \begin{align} \|\nabla^k\psi^{\nu_1}(\xi)\|\leqslant C(\|\xi\|^m+1),\ \xi\in{\mathbb R}^d\label{NB1} \end{align} for some $m\in{\mathbb N}$ and $C>0$. Thus \eqref{NB9}, \eqref{NB2} and \eqref{NB1} in particular implies that $$ (\xi,\eta)\mapsto {\mathbb E}{\mathrm{e}}^{\mathrm{i}\<(\xi,\eta), K^{\nu_1}_{0, 1}\>}\in{\mathcal S}({\mathbb R}^{2d}). $$ Therefore, $K^{\nu_1}_{0, 1}$ has a smooth density $p_1^{\nu_1}(x,{\mathrm{v}})\in{\mathcal S}({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, which is given by the inverse Fourier transform $$ p_1^{\nu_1}(x,{\mathrm{v}})=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}{\mathrm{e}}^{-\mathrm{i}(\<x,\xi\>+\<{\mathrm{v}},\eta\>)}{\mathbb E}{\mathrm{e}}^{\mathrm{i}\<(\xi,\eta), K^{\nu_1}_{0, 1} \>}{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta. $$ In particular, \eqref{LK33} holds. \medskip\\ {\bf (iv)} Finally, we assume \eqref{Con2}, and make the following decomposition $$ \nu_s=\nu^{(\alpha)}_1+\mu_s, $$ where $\mu_s:=\nu_s-\nu^{(\alpha)}_1\in{\mathbb L}^{sym}$. Let $L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}}$ be an $\alpha$-stable process with the L\'evy measure $\nu^{(\alpha)}_1$, and let $N_0({\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}})$ be an independent Poisson random measure with intensity measure $\mu_t({\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t$. Let $L^\mu_{s,t}$ be defined as in \eqref{ES1} and $K^{\mu}_{s,t}=(X^{\mu}_{s,t},V^{\mu}_{s,t})$ be defined as in \eqref{KT0} with $L^{\mu}_{s,t}$ in place of $L^\nu_{s,t}$. Clearly, \begin{align} (L^\nu_{s,t})_{s\leqslant t}\stackrel{(d)}{=}(L^{\nu^{(\alpha)}_1}_{t-s}+L^{\mu}_{s,t})_{s\leqslant t}, \ \ K^\nu_{s,t}\stackrel{(d)}{=}K^{\nu^{(\alpha)}_1}_{s,t}+K^{\mu}_{s,t}.\label{LK1} \end{align} Thus, the distributional density of $K^\nu_{s,t}$ is given by \begin{align}\label{EX1} p^\nu_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})={\mathbb E} p^{\nu^{(\alpha)}_1}_{s,t}\big(x-X^{\mu}_{s,t},{\mathrm{v}}-V^{\mu}_{s,t}\big). \end{align} As above, by \eqref{Mom} and $\|\Pi_{s,t}\|\leqslant \\|U\\|_\infty(t-s)$, we have $$ {\mathbb E}\|X^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_1}\leqslant C(t-s)^{q_1+\frac{q_1}{\alpha}},\ {\mathbb E}\|V^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_2}\leqslant C(t-s)^{\frac{q_2}{\alpha}}, $$ and $$ {\mathbb E}\Big(\|X^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_1}\|V^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_2}\Big)\leqslant\left({\mathbb E}\|X^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_1+q_2}\right)^{\frac{q_1}{q_1+q_2}} \left({\mathbb E}\|V^{\mu}_{s,t}\|^{q_1+q_2}\right)^{\frac{q_2}{q_1+q_2}}\leqslant C(t-s)^{q_1+\frac{q_1+q_2}{\alpha}}, $$ which, together with \eqref{EX1} and what we have proved, gives \eqref{EV11}. \end{proof} \begin{remark} Let $p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}'; x,{\mathrm{v}})$ be the smooth density of $K_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})=K_{s,t}+(x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}}, {\mathrm{v}})$, which is given by \begin{align}\label{Den} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}'; x,{\mathrm{v}})=p^{\nu}_{s,t}\big(x'-x-\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}},{\mathrm{v}}'-{\mathrm{v}}\big). \end{align} For any $n_1,m_1,n_2,m_2\in{\mathbb N}_0$, there is a constant $C=C(d,n_i,m_i,\kappa_0,\nu^{(\alpha)}_1,\alpha)>0$ such that for all $s<t$ and $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\nabla^{n_1}_{x'}\nabla^{m_1}_{{\mathrm{v}}'}\nabla^{n_2}_{x}\nabla^{m_2}_{{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}';x,{\mathrm{v}})\| {\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'\leqslant C(t-s)^{-((n_1+n_2)(1+\alpha)+m_1+m_2)/{\alpha}},\label{EV1} \end{align} which follows by the chain rule, $\|\Pi_{s,t}\|\leqslant\\|U\\|_\infty (t-s)$ and \eqref{EV11}. \end{remark} \begin{corollary} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, for any $f\in {\mathcal B}_b({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}f$ satisfies the following backward Kolmogorov's equation: for Lebesgue-almost all $s<t$ and all $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, \begin{align} \partial_s{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})+{\mathscr K}_s{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})=0,\label{EQ0} \end{align} where ${\mathscr K}_s$ is defined by \eqref{Eq218}. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} First of all, as a consequence of (\ref{EV1}), we have for any $n,m\in{\mathbb N}_0$, \begin{align} \\|\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f\\|_\infty\leqslant C(t-s)^{- (n(1+\alpha)+m)/{\alpha}}\\|f\\|_\infty,\ \ s<t.\label{EV6} \end{align} Thus, by Lebesgue's differentiable theorem, it suffices to prove that for all $s\leqslant t_0<t$ and all $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, $$ {\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})={\mathcal T}_{t_0,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})+\int^{t_0}_s{\mathscr K}_r{\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r. $$ Fix $t_1\in(t_0,t)$ and define $g(x,{\mathrm{v}}):={\mathcal T}_{t_1,t} f(x,{\mathrm{v}})$. By \eqref{Sem}, we only need to show that for all $s\leqslant t_0$ and all $x,{\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d$, $$ {\mathcal T}_{s,t_1}g(x,{\mathrm{v}})={\mathcal T}_{t_0,t_1} g(x,{\mathrm{v}})+\int^{t_0}_s{\mathscr K}_r{\mathcal T}_{r,t_1}g(x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r. $$ Since $g\in C^\infty_b({\mathbb R}^{2d})$ by \eqref{EV6}, it follows by \eqref{EQ00}. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{Le27} Let $\beta,\gamma\in(0,2)$. Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, for any $\bar\sigma\in{\mathbb M}^d$ and $\bar\nu\in{\mathbb L}^{sym}$ with $\\|\bar\sigma\\|\leqslant\kappa_0$ and $\bar\nu\leqslant\nu^{(\gamma)}\in{\mathbb L}^{sym, (\gamma)}$, and for any $n,m\in{\mathbb N}_0$, there is a positive constant $C$ depending only on $\kappa_0, \nu, n,m,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\nu^{(\gamma)}, \beta,\gamma$ such that for any $f\in C^2_b({\mathbb R}^{2d})$ and $t>s$, \begin{align} \big\\|\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} f\big\\|_\infty &\leqslant C(t-s)^{-(n(1+\alpha)+m+\beta+\gamma)/{\alpha}}\\|f\\|_\infty,\label{JH2}\\ \big\\|\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_x{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f\big\\|_\infty &\leqslant C(t-s)^{-(n(1+\alpha)+m+\beta+\gamma )/{\alpha}-\beta}\\|f\\|_\infty.\label{JH1} \end{align} Here we use the convention: ${\mathscr L}^{0}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}\equiv{\mathbb I}$ the identity operator. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}})$ be given by \eqref{Den}. Notice that by definition, \begin{align} \nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} f(x,{\mathrm{v}}) &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}})\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{{\mathrm{v}}'} f(x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}'\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{{\mathrm{v}}'}\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}}) f(x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}', \end{align} and \begin{align} \Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{{\mathrm{v}}'}\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}}) \!=\!\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}\delta^{(2)}_{\bar{\mathrm{v}}'}\delta^{(2)}_{\bar\sigma\bar{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}})\bar\nu({\mathord{{\rm d}}}\bar{\mathrm{v}})\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\bar {\mathrm{v}}'}{\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^{d+\beta}}. \end{align} By using \eqref{EV311}, \eqref{EV31} and \eqref{EV1}, it is easy to see that for some $C>0$ independent of $x,{\mathrm{v}},\bar{\mathrm{v}},\bar{\mathrm{v}}'$, \begin{align} &\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\big\|\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}\delta^{(2)}_{\bar{\mathrm{v}}'}\delta^{(2)}_{\bar\sigma\bar{\mathrm{v}}} p_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}',x,{\mathrm{v}})\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}' \leqslant C(t-s)^{-\frac{n(1+\alpha)+m}{\alpha}}\\ &\qquad\times \Big(\big((t-s)^{-\frac{4}{\alpha}}\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^2\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\big)\wedge \big((t-s)^{-\frac{2}{\alpha}}(\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^2\wedge \|\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|^2)\big)\wedge1\Big). \end{align} Hence, \begin{align} &\\|\nabla^n_x\nabla^m_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal L}^{\bar\nu}_{\bar\sigma,{\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\beta}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} f\\|_\infty \leqslant C(t-s)^{-\frac{m+n(1+\alpha)}{\alpha}}\\|f\\|_\infty\\ &\times\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\Big(\big((t-s)^{-\frac{4}{\alpha}}\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^2\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\big)\wedge \big((t-s)^{-\frac{2}{\alpha}}(\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^2\wedge \|\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|^2)\big)\wedge1\Big)\nu^{(\gamma)}({\mathord{{\rm d}}}\bar{\mathrm{v}})\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\bar {\mathrm{v}}'}{\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|^{d+\beta}}. \end{align} If we calculate the double integral in the following four regions separately, \begin{align} &\Big\{\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}},\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|\leqslant(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}\Big\} \cup\Big\{\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}},\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|>(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}\Big\}\\ &\cup\Big\{\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}},\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|\leqslant(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}\Big\} \cup\Big\{\bar{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}},\|\bar{\mathrm{v}}'\|>(t-s)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}\Big\}, \end{align} then we obtain \eqref{JH2}. Similarly, one can show \eqref{JH1}. \end{proof} \subsection{Fefferman-Stein's theorem} In this subsection we recall the classical Fefferman-Stein's theorem. First of all, we introduce a family of ``balls'' looking like a ``parallelepiped'' in ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, as seen below, which is natural for treating the kinetic operator. More precisely, fixing $\alpha\in(0,2)$, and for any $r>0$ and point $(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, we define \begin{align} Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0):=\Big\{(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):\ &t\in B_{r^\alpha}(t_0),x\in B_{r^{1+\alpha}}\big(x_0+\Pi_{t_0,t}{\mathrm{v}}_0\big), {\mathrm{v}}\in B_r({\mathrm{v}}_0)\Big\},\label{Ball} \end{align} where $\Pi_{t_0,t}:=\int^t_{t_0}U_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r$ and $B_r({\mathrm{v}}_0)$ is the Euclidean ball with radius $r$ and center ${\mathrm{v}}_0$. The set of all such balls is denoted by ${\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$. For $f\in L^1_{loc}({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, we define the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function by $$ {\mathcal M} f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\sup_{r>0}\fint_{Q_r(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}')\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t', $$ and the sharp function by $$ {\mathcal M}^\sharp f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\sup_{r>0}\fint_{Q_r(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}')-f_{Q_r(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t', $$ where for a $Q\in{\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$, $\|Q\|$ denotes the Lebesgue measure of $Q$ and $$ f_Q:=\fint_Q f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t'=\frac{1}{\|Q\|}\int_Q f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t'. $$ One says that a function $f\in BMO({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ if ${\mathcal M}^\sharp f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$. Clearly, $f\in BMO({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ if and only if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for any $Q\in{\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$, and for some $a_Q\in{\mathbb R}$, $$ \fint_Q \|f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}')-a_Q\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t'\leqslant C. $$ We have the following simple property about $Q_r\in{\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$. \begin{proposition}\label{Pr24} Let $c_1:=3^\frac{1}{\alpha}\vee 3\vee (3+4\\|U\\|_\infty)^{\frac{1}{1+\alpha}}$ and $c_2:=c_1^{1+(2+\alpha)d}$. We have \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item If $Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\cap Q_r(t_0',x_0',{\mathrm{v}}_0')\not=\emptyset$, then \begin{align} Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\subset Q_{c_1 r}(t_0',x_0',{\mathrm{v}}_0').\label{EL1} \end{align} \item $\|Q_{c_1 r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\|\leqslant c_2\|Q_{r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\|$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} (i) By the assumption, we have $$ \|t_0-t_0'\|\leqslant 2r^{\alpha}, \ \|{\mathrm{v}}_0-{\mathrm{v}}_0'\|\leqslant 2r, $$ and for some $t'\in B_{r^\alpha}(t_0)\cap B_{r^\alpha}(t_0')$, $$ \big\|x_0-\Pi_{t_0,t'}{\mathrm{v}}_0-\big(x_0'-\Pi_{t'_0,t'}{\mathrm{v}}'_0\big)\big\|\leqslant 2r^{1+\alpha}. $$ Thus, for any $(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)$, we have $$ \|t-t_0'\|\leqslant 3r^\alpha,\ \|{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_0'\|\leqslant 3r $$ and \begin{align} \big\|x-\big(x_0'-\Pi_{t_0',t}{\mathrm{v}}_0'\big)\big\|&\leqslant \big\|x-\big(x_0-\Pi_{t_0,t}{\mathrm{v}}_0\big)\big\|+\big\|x_0-\Pi_{t_0,t}{\mathrm{v}}_0-\big(x_0'-\Pi_{t_0',t}{\mathrm{v}}_0'\big)\big\|\\ &\leqslant r^{1+\alpha}+\big\|x_0-\Pi_{t_0,t'}{\mathrm{v}}_0-\big(x_0'-\Pi_{t'_0,t'}{\mathrm{v}}_0'\big)\big\|+\big\|\Pi_{t,t'}({\mathrm{v}}_0-{\mathrm{v}}_0')\big\|\\ &\leqslant r^{1+\alpha}+2r^{1+\alpha}+4\\|U\\|_\infty r^{1+\alpha}=(3+4\\|U\\|_\infty)r^{1+\alpha}. \end{align} From these, we immediately obtain (\ref{EL1}). \\ \\ (ii) It follows by noticing that $\|Q_{r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\|=c_3 r^{1+(2+\alpha)d}$ for some $c_3=c_3(d)$. \end{proof} \begin{remark} By Proposition \ref{Pr24} and \cite[Theorem 1, p.13]{St}, for any $p\in(1,\infty]$, there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $f\in L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, \begin{align} \\|{\mathcal M} f\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p.\label{EN1} \end{align} \end{remark} We need the following version of Fefferman-Stein's theorem, whose proof is given in Appendix 4.2. \begin{theorem}\label{Th26} (Fefferman-Stein's theorem) For any $p\in(1,\infty)$, there exists a constant $C=C(p,d,\alpha)>0$ such that for all $f\in L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, \begin{align} \\|f\\|_p\leqslant C\\|{\mathcal M}^\sharp f\\|_p.\label{EU4} \end{align} \end{theorem} Using this theorem, we have \begin{theorem}\label{Th2} For $q\in(1,\infty)$, let ${\mathscr P}$ be a bounded linear operator from $L^q({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ to $L^q({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ and also from $L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ to $BMO({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$. Then for any $p\in[q,\infty)$ and $f\in L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, $$ \\|{\mathscr P} f\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p, $$ where the constant $C$ depends only on $p,q$ and the norms of $\\|{\mathscr P}\\|_{L^q\to L^q}$ and $\\|{\mathscr P}\\|_{L^\infty\to BMO}$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Noticing that by the assumptions, $$ \\|{\mathcal M}^\sharp({\mathscr P} f)\\|_q\leqslant 2\\|{\mathcal M}({\mathscr P} f)\\|_q\stackrel{(\ref{EN1})}{\leqslant} C\\|{\mathscr P} f\\|_q\leqslant C\\|{\mathscr P}\\|_{L^q\to L^q}\\|f\\|_q $$ and $$ \\|{\mathcal M}^\sharp({\mathscr P} f)\\|_\infty\leqslant \\|{\mathscr P}\\|_{L^\infty\to BMO}\\|f\\|_\infty, $$ by the classical Marcinkiewicz's interpolation theorem (cf. \cite{St}), we have for any $p\in[q,\infty)$, $$ \\|{\mathcal M}^\sharp({\mathscr P} f)\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p, $$ which together with (\ref{EU4}) gives the desired estimate. \end{proof} \section{$L^p$-maximal regularity of nonlocal kinetic Fokker-Planck equations} For $\lambda>0$, we consider the following linear equation: \begin{align} \partial_s u+({\mathscr K}_s-\lambda) u+f=0,\label{EQ101} \end{align} where ${\mathscr K}_s$ is defined by \eqref{Eq218}. We first introduce the following notion. \begin{definition}\label{Def31} For given $f\in L^1_{loc}({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, a function $u\in C({\mathbb R}; L^1_{loc}({\mathbb R}^{2d}))$ is called a weak solution of equation \eqref{EQ101} if for all $s\leqslant T$ and any $\phi\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, \begin{equation}\label{Weak} \<u(s),\phi\>=\<u(T),\phi\>+\int^T_s\<u(t),({\mathscr K}^_t-\lambda) \phi\>{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t+\int^T_s\<f(t),\phi\>{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t, \end{equation} where $\<u,\phi\>:=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}u(x,{\mathrm{v}})\phi(x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}$ and ${\mathscr K}^_t:={\mathscr L}^{\nu_t}_{\sigma_t,{\mathrm{v}}}-U_t{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_x$ is the adjoint operator of ${\mathscr K}_t$. \end{definition} We need the following simple result. \begin{proposition}\label{Pr32} Given $p\in[1,\infty]$ and $f\in L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, the unique weak solution of equation \eqref{EQ101} with $u\in C({\mathbb R}; L^p({\mathbb R}^{2d}))$ and $\lim_{T_n\to \infty} u(T_n)=0$ weakly for some deterministic sequence $T_n\to \infty$ is given by \begin{align} u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})=\int^{\infty}_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\label{TST1} \end{align} where ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}f$ is defined by \eqref{TST}. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $\varrho:{\mathbb R}^{2d}\to[0,\infty)$ be a smooth function with compact support and $\int\varrho=1$. For $\varepsilon>0$, define $$ \varrho_\varepsilon(x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\varepsilon^{-3d}\varrho(\varepsilon^{-1}x, \varepsilon^{-2}{\mathrm{v}}),\ \ f_\varepsilon(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=f(t)\varrho(x,{\mathrm{v}}), $$ where $$ denotes the convolution, and $$ u_\varepsilon(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^{\infty}_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f_\varepsilon(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. $$ Since $f_\varepsilon\in L^p({\mathbb R}; C^\infty_b({\mathbb R}^{2d}))$, we have by \eqref{EQ00}, $$ \partial_s u_\varepsilon+({\mathscr K}_s-\lambda) u_\varepsilon+f_\varepsilon=0. $$ In particular, for all $s\leqslant T$ and $\phi\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{2d})$, \begin{align} \<u_\varepsilon(s),\phi\>=\<u_\varepsilon(T),\phi\>+\int^T_s\<u_\varepsilon(t),({\mathscr K}^_t-\lambda) \phi\>{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t+\int^T_s\<f_\varepsilon(t),\phi\>{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} By taking limits $\varepsilon\to 0$ and the dominated convergence theorem, one sees that $u$ is a weak solution of equation \eqref{EQ101}. Moreover, we also have $u\in C({\mathbb R}; L^p({\mathbb R}^{2d}))$ and $\lim_{T\to\infty} u(T)=0$ weakly. On the other hand, let $u$ be a weak solution of \eqref{EQ101}. In \eqref{Weak}, taking $\phi=\varrho_\varepsilon(x-\cdot,{\mathrm{v}}-\cdot)$ and setting $u_\varepsilon:=u\varrho_\varepsilon$, $f_\varepsilon:=f\varrho_\varepsilon$, one has \begin{align} u_\varepsilon(s)=u_\varepsilon(T)+\int^T_s({\mathscr K}_t-\lambda)u_\varepsilon(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t+\int^T_s(f_\varepsilon+g_\varepsilon)(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\label{BN9} \end{align} where \begin{align} g_\varepsilon(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})&:=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} u(t,x',{\mathrm{v}}') U_t({\mathrm{v}}'-{\mathrm{v}})\cdot\nabla_x\varrho_\varepsilon(x-x',{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} u(t,x-x',{\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}')U_t{\mathrm{v}}'\cdot\nabla_x\varrho_\varepsilon(x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'. \end{align} Since $u_\varepsilon\in C({\mathbb R}; C^\infty_b({\mathbb R}^{2d}))$ and $\lim_{n\to \infty} u_\varepsilon (T_n)=0$, the unique solution of \eqref{BN9} is given by \begin{align} u_\varepsilon(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})=\int^{\infty}_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} (f_\varepsilon+g_\varepsilon)(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t.\label{TST2} \end{align} Notice that by the definition of $\varrho_\varepsilon$, $$ \\|g_\varepsilon(t)\\|_p\leqslant \\|u(t)\\|_p\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|U_t{\mathrm{v}}'\|\cdot\|\nabla_x\varrho_\varepsilon(x',{\mathrm{v}}')\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'\leqslant C\varepsilon\\|u(t)\\|_p\to 0. $$ By taking limits $\varepsilon\to 0$ for both sides of \eqref{TST2}, we obtain \eqref{TST1}. \end{proof} Now we can present our main result of this paper. \begin{theorem}\label{Main} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, for any $p\in(1,\infty)$, there exists a positive constant $C=C(\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha)$ such that for all $\lambda> 0$ and $f\in L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$, \begin{align} \big\\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}u^\lambda\big\\|_p+\big\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}u^\lambda\big\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p,\label{BN77} \end{align} where $u^\lambda(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} f_t(x, {\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t$ is the unique weak solution of equation \eqref{EQ101}. \end{theorem} When $p=2$ and $U_s$ is independent of $s$, estimate \eqref{BN77} was proved in \cite{Al}. The proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p=2$ will be given in Appendix 4.3, which is new and more elementary even for the time-independent case considered in \cite{Al}. \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p\in(2,\infty)$} We introduce the following two operators: \begin{align} {\mathscr P}_1f:={\mathscr P}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_1 f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})&:=\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_{s,t} f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\\ \ \ {\mathscr P}_2f:={\mathscr P}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_2 f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})&:=\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_{s,t} f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} By Theorem \ref{Th2} and \eqref{BN77} for $p=2$, our main task is to show that ${\mathscr P}_1$ and ${\mathscr P}_2$ are bounded linear operators from $L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ to $BMO$. More precisely, we want to prove that for any $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$, and any $Q=Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\in{\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$, \begin{align} \fint_{Q}\|{\mathscr P}^{\nu,\sigma,U}_i f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a^{Q}_i\|^2 \leqslant C,\label{ET0} \end{align} where $a^{Q}_i$ is a constant depending on $Q$ and $f$, and $C$ only depends on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$. \begin{lemma}\label{Le34} (Scaling Property) For any $Q=Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\in{\mathbb Q}^{(\alpha)}$ and $i=1,2$, we have \begin{align} \fint_{Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)}\big\|{\mathscr P}^{\nu,\sigma,U}_if(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2= \fint_{Q_1(0)}\big\|{\mathscr P}^{\tilde\nu,\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}_i\tilde f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2,\label{SCL} \end{align} where $a\in{\mathbb R}$, $\tilde\nu_s:=\nu_{r^\alpha s+t_0}$, $\tilde \sigma_s:=\sigma_{r^\alpha s+t_0}$, $\tilde U_s:=U_{r^\alpha s+t_0}$ and $$ \tilde f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=f\big(r^\alpha t+t_0, r^{1+\alpha}x+x_0+\Pi_{t_0,r^\alpha t+t_0} {\mathrm{v}}_0, r{\mathrm{v}}+{\mathrm{v}}_0\big). $$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let us write $$ u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_{s,t} f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t $$ and $$ \tilde u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=r^{-\alpha} u\big(r^\alpha s+t_0,r^{1+\alpha} x+x_0+\Pi_{t_0,r^\alpha s+t_0} {\mathrm{v}}_0, r{\mathrm{v}}+{\mathrm{v}}_0\big), $$ where $\Pi_{t_0,r^\alpha t+t_0}=\int^{r^\alpha t+t_0}_{t_0}U_{r'}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r'$. By the change of variables, we have \begin{align} \fint_{Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)}\big\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2 =\fint_{Q_1(0)}\big\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}\tilde u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2. \end{align} On the other hand, by Proposition \ref{Pr32}, one sees that $$ \tilde u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})=\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^{\tilde \nu,\tilde \sigma, \tilde U}_{s,t}\tilde f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. $$ Thus, we obtain \eqref{SCL} for $i=1$. Similarly, \eqref{SCL} holds for $i=2$. \end{proof} Below we split ${\mathscr P}_if={\mathscr P}_{i1}f+{\mathscr P}_{i2}f$, $i=1,2$, where \begin{align} {\mathscr P}_{11} f&:=\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}\int^2_\cdot{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(\cdot-t)}{\mathcal T}_{\cdot,t}f(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\ \ \ {\mathscr P}_{21} f:=\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\int^2_\cdot{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(\cdot-t)}{\mathcal T}_{\cdot,t}f(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\\ {\mathscr P}_{12} f&:=\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}\int^\infty_2{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(\cdot-t)}{\mathcal T}_{\cdot,t} f(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\ \ \ {\mathscr P}_{22} f:=\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\int^\infty_2{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(\cdot-t)}{\mathcal T}_{\cdot,t} f(t){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} First of all, we treat ${\mathscr P}_{11}f, {\mathscr P}_{21}f$. \begin{lemma}\label{Le35} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, there is a constant $C>0$ depending only on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$, \begin{align} \int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr P}_{i1} f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})\|^2\leqslant C,\ \ i=1,2.\label{BN4} \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For $s\in[-1,1]$, let $$ u(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^2_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t=\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}((1_{[-1,2]}f) (t))(x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. $$ Since $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$, we have \begin{align} \\|u(s)\\|_\infty\leqslant 3,\ \ s\in[-1,1].\label{BOU} \end{align} By \eqref{EV311}, \eqref{EV31} and \eqref{EV6}, we have for any $t>s$, \begin{align} \\|\delta^{(1)}_x{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t)\\|_\infty &\preceq (\\|\nabla_x{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t)\\|_\infty\|x\|)\wedge\\|{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t)\\|_\infty\preceq ((t-s)^{-\frac{1+\alpha}{\alpha}}\|x\|)\wedge 1,\\ \\|\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t)\\|_\infty &\preceq (\\|\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t)\\|_\infty\|{\mathrm{v}}\|)\wedge\\|{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f (t)\\|_\infty\preceq ((t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|)\wedge 1. \end{align} Since $a\wedge 1\leqslant a^\gamma$ for any $a>0$ and $\gamma\in[0,1]$, we have for any $\gamma_1\in(0,\alpha/(1+\alpha))$, \begin{align} \\|\delta^{(1)}_xu(s)\\|_\infty\preceq \|x\|^{\gamma_1}\int^2_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}(t-s)^{-(1+\alpha)\gamma_1/\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C \|x\|^{\gamma_1},\label{BN2} \end{align} and for any $\gamma_2\in(0,\alpha\wedge 1)$, \begin{align} \\|\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}} u(s)\\|_\infty&\preceq \|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{\gamma_2}\int^2_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}(t-s)^{-\gamma_2/\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{\gamma_2},\label{BN11} \end{align} where $C>0$ is independent of $\lambda>0$. Let $\varphi$ be a nonnegative smooth cutoff function in ${\mathbb R}^{2d}$ with $\varphi(x,{\mathrm{v}})=1$ for $\|(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|\leqslant 4$ and $\varphi(x)=0$ for $\|(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|>8$. By Definition \ref{Def31}, it is easy to see that $u\varphi$ is a weak solution of equation \eqref{EQ101} with $f$ replacing by $$ g_\varphi=\left(f\varphi+{\mathscr K}_s\varphi\, u+\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}} u\,\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}}\varphi\,\nu_s({\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}})\right)1_{[-1,2]}(s). $$ Noticing that by \eqref{BOU} and \eqref{BN11}, $$ \\|g_\varphi\\|_2\leqslant C_\varphi, $$ and by Proposition \ref{Pr32}, we have $$ (u\varphi)(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})=\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}g_\varphi(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t, $$ which implies by \eqref{BN77} for $p=2$ that \begin{align} \big\\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}(u\varphi)\big\\|_2+\big\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}(u\varphi)\big\\|_2\leqslant C\\|g_\varphi\\|_2\leqslant C.\label{BN5} \end{align} By the definition of ${\mathscr P}_{11}$ and \eqref{EV441}, \eqref{BN2}, \eqref{BN5}, we have \begin{align} &\int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr P}_{11} f\|^2=\int_{Q_1(0)}\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}u\|^2\leqslant\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}\|(\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}u)\varphi\|^2\\ &\quad\leqslant 2\big\\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}(u\varphi)\big\\|_2^2+C_\varphi\Big(\sup_{x}\\|\delta^{(1)}_x u\\|_\infty/\|x\|^{\gamma_1}+\\|u\\|_\infty\Big)\leqslant C, \end{align} and by \eqref{EV441}, \eqref{BN11} and \eqref{BN5}, \begin{align} &\int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr P}_{21} f\|^2=\int_{Q_1(0)}\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}u\|^2\leqslant\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}\|(\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}u)\varphi\|^2\\ &\quad\leqslant 2\big\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}(u\varphi)\big\\|_2^2+C_\varphi\Big(\sup_{x}\\|\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|_\infty/\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{\gamma_2}+\\|u\\|_\infty\Big)\leqslant C. \end{align} The proof is complete. \end{proof} To treat ${\mathscr P}_{12}f, {\mathscr P}_{22}f$, we need the following estimate. \begin{lemma} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, there is a constant $C>0$ depending only on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$ and all $s\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} &\int^\infty_2\Big\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0) -\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{0,t}f(t,0,0)\Big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C,\label{NB6'}\\ &\quad\int^\infty_2\Big\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0) -\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{0,t}f(t,0,0)\Big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C.\label{NB6} \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} First of all, by \eqref{JH1} with $\gamma=\alpha$ and $\beta=\frac{\alpha}{1+\alpha}$, we have for all $s\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} &\int^\infty_2\big\|\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0) -\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{0,t}f(t,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\quad\leqslant\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^s_0\big\|\partial_r\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{r,t}f(t,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\quad=\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^s_0\big\|{\mathscr L}^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r, {\mathrm{v}}}\Delta_x^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}{\mathcal T}_{r,t}f(t,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\quad\preceq \int^\infty_2\!\!\int^s_0(t-r)^{-2}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\preceq 1, \end{align} which give \eqref{NB6'}. Next we deal with \eqref{NB6}. Let $\chi$ be a smooth cutoff function with $\chi(s)=1$ for $s\in[0,1]$ and $\chi(s)=0$ for $s>3$. Fix $\gamma\in(1,1+\tfrac{\alpha}{2-\alpha})$ and define $$ h_t({\mathrm{v}}):=\chi(\|{\mathrm{v}}\|/t^{\gamma/\alpha}),\ t>0, \ {\mathrm{v}}\in{\mathbb R}^d. $$ By definition, we have \begin{align} \Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0) =\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}}\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0)\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}=I_1(s,t)+I_2(s,t), \end{align} where \begin{align} I_1(s,t)&:=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}} {\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0)(1-h_{t-s}({\mathrm{v}}))\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}},\\ I_2(s,t)&:=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}} {\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0)h_{t-s}({\mathrm{v}})\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}. \end{align} Thus, we can write \begin{align} &\int^\infty_2\Big\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,0,0) -\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{0,t}f(t,0,0)\Big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\nonumber\\ &\quad\leqslant \int^\infty_2\|I_1(s,t)-I_1(0,t)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t+\int^\infty_2\|I_2(s,t)-I_2(0,t)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t.\label{EV7} \end{align} In view of $\gamma>1$, we have for all $s\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} \begin{split} \int^\infty_2\|I_1(s,t)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t&\preceq \int^\infty_2\left(\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\|(1-h_{t-s}({\mathrm{v}}))\|\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\preceq \int^\infty_2\left(\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{\gamma/\alpha}}\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t \preceq\int^\infty_2(t-s)^{-\gamma}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\preceq 1. \end{split}\label{EV77} \end{align} On the other hand, let us write \begin{align} \int^\infty_2\|I_2(s,t)-I_2(0,t)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^s_0\|\partial_r I_2(r,t)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant J_{1}+J_{2}, \end{align} where \begin{align} J_{1}:=\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^s_0\!\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\|\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}\partial_r{\mathcal T}_{r,t}f(t,0,0)h_{t-r}({\mathrm{v}})\|\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t,\\ J_{2}:=\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^s_0\!\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\|\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{r,t}f(t,0,0)\partial_rh_{t-r}({\mathrm{v}})\|\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} Recalling definition \eqref{NB5}, by \eqref{EQ0} and (\ref{JH2}), we have \begin{align} &\quad\|\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}\partial_r{\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(t,0,0)\|\\ &\leqslant\|\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r, {\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(t,0,0)\|+\|(U_r{\mathrm{v}}\cdot \nabla_x)({\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(t,0,{\mathrm{v}})-{\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(t,0,-{\mathrm{v}}))\|\\ &\leqslant 2\\|\nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathscr L}^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r,{\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}_{r,t}f(t)\\|_\infty\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2+2\\|U\\|_\infty\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\\|\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}\nabla_x{\mathcal T}_{r,t} f(t)\\|_\infty \preceq\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2(t-r)^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}. \end{align} By Fubini's theorem, we have for all $s\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} J_{1}&\preceq\int^\infty_2\!\!\!\int^{s}_0\left(\int_{{\mathbb R}^d} (t-r)^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}h_{t-r}({\mathrm{v}})\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha-2}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\nonumber\\ &=\int^s_0\!\!\!\int^\infty_{2-r}\left(\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}t^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}h_{t}({\mathrm{v}})\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha-2}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\nonumber\\ &\preceq\int^\infty_1t^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}t^{\frac{2\gamma}{\alpha}-\gamma}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t \preceq 1\mbox{ since $\gamma\in(1,1+\tfrac{\alpha}{2-\alpha})$}.\label{EV8} \end{align} For $J_{2}$, noticing that $$ \|\partial_th_t({\mathrm{v}})\|=\tfrac{\gamma}{\alpha}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|t^{-\gamma/\alpha-1}\|\chi'(\|{\mathrm{v}}\|/t^{\gamma/\alpha})\| \leqslant \tfrac{\gamma}{\alpha} t^{-1}\\|\chi'\\|_\infty1_{\{t^{\gamma/\alpha}<\|{\mathrm{v}}\|<3t^{\gamma/\alpha}\}}, $$ we also have \begin{align} J_{2}\leqslant\int^\infty_1\left(\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\|\partial_th_t({\mathrm{v}})\|\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t \preceq\int^\infty_1t^{-1-\gamma}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\preceq1.\label{EV9} \end{align} Combining (\ref{EV7}), \eqref{EV77}, (\ref{EV8}) and (\ref{EV9}), we obtain \eqref{NB6}. \end{proof} Now, we treat ${\mathscr P}_{12}f, {\mathscr P}_{22}f$ as follows. \begin{lemma}\label{Le37} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, there is a constant $C>0$ depending only on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$, \begin{align}\label{EP1} \int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr P}_{i2}f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-{\mathscr P}_{i2}f(0,0,0)\|^2\leqslant C,\ \ i=1,2. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For $i=2$, by definition, we have \begin{align} &\|{\mathscr P}_{22}f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-{\mathscr P}_{22}f(0,0,0)\|\leqslant\int^\infty_2\|{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}-{\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda t}\|\, \\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f\\|_\infty{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\qquad\qquad+\int^\infty_2{\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda t}\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(x,{\mathrm{v}})-\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(0,0)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\qquad\qquad+\int^\infty_2{\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda t}\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(0,0)-\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{0,t}f(0,0)\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\qquad\qquad=:I_1(s)+I_2(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})+I_3(s). \end{align} Noticing that by Lemma \ref{Le27}, \begin{align} &\\|\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} {\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t)\\|_\infty\leqslant C(t-s)^{-1},\\ &\\|\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t)\\|_\infty\leqslant C(t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}-1},\\ &\\|\nabla_x\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t)\\|_\infty\leqslant C(t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}-2}, \end{align} we have for all $s\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} I_1&\leqslant C\int^\infty_2\|{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}-{\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda t}\|(t-s)^{-1}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\leqslant C\|{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda s}-1\|\int^\infty_2{\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda t}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t=C\|{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda s}-1\|{\mathrm{e}}^{-2\lambda}/\lambda\leqslant C, \end{align} and for all $(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in Q_1(0)$, \begin{align} I_2(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})\leqslant C\int^\infty_2\Big((t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}-1}+(t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}-2}\Big){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C. \end{align} Moreover, by \eqref{NB6}, we have for all $s\in[0,1]$, $$ I_3(s)\leqslant C. $$ Combining the above calculations, we obtain \eqref{EP1} for $i=2$ with $C$ independent of $\lambda$. For $i=1$, it is similar. \end{proof} Now we can give \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p\in(2,\infty)$] By Lemmas \ref{Le34}, \ref{Le35} and \ref{Le37}, we know that $$ {\mathscr P}_i: L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})\to BMO, i=1,2\mbox{ are bounded linear operators.} $$ Estimate \eqref{BN77} for $p\in(2,\infty)$ follows by Theorem \ref{Th2} and the well-known estimate for $p=2$. \end{proof} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p\in(1,2)$} We shall use the dual argument to show that ${\mathscr P}_i$, $i=1,2$ are still bounded linear operators in $L^p({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ for $p\in(1,2)$. Let ${\mathcal T}^_{s,t}$ be the adjoint operator of ${\mathcal T}_{s,t}$, that is, $$ \int g{\mathcal T}^_{s,t} f=\int f{\mathcal T}^_{s,t} g. $$ By definition \eqref{TST}, we have $$ {\mathcal T}^_{s,t}f(x,{\mathrm{v}}):={\mathbb E} f\left(x+\int^t_s U_r\left[{\mathrm{v}}+\int^t_r\sigma_{r'}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{r',t}\right]{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r,{\mathrm{v}}+\int^t_s\sigma_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} L_{r,t}\right). $$ Let $p\in (1,2)$ and $q=\frac{p}{p-1}\in (2,\infty)$. By the dual relation between $L^p$ and $L^q$, we have \begin{align} \\|{\mathscr P}_1f\\|_p&=\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d)},\\|h\\|_q\leqslant 1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}\int^\infty_s{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\cdot \Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_x h\\ &=\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d)},\\|h\\|_q\leqslant 1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}f\cdot\left(\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t} \Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_x h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right). \end{align} Since ${\mathcal T}^_{s,t} \Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xh=\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_x{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}h$, as in the previous subsection, one has $$ \left\\|\int^\cdot_{-\infty}{\mathcal T}^_{s,\cdot}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_x h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right\\|_q= \left\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_x\int^\cdot_{-\infty}{\mathcal T}^_{s,\cdot} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right\\|_q\leqslant C\\|h\\|_q. $$ Hence, by H\"older's inequality, \begin{align}\label{UR2} \\|{\mathscr P}_1f\\|_p\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p. \end{align} Similarly, we have \begin{align}\label{UR1} \\|{\mathscr P}_2f\\|_p=\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d)},\\|h\\|_q\leqslant 1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}f\cdot\left( \int^t_{-\infty}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right). \end{align} However, we can not treat it as ${\mathscr P}_1$ because $$ {\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} h\not=\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t} h. $$ To overcome this difficulty, for $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, we introduce a new operator \begin{align} {\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon f:&={\mathscr Q}^{\nu,\sigma, U}_\varepsilon f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^{,\nu,\sigma, U}_{s,t}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} f_\varepsilon(s,x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s, \end{align} where $f_\varepsilon(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})=f(t,\cdot)\varrho_\varepsilon(x,{\mathrm{v}})$ so that ${\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon f$ is well defined for $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$. Notice that ${\mathscr Q}_0$ can be considered as the formal adjoint operator of ${\mathscr P}_2$. As in the previous subsection, we want to show that $$ {\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon\mbox{ is a bounded linear operator from $L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ to $BMO$.} $$ First of all, as in Lemma \ref{Le34} we have $$ \fint_{Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)}\big\|{\mathscr Q}^{\nu,\sigma,U}_\varepsilon f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2= \fint_{Q_1(0)}\big\|{\mathscr Q}^{\tilde\nu,\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}_\varepsilon\tilde f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2. $$ where $\tilde\nu,\tilde\sigma,\tilde U$ and $\tilde f$ are defined as in Lemma \ref{Le34}. We aim to prove that there is a constant $C=C(\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha)>0$ independent of $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$, $$ \fint_{Q_1(0)}\big\|{\mathscr Q}^{\tilde\nu,\tilde\sigma,\tilde U}_\varepsilon\tilde f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})-a\big\|^2\leqslant C. $$ Below we drop $\tilde\nu,\tilde\sigma,\tilde U$ and the tilde. As above, we make the following decomposition $$ {\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon f=\left(\int^\cdot_{-2}+\int^{-2}_{-\infty}\right){\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-\cdot)}{\mathcal T}^{}_{s,\cdot}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} f_\varepsilon(s){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s=:{\mathscr Q}^\varepsilon_{1}f+{\mathscr Q}^\varepsilon_{2}f. $$ \begin{lemma} Let $\varphi\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{2d})$. For any $p\in[1,2]$, there exist constants $C_\varphi, \gamma>0$ such that for all $h\in L^2({\mathbb R}^{2d})$ and $0<t-s\leqslant 3$, \begin{align}\label{LK0} \\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}({\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)-\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} (\varphi h))\\|_p\leqslant C_\varphi(t-s)^{\gamma-1}\\|h\\|_2, \end{align} where $\varphi_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\varphi(x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}},{\mathrm{v}})$ and $\Pi_{s,t}=\int^t_s U_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $p^\nu_{s,t}(x,{\mathrm{v}})$ be the distributional density of $K^\nu_{s,t}$. Notice that \begin{align} \nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(x,{\mathrm{v}}) &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}f(x',{\mathrm{v}}')\nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}} p^{\nu}_{s,t}(x'-x-\Pi_{s,t}\cdot,{\mathrm{v}}'-\cdot)({\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}f(x'+x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}},{\mathrm{v}}'+{\mathrm{v}})\Phi_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}', \end{align} where $$ \Phi^{ij}_{s,t}=\sum_{i', j'}\Pi^{ii'}_{s,t}\Pi^{jj'}_{s,t}\partial_{x_{i'}}\partial_{x_{j'}}p^\nu_{s,t}+ 2\sum_{i'}\Pi^{ii'}_{s,t}\partial_{x_{i'}}\partial_{{\mathrm{v}}_{j}}p^\nu_{s,t}+\partial_{{\mathrm{v}}_{i}}\partial_{{\mathrm{v}}_{j}}p^\nu_{s,t}. $$ For any $\beta\in(0,\alpha)$, by \eqref{EV11}, it is easy to see that \begin{align} &\\|\nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)-\varphi_{s,t}\nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h)\\|_p\\ &\quad\leqslant [\varphi]_\beta\\|\varphi h\\|_p\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}(\|x'\|^\beta+\|{\mathrm{v}}'\|^\beta)\|\Phi_{s,t}(x',{\mathrm{v}}')\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}'\\ &\quad\leqslant C[\varphi]_\beta\\|h\\|_2(t-s)^{\frac{\beta(\alpha\wedge 1)-2}{\alpha}}, \end{align} where $[\varphi]_\beta:=\sup_{z\not=z'}\|\varphi(z)-\varphi(z')\|/\|z-z'\|^\beta$. Furthermore, by the chain rule we have \begin{align} \\|\nabla^2_{\mathrm{v}}({\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)-\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} (\varphi h))\\|_p \leqslant C_\varphi\\|h\\|_2(t-s)^{\frac{\beta(\alpha\wedge 1)-2}{\alpha}}. \end{align} Hence, by definition \eqref{Def3} and \eqref{EV31}, we have \begin{align} &\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}({\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)-\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h))\\|_p\\ &\qquad\leqslant\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\\|\delta^{(2)}_{\mathrm{v}}({\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)-\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} (\varphi h))\\|_p\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\\ &\qquad\leqslant 4\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|>(t-s)^{(2-\beta(\alpha\wedge 1))/(2\alpha)}}\Big(\\|{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h)\\|_p+\\|\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t} (\varphi h)\\|_p\Big)\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\\ &\qquad\quad+C_\phi\\|h\\|_2(t-s)^{\frac{\beta(\alpha\wedge 1)-2}{\alpha}}\int_{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|\leqslant (t-s)^{(2-\beta(\alpha\wedge 1))/(2\alpha)}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^2\frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}}{\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^{d+\alpha}}\\ &\qquad\leqslant C_\phi\\|h\\|_2(t-s)^{\frac{\beta(\alpha\wedge 1)}{2}-1}. \end{align} Thus, we obtain \eqref{LK0}. \end{proof} \begin{lemma} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, there is a positive constant $C$ only depending on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$ and all $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, \begin{align} \int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr Q}^_{\varepsilon} f(s,x,{\mathrm{v}})\|^2\leqslant C.\label{BN4'} \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For $t\in{\mathbb R}$, define $$ u(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} ((1_{[-2,1]}f_\varepsilon)(s))(x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} s. $$ Let $\varphi$ be a nonnegative smooth cutoff function in ${\mathbb R}^{2d}$ with $\varphi(x,{\mathrm{v}})=1$ for $\|(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|\leqslant 4$ and $\varphi(x)=0$ for $\|(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|>8$. We have \begin{align} \\|u\\|_{L^2(Q_1(0))}&\leqslant\\|u\varphi^2\\|_{2}=\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d}), \\|h\\|_2\leqslant 1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}u\varphi^2h\\ &=\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d}), \\|h\\|_2\leqslant 1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}}1_{[-2,1]}(s)f_\varepsilon\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} \int^\infty_s {\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h (t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\leqslant\\|f\\|_\infty\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d}), \\|h\\|_2\leqslant 1} \left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h (t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_1. \end{align} Let $h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|h\\|_2\leqslant 1$. By \eqref{LK0}, we have \begin{align} &\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_1\\ &\quad\leqslant\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_1+C. \end{align} Since $\varphi_{s,t}=\varphi(x+\Pi_{s,t}{\mathrm{v}},{\mathrm{v}})$ has support $\Big\{(x,{\mathrm{v}}): \|(x,{\mathrm{v}})\|\leqslant 8(\\|U\\|_\infty+1)\Big\}$, and for any $\gamma\in(0,\alpha\wedge 1)$, \begin{align} \\|\delta^{(1)}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h)\\|_2&\leqslant (\\|\nabla_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h)\\|_2\|{\mathrm{v}}\|)\wedge (2\\|{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h)\\|_2)\\ &\leqslant C((t-s)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|)\wedge 1\leqslant C(t-s)^{-\frac{\gamma}{\alpha}}\|{\mathrm{v}}\|^\gamma, \end{align} by \eqref{EV441} and \eqref{LK0}, we have \begin{align} &\Bigg\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\Bigg\\|_1\\ &\quad\leqslant\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\varphi_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_1+C\\ &\quad\leqslant\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\varphi_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_2+C\\ &\quad\leqslant\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\varphi_{s,t}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi h(t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_2+C\\ &\quad\leqslant\left\\|1_{[-2,1]}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^1_{\cdot}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}(\varphi^2 h (t)){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_2+C\\ &\quad\leqslant C\\|\varphi^2 h\\|_2+C\leqslant C. \end{align} Combining the above calculations, we obtain \eqref{BN4'}. \end{proof} The following lemma is the same as in Lemma \ref{Le37}. \begin{lemma} Under \eqref{Kapp} and \eqref{Con2}, there is a positive constant $C$ only depending on $\kappa_0, p,d,\nu^{(\alpha)}_i,\alpha$ such that for all $f\in L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\\|f\\|_\infty\leqslant 1$ and $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, $$ \int_{Q_1(0)}\|{\mathscr Q}^\varepsilon_{2}f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})-{\mathscr Q}^\varepsilon_{2}f(0,0,0)\|^2\leqslant C. $$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By \eqref{JH2} with $\beta=\gamma=\alpha$, we have for all $t\in[-1,1]$, \begin{align} &\int^{-2}_{-\infty}\big\|{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}f_\varepsilon(s,0,0) -{\mathcal T}^_{s,0}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}f_\varepsilon(s,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\quad\leqslant\int^{-2}_{-\infty}\!\int^t_0\big\|\partial_r{\mathcal T}^_{s,r}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}f_\varepsilon(s,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\quad=\int^{-2}_{-\infty}\!\int^t_0\big\|{\mathscr L}^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r, {\mathrm{v}}}{\mathcal T}^_{s,r}\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}f_\varepsilon(s,0,0)\big\|{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\quad\leqslant C\int^{-2}_{-\infty}\!\int^t_0(t-r)^{-2}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant C. \end{align} Using this estimate, as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Le37}, we obtain the desired estimate. \end{proof} Now we can give \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p\in(1,2)$] By Lemmas \ref{Le34}, \ref{Le35} and \ref{Le37}, we know that $$ {\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon: L^\infty({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})\to BMO\mbox{ is bounded with norm independent of $\varepsilon$.} $$ Moreover, by duality, we also have $$ {\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon: L^2({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})\to L^2({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})\mbox{ is bounded with norm independent of $\varepsilon$.} $$ Hence, for $q=p/(p-1)\in(2,\infty)$, by Theorem \ref{Th2}, we have for some $C>0$ independent of $\varepsilon$, $$ \\|{\mathscr Q}_\varepsilon f\\|_q=\left\\|\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} f_\varepsilon{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right\\|_q\leqslant C\\|f\\|_q. $$ Now going back to \eqref{UR1}, for $p\in(1,2)$, by Fatou's lemma, we get \begin{align} \\|{\mathscr P}_2f\\|_p&\leqslant \\|f\\|_p\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d)},\\|h\\|_q\leqslant 1}\left\\|\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right\\|_q\\ &\leqslant \\|f\\|_p\sup_{h\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d)},\\|h\\|_q\leqslant 1}\varliminf_{\varepsilon\to 0} \left\\|\int^t_{-\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}^_{s,t}\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} h_\varepsilon{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right\\|_q\leqslant C\\|f\\|_p, \end{align} which together with \eqref{UR2} gives \eqref{BN77} for $p\in(1,2)$. \end{proof} \section{Appendix} \subsection{Carleman's representation for Boltzmann's equation} Let us first show the following elementary formula in calculus. \begin{lemma} We have \begin{align}\label{For} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}F(x,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x = \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}F(h\pm w,\bar w)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w, \end{align} where $\bar w:=w/\|w\|$ and we have used the convention that $F(h\pm w,\bar w)=F(h+w,\bar w)+F(h-w,\bar w)$. In particular, if $F(x,\omega)=F(x,-\omega)$, then $$ \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}F(x,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\!\!\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}F(h+w,\bar w)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w. $$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By the co-area formula and the change of variables, we have \begin{align} \int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}F(x,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega &=\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\!\!\int^\infty_0\!\!\int_{\{\<h,\omega\>=\pm r\}}F(h,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\!\!\int^\infty_0\!\!\int_{\{\<h\pm r\omega,\omega\>=0\}}F(h,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\!\!\int^\infty_0\!\!\int_{\{\<h,\omega\>=0\}}F(h\pm r\omega,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} \omega\\ &=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}}\!\!\int_{\{\<h,w\>=0\}}F(h\pm w,\bar w)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w. \end{align} The desired formula follows. \end{proof} By a change of variables and \eqref{For}, noting that $\<h,w\>=0$, one can rewrite the collision operator $Q(f,g)$ as: \begin{align} Q(f,g)({\mathrm{v}})&=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\int_{{\mathbb S}^{d-1}}\Big[f({\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_+\<{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>\omega)g({\mathrm{v}}-\<{\mathrm{v}}_,\omega\>\omega)\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad-f({\mathrm{v}}-{\mathrm{v}}_)g({\mathrm{v}})\Big]B(\|{\mathrm{v}}_\|,\omega){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\omega{\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}_\\ &=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}\Big[f({\mathrm{v}}-h-w+\<h+w,\bar w\>\bar w)g({\mathrm{v}}-\<h+w,\bar w\>\bar w)\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad-f({\mathrm{v}}-h- w)g({\mathrm{v}})\Big]B(\|h+ w\|,\bar w)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w\\ &=2\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\int_{\{h\cdot w=0\}}\Big[f({\mathrm{v}}-h)g({\mathrm{v}}-w)-f({\mathrm{v}}-h-w)g({\mathrm{v}})\Big]\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\times B(\|h+w\|,\bar w)\|w\|^{1-d}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} h{\mathord{{\rm d}}} w, \end{align} which gives representation \eqref{Bol} by changing $w$ into $-w$. \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Th2}} Let us introduce a quasi-metric in ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$ as follows: \begin{align} &\rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0),(t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1))\\ &:=\|t_0-t_1\|^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}+\|{\mathrm{v}}_0-{\mathrm{v}}_1\|+\|x_0-x_1+\Pi_{t_0,t_1}{\mathrm{v}}_1\|^{\frac{1}{1+\alpha}}+\|x_1-x_0+\Pi_{t_1,t_0}{\mathrm{v}}_0\|^{\frac{1}{1+\alpha}}, \end{align} where $\Pi_{t_0, t_1}:=\int^{t_1}_{t_0}U_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r$. More precisely, $\rho$ satisfies \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item $\rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0),(t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1))=0\Rightarrow t_0=t_1, x_0=x_1, {\mathrm{v}}_0={\mathrm{v}}_1$. \item $\rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0),(t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1))=\rho((t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1),(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0))$. \item For some constant $c_0\geqslant 1$ and any points $(t_i,x_i,{\mathrm{v}}_i)\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}, i=0,1,2$, it holds that \begin{align} &\rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0),(t_2,x_2,{\mathrm{v}}_2))\\ &\quad\leqslant c_0\Big(\rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0),(t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1))+\rho((t_1,x_1,{\mathrm{v}}_1),(t_2,x_2,{\mathrm{v}}_2))\Big). \end{align} \end{enumerate} Given $(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$ and $r>0$, a ``ball'' in ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$ with radius $r$ with respect to the quasi-metric $\rho$ is defined by $$ \widetilde Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0):=\Big\{(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}: \rho((t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0), (t,x,{\mathrm{v}}))<r\Big\}. $$ Recalling the definition of the ``ball'' $Q_r$ in (\ref{Ball}), we have the following relation between $\widetilde Q_r$ and $Q_r$, whose proof is obvious by definitions. \begin{lemma}\label{Le51} Let $c_1:=(4+\\|U\\|_\infty)^\alpha$. For any $r>0$ and $(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, we have \begin{align} \widetilde Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\subset Q_r(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\subset\widetilde Q_{c_1r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0). \end{align} In particular, let $c_2:=(2c_1)^{1+(2+\alpha)d}$, the following doubling property holds: \begin{align} \|\widetilde Q_{2r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\|\leqslant c_2\|\widetilde Q_{r}(t_0,x_0,{\mathrm{v}}_0)\|.\label{EY1} \end{align} \end{lemma} The doubling property (\ref{EY1}) means that $({\mathbb R}^{1+2d},\rho,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x)$ is a space of homogenous type in the sense of \cite[Definition 1]{Ch}. Thus by the $T(b)$ theorem (see \cite[Theorem 11]{Ch}) , we have \begin{lemma}\label{Le42} With respect to the space $({\mathbb R}^{1+2d},\rho,{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x)$, there exists a collection of open subsets $\{O_{nj}\subset{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}, n\in{\mathbb Z}, j\in {\mathcal I}_n\}$, where ${\mathcal I}_n$ denotes some index set depending on $n$, and constants $\delta\in(0,1)$, $a_0>0$ and $c_3>0$ such that \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item For each $n\in{\mathbb N}$, $\|{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}\setminus(\cup_{j\in{\mathbb I}_n})O_{nj})\|=0$. \item If $n\geqslant k$, then either $O_{nj}\subset O_{ki}$ or $O_{nj}\cap O_{ki}=\emptyset$. \item For each $(n,j)$ and $k<n$, there is a unique $i\in {\mathcal I}_k$ such that $O_{nj}\subset O_{ki}$. \item Diameter of $O_{kj}$ is less than $c_3\delta^n$, and hence, for each $(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in O_{nj}$, we have $$ O_{nj}\subset \widetilde Q_{\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}). $$ \item For each $(n,j)$, $O_{nj}$ contains some ball $\widetilde Q_{a_0\delta^n}$, and so $$ \|O_{nj}\|\geqslant c_3\delta^n. $$ \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} Let $O_{nj}$ be as in the above lemma, which will play the role of ``cube'' in the classical Calder\'on-Zygmund's decomposition. We write $$ {\mathbb C}_n:=\Big\{O_{nj}, j\in {\mathcal I}_n\Big\}. $$ If we define $O:=\cap_{n\in{\mathbb Z}}(\cup_{j\in{\mathbb I}_n})O_{nj})$, then by (i), the complement $O^c$ has null Lebesgue measure. By restricting on $O$, without loss of generality, we may assume that ${\mathbb C}_n$ is a partition of ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$. Thus, for each $(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, there is a unique $O_n\in{\mathbb C}_n$ such that $(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in O_n$. We will also denote this $O_n$ by $O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})$, and for any local integrable function $f$, define $$ f_{\|_n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\fint_{O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}'){\mathord{{\rm d}}} {\mathrm{v}}'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} x'{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t'. $$ The function $f_{\|_n}$ can be considered as a ``conditional function of $f$ given ${\mathbb C}_n$''. By Lemma \ref{Le42}, one sees that $\{{\mathbb C}_n,n\in{\mathbb N}\}$ forms a sequence of partitions in the sense of \cite[Definition 1, p.74]{Kr}. More precisely, \begin{enumerate}[(i)] \item For each $n$ and $O_n\in{\mathbb C}_n$, there is a unique $O_{n-1}\in{\mathbb C}_{n-1}$ such that $O_n\subset O_{n-1}$, and $$ \|O_{n-1}\|\leqslant C_{d,\alpha}\|O_n\|. $$ \item For any continuous function $f$ on ${\mathbb R}^{1+2d}$, we have $$ \lim_{n\to\infty}f_{\|_n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\to f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}),\ \forall (t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\in{\mathbb R}^{1+2d}. $$ \end{enumerate} Now we can give \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Th26}] We define another sharp function associated to $\{{\mathbb C}_n, n\in{\mathbb Z}\}$ by $$ \tilde{\mathcal M}^\sharp f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}):=\max_{n\in{\mathbb Z}}\fint_{O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f-f_{\|_n}\|. $$ By \cite[Theorem 10, p.81]{Kr}, for any $p\in(1,\infty)$, we have \begin{align} \\|f\\|_p\leqslant C\\|\tilde{\mathcal M}^\sharp f\\|_p.\label{EN2} \end{align} On the other hand, by (iv) and (v) of Lemma \ref{Le42}, we have $$ O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\subset \widetilde Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\subset Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}) $$ and $$ \|O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\|\geqslant c\delta^n\geqslant \|Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})\|. $$ Therefore, \begin{align} \fint_{O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f-f_{\|_n}\|&\leqslant\fint_{O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\fint_{O_n(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}')-f(t'',x'',{\mathrm{v}}'')\|\nonumber\\ &\leqslant\fint_{Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\fint_{Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f(t',x',{\mathrm{v}}')-f(t'',x'',{\mathrm{v}}'')\|\nonumber\\ &\leqslant 2\fint_{Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|f-f_{Q_{c\delta^n}(t,x,{\mathrm{v}})}\|\leqslant{\mathcal M}^\sharp f(t,x,{\mathrm{v}}).\label{EN3} \end{align} Estimate (\ref{EU4}) now follows by (\ref{EN2}) and (\ref{EN3}). \end{proof} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p=2$} In this subsection we give a proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p=2$. Let us first recall a key estimate due to Bouchut \cite{Bo}. Since there is a time inhomogeneous matrix $U_s$ in our formulation, we need to modify the proof given in \cite{Al}. \begin{theorem}\label{Th44} Let $U:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb M}^d$ satisfy $$ \kappa_0:=\sup_{s}\\|U_s\\|+\sup_{s<t}\Big((t-s)\\|\Pi_{s,t}^{-1}\\|\Big)<\infty, $$ where $\Pi_{s,t}:=\int^t_sU_r{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r$. Let $u,f\in L^2({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ with $\Delta_{\mathrm{v}}^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$ for some $\alpha\geqslant 0$, and satisfy \begin{align} \partial_s u+U_s{\mathrm{v}}\cdot\nabla_x u+f=0 \quad \hbox{in the distributional sense.} \label{EW1} \end{align} Then for some $C=C(d,\alpha,\kappa_0)>0$, we have \begin{align} \\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xu\\|_2\leqslant C\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|^{\frac{1}{1+\alpha}}_2\\|f\\|^{\frac{\alpha}{1+\alpha}}_2.\label{EV10} \end{align} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We follow the argument of \cite{Al} with modification to deal with the time-dependent case. Taking Fourier transform in $(x, {\mathrm{v}})$-variables on both sides of \eqref{EW1}, we have \begin{align}\label{EM3} \partial_s \hat u-U^_s\xi\cdot\nabla_\eta \hat u+\hat f=0 . \end{align} Here $$ \hat u(t, \xi,\eta)=\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}{\mathrm{e}}^{{\rm i}(\xi\cdot x+\eta\cdot{\mathrm{v}})}u(t, x,{\mathrm{v}}){\mathord{{\rm d}}} x{\mathord{{\rm d}}}{\mathrm{v}}, $$ and $\hat f(t, \xi, \eta)$ is defined in a similar way. Let $\psi: [0,\infty)\to[0,1]$ be a smooth function with $\psi (s)=1$ for $s<1$ and $\psi (s)=0$ for $s>2$. For $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, define $$ \phi_\varepsilon(\xi,\eta):=\psi (\varepsilon\|\eta\|/\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}). $$ By Planchel's identity, we have \begin{align} \begin{split} \\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xu\\|^2_2 \, =& \int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\|\hat u\|^2(s,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ \leqslant & 2\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}(1-\phi_\varepsilon(\xi,\eta))^2\|\hat u\|^2(s,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &+2\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\phi^2_\varepsilon(\xi,\eta)\|\hat u\|^2(s,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s \\ =:& {\mathscr I}_\varepsilon+{\mathscr J}_\varepsilon. \end{split} \label{EM1} \end{align} For ${\mathscr I}_\varepsilon$, by the definition of $\phi_\varepsilon$, we have \begin{align}\label{EM2} {\mathscr I}_\varepsilon\leqslant 2\varepsilon^{2\alpha}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\eta\|^{2\alpha}\|\hat u\|^2(s,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s=2\varepsilon^{2\alpha}\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|^2_2. \end{align} To treat ${\mathscr J}_\varepsilon$, let us write $$ \hat u_{\varepsilon}:=\phi_\varepsilon\hat u,\ \ \hat f_\varepsilon:=\phi_\varepsilon\hat f,\ \ g_\varepsilon:=\hat f_\varepsilon+(U^_s\xi\cdot\nabla_\eta\phi_\varepsilon) \hat u. $$ Then by \eqref{EM3}, it is easy to see that $$ \partial_s \hat u_\varepsilon-U^_s\xi\cdot\nabla_\eta \hat u_\varepsilon+\hat g_\varepsilon=0. $$ Multiplying both sides by the complex conjugate of $\hat u_\varepsilon$, we obtain $$ \partial_s \|\hat u_\varepsilon\|^2-U^_s\xi\cdot\nabla_\eta \|\hat u_\varepsilon\|^2+2\Re\mathrm{e}(\hat g_\varepsilon,\bar{\hat u}_\varepsilon)=0. $$ It follows that \begin{align} \|\hat u_\varepsilon\|^2(s,\xi,\eta) &= - \int_s^\infty \frac{{\mathord{{\rm d}}} }{{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t} \|\hat u_\varepsilon\|^2(t,\xi, \eta -\Pi^_{s, t} \xi) {\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &= 2\int^\infty_s\Re\mathrm{e}(\hat g_\varepsilon,\bar{\hat u}_\varepsilon)(t, \xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} Since the support of $\phi_\varepsilon$ is contained in $\big\{\varepsilon\|\eta\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\big\}$, we get \begin{align} {\mathscr I}_\varepsilon&=\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}1_{\{\varepsilon\|\eta\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\}}\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|^2(s,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\leq2\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\int^\infty_s1_{\{\varepsilon\|\eta\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\}} \|\hat g_\varepsilon\|\,\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|(t, \xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=2\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\int^\infty_s1_{\{\varepsilon\|\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\}} \|\hat g_\varepsilon\|\,\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=2\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\left(\int^t_{-\infty}1_{\{\varepsilon\|\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\}} {\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right)\|\hat g_\varepsilon\|\,\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t. \end{align} Let us estimate the integral in the bracket. By the assumption, we have \begin{align} &\int^t_{-\infty}1_{\{\varepsilon\|\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|<2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s \leqslant\int^t_{-\infty}1_{\{\|\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|\leqslant \|\eta\|+2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}/\varepsilon\}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\quad\leqslant\int^t_{-\infty}1_{\{\kappa^{-1}_0(t-s)\|\xi\|\leqslant \|\eta\|+2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}/\varepsilon\}}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s =\kappa_0\Big(\|\eta\|+2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}/\varepsilon\Big)/\|\xi\|. \end{align} Moreover, by the definition of $\hat g_\varepsilon$, we also have \begin{align} \|\hat g_\varepsilon\|\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|&\leqslant \left(\|\hat f_\varepsilon\|+\kappa_0\varepsilon\\|\psi'\\|_\infty\|\xi\|^{\alpha/(1+\alpha)} 1_{\{1\leqslant\varepsilon \|\eta\|/\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\leqslant 2\}}\|\hat u\|\right)\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|. \end{align} Therefore, \begin{align} {\mathscr J}_\varepsilon&\leqslant \frac{2\kappa_0}{\varepsilon}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} \|\xi\|^{\frac{\alpha-1}{1+\alpha}}(\varepsilon\|\eta\|+2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)})\|\hat f_\varepsilon\| \|\hat u_\varepsilon\|(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\quad+2\kappa^2_0\\|\psi'\\|_\infty\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} \|\xi\|^{\frac{2\alpha-1}{1+\alpha}}(\varepsilon\|\eta\|+2\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)})\\ &\qquad\times 1_{\{1\leqslant\varepsilon \|\eta\|/\|\xi\|^{1/(1+\alpha)}\leqslant 2\}}\|\hat u\|\,\|\hat u_\varepsilon\|(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\leqslant \frac{8\kappa_0}{\varepsilon}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} \|\xi\|^{\frac{\alpha}{1+\alpha}}\|\hat f\|\,\|\hat u\|(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\quad+8\kappa^2_0\\|\psi'\\|_\infty\int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}} (\varepsilon\|\eta\|)^{2\alpha}\|\hat u\|^2(t, \xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\leqslant C\varepsilon^{-2}\\|f\\|^2_2+\tfrac{1}{2}\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xu\\|^2_2+8\kappa^2_0\\|\psi'\\|_\infty\varepsilon^{2\alpha}\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|^2_2. \end{align} Combining this with \eqref{EM1} and \eqref{EM2}, we obtain \begin{align} \\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xu\\|^2_2&\leqslant(1+8\kappa^2_0\\|\psi'\\|_\infty)\varepsilon^{2\alpha}\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|^2_2 +C\varepsilon^{-2}\\|f\\|^2_2+\tfrac{1}{2}\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2(1+\alpha)}}_xu\\|_2^2, \end{align} which gives the desired estimate by letting $\varepsilon=(C\\|f\\|^2_2/\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}} u\\|^2_2)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha)}}$. \end{proof} Now we can give \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Main} for $p=2$] Without loss of generality, we may assume $f\in C^\infty_c({\mathbb R}^{1+2d})$. It follows from Fourier transformation, \eqref{TST0}, \eqref{NB9}, and H\"older's inequality that \begin{align} &\\| \Delta^{\alpha/2}_v u^\lambda \\|_2 = \int^\infty_{-\infty}\left\\|\Delta^{{\alpha}/{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,\cdot,\cdot){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_2^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\eta\|^{2\alpha}\left\|\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}\widehat{{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f}(t,\xi,\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\eta\|^{2\alpha}\left\|\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}\hat f(t,\xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,r}\xi ) {\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\leqslant\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\left(\int^\infty_s\|\eta\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}\|\hat f(t,\xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi)\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right)\\ &\qquad\qquad\times\left(\int^\infty_s\|\eta\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s. \end{align} By \eqref{Con1} and a similar argument as that for \eqref{NB2}, we have $$ \int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\geqslant\kappa_1\int^t_s\|\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta\|^\alpha{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r \geqslant c_1(t-s)\|(\eta,(t-s)\xi)\|^\alpha, $$ and $$ \int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r\geqslant\kappa_1\int^t_s\|\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\eta\|^\alpha{\mathord{{\rm d}}} r \geqslant c_1(t-s)\|(\eta,(t-s)\xi)\|^\alpha. $$ Hence, $$ \int^\infty_s\|\eta\|^{\alpha}{\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}( \Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\leqslant \int^\infty_s\|\eta\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-c_1(t-s)\|\eta\|^\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t=\frac{1}{c_1}, $$ and \begin{align} &\int^t_{-\infty}\|\eta+\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|^{\alpha}{\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s \leqslant 2\int^t_{-\infty}\|\eta\|^{\alpha}{\mathrm{e}}^{-c_1(t-s)\|\eta\|^\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\qquad+2\\|U\\|_\infty^\alpha\int^t_{-\infty}((t-s)\|\xi\|)^{\alpha}{\mathrm{e}}^{-c_1(t-s)^{1+\alpha}\|\xi\|^\alpha}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s=\frac{2}{c_1}+\frac{2\\|U\\|^\alpha_\infty}{c_1(1+\alpha)}. \end{align} Thus, by the change of variables and Fubini's theorem, we further have \begin{align} &\int^\infty_{-\infty}\left\\|\Delta^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}_{\mathrm{v}}\int^\infty_s{\mathrm{e}}^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathcal T}_{s,t}f(t,\cdot,\cdot){\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right\\|_2^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &\leqslant\frac{1}{c_1}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\left(\int^\infty_s\|\eta\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{s,r}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}\|\hat f(t,\xi,\eta-\Pi^_{s,t}\xi)\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=\frac{1}{c_1}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\left(\int^\infty_s\|\eta+\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(-\Pi^_{r,t}\xi-\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}\|\hat f(t,\xi,\eta)\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\right){\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\\ &=\frac{1}{c_1}\int^\infty_{-\infty}\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\left(\int^t_{-\infty}\|\eta+\Pi^_{s,t}\xi\|^{\alpha} {\mathrm{e}}^{-\int^t_s\psi^{\nu_r}_{\sigma_r}(\Pi^_{r,t}\xi+\eta){\mathord{{\rm d}}} r}{\mathord{{\rm d}}} s\right)\|\hat f(t,\xi,\eta)\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t\\ &\leqslant\left(\frac{2}{c^2_1}+\frac{2\\|U\\|^\alpha_\infty}{c^2_1(1+\alpha)}\right) \int^\infty_{-\infty}\!\!\int_{{\mathbb R}^{2d}}\|\hat f(t,\xi,\eta)\|^2{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\eta{\mathord{{\rm d}}}\xi{\mathord{{\rm d}}} t =\left(\frac{2}{c^2_1}+\frac{2\\|U\\|^\alpha_\infty}{c^2_1(1+\alpha)}\right)\\|f\\|^2_2. \end{align} The proof of \eqref{BN77} for $p=2$ is thus complete by \eqref{EV10}. \end{proof}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} SOAR Adaptive Module (SAM) is a facility adaptive optics (AO) instrument at the 4.1-m Southern Astrophysical Research Telescope, SOAR. It improves the natural seeing by partial compensation of turbulence near the ground. Although various aspects of SAM have been covered in the literature, there has been no single reference with a comprehensive description of the entire instrument and its performance. The present article fills this lacuna. It is primarily intended for SAM users and may be of interest to instrument developers. On the other hand, the format of a journal article is not well suited for technical details such as full optical prescription, software algorithms, etc.; this paper is {\it not} an instrument reference manual. From the outset, the SOAR telescope was designed to deliver high angular resolution over a relatively narrow field, unlike other wide-angle 4-m telescopes \citep{SOAR}. It contains a fast actuated tertiary mirror (M3) for compensation of atmospheric tilts. Extending the compensation order using the AO technology appeared natural. However, SOAR is used mostly at visible wavelengths, where the standard AO compensates turbulence only over a narrow few-arcsec field and needs a bright star or a powerful laser to do so. In 2002, when SOAR was completed, the AO technology enabled good turbulence correction only in the infrared (IR). However, low-order IR AO systems still provided {\it partial} correction in the visible and could improve the resolution by a factor of $\sim 2$, as demonstrated by the PUEO instrument \citep{PUEO}. Such partial correction could benefit a large range of science projects done at SOAR at visible wavelengths. The idea of correcting only low-altitude turbulence, known as Ground-Layer AO (GLAO), was first formulated by \citet{Rigaut}. In GLAO, the compensation quality is traded against uniformity of correction over a wide field. Quantitative analysis of GLAO was done later by \citet{Tok04}, see also \citet{Gemini-GLAO}. Although several natural guide stars (NGSs) or laser guide stars (LGSs) located at the perimeter of the field of view are optimal for sensing ground-layer turbulence, even a single LGS at low altitude is an acceptable solution for GLAO. In such case, the so-called cone effect effectively reduces sensitivity to high-altitude turbulence. The concept of SAM, first presented by \citet{Tok03}, is based on a single LGS created by Rayleigh scattering of an ultraviolet (UV) laser. The use of a UV laser, advocated by \citet{Angel2000}, has several advantages: efficient Rayleigh scattering proportional to $\lambda^{-4}$, easy separation of the laser light from longer science wavelengths, and no ocular hazards, making the beam safe to airplanes. The LGS is needed for a high sky coverage; an alternative wave-front sensor (WFS) using several NGSs would deliver a much inferior compensation. At that time, an AO system with a UV laser was being built for the 2.5-m telescope at Mt. Wilson \citep{Thompson2002}, while a similar AO instrument with a green Rayleigh laser was developed at the 4.2-m William Hershel telescope \citep{GLAS}. For technical reasons, those two projects have not produced any science results, but we learned from their experience. The GLAO system with a green Rayleigh laser at the 6.5-m MMT telescope \citep{MMT} is not used in regular observing programs. On the other hand, the Robo-AO instrument with a UV laser at the Palomar 1.5-m telescope \citep{RoboAO} is highly productive \citep[e.g.][]{Law2014}. The SAM instrument design was driven by the science goal (improve seeing over a moderate field of view at optical wavelengths), availability of suitable technology (e.g. UV lasers and fast CCD detectors), and technological trade-offs. In the development of SAM, we tried to use commercial or otherwise proven components, whenever possible. New and/or critical elements were first prototyped and tested. We consulted with the AO team at the MMT telescope who generously shared their experience. The SAM system as a whole is presented in \S~\ref{sec:overview}. The main AO module is described in \S~\ref{sec:AOM}, the laser subsystem is covered in \S~\ref{sec:LGS}. \S~\ref{sec:SW} describes the SAM software, and \S~\ref{sec:perf} provides information on the SAM performance. Science operation is covered in \S~\ref{sec:sci}. In \S~\ref{sec:sum} we discuss the place of SAM among other ground-based and space facilities, its future instruments and upgrades. \section{System architecture and overview} \label{sec:overview} \subsection{Evolution of the concept} \label{sec:concept} The choice of the deformable mirror (DM) has a large impact on the instrument design. An adaptive secondary mirror, like in the MMT, would be an ideal technical solution, but it was beyond our budget and, in hindsight, would have substantially delayed the project. Initially we hoped to use a small electrostatic DM from OKO-tech and to build a small instrument around it, but the stroke of this DM turned out to be insufficient \citep{DM79}. We selected instead the bimorph DM BIM-60 made by CILAS. The initial optical relay based on refractive optics was replaced by a classical scheme with a pair of off-axis parabolic mirrors (OAPs) and a pupil diameter of 50\,mm. Then the AO-corrected beam has the same focal ratio and pupil location as at the uncorrected telescope focus, allowing to use with SAM any instrument built for SOAR (within allowable mass and space limits). SAM acts as a seeing-improvement interface between SOAR and its science instrument. SAM feeds corrected images to its internal CCD detector, SAMI (4K$\times$4K CCD) or to a visitor instrument (this port is now occupied by the speckle camera). \subsection{System layout} \label{sec:sys} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f1.eps} \caption{\label{fig:all} Simplified block-diagram of the SAM system. The science light path is denoted by green lines, the laser light path is in pink. } \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:all} presents a simplified block-diagram of the SAM system. Light from celestial objects reflected by the SOAR primary mirror M1 experiences three more reflections before reaching the SAM Adaptive-Optics Module (AOM), attached to the instrument-selector box (ISB) at the Nasmyth focal station of SOAR. During observations, SAM rotates to compensate for parallactic angle. The optical relay inside AOM includes reflection from the DM. The corrected beam is sent either to SAMI or to the visitor instrument, both mounted on the opposite sides of the AOM. The LGS is created by the pulsed UV laser located in a box on the telescope truss and also subjected to variable gravity depending on the telescope elevation. The laser power supply and chiller are housed in a thermally insulated rack attached to the fork of the SOAR mount, in fixed gravity. The laser beam is transported to the laser launch telescope (LLT) located behind the SOAR secondary mirror, M2. Each pulse of the laser light propagates through the atmosphere and part of it is scattered back. Photons scattered from the distance of 7\,km are selected by the fast range-gate shutter inside AOM, synchronized with the laser pulses. The UV light is analyzed by the WFS, and the correction is sent to the DM in closed loop. Other essential elements of SAM shown in Figure~\ref{fig:all} are its electronics, mostly housed in a rack near the AOM, and its computers with software. The Rayleigh scattering preserves polarization. The AOM rotates relative to the telescope and the laser, hence its polarization-sensitive WFS cannot be adjusted to match the polarization of the laser. To mitigate this effect, the laser beam is propagated circularly polarized, and the scattered circularly-polarized beam is converted back to linear polarization in the WFS. Only the oblique reflection from M3 slightly affects the polarization tuning. SAM is different from the majority of AO systems in several ways. First, the tip and tilt (TT) compensation is provided by M3, the actuated tertiary mirror of SOAR, upstream from the instrument. Second, TT is sensed by two small guide probes deployed in the input (un-corrected) focal plane. This avoids the need to split photons in wavelength between science and guide channels. The probes sample the $5'$ square patrol field outside the $3'$ science field. In this design the tilts introduced by the deformable mirror (DM) are not sensed, but the DM control is tilt-free. The UV light from the LGS is focused well behind the nominal telescope focal plane, meaning that the light path of LGS photons inside SAM is very different from the starlight path. Nevertheless, major non-common-path errors between the science and WFS paths were avoided. Readers who are not interested in the SAM design can skip the following material and go to Section~6. \section{Adaptive Optics Module} \label{sec:AOM} In this Section, the AOM and its subsystems are covered. \subsection{Optical relay} \label{sec:OAP} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f2.eps} \caption{\label{fig:OAP} AOM optical layout. The beam corresponds to the circular field of 3\arcmin (60\,mm) diameter. } \end{figure} The optical layout of the SAM AOM is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:OAP}, and the optical elements are listed in Table~\ref{tab:opt}. The beam, focused by the telescope and reflected by the M4 mirror inside the ISB, propagates to the focal plane inside AOM, where guide probes (GPs) are located, and then hits the first OAP. Simulated light source can be inserted in the path before OAP1 for tests and DM flattening. The collimated beam after OAP1 propagates towards the DM, with an incidence angle of 14\fdg16. After the DM, the UV light is reflected by the dielectric coating of the dichroic plate, while longer wavelengths are transmitted through the dichroic towards OAP2 and re-focused on the science instrument (after the fold mirrors). The SAMI fold mirror is installed permanently. The visitor fold mirror is mounted on a translation stage; when inserted, it intercepts the beam and directs it to the visitor port. The atmospheric dispersion corrector (ADC) can be inserted in the collimated beam after the dichroic. It consists of two cemented zero-deviation prisms, each made of the BaK2 (angle 4\fdg45) and CaF2 (angle 5\fdg54) glasses \citep{ADC}. Immediately behind the ADC, the collimated space is available for insertion of other elements, for example a non-redundant pupil mask or a Fabry-Perot etalon. The UV photons from the LGS at 7-km distance are focused well behind the science focal plane, very close to the OAP1. The LGS beam on the DM is divergent. Upon reflection from the dichroic, it is focused by the custom UV triplet lens, then the beam is folded by a mirror. The triplet also works well for the visible light, enabling SAM operation with the NGS. However, this mode was used only during initial commissioning, and SAM cannot be reconfigured back to work with NGS without losing the LGS capability. The mirrors in the AOM, including the DM, have a protected silver coating with dielectric layers enhancing reflectivity at the laser wavelength 355\,nm. The overall transmission in the science path was measured to be 0.90 at 633\,nm. During optical integration, the Strehl ratio in the science channel at this wavelength reached 0.60 after alignment and with a carefully flattened DM. This means that, despite substantially different light path in the WFS, the non-common-path errors are not significant (remember that SAM optics does not need to be diffraction-limited). The optical relay with two OAPs has a slightly curved field with a quadratic distortion. These effects, determined by the optical design, were confirmed by mapping the position and focus of the point light source. The curvature is small and it can be safely neglected, while the distortion is correctable by post-processing the images. The maximum lateral shift caused by the distortion is 0.6\,mm or 1\farcs8. \subsection{Deformable mirror} \label{sec:DM} SAM uses the bimorph or ``curvature'' DM BIM-60 made by the French company CILAS for the 8-m VLT telescope. The stroke of this DM is hence more than sufficient for the 4.1-m SOAR aperture, even considering the reduced pupil diameter of 50\,mm instead of the nominal 60\,mm. The curvature radius with a maximum voltage of 400\,V on all electrodes is measured to be 6.7\,m; a radius of 30\,m would suffice to correct a 1\arcsec ~seeing in SAM. The electrodes are arranged in radial geometry with five rings. Without any voltage, the DM has a large static aberration, including defocus. About half of the dynamic range is used to ``flatten'' the DM. The ``flat'' voltages depend on ambient temperature and instrument orientation, because the thin DM is deformed by gravity as SAM rotates, creating mainly defocus and trefoil. The gravity deformation is compensated by applying to all electrodes pre-calculated corrections varying as sines and cosines of the rotation angle. With those corrections, SAM can work in open loop, which is useful in its normal operation when the LGS is not needed or cannot be used for some reason. \begin{table}[ht] \center \caption{Optical elements of the SAM AOM} \label{tab:opt} \begin{tabular}{l cc l} \hline Element & Diam. & Dist. next & Notes \\ & (mm) & (mm) & \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{\it Common path} \\ Focal plane & 60x60 & 810 & Science field \\ OAP1 & 150 & 890 & $F=810$\,mm \\ DM & 60 & 150 & BIM-60 \\ \multicolumn{4}{c}{\it Science path} \\ Dichroic & 80 & 32 & 614.7\,mm to OAP2 \\ ADC prism1 & 80 & 3 & Thickness 14.5mm \\ ADC prism2 & 80 & 550.6 & Thickness 14.5mm \\ OAP2 & 150 & 345.5/455.5 & To Visitor/SAMI \\ Visitor Fold & 210x150 & 478.6 & Visitor instrument \\ SAMI Fold & 210x150 & 368.6 & SAMI \\ Science focus & 60x60 & n/a & \\ \multicolumn{4}{c}{\it WFS path} \\ Dichroic & 80 & 180 & \\ WFS triplet & 80 & 65 & UV triplet \\ WFS fold & 100 & 616.3 & Mirror \\ $\lambda/4$ plate & 25 & 6.6 & \\ F-adjuster lens & 25 & 53.3 & Single lens \\ Field stop & 0.55x0.55 & 61.3 & Square aperture \\ WFS collimator & 25 & 10.2 & Single lens \\ Polarizer-1 & 10 & 3 & FocTek polarizer \\ Pockels cell & 10 & (20) & QX1020 \\ Polarizer-2 & 10 & 10.2 & FocTek polarizer \\ Re-imager L1 & 25 & 5.6 & \\ Re-imager L2 & 25 & 43.3 & \\ S-H focal plane & n/a & 12.2 \\ S-H coll. lens & 25 & 14.7 \\ Lenslet array & 2.2 & 6.5 & Pupil 1.989\,mm \\ CCD-39 & 2.2 & n/a & WFS detector \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \subsection{Wavefront sensor} \label{sec:WFS} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f3.eps} \caption{\label{fig:LGS-WFS} LGS WFS. } \end{figure} SAM was first tested on the sky in 2009 with a simplified WFS, using an NGS for turbulence sensing. The UV dichroic was replaced then by a neutral beamsplitter. In the beginning of 2011, when SAM was finally commissioned in the NGS mode, the definitive LGS WFS was installed; it is described here. Both versions of the WFS used the same detector, CCD-39, and the same lenslet array (LLA). The LGS WFS optics (Figure~\ref{fig:LGS-WFS}) is tailored to match the commercial Pockels cell QX1020 manufactured by Cleveland Crystals. Constraints on the beam angular divergence in the cell imposed by its birefringent material, KDP, and the clear aperture of the cell, 10\,mm, called for a $\sim$6-mm diameter beam inside the cell. So, after the field stop at the WFS focus the beam is collimated by a fused-silica lens (good for the monochromatic laser light). It passes through the first Glan-Taylor polarizer, the Pockels cell, and the second (crossed) polarizer. Then two more singlet lenses re-shape the beam and form the pupil image of 1.99\,mm diameter on the LLA, to get 10$\times$10 pupil sampling in the Shack-Hartmann WFS. The LLA is placed directly in front of the CCD. Its pitch, 0.192\,mm, equals eight CCD pixels. The LLA focal length of 6.5\,mm (at 633\,nm) leads to the pixel scale of 0\farcs375, and the field of view of 2\farcs8, with 8 pixels per sub-aperture. The optics of SAM allows the LGS distance to be set between 7\,km and 14\,km (it is fixed presently at 7\,km). When the WFS is refocused to a different distance (it is mounted on a translation stage), the pupil size on the LLA changes slightly. To compensate for this variation, another weak singlet lens is placed before the focus on a small translation stage. Axial motion of this focal adjuster allows us to keep the constant pupil diameter at the LLA. The $\lambda/4$ wave plate is placed together with this lens to transform the elliptically polarized laser beam into linear polarization. The parameters of the LLA APO-Q-P192-F5.75 were chosen optimally for the NGS WFS, while the second LLA with a shorter focal length of 3.17\,mm was procured for the LGS WFS from the same vendor, A$\mu$S. Both LLAs are made of fused silica and have excellent optical quality. However, we could not use the short-focus LLA as planned because the distance from the CCD surface to its glass window exceeded the specification by 1\,mm. To match the pixel scale and the size of the LGS spots, we bin the CCD 2$\times$2, to 0\farcs75 per binned pixel. The CCD-39 detector has 80$\times$80 pixels of 24\,$\mu$m size and four output amplifiers for fast readout. The vendor, e2v, guaranteed quantum efficiency of $>$0.4 at 355\,nm. The detector is cooled thermoelectrically to about $-20^\circ$C. CCD-39 works in SAM with the SDSU-III controller. With the 2$\times$2 binning, the loop frequency is 478\,Hz and the readout noise is about 5.5 electrons. The digitized signal is transmitted by the optical fiber from the controller to the acquisition board inside the real-time computer (RTC). The bias pattern is not very stable, requiring its re-calibration a few times per night, while slow drifts of the bias in each quadrant are tracked and subtracted using signals in the empty corners of the image. The duration of the range-gate pulse determines the vertical extent of the LGS and hence the maximum spot elongation in the peripheral sub-apertures. We normally use the 150-m range gate, or 1\,$\mu$s gate pulses. The amplitude of the driving pulses producing the $\lambda/2$ phase shift in the Pockels cell at the laser wavelength of 355\,nm is 2.7\,kV. The KDP crystal in the cell is piezoelectric, so the driving pulses excite its acoustic oscillations at 95\,kHz. As a result, the shutter does not close completely and some after-pulses or ``ringing'' appear. The 1\,$\mu$s drive pulses produce a spurious pulse of $\sim$10\% transmission delayed by 3.6\,$\mu$s from the opening edge of the gate. The weak ``tails'' of the LGS spots caused by this ringing are truncated by the WFS entrance aperture, except the innermost sub-apertures where they pass through and slightly bias the centroids. The entrance aperture of the WFS is carefully aligned laterally to avoid ``spilling'' of light into adjacent sub-apertures. This aperture mask is mounted on a translation stage which, when moved, replaces it by a UV source used to measure the reference positions in each sub-aperture. At the same time the main beam is intercepted by a diagonal mirror that sends it to the acquisition camera. We use a simple GC650 CCD detector from Prosilica, with a Gigabit Ethernet interface, to acquire ``live'' image of the un-gated LGS. It is strongly peaked and easy to center. \subsection{Tip-tilt guide probes} \label{sec:GP} Any LGS AO system needs a tip-tilt (TT) correction using natural guide stars because the LGS does not provide valid TT signal. In the case of GLAO, the requirements on residual TT errors are relaxed in comparison to the classical AO, as we do not need to reach the diffraction-limited resolution. However, the sky coverage is essential. Our calculations indicated that the faint limit of the TT probes should be no less than $R=18$ mag for reaching the full sky coverage. Atmospheric TT errors increase with increasing angular distance from the TT guide star (so-called tilt anisoplanatism). The resulting PSF non-uniformity was a concern for SAM. We planned to have three guide probes (GPs) picking stars around the science field of view (FoV). Further study showed that with just two GPs the correction uniformity is almost as good, so SAM has two GPs, each patrolling half of the field. The technical FoV for picking the stars is $5' \times 5'$ square. We take advantage of the SOAR fast tertiary mirror for the TT correction. The GPs are placed at the telescope focus upstream from the optical relay. To reduce vignetting, the width of the GPs is minimized to 6\,mm. The optical scheme of the GPs is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:GP}. The 2$\times$2 array of 0.5-mm acrylic micro-lenses, cut from a larger sample, is optically coupled to four multimode fibers with a core diameter of 100\,$\mu$m. The SOAR pupil image on the fiber ends has a diameter of 90\,$\mu$m, allowing some tolerance for alignment. Each fiber, glued into a steel ferrule, is aligned with respect to its micro-lens to coincidence between images of all fibers formed by the micro-lenses. After alignment, the lenslets and ferrules are potted by transparent epoxy to form a solid module. The ferrules with fibers are slightly tilted, so that the source at the center is well within their acceptance cone (numerical aperture) which, together with the lenslet size, define the field of view, 1\farcs5 per quadrant. The four fibers terminate by the FC connectors plugged into the module of four photon-counting avalanche photo-diodes (APDs), model SPCM-A Q4C from Perkin Elmer. The measured optical transmission is 0.7. The acrylic lenslets do not transmit the UV light, so the probes are not affected by the LGS even without any protective filters. \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f4.eps} \caption{\label{fig:GP} Optics of the SAM guide probe (left) and the actual device (right), with the light path in green overlayed. } \end{figure} The right-hand part of Figure~\ref{fig:GP} shows the actual guide probe without cover. The light from the telescope passes through a 3-mm hole and is deflected by a 3-mm right-angle prism before being focused on the lenslets and injected into the fibers. Tilts of the prism allow co-alignment of the optical axis with the direction of the incoming light, i.e. with the SOAR pupil. The back side of the probe facing SAM can project a point source created by a single-mode fiber and a red laser diode. This fiducial source is approximately coincident with the star. It proved very useful for a number of tasks, such as mapping the guide-probe coordinates on the CCD (to ease guide-star acquisition) and testing the optics of the AOM internally. The APDs are cooled thermoelectrically within their modules to reduce the dark count which varies from 200 to 1500\,Hz, depending on the detector. The high voltage (HV) enabling the avalanche amplification is turned on only after positioning the probes. To protect the APDs from damage by over-light, we installed a circuit that switches off the HV as soon as the current exceeds some threshold. This hardware protection has saved the APDs when a room light was turned on accidentally during SAM integration. Guide stars (GSs) brighter than $V \sim 11$ mag sometimes trigger the over-light protection. Comparison of the $V$ magnitudes of the GS with the actual counting rate shows a scatter of about 1 mag, mostly because of unreliable photometry in the USNO-2 catalog. The mean flux $F$ (sum of counting rates in the four quadrants) follows the expected trend \begin{equation} F {\rm [kel/s]} = 10^{ 0.4(V_0 -V) } , \label{eq:Flux} \end{equation} with the zero points $V_0$ of 19.9 and 19.7 mag for GP1 and GP2, respectively. These zero points match the estimated sensitivity. A star of $V=18$ mag gives a flux of 5.75 kel/s (or 57 counts per 10\,ms loop cycle) in GP1. A Gaussian star of 1\arcsec ~Full Width at Half Maximum, FWHM (rms width 0\farcs42) will have a centroid error on the order of 0\farcs02 in the 10-Hz servo bandwidth. We do guide on $V=18$ mag stars when no better choice is left. The 3\arcsec ~aperture of the GPs is smaller than the pointing error of SOAR. To acquire a GS, we first take the pointing exposure with SAMI and determine the offset by measuring position of a star with known coordinates in the image. The GP is then positioned on the selected GS automatically, the HV on the APDs is turned on. If the star is detected, the GP can be centered on it manually; however, by closing the TT loop the star is centered automatically. Manual centering of at least one GP is required if both GPs are used, so that both GPs work near null. If the star is not detected, we use a software tool that modulates the tertiary mirror circularly with increasing radii of 1\arcsec, 3\arcsec, and 5\arcsec. This effectively enlarges the capture zone of the GPs. If the modulated signal is detected, the GP is moved towards the star. Otherwise, we revise the pointing offset or select another star (some ``stars'' in the USNO-2 catalog are galaxies not suitable for guiding). \subsection{Turbulence simulator} \label{sec:TurSim} The AOM contains a built-in artificial UV light source than can be injected in the optical path instead of the LGS. The focus and pupil of the simulated beam mimic the actual LGS; the beam can be artificially distorted, simulating the turbulence. This device, called TurSim, is essential for the SAM operation; it is used for flattening the DM and testing the health of the AO loop during daytime. The 365-nm UV light in TurSim is emitted by the photo-diode from Nicia, with a diffuser and a circular aperture to emulate a 1\arcsec ~star. Two DC motors with cam mechanisms translate the source laterally and serve for centering its image in the WFS. The beam is collimated by a custom UV triplet lens, passes through the pupil mask simulating central obscuration, and is re-imaged by another lens group with the telescope's focal ratio, at a fixed axial position corresponding to the LGS at 7\,km. One or two phase screens can be inserted in the parallel beam near the pupil mask to simulate turbulence of variable strength and speed; they are driven by regulated DC motors. The phase screens, made in-house \citep{TurSim}, do not match exactly the expected Kolmogorov spectrum, but this is not critical for testing SAM. TurSim has a deployable arm for projecting the simulated LGS on-axis. With a total of seven mechanisms, it is a rather complex subsystem. To transmit the TurSim light through the WFS, its Pockels cell is triggered by internally generated pulses rather than by the laser. \subsection{AOM structure and mechanisms} \label{sec:mech} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f5.eps} \caption{\label{fig:mech} Mechanical structure of SAM. } \end{figure} All elements of SAM are housed in a box-like aluminum structure, called bench (Figure~\ref{fig:mech}). It provides stiffness against gravity change in one direction as SAM rotates at the Nasmyth focus. The total range of flexure, measured by displacement of the image of the light source in the GP on the science CCD, is only $\pm$0\farcs35. To prevent image blurring by flexure, avoid long exposures near the zenith associated with large rotation during the exposure. The SAM bench is made of aluminum plates bolted together. They have large rectangular openings to access the optics and mechanisms of SAM. The covers are hermetized to prevent light and dust from entering SAM. For the same reason, the entrance opening of SAM is covered by an environmental shutter, opened only during observations. The total mass of SAM (including SAMI) is 330\,kg. An instrument up to 70\,kg can be mounted on the visitor port. The mechanical design of SAM was complicated because of the space restrictions at the Nasmyth focus. The AOM has 23 remotely controlled motions (e.g. 6 in the guiders, 7 in TurSim, 3 in the ADC, etc.). To reduce heat dissipation inside the instrument, all motor controllers are housed in two glycol-cooled boxes attached outside the bench. However, the APD modules and the driver of the Pockels cell are located inside SAM, as well as the WFS detectors CCD-39 and GC650. \subsection{SAMI, the CCD imager} \label{sec:SAMI} \begin{table}[ht] \center \caption{Parameters of SAMI} \label{tab:SAMI} \begin{tabular}{l l} \hline Parameter & Value \\ \hline Format H$\times$V (pixels) & 4096$\times$4112 \\ Pixel size (arcsec) & 0.0455 \\ Field of view (arcmin) & 3.07 \\ Gain (el/ADU) & 2.1 \\ Readout noise (electrons) & 3.8 \\ Zero point in SDSS $g'$ \& $i'$ (mag) & 24.4 \& 24.7 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} The CCD imager, SAMI (Table~\ref{tab:SAMI}), uses the 4096$\times$4112 CCD231-84 detector with a pixel size of 15\,$\mu$m manufactured by e2v. The chip has an astro broad-band anti-reflection coating providing a quantum efficiency of up to 0.90. It has an excellent cosmetic quality without any major blemishes. The CCD is read out through four amplifiers using the SDSU-III controller, as in the WFS. The full frame without binning is read out in about 8\,s, with a readout noise of 3.8 electrons and a gain of 2.1 electrons per ADU. Most of the time, the imager uses a 2$\times$2 binning, or an effective pixel scale of 91\,mas. The CCD is housed in a dewar cooled by liquid nitrogen and maintained at stabilized working temperature of $-120^\circ$C. A blade shutter in front of the CCD allows exposure time as short as 0.1\,s, although longer exposures are recommended to ensure good photometric uniformity. The filter wheel is mounted before the shutter. The SAMI software provides a standard functionality: acquisition of single or multiple images of the full frame or of a region of interest. The image headers contain information received from the telescope, as well as the state of the SAM instrument. The SAMI software can be driven externally, e.g. by a script that synchronizes exposures with stepping of the Fabry-Perot etalon inside SAM. Dithering can be done by a script in the SAM software. However, recombination of images taken with large dithers requires prior correction of their distortion. The photometric zero point of SAMI in the SDSS $g'$ band (stellar magnitude of a source giving a flux of 1 ADU/s) is 24.4 mag \citep{Tok14}. This corresponds to the overall quantum efficiency of 0.46, which is quite high considering light losses in the atmosphere, telescope, SAM optics, and filter. The response of SAMI is higher than that of SOI, a simple optical imager at SOAR with a focal reducer in front of the CCD. \section{Laser system} \label{sec:LGS} The LGS is produced by Rayleigh and aerosol (Mie) scattering of light at 355\,nm wavelength from the pulsed laser, projected on the sky through a small telescope, LLT. Main optical elements of the laser system are listed in Table~\ref{tab:LGS} (CC stands for conic constant). \begin{table}[ht] \center \caption{Optical elements of the SAM LGS} \label{tab:LGS} \begin{tabular}{l l} \hline Element & Description \\ \hline Laser & Tripled Nd:YAG, 10W, 355\,nm \\ Beam expander & 8x magnification \\ LGS M4 mirror & $D=25$\,mm \\ LLT fold mirror & UV mirror \\ Phase plate & UV $\lambda/4$ \\ LLT M2 mirror & Spherical $D=15$\,mm, $R=$30\,mm \\ LLT M1 mirror & $D=250$\,mm, $R=$840\,mm, CC=$-0.967$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} \subsection{The UV laser} \label{sec:laser} The laser (model Q301-HD from JDSU) is a frequency-tripled pulsed Nd:YAG with a nominal average power of 10\,W. It is located on the telescope truss, in a thermal box maintained at $+20^\circ$C temperature and flushed with dry air. In the real operation (under variable gravity and at the altitude of Cerro Pach\'on) the internal power meter of the laser indicates its output power in the range from 7.5\,W to 7.8\,W. The beam quality measured in the laboratory is very good, $M^2 = 1.05$. We operate the laser at its nominal pulse frequency of 10\,kHz. The pulse duration is about 34\,ns. The JDSU company fabricated hundreds of such lasers, mostly for photo-lithography, so it is a rugged industrial product. So far, we had no problems with the laser; it works without any servicing, apart from the coolant refreshment every year or so. \subsection{Beam transfer optics} \label{sec:BTO} The narrow beam emerging from the laser is expanded to the diameter of $\sim$8\,mm (at $1/{\rm e}^2$ intensity level) and directed to the LLT with one reflection from the LGS-M4 mirror at the SOAR top ring. The beam path to the LLT is enclosed in a 1-inch aluminum tube for safety and dust protection. The decision to expand the beam was taken to reduce its intensity on the path to the LLT (less coating damage and more tolerant to dust on the optics) and to have extra flexibility for adjusting the diameter. The laser box has a fast safety shutter. During alignment, a mirror can be inserted in the light path to substitute the UV beam with a green laser pointer. Tilts of the LGS-M4 mirror are controlled remotely for centering the beam on the LLT. Four UV photo-diodes around the LLT primary mirror and the 5th diode on-axis serve for the beam diagnostic. The tilts of the LGS-M4 are regulated to center the beam by balancing the four photo-diode signals approximately, while the laser beam is propagated in the dome during daytime. Signals of these photo-diodes serve as a useful diagnostic of normal LGS operation. The size of the beam on the LLT mirror is adjusted by the magnification and/or focus of the beam expander in the laser box. It is measured by the signal ratio of the peripheral and central photo-diodes and/or by the shape of the UV beam at the LLT exit, visualized by luminescence of a standard white paper and photographed (this beam is not very intense, hence safe). The beam on the LLT mirror has FWHM diameter of 125\,mm. \subsection{Laser Launch Telescope (LLT)} \label{sec:LLT} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f6.eps} \caption{\label{fig:LLT} The LLT. Photo on the left (a) shows the LLT without enclosure, with the laser light path depicted in pink. The photo (b) is a side view from the input panel with connectors, showing how the primary mirror is suspended on the flexures. In (c) the back side of the light-weighted primary mirror is shown. The mirror diameter is 25\,cm. } \end{figure} The design of the LLT (Figure~\ref{fig:LLT}) is constrained by the small space available behind the SOAR M2. Its 25-cm aperture was chosen to minimize the LGS spot size, balancing between the diffraction and the atmospheric blur. For sodium lasers, the LLTs have typical diameters of $\sim$0.5\,m, but for the UV the optimum LLT diameter is reduced in proportion to the wavelength. In hindsight, the SAM LLT could be even smaller because in reality the atmospheric blur of the LGS dominates over diffraction. The LLT optics consists of the spherical secondary mirror M2 and the fast elliptical primary M1 (a Dall-Kirkham telescope). Spherical M2 is easier in fabrication and alignment, but such optics has only a small FoV, limited by the off-axis coma aberration. Although the LGS beam is on-axis, the FoV of $\sim 1'$ is needed for co-alignment between LLT and SOAR, compensating the flexure of both telescopes. This requirement is fulfilled by mounting the M1 on three flexure rods that point to its focus. Lateral motions of M1 are thus converted into its rotations around the focal point. As M1 is actuated to steer the LLT beam on the sky, it stays perpendicular to the beam, thus avoiding the off-axis coma. The flexures also serve as a kinematic M1 mount. The LLT M1 was fabricated by S.~Potanin using a 5-cm thick Astro-Sitall (Zerodur analogue) blank, light-weighted by removing most of the material from the back side and leaving the rib structure. Three Invar inserts are glued into the circular pucks machined in the blank to connect mirror with the flexures. Although the thermal expansion coefficients of Zerodur and Invar are both about $10^{-7}$, the 0.1-mm layer of the epoxy glue around the inserts produced thermal deformation of M1. The problem was fixed by replacing the solid inserts with flexible equivalents that do not stress M1. The M2 mirror is mounted above M1 on a column, attached to it by a light-weight truss and flexures. This allows its axial motion for focusing. The distance between M1 and M2 is fixed by an Invar rod, actuated for focusing by a motor near M1. In this way, the LLT focus is not very sensitive to temperature changes, despite its aluminum structure. Lateral position of M1 is defined by two motors that act on its flexures laterally, in a kinematic arrangement. The LLT internal structure is very stiff and light-weight. It is connected to SOAR via three mounting points. The box-shaped LLT enclosure is attached to the same points independently of the main opto-mechanical assembly. The environmental shutter of the enclosure is a thin steel sheet that slides to the side when opened. The 8-mm parallel beam arriving at the LLT after reflection from the LGS-M4 is deflected towards LGS-M2 by the tertiary mirror LGS-M3, mounted on the piezo-electric tip-tilt platform (S-330 from Physik Instrumente) for fast beam steering. The platform is driven by the average spot centroids in the SAM WFS and keeps the spots centered in the WFS in closed loop. Remember that the SOAR M3 is actuated in TT to stabilize the science image; this also displaces the LGS, so the LLT TT servo has to compensate for this disturbance and for the intrinsic beam wander of the LLT itself, to keep the spots centered. The range of the LLT fast tilt servo is $\pm$14\arcsec ~on one axis and $\pm$10\arcsec ~on the other axis, reduced by oblique reflection from the LGS-M3. The LGS can be steered over a larger range by the M1 lateral actuators, while the piezo platform compensates only small and fast residual tilts. The LGS-M3 with a dielectric UV coating is almost transparent to the visible light. Below it, a small ``telescope'' is located to capture the collimated light of a bright star, for co-alignment between LLT and SOAR and for testing the LLT image quality. It uses the GC650 CCD camera, as in the WFS acquisition channel. This device can also back-project a parallel beam from a red laser diode through the LLT. We mount a 20-cm flat mirror in front of the LLT to reflect the emerging red beam back, and test the LLT optics in auto-collimation. This functionality proved critical for {\it in situ} testing and alignment of the LLT. On 2015 September 16, the strong earthquake caused an acceleration up to $\sim$5g at the SOAR M2. The LLT was slightly misaligned, but could be re-aligned quickly by tilting the spherical M2, using the auto-collimation mirror and the red diode beam. The size of the LGS spots in the WFS often exceeded 2\arcsec, well above the expected seeing blur. Partly it was caused by the heat dissipated by the LLT electronics located just beneath it. The electronics was modified and is now powered only when the LLT motors are actually used. As a result, the LGS spots became smaller. However, they are still enlarged sporadically by internal seeing in the SOAR dome. The $\lambda/4$ wave plate located above the LGS-M3 transforms elliptical polarization of the laser beam into circular polarization propagated in the sky. There were several incidents when insects, attracted by the UV light, got inside the LLT and were burned, damaging either the $\lambda/4$ plate or the window of the laser box. These elements were easily replaced, without need for realignment. To prevent further damage, we covered the LLT aperture with a metallic mesh (3-mm pitch and 0.1-mm thickness). It causes only a minor light loss of $\sim$12\% through blocking and diffraction. \section{Computers and software} \label{sec:SW} \subsection{Real-time computer and software} \label{sec:RTSoft} The SAM real-time computer (RTC) is a standard PC with an Intel$^{\rm R}$ Core Duo processor E7500 running at 2.93\,GHz. It works under CentOS release 5.8 operational system (Linux kernel version 2.6.25 \#5 SMP) with a real-time patch RTAI~3.8. The RTC is located in the SOAR computer room. It contains the acquisition board of the SDSU CCD controller receiving the WFS signal and the waveform generator board for the M3 control. Other interface modules of the RTC are housed in the PXI chassis in the SAM electronic rack. The fiber connection between RTC and PXI effectively brings the computer bus towards the instrument. The PXI chassis must be powered when the RTC is booted. The PXI contains two 32-channel digital-to-analog converters that generate the DM drive signals and the timer/counter boards for acquisition of counts from the TT APD detectors. Another timing board generates the range-gate pulses of programmable delay and duration. The {\it real-time core} (RTCORE) is at the heart of the AO control. Each control loop cycle is triggered by an interrupt from the acquisition board when the fresh CCD frame arrives. The spot centroids are computed using a standard center-of-gravity algorithm. Several alternative centroid algorithms such as correlation or weighted centroid \citep{Thomas06} are available and have been tested, but we found that with the 2$\times$2 binning and the small WFS aperture the standard centroid gives the smallest noise. The wave-front slopes are the differences between the current centroids and the reference spot positions. The 144 slopes from 72 sub-apertures are multiplied by the 60$\times$144 reconstructor matrix, and the resulting 60 DM drive voltages are filtered temporarily by the loop controller (integrator with a gain of 0.25). The reconstructor matrix typically contains 38 to 40 system modes (weak modes are rejected in the reconstructor calculation). To prevent growth of unseen modes, a leak of 0.01 is introduced. A somewhat faster second-order temporal controller (so-called Smith predictor) is implemented, but it gives no sizable improvement over the simple integrator. When using the LGS, the standard AO control scheme is modified. Slopes averaged over all subapertures are subtracted from the high-order control signals. Those average slopes instead are driving the tip-tilt platform in the LLT to keep the spots centered in the WFS. The two control voltages for the LLT are generated together with the 60 DM voltages. Occasionally, the LGS spots become blurred or contain too few photons because of clouds. Some spot centroids then remain indeterminate. Those ``missing slopes'' do not participate in the calculation of the average tilt and are replaced by zeros in the high-order loop control. The AO loop is robust against subapertures with missing information. The RTCORE communicates with the non-real-time applications written mostly in LabView. They include the graphic user interface (GUI) and various service modules. A bank of shared memory containing slopes and DM voltages is used for the analysis of the AO loop performance (e.g. temporal power spectra of Zernike modes), estimation of atmospheric parameters and residual aberrations. Some of those diagnostic data are saved in the log file and in the image headers. Samples of AO data (slopes, DM voltages, TT signals, and WFS frames) can be saved by the SAM operator for further off-line analysis and archiving. \subsection{Instrument control} \label{sec:motion} Apart from the real-time software, the SAM instrument is controlled by four other software modules running in the instrument computer (IC), also operated under Linux. The IC is housed in a cabinet on the SOAR mount platform. All instrument control software is written in LabView; each module has its own GUI. The software is accessed by VNC connections either from the SOAR control room or remotely. Two modules (one for AOM and one for LGS) take care of the motion control and other hardware. The motor controllers, switches, and telemetry boards of the AOM are all connected to the serial RS-485 line acting as a bus and accessed by a communication board in the IC. The laser subsystems are controlled in a similar way, with an addition of the direct serial communication with the laser. Each controlled motion (e.g. the WFS focusing stage) has to be initialized (search for the zero-point mark) after powering the instrument. Then the controllers ``know'' the current mechanism positions and can move them using incremental encoders. To speed up the start-up process and to avoid unnecessary motions, all current mechanism positions are saved by the software and re-loaded in the controllers at the start, thus by-passing the initialization. This is particularly important for the LLT mechanisms that are powered only when actually used and hence must ``wake up'' quickly. The exception is made for the guiders: their six motors are initialized after each power-up. This is done to avoid the risk of collision between the GPs (their trajectories can overlap). Collision is avoided by the motion control software, while an additional hardware anti-collision sensor is implemented as an extra precaution. The instrument control software (ICSOFT) of SAM is a high-level LabView application used to operate the whole instrument. It communicates with the lower-level modules (motion control and RTSOFT) and the telescope through sockets. In normal use, SAM is controlled only through the ICSOFT GUI and there is no need to access other modules. ICSOFT has a scripting capability to code sequences of actions, thus simplifying SAM operation. For example, search for guide stars by the SOAR M3 modulation with increasing amplitude, their detection and re-positioning of GP when the star is found is done by a script activated by a single button. There are scripts for preparing SAM for observations and shutting it down at the end of the night. A software tool for visualization of the WFS acquisition images and a star catalog software for selecting guide stars are run together with the ICSOFT during SAM operation. \subsection{Laser safety} \label{sec:safety} SAM operation is subject to restrictions on laser propagation imposed by the US Space Command and managed by the Laser Clearing House (LCH). Lists of target coordinates are sent to the LCH several days prior to the observations, and the authorized laser propagation windows for each target are received on the day of operation, or a day before. These files are loaded in the software module that automatically shutters the laser when the telescope coordinates differ from the target coordinates by more than 120\arcsec ~or when the propagation is not authorized. This software receives information from the telescope control system. Both the internal laser shutter and the fast safety shutter in the laser box are closed. Typical LCH interrupts last a few tens of seconds, while their frequency varies from a few per hour to one or none per night, depending on the target location. Blanket laser closures occasionally announced by the LCH are introduced manually in the software and then enacted automatically. The SAM laser does not present any hazards to the airplanes. Its UV radiation is not visible and does not penetrate the eye, being absorbed by the cornea. As a result, the safe illumination level is much higher compared to the visible-light lasers. An airplane going through the SAM beam receives only one laser pulse, as the next pulse falls at a different non-overlapping location; the resulting illumination is 100 times less than the safe threshold for eye and skin established by the US safety standard ANSI Z136.6-200. The narrow beam of the SAM laser and even the expanded 8-mm beam are hazardous to people. Work with those beams involves standard laser safety precautions and can be done only be qualified personnel. In normal operation these beams are encapsulated inside boxes and beam conduits. The beam emerging from the LLT is sufficiently diluted to be safe; moreover, it is not accessible from anywhere inside the dome. Consequently, the SAM laser in normal operation does not require any safety measures. Nevertheless, a luminous sign in the telescope control room warns when the laser diodes are energized. A safety circuit and several emergency stop buttons are implemented to shut down the laser in abnormal situations. \section{Performance of SAM} \label{sec:perf} \subsection{Requirements and error budget} \label{sec:req} The basic requirements follow from the intended use of SAM: (i) provide a non-negligible improvement of the image resolution, with a FWHM of 2/3 compared to the uncorrected seeing, (ii) FWHM variation of $<10$\% over the field, and (iii) sky coverage of no less than 90\%. The remaining requirements relate to the instrument use (e.g. one-person operation), operating conditions such as temperature range, etc. A large number of technical requirements were formulated to guide the instrument design. The quality of AO compensation is normally characterized by the Strehl ratio, which translates to the residual wavefront error. In GLAO the goal is to reduce the PSF size, so the Strehl ratio is not an adequate metric. The expected performance of SAM was first evaluated for an ideal instrument, considering the finite compensation order, the geometry of the LGS, and the turbulence profiles measured at Cerro Pach\'on \citep{TT06}. The PSF is computed from the structure function of residual wavefront errors (RSF) which, for SAM, grows almost linearly with the distance. The corresponding PSF has a sharper peak and stronger ``wings'' compared to the seeing profile; it can be well approximated by a Moffat function with $\beta = 1.5$ \citep[][see equation 1 below]{perf}. In the real instrument, the errors of the spot centroids, TT residuals, and servo lag degrade the performance somewhat. The combined errors of the SAM AO were required not to degrade the ideal resolution by more than 10\%, meaning that their relative contribution to the RSF at the characteristic baseline of 0.5\,m should not exceed 10\%. In this way, the error budget and requirements to various AO subsystems were developed \citep{perf}. Unlike the standard Strehl-based approach to the AO design, it constrains only the difference between the real and ``perfect'' SAM and does not depend on the fixed instrument parameteres and turbulence profile. \subsection{Performance of the AO loop} \label{sec:AO} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f7.eps} \caption{\label{fig:spots} LGS spots in the SAM WFS in the 2013 September run, illustrating the spot size variation from 1\farcs6 to 2\farcs4, depending on the seeing. } \vspace{0.1cm} \end{figure} When SAM was first installed at SOAR in 2009, we found that the axis of the Nasmyth rotator did not point to the center of the pupil. As a result, rotation displaced the pupil image on the LLA. This has been adjusted by tuning the angle of the SOAR M3, so that rotation-induced pupil motion became less than 0.2 of the sub-aperture size. The diameter of the pupil image on the LLA was measured by recording sky through the WFS, measuring flux in each sub-aperture, and fitting a model with three parameters: pupil diameter and its lateral shifts. The optimum pupil radius is 5.1 sub-apertures, the actually measured one is 4.8 sub-apertures. This causes a loss of flux in the peripheral sub-apertures and a mismatch between the interaction matrix measured with TurSim and the actual LGS. With a typical range gate of 0.15\,km (maximum spot elongation of 1\farcs25) and the loop frequency of 478\,Hz the return LGS flux varies between 200 and 800 electrons per sub-aperture per loop cycle. The flux depends on the spot size (large spots are truncated by the WFS aperture), atmospheric conditions (more photons are scattered by aerosols or less photons due to additional absorption by thin clouds) and the rotator angle (the polarization adjustment in the WFS is not perfect). Light losses in the up-link and down-link LGS path lead to the estimated (and measured) total efficiency of 5\%. This number, combined with the lidar equation, implies the return flux of 600 photons per sub-aperture per loop cycle, as actually observed under favorable circumstances. The FWHM size of the LGS spots is measured by stacking many WFS frames and fitting Gaussians to several spots around the pupil center (the elongation due to the finite range gate is thus small). It ranges from 1\farcs3 to 2\farcs3, depending mostly on the local seeing (Figure~\ref{fig:spots}). The rms centroid noise is normally between 0.15 and 0.25 pixels. Figure~\ref{fig:loop} gives an example of the AO loop performance on a night with mediocre atmospheric conditions. \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f8.eps} \caption{\label{fig:loop} Performance of the SAM AO loop on 2013 September 26 at 1:20 UT. Top left: temporal spectrum of the Zernike defocus coefficient $a_4$ (residual in dashed line, input in full line, variance 1.2\,rad$^2$). Top right: temporal spectra of the global tilt in the WFS in X (full line) and Y (dashed line), rms 0.35 pixels. Lower left: average WFS spots (flux 160\,kel/s, spot size 1\farcs61). Lower right: residual centroid variance in each sub-aperture (X in full line, Y in dashed line) in WFS pixels, with the global tilt subtracted. } \end{figure} The TT loop uses signals of one or two GPs to control the angles of SOAR M3. The temporal controller accounts for the frequency response of M3, which eventually restricts the TT bandwidth to $\sim$10\,Hz. As the TT probes are quad-cells, the loop gain depends on the seeing. With a very good seeing and a gain too large, the 15-Hz oscillation appears, so the nominal TT gain is set to avoid such situations. The optical axis of SOAR vibrates with a frequency of 50\,Hz and a typical rms amplitude between 20 and 50 mas. The cause of this vibration is not yet established, but it is clearly seen in the spectra of the TT signal. This vibration is too fast to be compensated by the TT loop. Fortunately, its contribution to the FWHM resolution is only marginal under normal use of SAM and long exposures. The 50-Hz vibration is a very serious factor in speckle interferometry, forcing to use exposures shorter than 10\,ms and affecting the limiting magnitude. \subsection{Delivered image quality} \label{sec:DIQ} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f9.eps} \vspace{0.5cm} \caption{\label{fig:FA} Atmospheric conditions and FWHM resolution of SAM on 2016 January 17. Series of short-exposure images were recorded with HRCam in the $I$ band, co-added with re-centering, and approximated by a Moffat function. The outlying data points correspond to the data taken in open loop. The black and red curves correspond to the total and free-atmosphere (FA) seeing measured by the site monitor. } \end{figure} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f10.ps} \caption{Cumulative histograms of the free-atmosphere seeing (full line) and SAM FWHM in various filters for eight nights in January, February, and September 2013. The medians are 0\farcs52 for both the FA seeing and the FWHM in the $I$ or Sloan $i'$ bands, while the median FWHM in $R$ or $r'$ is 0\farcs63 and the median FWHM in $V$ or $g'$ is 0\farcs70. \label{fig:diq} } \end{figure} \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f11.eps} \caption{Image of the M5 globular cluster taken on 2013 March 2 (six 10-s exposures in the $I$ filter, median-combined). The square fragments of 12\arcsec ~size in the corners and in the center of the image demonstrate the stability of the PSF over the entire field (the FWHM measured on several stars in each fragment is indicated). \label{fig:M5} } \vspace{0.1cm} \end{figure} The gain over natural seeing brought by SAM is quantified by several metrics: by the FWHM resolution and its uniformity over the field, by the PSF profile and its variation, and by the increased energy concentration. The normalized rotationally-symmetric PSF $I(r)$ is frequently approximated by the Moffat function \begin{equation} I(r) = [1 + (a r)^2]^{-\beta} \label{eq:Moffat} \end{equation} with two parameters $a$ and $\beta$; the FWHM is $ (2 \sqrt {2^{1/\beta} -1})/a$. The case $\beta=1$ corresponds to the Lorentz profile, whereas the seeing profile under Kolmogorov turbulence is well modeled by $\beta \approx 4.77$. The SAM PSF under good compensation corresponds to $\beta \approx 1.5$, in agreement with its predicted shape (see \S~\ref{sec:req} above). Compared to the seeing-limited PSF, it has a sharper core and stronger wings. The gain of SAM depends on the metrics used and cannot be expressed by a single number. Here we quantify it by the FWHM resolution. If SAM improves it by a factor of 2, the gain in the central PSF intensity is about 2.8 times, while the half-energy diameter is reduced only by $\sim$1.5 times compared to the seeing. The FWHM resolution at long wavelengths (e.g. in the $I$ band) closely follows the free-atmosphere (FA) seeing measured by the MASS instrument (Figure~\ref{fig:FA}). According to \citet{TT06}, the median FA seeing at Cerro Pach\'on is 0\farcs40. At shorter wavelengths, the gain in resolution over seeing is less because the compensation order of SAM is not high enough. Still, the resolution gain in the $R$ and $V$ bands remains substantial. However, when the total seeing is dominated by the high-altitude turbulence, SAM brings no improvement because it does not sense this high turbulence. Turbulence sensing by SAM decreases with distance progressively and turbulence at, say, 0.5\,km is compensated to some extent, but the compensation is always partial because of the finite AO order, servo lag, and noise. So, the resulting SAM performance depends on a number of factors. However, the simplistic rule of thumb that SAM resolution is almost always close to the FA seeing turned out to be remarkably good in practice, as demonstrated by plots similar to Figure~\ref{fig:FA} that appear in \citep{AO4ELT3,Tok14}. Figure~\ref{fig:diq} shows cumulative distributions of the FWHM in several filters in eight nights during three SAM runs in 2013, under a variety of turbulence conditions. Each point is a median FWHM of all stellar sources in one closed-loop exposure, not corrected to zenith. The histogram of the FA sesing at zenith measured by MASS, matched in time to the SAM exposures, is plotted for comparison. The FWHM in the $I$ or $i'$ filters (214 estimates) equals the FA seeing in $\sim$80\% of the exposures, with the same median of 0\farcs52. The remaining 20\% are affected by very poor total seeing and, for deep exposures, by semi-resolved distant galaxies which bias the median FWHM estimates to larger values. On the other hand, the 53 exposures in H$\alpha$ taken under a median FA seeing of 0\farcs32 have a median FWHM of 0\farcs35. The uniformity of correction over the $3'$ field depends on the atmospheric conditions. Both the uncorrected high turbulence and the well-corrected ground layer do not cause PSF variation in the field, but the partially corrected turbulence in the ``gray zone'' (at a few hundred meters) leads to the non-uniformity, with a better resolution on-axis \citep{Tok04}. This phenomenon is actually observed,\footnote{See Figure 21 in the SAM Commissioning Report, \url{ http://www.ctio.noao.edu/soar/sites/default/files/SAM/archive/ samrep.pdf}. } but in general the FWHM is very uniform over the field and rarely degrades by more than a few percent towards the edge (Figure~\ref{fig:M5}). For the $I$-band data presented in Figure~\ref{fig:diq}, we modeled the FWHM dependence on the distance from the CCD center by a linear function and found that the median linear coefficient is zero, within errors. The uniformity becomes even better at shorter wavelengths where the resolution gain becomes smaller. In principle, the resolution should depend on the distance from the TT star(s), but this effect has not been studied on the real data. \section{Science operation of SAM} \label{sec:sci} SAM has been fully commissioned by the end of 2013. Some scientific results have already been obtained by that time using commissioning data \citep{Fraga2013}. Since the 2013B semester, SAM was offered in a shared-risk mode, and its science verification (SV) program was executed in 2014. Regular observing proposals for SAM are accepted since the 2014B semester. Like other SOAR instruments, SAM can be operated remotely from La Serena or from other location with a fast enough network connection. \subsection{Operational sequence} \label{sec:oper} SAM is scheduled classically for specific nights, preferably grouped in runs (the instrument is switched off between the runs but stays on the telescope). Before each run, the SAM scientist starts the software and makes daytime tests following the standard checklist. This procedure has been successful in detecting hardware or software problems, leaving time for their fixes. For example, failures of the line transformer in the high-voltage DM driver, failed motor-control boards, or a stuck motor shaft. When possible, SAM is tested during engineering nights a few days before the science runs. Fortunately, we have not yet lost any significant night time to SAM failures. The filters in SAMI are installed by the telescope operators during daytime, as in other SOAR instruments. SAMI can use either 4$\times$4 inch square filters in a wheel with 5 positions or 3$\times$3 inch filters in another 7-slot wheel. The limited number of filters restricts sometimes the number of science programs that can be executed with SAMI on any given night. The overhead time, from the start of the telescope slew on a new target to closing all four loops, can be as short as 5 minutes, with 7 minutes being typical. Most of this time is spent for acquisition of guide stars. Owing to the small 3\arcsec ~field of the GPs, the exact telescope pointing is determined by pre-imaging with SAMI; a star with known coordinates must be identified in this image to compute the pointing offset. {\it All} science targets observed so far had guide stars down to the $R=18$ limit, i.e. the SAM has a complete sky coverage. Such a star gives $\sim$60 counts per 10-ms cycle of the TT loop. The SAM {\it observing tool} (OT) is a custom IDL software that helps formatting the target lists for the LCH, but also allows pre-selection of guide stars and loading DSS2 images in the 5$\times$5 arcmin field to assist in field identification. Guide stars pre-selected in the OT can be fed to the SAM software and used alongside with the catalogs. When the TT loop is closed, the SAM operator opens the laser shutter and acquires the LGS. For LGS centering, the un-gated LGS image is captured by the WFS acquisition camera. The LLT electronics is powered on and the LGS is centered, compensating for differential flexure between the LLT and SOAR optical axes (typically less than 10\arcsec). Then the LGS tilt loop is closed, and the high-order loop is closed as well (the LLT electronics is powered off automatically at this time by the script). The LGS acquisition is straightforward and takes less than a minute. If the telescope slew was small, the laser photons reach the WFS without re-centering the LLT, in which case the two LGS loops are closed within a few seconds. Experience shows that SAM often remains operational with a light cirrus clouds because the LGS is located below the clouds. Time remaining until the next LCH interrupt is displayed in the ICSOFT. A few seconds before the interrupt, the LGS loops are opened automatically, while the science exposure is normally paused by the observer. The SAM operator closes the laser loops manually after the interrupt. The first target of the night is usually used to check the relative focus between SAM WFS and SAMI. The focus might change because of temperature or because of SAMI filters of non-standard thickness, although it was found to be quite stable. To test the focus, two short exposures are taken with closed AO loop and WFS defocused by $\pm$4\,mm from the nominal. The SAM PSF should be enlarged by the same amount if the nominal focus is correct. Otherwise, the correct focus setting of the WFS stage is found by linear interpolation between bracketing exposures. SAM can operate in open loop, without laser. In such case, the DM is flattened passively. The LGS, if available, still helps to focus the telescope in open loop by measuring the focus term and nulling it by adjusting the telescope focus. Open-loop operation happens when the image quality is not critical or for targets that are not in the LCH list (e.g. photometric standards). \subsection{Projects done with SAM} \label{sec:prj} During 2014, SAM received only a small number of proposals, but its use has steadily increased in 2015, making it the second most popular instrument at SOAR. \begin{figure}[ht] \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f12.eps} \caption{Images of the gravitational arcs in the galaxy cluster Abel~370 from SDSS, HST, and SAM. The SAM images were taken on 2013 September 29, 2013. Five 5-minute exposures in the SDSS $i'$ and $r'$ filters each are median-combined and presented as a false-color image with a FWHM resolution of 0\farcs5. \label{fig:arcs} } \end{figure*} By concentrating the light of stars in a smaller number of pixels, SAM reduces photometric errors in dense stellar fields dominated by confusion \citep{Olsen}. The gain in sensitivity in such case is proportional to the central intensity of the PSF. The first science paper produced by SAM presented the color-magnitude diagram of the globular cluster NGC~6496 \citep{Fraga2013}. The FWHM resolution in these early commissioning data of 2012 May was excellent, reaching 0\farcs25 in the $I$ band. However, it was not uniform over the field, showing an asymmetry likely related to the wind direction (the SAM loop worked then with a low frequency of 233\,Hz). Despite this, accurate photometry was possible by fitting field-dependent PSF with DAOPHOT. Presently, J.~Santos (Brazil) is conducting a large survey of globular clusters in the Magellanic Clouds, exploiting the potential of SAM in crowded fields; eight nights in the 2015B semester were used successfully. \citet{Salinas2016} discovered new variable stars in globular clusters with SAM. SAM can help in resolving close binary stars, especially the faint ones beyond the reach of speckle interferometry. The survey of faint low-mass companions to nearby stars has revealed one new 0\farcs2 binary \citep{Tok14}. However, for binary stars the ``detection power'' of SAM in terms of resolution and dynamic range is inferior to the classical AO in the infrared or to speckle interferometry. Combination of speckle interferometry with laser-enhanced seeing is a promising technique. It was used in 2015 May for the survey of {\it Kepler-2} field \citep{Kepler}. SAM worked with the laser, but without guiding. Series of short-exposure images were re-centered and combined offline; the median FWHM resolution of the re-centered images was 0\farcs43. Binarity of targets as faint as $I=15$ mag could be probed down to 0\farcs15 separation by the speckle image processing. This technique was used again in 2016 January to discover young low-mass binaries in Orion, in a project led by C.~Brice\~no. The FA seeing was better than in May and the FWHM resolution of re-centered images reached 0\farcs25 (Figure~\ref{fig:FA}). Several programs on emission-line objects are planned using SAMI with narrow-band filters. The Herbig-Haro jet HH~46/47 in the S[II] narrow-band filter was observed with SAM on 2015 February 14, yielding a FWHM resolution of 0\farcs45. Continued observations with SAM use a combination of custom narrow-band filters to probe physical conditions in the jets. The team of A. Ardila observed with SAM nearby galaxies NGC~1232 and NGC~1482 in the H$\alpha$ band to study star-formation regions with high spatial resolution. The data are still being analyzed, while nice images resulting from this effort were generated with a resolution twice better than in the image of NGC~1232 from the VLT press release. During three nights in 2015 SAM worked with a Fabry-Perot (F-P) etalon inserted in its collimated beam after the ADC, on a translation stage \citep{FP}. The existing F-P etalon with a spectral resolution of about 11\,000 just fits in the available space, with 1-mm gaps on both sides. Selection of one F-P order is done by the interference filters in the SAMI wheel. This project is led by C.~Mendez de Oliveira and P.~Amram. To overcome the SAMI readout noise, the binning of 4$\times$4 (pixels of 0\farcs18) was used. Some science verification programs intended to use SAM for detecting faint nebulae around stars. In this area, SAM has no advantage over other ground-based imagers; it concentrates the light in the core of the PSF but does not reduce its wings. SAM is well suited for high-resolution imaging of faint deep-space objects. Here its complete sky coverage and a moderately wide 3\arcmin ~field play an essential role. D.~Murphy used SAM in 2013 for two nights to get a very deep high-resolution image of a peculiar galaxy in a cluster, apparently affected by recent interaction \citep{Skidmark}. Spectacular images of thin gravitational arcs produced by lensing distant galaxies were obtained with SAM during its commissioning (Figure~\ref{fig:arcs}). No proposals for continuing this effort have been accepted so far. However, the program by V.~Motta was started in 2015 December and continues in 2016. Her team took high-resolution images of lensed quasar candidates revealed in a wide-field survey. This is an excellent example of the future use of SAM, where it will complement wide-angle surveys by studying interesting objects with higher spatial and/or spectral resolution. Yet another promising application of SAM will be to study globular clusters (GCs) in other galaxies. Even a small gain in resolution over seeing might be critical here to distinguish GCs from stars. Results in this area are reported by \citet{Salinas2015}. \section{Summary and outlook} \label{sec:sum} The crucial role of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) in astronomy, despite its moderate 2.4-m size, demonstrates the need of high angular resolution at optical wavelengths, so far not provided by ground-based AO instruments. The resolution delivered by SAM is still much inferior to the resolution of the HST, which continues to be the facility of choice. The advantages of SAM compared to the HST are its accessibility and the larger telescope aperture, hence the larger number of collected photons. When very faint objects are observed in narrow spectral bands, the minimum size of the resolution element may be set by the need to collect enough photons. In this situation, SAM is preferable to the HST. Its recent use with narrow-band filters and Fabry-Perot nicely illustrates this aspect. Under good seeing, current AO instruments designed to work in the IR could provide substantial resolution gain in the red part of the visible spectrum, e.g. at H$\alpha$. However, their use at optical wavelengths is not envisioned and sometimes is impossible because of dichroics in the science path or the lack of optical instruments. This situation, presently to the advantage of SAM, is slowly evolving. The MUSE instrument at the VLT \citep{MUSE} will operate with partial seeing correction at visible wavelengths over a 1\arcmin ~field using four sodium lasers. The ARGOS AO system at the LBT \citep{ARGOS} will implement GLAO with green Rayleigh lasers and will work in the IR. The potential of SAM will be fully exploited when its high spatial resolution is combined with spectroscopy. This is already happening when SAM is used with F-P. A multislit spectrometer for SAM is being developed by \citet{Robberto2016}. This instrument, SAMOS, will use a commercial digital micromirror device (DMD) as a software-configurable multislit mask. The spectral resolution between 2000 and 8000 is envisioned. The SAMOS science targets are faint extragalactic and stellar objects where the increased spatial resolution brings a gain in sensitivity against the sky background, in addition to probing small spatial details and reducing source confusion. The SAM instrument designed more than 10 years ago is technologically obsolete. Using modern electron multiplication CCD detectors with a fast gating, a higher-order wavefront sensing is feasible with the same laser power. If the DM is replaced by a new device with a larger actuator count, the increased compensation order will improve image correction at shorter wavelengths, in the green and blue spectral regions, bringing it closer to the SAM performance in the $I$ band. Future upgrade of SAM along these lines will be decided based on its popularity and availability of funds. \acknowledgments Many people working at CTIO and SOAR have contributed to the creation of SAM. Apart from the authors, the non-exhaustive list of major participants in this project includes B.~Gregory, S.~Heathcote, E.~Mondaca, A.~Montan\'e, W. Naudy Cort\'es, F.~Delgado, O.~Estay. F.~Collao, R.~Rivera, D.~Sprayberry. The initial optical design of SAM by V.~Terebizh and sharing of the AO code by Ch.~Keller helped us to start the SAM project in 2002. Consultations with M.~Hart and T.~Stalcup are gratefully acknowledged. The efforts of other experts in astronomical AO who reviewed the SAM project must not be forgotten. S.~Potanin helped at a critical moment by fabricating the LLT mirror while major optical vendors refused to bid. The SOAR crew (E.~Serrano, G.~Gomez, G.~Dubo and others) supported SAM installation, commissioning, and operation. Referee's comments helped to improve this article.
\section{Introduction} \subsection{Star Formation in the Large Magellanic Cloud} \noindent Massive stars have a profound impact on galaxies. Their great luminosities and intense ionizing radiation change the thermodynamic state of the surrounding interstellar medium (ISM) \citep{blak87, krau13}, their strong stellar winds compress the ISM \citep{lada85, heck90, kudr00, hopk12}, and their explosive ends enrich it with heavy elements \citep{woos95, woos02, hege03}. Massive star formation is not a scaled up version of low-mass star formation. Formation of low-mass stars have been studied in detail within the Milky Way \citep[e.g.,][]{krou93, xue08, heid10, kafl14}. The intense radiation from high-mass stars has a significant effect on the surrounding medium as well as limits the accretion rate onto a high-mass protostar. Low-mass stars have very little gravitational effect on the surrounding gas or on other nearby stars. Massive stars play a more important role in defining the dynamics on the stellar cluster in which they reside: they can steal material from other stars (competitive accretion) \citep{tan14}. Massive stars have stellar winds and high ultraviolet radiation pressures that may trigger further star formation in nearby regions, which low-mass stars cannot do. \\ \\ The Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) provides an opportunity to study star formation at reduced metallicity of Z $\approx$ 0.5 $\mathrm{Z_{\odot}}$ \citep{west97}. The nearly face-on viewing angle provides a unique view of resolved stellar populations without the confusion and extinction of the Galactic plane. Extinction to young stellar objects (YSOs) is nearly all associated with the star-forming region itself. Also, unlike in the Galaxy where distances are ambiguous, the distance to the LMC is well-determined (50 kpc, \citet{feas99}), leading to robust luminosity determinations. The recent discoveries of thousands of YSO candidates in the LMC provides an opportunity to study massive star formation in both a statistical and detailed way \citep{meix06, whit08, seal09, chen10, carl12, meix13, seal14}. \citet{fuku15.1} study previously identified YSO candidates in the N159 region of the LMC, and related the known YSO candidates to $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ ALMA observations of molecular gas. One of the young, massive YSO candidates in N159 is suspected to have formed via filamentary collision. \citet{fuku15.2} look at two molecular clouds colliding in RCW 38, a young super star cluster in the Milky Way. The collision between two filaments in RCW 38 has lead to the formation of 20 O stars. Colliding filaments is one theory on how high-mass stars form. Another theory is based on competitive accretion. Star formation surveys show that the majority of low-mass, more evolved YSOs are found in clusters \citep{lada93}. \citet{bonn01} simulate 100 stars in a cluster and find stars located at the centers of clusters accrete more gas than those at the outskirts. Competitive accretion is highly non-uniform and depends on the initial mass of the star as well as the star's position in the cluster. \\ \\ Previous observations, theories, and simulations all suggest the molecular gas structure is connected to the formation of high-mass stars \citep{gold11}. In this paper we will discuss the impact of molecular gas and dust on massive star formation and make comments on how our results relate to previously observed thresholds necessary for high-mass star formation to occur. \subsection{Star Formation and Molecular Clumps in 30 Doradus} \noindent The 30 Doradus region, a.k.a. the Tarantula Nebula, provides a unique opportunity to study star formation over a range of masses and its feedback on the environment. 30 Doradus is one of the most active star formation regions in the Magellanic Clouds and the only Giant HII region in the Local group. At the heart of 30 Doradus is R136, the super star cluster with extraordinarily high stellar densities of $\textgreater 1.5 \times 10^{4}-10^{7}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-3}}$ \citep{selm13}, containing the most massive stars known \citep{crow10}. Combining data from the \textit{Spitzer} SAGE survey \citep{meix06}, the \textit{Herschel} Heritage survey \citep{meix13}, and the Hubble Tarantula Treasury Project (HTTP) \citep{sabb13, sabb16} we can study young and massive YSOs and low-mass and more evolved YSOs over the bulk of the mass function ($0.5 - 35\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$). Studying both low-mass and high-mass stars that are located in the same low-metallicity region can shed some light on the conditions necessary for star formation to occur. \\ \\ The 30 Doradus region has been previously investigated in the tracers of the interstellar medium (ISM) that fuel the star formation. The dust content has been measured and quantified with the analysis of \textit{Spitzer} SAGE \citep{meix06} and \textit{Herschel} HERITAGE \citep{meix13} surveys by \citet{gord14}. $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (1-0) has been imaged as part of whole LMC surveys at $2.6^{\prime}$ with NANTEN \citep{fuku08} and at $45^{\prime\prime}$ with MOPRA \citep{wong11}. $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (1-0), (2-1), and (3-2) have been observed in 30 Doradus by SEST \citep{joha98}. \\ \\ ALMA observations of $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1), $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1), and $\mathrm{C^{18}O}$ (2-1) clumps have been analyzed by \citet{inde13}. The $\mathrm{CO}$ observed in 30 Doradus is very clumpy, similar to that observed in the Milky Way. Analysis of the ALMA data shows a decrease in $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) emission relative to the total gas mass compared to massive star formation regions in the Milky Way, consistent with theory: there is less shielding in a lower-metallicity environment and $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) is not well shielded in comparison to $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ gas. High density gas tracers such as $\mathrm{HCN}$ (1-0) and $\mathrm{HCO^{+}}$ (1-0) show clumps in 30 Doradus have similar, but slightly larger linewidths than other regions in the LMC \citep{ande13}. The physical conditions of the gas surrounding the R136 cluster have previously been constrained with ionized gas models \citep{inde09, lope11, pell11}. \citet{inde09} find photodissociated regions (PDRs) dominate over collisional excitation of shocks and that the effects of local hot stars play a more important role in shaping the gas chemistry than large scale trends with distance from the R136 cluster. The hot gas in 30 Doradus may be leaking out of the pores of the HII shells, since the X-ray gas pressure is measured to be much weaker than the radiation pressure \citep{lope11}. $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ gas correlates well with $\mathrm{Br\gamma}$ and $\mathrm{CO}$ in the region, implying that the $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ gas comes from PDRs \citep{yeh15}. Further work on PDR modeling has been done by \citet{chev16} who find 90$\%$ of [CII] emissions originates from PDRs and 70$\%$ of the far infrared luminosity is associated with the ionized gas component. \citet{chev16} conclude that the gas in 30 Doradus is very porous and dominated by photoionization. \\ \\ Our goal in this paper is to conduct a thorough investigation of early stage massive YSOs and later stage low-mass YSOs, and their relation to the clump structure of $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) molecular gas. This comprehensive study of high-mass and low-mass star formation with multi wavelength photometric and spectroscopic observations of molecular gas and dust will help shed light on the physical conditions necessary for high-mass star formation to take place. In Section 2 we describe the observations we use in more detail. In Section 3 we describe the dendrogram program we use to study the hierarchical structure of the clumps. In Section 4 we describe the YSOs in the study in more detail. In Section 5 we discuss the trends we see in molecular gas and how the how star formation is affected by the distribution of molecular gas. Lastly we present our conclusions in Section 6. \section{Observations} \subsection{\textit{Spitzer} Surveying the Agents of Galaxy Evolution (SAGE) and \textit{Herschel} HERschel Inventory of the Agents of Galaxy Evolution (HERITAGE) Surveys} \noindent The SAGE survey imaged the LMC using IRAC (3.6 $\mu$m, 4.5 $\mu$m, 5.8 $\mu$m, 8.0 $\mu$m) and MIPS (24 $\mu$m, 70 $\mu$m, 160 $\mu$m) instruments on the \textit{Spitzer} Space Telescope. One of the primary goals of the SAGE survey was to catalog YSOs in the LMC and study the current star formation rate in the LMC. The \textit{Herschel} Heritage survey used the PACS and SPIRE instruments to image the LMC at 100 $\mu$m, 160 $\mu$m, 250 $\mu$m, 350 $\mu$m, 500 $\mu$m wavelengths in order to study the very cold dust surrounding the deeply embedded YSOs. Several YSO candidates we use in this work have previously been studied by \citet{whit08, grue09, carl12}; and \citet{seal14} who used the \textit{Spitzer} SAGE \citep{meix06} and \textit{Herschel} Heritage \citep{meix13} surveys. \subsection{Hubble Tarantula Treasury Project (HTTP)} \noindent HTTP is a survey of stellar populations in 30 Doradus that reaches into the sub-solar mass regime ($\textless 0.5\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$) \citep{sabb13, sabb16}. The survey includes optical (F555W and F658N with ACS and WFC), infrared (F110W and F160W with WFC3 and IR), and ultraviolet (F257W and F336W with WFC3 and UVIS). In addition, archival monochromatic survey in the F775W filter was used (realized using ACS/WFC and WFC3/UVIS in parallel). HTTP covers a projected area of 14' x 12' in the sky. We focus on the late-stage and more evolved YSOs \citep{sabb16} that are located within the 30 Doradus ALMA footprint \citep{inde13}. \subsection{ALMA $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) Observation} \noindent ALMA allows us to resolve giant molecular clouds (GMCs) at the distance of the LMC with comparable resolution as HST, as well as provides us with high spectral resolution data. The frequency axis of the data is converted to velocity and results in a position-position-velocity (PPV) cube. The ALMA Cycle 0 footprint of 30 Doradus is a small region north of R136 and has been mapped with $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1), $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1), $\mathrm{C^{18}O}$, and $\mathrm{H30\alpha}$ \citep{inde13}. \citet{inde13} analyze the PPV data cubes and calculate mass, velocity, and size of the clumps. Figure ~\ref{fig:d1} shows the HST F160W in greyscale, ALMA+APEX $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) in contour, and the location of the low-mass YSOs. Figure ~\ref{fig:d1} shows the HST F160W in greyscale, ALMA+APEX $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) in contour, and the location of point sources from the SAGE catalog that are in the ALMA footprint. We use the ALMA Cycle 0 combined with APEX single dish observations of $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) made by \citet{inde13} in our analysis. \section{Dendrogram Analysis} \subsection{Astrophysical Motivation for Using Dendrogram Analysis} \noindent The molecular cloud structure determines where star formation occurs and the mass distribution of stars in a cluster. Molecular cloud sizes range several orders of magnitudes: high density parsec size clumps are nested within larger low density clumps that span several tens of parsecs \citep{lada92}. We use dendrograms as a way to study the hierarchical structure of the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) emission from molecular clouds. We define clumps to mean any entity that is bound by an iso-intensity surface. Dendrogram algorithms look for the largest scale sizes first and then for smaller clumps embedded within the larger ones. This is different than previous studies which look at individual clumps and not nested structures. The dendrogram of a PPV data cube is a way to keep track of the iso-intensity surfaces over a range of size scales. If the intensities of a structure are not contiguous, then this structure is split into separate entities. The low-density gas is represented at the bottom of the hierarchical structure in a dendrogram, the starting branch of the structure. This branch connects to other branches and leaves that represent smaller and denser clumps embedded in the low-density media. The leaves and branches correspond to the different volumes in the data cube bounded by a given isosurface level. \\ \\ Dendrogram analysis allows us to relate the low density ISM to the high density clumps in which star formation takes place. This novel approach is different than previous studies where a GMC would be separated into different clumps, however the structure as a whole would not be taken into account. Previous studies using dendrograms find that using this approach can lead to selecting GMCs in an automated way using only physically motivated criteria \citep{roso08}. Clumps in very active star forming regions like the central molecular zone (CMZ) follow the same size-linewidth relation slope as clumps in other Milky Way clouds but are offset higher by a certain factor \citep{shet12}. Clumps with star formation tend to be more massive (for a given radius) than clumps without star formation \citep{kauf10}. With the use of dendrograms we can relate the parent clump (the starting branch of the dendrogram) to the child clumps (the leaves of the dendrogram) and study the contiguous nature that is inherent in the ISM. \subsection{Method} \noindent The \textit{astrodendro} program uses what is known as the clipping method to calculate clump properties from a 2D image or a 3D data cube. The clipping method only accounts for emission above a contour level to be associated with an object, as oppose to extrapolating down to a zero intensity isosurface. The user has to input the minimum value to be considered in the data set, the threshold value that determines if a leaf will be a single entity or not, and the minimum number of pixels for a leaf to be considered a single entity. The larger branch breaks down into leaves depending on the three input criteria. Figure ~\ref{fig:d2a} shows the dendrogram structure of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) column density, Figure ~\ref{fig:d2b} shows how the dendrogram structure relates to the molecular clouds. Figure ~\ref{fig:d3a} shows the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) brightness temperature, Figure ~\ref{fig:d3b} shows the corresponding emission map. The individual dendrogram structures of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) are different because we are looking at two different quantities (column density and brightness temperature) and because of optical depth effects. The dendrogram structures highlighted in Figures ~\ref{fig:d2b} and ~\ref{fig:d3b} were chosen in order to illustrate how branches and leaves translate to an image map. The \textit{astrodendro} program outputs the total integrated luminosity of an isosurface (a.k.a. clump), the linewidth ($\mathrm{v_{RMS}}$) of the clump, and the area of the clump, the effective radius of the clump, and the orientation angle of the clump. These properties can be used to calculate relevant astrophysical properties such as the column density or mass. \subsection{Results from Dendrogram Analysis of $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) Emission in 30 Doradus} \noindent The most dominant molecular species in the ISM is $\mathrm{H_{2}}$. Unfortunately $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ does not have any dipole moment, all of the low energy transitions are quadrupole transitions with small transition probabilities and high excitation energies. This means that the $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ is excited at high temperatures or in the vicinity of strong ultraviolet radiation. The most abundant molecule in the ISM is invisible to direct observation since the majority of ISM conditions cannot excite it. The second most abundant molecule in the ISM is CO and is frequently used to estimate the $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ gas mass via a conversion factor. \citet{lero11} find the $\mathrm{^{12}CO-to-H_{2}}$ conversion factor (or the X-factor) in the LMC to be $3-9\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}\;(K\;km\;s^{-1})^{-1}}$ in the local group which includes: M21, M33, the LMC, NGC 6822, and the SMC. The $\mathrm{M_{mol}}$/F($\mathrm{^{12}CO}\;1-0$) X-factor of 30 Doradus is higher than the average X-factor in the LMC: \citet{inde13} compare the calculated molecular mass to the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) intensity and find that the X-factor is $12 \pm 4\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}\;(K\;km\;s^{-1})^{-1}}$. We calculate the brightness temperature integrated over the velocity for $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and use a X-factor of $12 \pm 4\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}\;(K\;km\;s^{-1})^{-1}}$. The total mass of all dendrogram branches in Figure ~\ref{fig:d3a} is $1.3 \pm 0.4 \times 10^{5}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$. Table 1 lists the mass of the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) clumps. \\ \\ Table 2 lists column density and mass values we obtain on the $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps. The equations we used to convert the $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) column density to the $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ mass can be found in Appendix A. We use a $\mathrm{H_{2}/^{13}CO}$ abundance ratio of $5 \times 10^{6}$ to convert the $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ column density to the $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ column density, the same abundance factor that was used by \citet{inde13}. The total $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ mass we obtain by summing up the masses of each dendrogram trunk in Figure ~\ref{fig:d2a} is $6.7 \times 10^{4}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$. The mass estimated from $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) in this work are consistent with each other as well as those estimated by \citet{inde13} using dust continuum emission ($6.0 \pm 1.0 \times 10^{4}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$) and LTE analysis of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) ($6.8 \times 10^{4}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$). \section{Massive YSOs and Low-Mass YSOs} \noindent The molecular clump sizes range from 0.2 - 1.4 $\mathrm{pc}$. To trace star formation at this scale we need an inventory of the forming stars. We use recent surveys (HTTP, \textit{Spitzer} SAGE, \textit{Herschel} HERITAGE) to make a catalog of all the low-mass and massive YSOs. We define the stage of the YSO candidates in our sample by the following: Stage 0/I objects have $\mathrm{\frac{{\dot{M}_{env}}}{M_{star}}} \textgreater 10^{-6}\;\mathrm{yr^{-1}}$, Stage II objects are those that have $\mathrm{\frac{{\dot{M}_{env}}}{M_{star}}} \textless 10^{-6}\;\mathrm{yr^{-1}}$ and $\mathrm{\frac{M_{disk}}{M_{star}}} \textgreater 10^{-6}$, and Stage III objects have $\mathrm{\frac{{\dot{M}_{env}}}{M_{star}}} \textless 10^{-6}\;\mathrm{yr^{-1}}$ and $\mathrm{\frac{M_{disk}}{M_{star}}} \textless 10^{-6}$ \citep{robi06, robi07, chen10}. \subsection{Stage III Low-Mass YSOs} \noindent Stage III low-mass YSOs are usually identified by their location in an optical color-magnitude diagram, which leads to two problems: 1) contamination by older field stars and the effects of differential extinction that may lead to an overestimate of the actual number of candidates 2) older YSOs that are close to the main sequence (MS) cannot be identified accurately \citep{dema11.1}. An alternate method of looking for Stage III low-mass YSOs is by H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess from accretion shocks \citep{dema11.1}. Strong and fast variability of the H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ line intensity has been detected spectroscopically \citep[e.g.,][]{fern95, reip96, smit99, alen01, alen05, sous16} that can move a star above and below our 10 Angstrom equivalent width threshold in a few days and sometimes in a few hours. Comparing observations of the SN 1987A field taken at 3 different epochs \citep{roma98, pana00} revealed that the number of stars that have strong H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess is essentially the same at all epochs, but only about about 1/3 of them are that strong at all epochs. This suggests a duty cycle of about 1/3. An ongoing study of the PMS stars in NGC 346, based on the original work of \citet{dema11.2, dema11.3} revealed that the number of H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ strong PMS stars in the `classical' region of the color magnitude diagram (CMD) (i.e. stars brighter and redder than the MS) are between 1/3 and 2/3 of all the stars in the same region (De Marchi $\&$ Panagia, private communication). Note that in the case of NGC 346 the reddening is not so high ($\mathrm{A_{v}} \approx 0.5$) and, therefore, there is no serious problem of contamination in that region of the CMD. All those elements taken together suggest that the duty cycle of relatively young PMS stars (those still above and redder than the MS) should be of the order of 1/3. \\ \\ We have used the HTTP catalog \citep{sabb16} to select the low-mass Stage III YSO candidates with H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess within the ALMA footprint using the stringent selection criteria as defined by \citet{dema11.1}. In particular, all selected stars must have uncertainties lower than 0.1 mag in each of the V, I and H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ bands, simultaneously. Furthermore, they must display V-H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excesses higher than the 4$\mathrm{\sigma}$ level as compared to stars of the same V-I color. There are 87 stars that meet the above criteria and are located within the ALMA footprint. \\ \\ Figures ~\ref{fig:d4a} and ~\ref{fig:d4b} shows the F160W versus F110W - F160W color-magnitude diagram (CMD) with isochrones and mass evolutionary tracks overplotted. We plot isochrones and mass evolutionary tracks taken from the Padova code \citep{bres12, chen15} on these figures. For our purposes we use Milky Way extinction of $\mathrm{A_{v}}=0.06$ and metallicity of $\mathrm{Z}=0.008$ to redden the Padova isochrones to their location in the LMC. In addition we use the local extinction of 30 Doradus as calculated by \citet{dema16} to de-redden the low-mass YSOs. The majority of stars fall between $10^{5} - 10^{7}\;\mathrm{yrs}$ isochrones and $1 - 3\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ mass evolutionary tracks. Table 3 lists the approximate masses of these low-mass YSOs. These masses were calculated by the best fit mass evolutionary track from F160W versus F110W - F160W for each source. When we check these mass estimates with the best fit mass evolutionary track to F775W versus F555W - F775W for each source, we find that 75$\%$ of the masses do not match. The masses from the best fit evolutionary track to F775W versus F555W - F775W are always lower than those from F160W versus F110W - F160W. We choose the near infrared CMD mass evolution tracks to determine the mass because these wavelengths are not as contaminated from extinction as optical bands. All masses of low-mass YSOs have an uncertainty of $\pm 0.25\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$. This is due to the the $0.5\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ spacing between the mass evolutionary track (Figure ~\ref{fig:d4b}). \\ \\ We are not complete in our catalog of low-mass YSOs due to the H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ duty cycle - selection of low-mass YSOs by H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess means at any given time we can observe 1/3 of the stars. Selecting the low-mass YSOs by H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess means that we are targeting Stage III objects. Figure ~\ref{fig:d7} shows a histogram of all massive and low-mass YSO star masses. The majority of low-mass YSOs in our analysis are $3\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$. We do not select any Stage I or Stage II low-mass YSO candidates. This is the result of our bias towards selecting low-mass Stage III YSOs by H$\mathrm{\alpha}$ excess. \subsection{Stage I Massive YSOs} \subsubsection{Overview} \noindent We include massive YSO stage I candidates found by \citet{grue09} and \citet{seal09, seal14} in our study. There are no massive stage I YSO candidates from \citet{whit08} that are found in the ALMA CO footprint. \citet{grue09, whit08} implements color cuts of different kinds, \citet{seal09} was a spectroscopic follow-up of \citet{grue09} sources, and \citet{walb13} study 10 Spitzer selected YSOs in 30 Doradus in more detail in order to provide mass estimates of these objects. \citet{seal09} use \textit{Spitzer} IRS spectra and group YSO candidates in six categories. The S Group objects have silicate absorption features including the 10 $\mu$m absorption feature and sometimes including the 18 $\mu$m absorption feature, the SE Group objects have both silicate absorption features (similar to S Group) and strong fine-structure emission lines, the P group objects have strong PAH features, the PE group objects have strong PAH and fine-structure line emission, the E group contain sources that only have very strong fine-structure emission lines, and the F group all other sources whose spectra looks similar to that of a YSO but they do not fit any of the above criteria. \\ \\ We look at all point source objects in the SAGE catalog that are in the ALMA footprint of 30 Doradus to see if any possible massive YSO candidates were missed by previous galaxy wide studies because of stringent cuts. There are 6 YSO candidates that have previously been identified: J84.703995-69.079110, J84.699755-69.069803, J84.688990-69.084695, J84.695173-69.084857, J84.726173-69.082254, and J84.720292-69.077084. And there are 9 point sources in the ALMA footprint that have not been studied before: J84.695932-69.083807, J84.688372-69.078168, J84.669113-69.081638, J84.674734-69.077374, J84.709403-69.075682, J84.688168-69.071013, J84.694286-69.074499, J84.676469-69.082774, and J84.671132-69.077168. We fit these sources to the \citet{robi06, robi07} spectral energy distribution (SED) fitter. We develop a code which we use in conjunction with the \citet{robi06} SED fitter. This code outputs the maximum likelihood of the YSO parameters such as mass, luminosity, accretion rate, and associated 1$\mathrm{\sigma}$ errors. Tables 4 and 5 list the near infrared and far infrared photometry we used. For candidates with no PACS or SPIRE photometry we use the upper limit in each far infrared band as given in Table 6 of \citet{meix13}. We assume the 6 previously identified YSO candidates are real candidates. For the 9 new point sources in the Spitzer footprint that have not been previously studied we require the reduced $\mathrm{\chi^{2}}$ of the best fit YSO SED to be less than 10 and the reduced $\mathrm{\chi^{2}}$ of the best fit stellar photosphere to be greater than 10. If an object is a good match to a YSO SED and not a good match to a reddened stellar photosphere SED, then we say it is a YSO candidate. With this definition we identify 4 new YSO candidates: J84.695932-69.083807, J84.688372-69.078168, J84.669113-69.081638, and J84.674734-69.077374. There are 5 \textit{Spitzer} point sources that do not meet our $\mathrm{\chi^{2}}$ criteria: J84.709403-69.075682, J84.688168-69.071013, J84.694286-69.074499, J84.676469-69.082774 and J84.671132-69.077168. We look at the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) map and find that the emission at the location of these 5 sources is less than $3\mathrm{\sigma}$. Figures ~\ref{fig:d5} shows SEDs of all YSO candidates. Figure ~\ref{fig:d6} shows spectra for 3 massive YSO candidates. \\ \\ \citet{carl12} also used multi-color cuts, but included more of a grey zone with $\mathrm{\alpha}$ and $\mathrm{\beta}$ cuts to include bluer sources at a lower reliability in comparison to \citet{grue09}. The \citet{carl12} cuts are based on \textit{Spitzer} IRAC (3.6 $\mu$m, 4.5 $\mu$m, 5.8 $\mu$m, 8.0 $\mu$m) and MIPS (24 $\mu$m) color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs). The $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria can be applied to galaxy-wide surveys and has a low contamination rate. Applying $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cuts selects the most massive and luminous YSOs. The $\mathrm{\beta}$ cut criteria should be applied to star-forming regions with less contamination from background sources, where it is more likely the cuts will select a YSO. Figure ~\ref{fig:d8} shows [3.6] versus [3.5]-[5.8] CMD. YSO candidates numbered 1, 3, 4, and 7 have been previously studied \citep{grue09, seal09, seal14}. These four YSO candidates meet the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria (all located to the right of the orange line). YSO candidates 2, 5, 8, and 10 have not been previously identified. YSO candidate 8 meets the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. YSO candidates 2, 5, and 10 meet the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\beta}$ cut criteria. The YSO numbering refers to ranking from most massive to least massive YSO, as given in Table 6. \\ \\ The 6 previously identified YSO candidates and the 4 new YSO candidates in this work are all Stage I objects as given by the peak of the likelihood distribution of $\mathrm{\frac{\dot{M_{env}}}{M_{star}}}$. Our goal is to find out how massive star formation relates to molecular clumps. Even though we are most likely missing many later stage low-mass YSOs, our catalog of massive Stage I YSO candidates (objects $\textgreater 8\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ in Figure ~\ref{fig:d7}) is complete. \\ \\ In addition to Stage, we can characterize the SED by Type. \citet{chen10} conduct an empirical analysis by looking at the shape of the SEDs to classify it by Type: Type I YSOs have SEDs with a steady rise in the near infrared and a high peak at 8-24 $\mu$m, Type II YSOs have low peak in the optical and a peak in the near infrared as well, Type III have SEDs peaking in the optical with some peak in the near or mid infrared wavelengths. There is correlation between Type I and Stage I YSOs, because these objects are deeply embedding within a molecular cloud. However there is little to no correlation between the any other Type and Stage classification. Below we list each of the YSO candidates in this study and describe the SED morphology in more detail. \subsubsection{Details of Each YSO Candidate in Order of Most Massive to Least Massive} \noindent J84.703995-69.079110: This massive YSO candidate in our work is located in the central, most massive clump as can be seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:d1}. The spectra for this source is shown in the top panel of Figure ~\ref{fig:d6}. This YSO candidate is in the PE group \citep{seal09}. There is a silicon absorption feature visible, as well as strong PAH and fine-structure line emission. There is a steep rise in the SED as shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:d5}, and a peak in the mid infrared. This object is a Type I YSO. This object also meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. \citet{walb13} find there are two water masers associated with this object and the spectral type of the object is O2. \\ \\ J84.695932-69.083807: This second most massive YSO candidate is located in clump 13 ($\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clump as listed in Table 1), as well as clumps 14 and 25. This object also meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\beta}$ cut criteria. There is a shallow rise from the near infrared to the far infrared wavelengths in the SED, therefore we say this is a Type II YSO. This object along with J84.695173-69.084857 is a double source and labeled as IRSN 122 and IRSN 126 by \citet{rubi08}. \\ \\ J84.699755-69.069803: The SED of the YSO candidate shows a steep rise in the IRAC bands, therefore we say this is a Type I YSO. This object also meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. \citet{walb13} find this object to be a bright source surrounded by a cluster of faint sources, and the entire cluster is surrounded by a thick annulus of emission in the \textit{Spitzer}/MIPS 24$\mathrm{\mu m}$ image. \\ \\ J84.688990-69.084695: \citet{seal09} categorize this object to be in the PE group. The spectra is shown in the central panel of Figure ~\ref{fig:d6}. There is no silicon absorption feature, however there are strong PAH and fine-structure line emission features. A lack of silicon absorption may mean this candidate is more evolved that the other two YSO candidates that have spectra in our work(J84.703995-69.079110 and J84.720292-69.077084). This YSO candidate is located inside clump 8 ($\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clump as listed in Table 1). There is a double peak in the SED of this object, with one peak in the near infrared and the other peak in the far infrared. Therefore we classify this objects as a Type II YSO candidate. his object also meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. \\ \\ J84.695173-69.084857: This YSO candidate is located inside clump 15 ($\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clump as listed in Table 1). This object meets \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ and $\mathrm{\beta}$ cut criteria. There is a shallow rise from the near infrared to the far infrared wavelengths in the SED, therefore we say this is a Type II YSO. This object and J84.695932-69.083807 are part of a double source as studied by \citet{walb13}. \\ \\ J84.726173-69.082254: The SED of the YSO candidate shows a steep rise in the IRAC bands, therefore we say this is a Type I YSO. \\ \\ J84.720292-69.077084: This object is in the PE group \citep{seal09}. The spectra shown in the bottom panel of Figure ~\ref{fig:d6} shown silicon absorption, PAH emission, and fine-structure line emission. This YSO candidate is located inside clump 9 ($\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clump as listed in Table 1). There is a steep rise in the SED as shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:d5}, and a peak in the far infrared. This object is a Type I YSO. This objects meets \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. \citet{walb13} find a water maser near this object. \\ \\ J84.688372-69.078168: This YSO candidate is located within $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps 29 and 30. This object also meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. This YSO is Type I YSO due to the prominent peak of the SED in mid infrared wavelengths. There is a steep rise in the SED as shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:d5}, and a peak in the far infrared. This object is a Type I YSO. \\ \\ J84.669113-69.081638:This YSO candidate is located within $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clump 46 and meets one of the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ cut criteria. This object is a Type III YSO candidate due to the similar strength of the near infrared and far infrared peaks in the SED. \\ \\ J84.674734-69.077374: This object meets the \citet{carl12} $\mathrm{\alpha}$ and $\mathrm{\beta}$ cut criteria. This object is a Type III YSO candidate due to the similar strength of the near infrared and far infrared peak in the SED. \section{Results and Discussion} \subsection{Size, Linewidth, and Mass Surface Density} \noindent The `universality' of Larson's law has been verified by other observations \citep{lada85, bola08, heye09} and simulations \citep{fede12, gold11}. \citet{shet12} study the central molecular zone (CMZ) and analyze $\mathrm{N_{2}H^{+}}$, $\mathrm{HCN}$, $\mathrm{H^{13}CN}$, and $\mathrm{HCO^{+}}$ using dendrograms. They find a slope of 0.67, 0.46, 0.78, 0.64 and a coefficient of 2.6, 3.8, 2.6, 2.1 for $\mathrm{N_{2}H^{+}}$, $\mathrm{HCN}$, $\mathrm{H^{13}CN}$, and $\mathrm{HCO^{+}}$ respectively. There is a similarity in the slope of the size-linewidth relation that is independent of the local environmental factors and independent of the particular molecular gas that is studied. \citet{bola08} find the slope to be 0.60 in extra-galactic clouds, \citet{heye09} find the slope to be 0.50 in Milky Way clouds, \citet{shet12} find the slope to range between 0.46 and 0.78 in the CMZ for several high density tracers. This agreement in the slope of the size-linewidth relation is theorized to be because of the universality of turbulence \citep{heye04}. \\ \\ Figure ~\ref{fig:d9} shows the corresponding size-linewidth relation of the $\mathrm{^{12}CO (2-1)}$ brightness temperature clumps. In order to define a radius we use the geometric mean of the major axis radius and minor axis radius of the best-fit ellipse to the clump. The best fit line to the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) clumps in this study is given by the equation $\mathrm{\sigma = (1.66 \pm 0.06) r^{(0.65 \pm 0.04)}}$. We find the slope of the $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) size-linewidth relation to be similar to extragalactic clouds studied by \citet{bola08}, but the clumps in this 30 Doradus study have a systematic offset to larger linewidths by a factor of 3.8. \\ \\ Figure ~\ref{fig:d10} shows the size-linewidth of $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps analyzed using dendrograms and $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps analyzed by \citet{inde13} using cprops \citet{roso06}. The astrodendro algorithm calculated smaller linewidths for a given clump size. This can be seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:d10} and is further explained in Appendix B: the astrodendro clumps have smaller linewidth for a given size. The best-fit line for the $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps from this study is given by the solid black line ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.58 \pm 0.18) r^{(0.97 \pm 0.12)}}$). The best-fit line for the $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps from \citep{inde13} is given by the solid cyan line ($\mathrm{\sigma = (2.39 \pm 0.33) r^{(0.91 \pm 0.15)}}$). The cyan points in Figure ~\ref{fig:d10} use the same regions in position-position-velocity (PPV) space as the clumps defined using cprops and analyzed in \citep{inde13}, but a different method to calculate size and linewidth, to be more consistent with the astrodentro calculation. In this paper we use the same definition of size for both astrodendro clumps and cprops clumps. The size is calculated from the weighted second moment in two spatial directions. The radius is 1.91 times the geometric mean of those two spatial second moments \citep{solo87}. The linewidth is calculated using the weighted velocity second moment of the pixels assigned to the cprops clump or astrodendro structure. More details of the sizes and linewidths from cprops and astrodendro can be found in Appendix C. The analysis in this work is in agreement with \citet{inde13}: the $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps derived from astrodendro lie in the same parameter space as the clumps analyzed by cprops \citep{inde13}. \\ \\ One comparable analysis to our work in that of the Perseus cloud in the Milky Way by \citet{shet12}. The dashed line in Figure ~\ref{fig:d10} shows the results from \citet{shet12} who analyzed the Perseus cloud, an ordinary Milky Way molecular cloud, using dendrograms. The best-fit equation to the dash line is given by $\mathrm{\sigma = 0.62 r^{0.54}}$. The slope of the line that best fits the $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps in this study is within $3\mathrm{\sigma}$ of the slope of the line that best fits the Perseus clump analysis. The linewidths for a given clumps size in 30 Doradus are larger by a factor of 2.5 than those in Perseus. Linewidths of clumps in high pressure, high density, high star-forming environments are on average higher than those in quiescent Milky Way clumps. This is similar to studies by \citet{shet12} who find $\mathrm{N_{2}H^{+}}$ and $\mathrm{HCN}$ clumps in the CMZ are offset by a factor of 5 in comparison to $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ clumps in Perseus. The results of this work and the results found by \citet{inde13} show 30 Doradus clumps to have larger linewidths in comparison to ordinary Milky Way clouds. We use the same data as \citet{inde13} in this work. However we do a more thorough analysis: we re-calculate the `size' and `linewidth' values output from cprops in order to match the same definition by astrodendro, we fit a line through the cprops size-linewidth relation, and compare our results quantitatively to other studies. The results of this paper are different and supersede the results of Indebetouw et al. (2013). \\ \\ Similar offset to higher linewidths has also been seen in infrared dark cloud studies in the Milky Way, as is pointed out by \citet{inde13}. There are star forming infrared dark clumps in our Galaxy with similar size, mass, linewidth, and mass surface density as those in an extreme environment like 30 Doradus. \citet{pere13} study infrared dark cloud SDC335.579-0.272, located 3.25 kpc away from the Sun. Their ALMA observations show filamentary collisions with two massive star-forming cores at the intersection of the collision. \citet{bont10} study six massive and dense cores located in Cygnus X. Cygnus X is located 1.7 kpc away and contains 40 known massive dense cores (representative of the earliest phase of massive star formation). \citet{gibs09} use the MSX database to probe the physical conditions of several dozens of infrared dark clouds. We plot the size-linewidth values of infrared dark cloud studies by \citet{gibs09, bont10, pere13} in Figure ~\ref{fig:d10}. The Milky Way infrared dark clumps are in the same size-linewidth parameter space as 30 Doradus $\mathrm{^{13}CO (2-1)}$ clumps. Clumps in 30 Doradus have a larger linewidths than typical Milky Way clumps, however they have similar linewidth as infrared dark clouds that are very likely forming protostars. \\ \\ We investigate if the size-linewidth relation is dependent on the individual dendrogram structures. The size-linewidth relation of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) column density clumps is $\mathrm{\sigma = (1.58 \pm 0.18) r^{(0.97 \pm 0.12)}}$ (Figure ~\ref{fig:d11}). The red squares are clumps in the red dendrogram structure in Figure ~\ref{fig:d3a} ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.91 \pm 0.31) r^{(1.14 \pm 0.19)}}$), the green stars are those that are in the green structure in Figure ~\ref{fig:d3a} ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.12 \pm 0.11) r^{(0.58 \pm 0.11)}}$), and the cyan circles are clumps in the cyan structure in Figure ~\ref{fig:d3a} ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.25 \pm 0.69) r^{(0.60 \pm 0.48)}}$). For each structure traced in different colors, we fit a slope and intercept. We compare the intercepts with each other and all the intercept values are 1-2$\mathrm{\sigma}$ away from each other. We then compare the slopes of the line fit to the different structures and we find the slopes are also 1-2$\mathrm{\sigma}$ away from each other. We then investigate if the size-linewidth is dependent upon if a clump is forming a star or not. The size-linewidth relation of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps that are associated with YSOs ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.58 \pm 0.18) r^{(0.90 \pm 0.17)}}$) and those that are not ($\mathrm{\sigma = (1.86 \pm 0.26) r^{(0.91 \pm 0.14)}}$) in Figure ~\ref{fig:d12}. The size-linewidth of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps is the same for clumps with YSOs and those without. Individual star forming clumps have different mass, temperature, pressure conditions. Clumps with star formation taking place within them, and those with no observable star formation also should have different conditions. We thought local variations due to properties of the cloud or star formation happening would result in a different size-linewidth relation. However these differences in the local environment are negligible in comparison to the overall conditions in the regions of 30 Doradus we study in this work. \\ \\ Larson's first law suggests that the linewidth of a clump is only dependent on the size, $\mathrm{\sigma \propto r^{0.5}}$. We look into whether the universality of Larson's first law applied to the clumps in 30 Doradus. We assume the clumps are self-gravitating and say the observed cloud mass is the virial mass: \begin{equation} M_{obs}=\frac{5 \sigma^{2} r}{G}. \end{equation} We can substitute the molecular gas surface density ($\mathrm{\Sigma=\frac{M_{obs}}{\pi r^{2}}}$) and solve for the linewidth: \begin{equation} \sigma=\left(\frac{\pi G}{5}\right)^{0.5} \Sigma^{0.5} r^{0.5}. \end{equation} The linewidth of a clump depends on the spatial extent as well as the mass surface density. Figure ~\ref{fig:d13} shows the size-line width for $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) colorized by mass surface density: black diamonds for clumps with mass density less than 1000 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$, red squares are clumps with mass density between 1000-2000 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$, and cyan circles are clumps with mass density above 2000 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$. We find clumps with larger sizes and linewidths tend to have larger mass surface densities. \\ \\ We follow a similar approach to \citet{heye09} and look at the dependence of the size and linewidth on the mass surface density. \citet{heye09} find that Larson's scaling relations are not universal. If $\mathrm{\Sigma}$ in Equation 2 is constant, then you can recover Larson's first law ($\mathrm{\sigma=\nu\;r^{0.5}}$, where $\mathrm{\nu}$ is a constant). This means that $\mathrm{\frac{\sigma}{r^{0.5}}}$ = $(\mathrm{\frac{\pi G \Sigma}{5}})^{0.5}$ = $\mathrm{\nu}$, which is a constant. If Larson's first law is to hold, then we should see a flat horizontal line when we plot $\mathrm{\nu}$ versus $\mathrm{\Sigma}$. Figure ~\ref{fig:d14} shows that $\mathrm{\nu}$ is not constant with respect to $\mathrm{\Sigma}$, which is contradictory to Larson's first scaling law. We find that $\mathrm{\nu \propto \Sigma ^{0.45}}$. This is similar to the study done by \citet{heye09}. They too find a dependence of $\mathrm{\frac{\sigma}{r^{0.5}}}$ on $\mathrm{\Sigma}$ (Figure 7 in their paper). The slope of the line is not reported in their paper. We take the linewidth, size, and mass values they report and calculate $\mathrm{\nu}$ and $\mathrm{\Sigma}$. \citet{heye09} results show that $\mathrm{\nu \propto \Sigma ^{0.31}}$. Our findings of scaling relations between size, linewidth, and mass surface density lead us to the same conclusion as \citet{heye09}: Larson's velocity scaling relationships are not universal. \subsection{Energy Balance} \noindent We can further analyze the dynamics of the clumps by comparing the kinetic energy and the gravitational energy. We define the virial parameter, $\alpha$, to equal to $\mathrm{\frac{5 \sigma^{2}\;r}{G\;M}}$ \citep{roso08} \citep{mcke92} - the ratio of the kinetic potential energy to the gravitational potential energy. When $\alpha \textless 1$, the object is self-gravitating. Figure ~\ref{fig:d15} shows the virial parameter as a function of clump mass on a log-log plot. The smaller mass clumps embedded within the larger mass clumps have a larger kinetic energy compare to the larger mass. We find larger clumps to have a larger gravitational potential energy than the smaller clumps: 72$\%$ of the $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps have a virial parameter equal to 1 or less. Larger clumps in this study tend to have multiple YSO candidates, whereas smaller clumps tend to have one or no YSO candidates associated with them. \\ \\ We compare our results with Milky Way studies in order to see how star-forming clumps in two different galaxies differ from each other. We plot virial parameter versus clump mass of infrared dark clouds studies by \citet{gibs09, bont10, pere13} in Figure ~\ref{fig:d15}. These Milky Way clumps found via analysis of dark clouds could contain a few massive YSOs or hundreds of low-mass YSOs \citep{bont10}. Mass constraints on these stars have not been placed yet. ALMA observations of Dark cloud SDC335.579-0.272 show that it is one of the most massive, compact protostellar cores ever observed in the Galaxy and could potentially form an OB cluster similar to the Trapezium cluster in Orion \citep{pere13}. The virial parameter versus mass value of this cluster is located close to the gravitationally bound massive star forming clumps in Figure ~\ref{fig:d15} (the green star located at the bottom right). Orion is the nearest region of massive star formation, and therefore Orion and massive star formation sites similar to Orion provide the best comparison to 30 Doradus. Figure ~\ref{fig:d15} shows star formation can take place in a wide range of conditions within infrared dark clouds: there are several low-mass gravitationally-unbound clumps that are forming stars and gravitationally-bound clumps 1000s of solar masses in size that are forming stars. However the virial conditions of dark cloud SDC335.579-0.272, a potential massive star formation location in the Milky Way, seems similar to massive star forming clumps in 30 Doradus. \\ \\ There are a total of 15 star forming clumps, out of which 14 have a virial parameter equal to 1 or less. The majority (75$\%$) of clumps with masses greater than log(clump mass)=3.5 are associated with a YSO, but only 17$\%$ of clumps with masses less than log(clump mass)=3.5 are associated with a newly forming star. It is possible that the $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) line is not fully thermalized, therefore leading to an underestimate of the true mass. If the mass we report is underestimated, then the virial parameter we calculate would be overestimated. The points in Figure ~\ref{fig:d15} would shift down and to the right in this hypothetical scenario if we could calculate the true mass. We would still find 14, or perhaps even all 15, of the star forming clumps to be gravitationally bound ($\alpha \textless 1$). We would also still find the majority of high-mass clumps are associated with star formation. We do not have the whole CO ladder to calculate the true mass, however the possibility of $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) not being fully thermalized does not affect our conclusions about the dynamical state of the clumps. \subsection{Which Clumps Have Newly Forming Stars and Which Do Not} \noindent We use the effective radius of the column density clumps to determine if there are any YSOs associated with the clumps. We find 7/87 more evolved low-mass YSOs and 7/10 massive young YSO candidates are associated with clumps. The 7 massive YSOs that are found within a clump are: [1] J84.703995-69.079110 , [2] J84.695932-69.083807, [4] J84.688990-69.084695, [5] J84.695173-69.084857, [7] J84.720292-69.077084, [8] J84.688372-69.078168, [9] J84.669113-69.081638 (the numbers are the same as those in Table 6). The reason for a higher percentage of massive YSOs to be associated with clumps than low-mass YSOs is consistent with massive YSOs being at an earlier evolutionary stage. The molecular cloud surrounding stars quickly dissipate due to the strong UV radiation from the central stars. Massive YSOs are much younger than low-mass YSOs in this study and therefore still can sometimes be found in their parental cloud. We are missing low-mass embedded YSOs. \citet{tach01} study the Lupus star-forming region with $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ NANTEN data and find 40$\%$ of the more evolved low-mass YSOs in their study are associated with clumps less than $\textless 20\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, which suggests that more evolved low-mass YSOs form in small clouds and then the parental cloud rapidly dissipates. We see more evolved low-mass YSOs (stars less than 3 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ in Figure \ref{fig:d17a}) projected against, and thus perhaps forming in clouds a few hundred solar masses to several tens of thousands solar masses. It is not clear if the lack of many more evolved low-mass YSOs associated with clumps is due to them moving away from the parental clump over time or if the parental clump of the young star has dissipated over time. Another reason of finding a smaller fraction of more evolved low-mass YSOs associated with clumps is because low-mass YSOs are fainter and harder to detect due to the sensitivity limits of the surveys. \\ \\ Figure ~\ref{fig:d16} shows the difference in clump mass and $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ mass surface density distributions between clumps that do contain massive or low-mass YSOs versus clumps that do not. The distributions of clumps with massive or low-mass YSOs and those without are very different. The mass distribution of clumps without massive or low-mass YSOs is quasi normal, and the mass surface density distribution of clumps without massive or low-mass YSOs is uniform. Both the mass distribution and the mass surface density distribution of clumps with massive or low-mass YSOs are mostly uniform, but do have a noticeable peak in the center. The mass distribution and mass surface density distribution of clumps with star formation span a higher range in values than those without star formation: for example Figure ~\ref{fig:d16} shows clumps without any stars have masses up to log(clump mass) = 3.75, but clumps with YSOs have masses up to log(clump mass) = 4.50. The average mass, column density, and mass surface density of clumps without any YSOs are 957 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, $6.1 \times 10^{22}\;\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$, and 957 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$. The distribution of clumps with massive or low-mass YSOs is centered at x6 higher mass, x2 higher column density, and x2 higher mass surface density. Figure ~\ref{fig:d17a} shows the mass of YSO versus the clump mass. Structures are designed such that the clumps may be concentric (one clump within another clump), therefore there are stars that are counted more than once. If a YSO is associated with a small clump, then it is also associated with the larger clump the smaller clump is embedded in. Only 20$\%$ of clumps smaller than 1778 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ ($10^{3.25}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$) have a YSO above 10 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, whereas 66$\%$ of clumps larger than 1778 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ have a YSO above 10 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$. Figure ~\ref{fig:d17b} shows that 46$\%$ of clumps with $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ mass surface density less than 2512 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$ ($10^{3.40}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$) have a massive YSO, but 71$\%$ of of clumps with mass surface density more than 2512 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$ have a massive YSO. Larger mass clumps are more likely to form larger mass stars than smaller mass clumps. \\ \\ The lowest surface density clump with a massive YSO forming in it provides us with a lower limit on the threshold above which high-mass star formation can occur: massive star formation appears to occur in clumps with mass $\textgreater 1.83 \times 10^{2}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, surface density $\textgreater 6.67 \times 10^{2}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$, and turbulence $\textgreater 1.18\;\mathrm{km/s}$. It is possible there are clumps with lower masses and lower surface densities forming low-mass YSOs. Future studies that find lower mass YSOs may push this mass surface density value lower. However, 30 Doradus is a very extreme star forming environment and more turbulent than typical GMCs in the Milky Way. The specific region we are analyzing in this study is 10 pc North of the R136 supercluster and is most likely influenced by the radiation field of R136. If there is more turbulence, then we would need higher densities and mass surface densities for star formation to occur. The mass surface density threshold in this study is 5 to 6 times higher than mass thresholds necessary to form stars as observed by \citet{heid10, lada10, kenn12}. \citet{heid10} use extinction maps to determine the gas surface density of Galactic star forming regions and find a threshold of 129 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$. \citet{lada10} find similar values for the gas surface density: 116 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$. The thresholds determined from Galactic studies applies to low-mass star formation. The surface density threshold of $\textgreater 6.67 \times 10^{2}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$ we place in the ALMA footprint of 30 Doradus is for massive star formation. \\ \\ \citet{dunh11} study high density gas tracer $\mathrm{NH_{3}}$ and measure an average mass density threshold of 176 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$ for star forming clumps in the Milky Way. \citet{rath14} study nearby clouds and compare them to clouds in the CMZ. Observations of solar neighborhood clouds suggest a column density threshold of $1.4 \times 10^{22}\;\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$ \citep{lada10}. However the universality of this value is questioned since theoretical models predict the threshold for star formation is dependent on the density and the Mach number \citep{krum05}. Even though the CMZ has a much higher column density than $1.4 \times 10^{22}\;\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$, it is producing orders of magnitude less stars than predicted. \citet{rath14} find that the density threshold for star formation locally is $10^{4}\;\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, however the CMZ with much higher turbulence has a density threshold of $10^{8}\;\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$. Star formation is dependent on the local environment, with regions of high turbulence having a higher threshold to overcome in order for the star formation process to occur. \section{Conclusion} \noindent We look at YSOs that are within the ALMA CO footprint of 30 Doradus to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the molecular gas and the stars that form within them. We analyze the CO clumps using dendrograms. The $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) molecular gas clumps analyzed using dendrograms have sizes that range from 0.23 - 1.17 pc, masses that range from 53 - 19300 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, and linewidths that range from 0.27 - 2.81 km/s. There are several conclusions we come to with our analysis of CO clumps and YSOs as listed below. \\ \\ 1. We find $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) clumps to have a larger linewidth for a given size than previous studies done with the Perseus cloud \citep{shet12}. A larger linewidth is not dependent on the size scale, and not dependent on if star formation is taking place in a clump or not. Local environmental factors (high star formation rate, high densities, and high pressures) in 30 Doradus can explain why we find clumps to have a larger linewidth for a given size. Our result is similar to studies by \citet{shet12} who find clumps in the CMZ have a slope of 0.5 in the size-linewidth relation, but are offset higher compared to the Perseus cloud due to the local environmental conditions. We find the slope of the size-linewidth relation of $\mathrm{^{12}CO}$ (2-1) and $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ (2-1) molecular gas to be consistent within 3$\mathrm{\sigma}$ of previous studies \citep{bola08, heye09, shet12}. \\ \\ 2. Higher mass clumps have a tendency to have a lower viral parameter and contain multiple YSOs in comparison to lower mass clumps. \\ \\ 3. We find a total of 10 massive YSOs (4 new YSO candidates) with masses between 8.5-24.0 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$, and 87 more evolved low-mass YSOs with masses between 1-3 $\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$ in the region of interest. \\ \\ 4. There is a difference in distribution of the mass and $\mathrm{H_{2}}$ column density of clumps that do not contain any newly forming stars and those that do. The mass and column density of clumps without stars falls off quickly and tend to be lower on average than clumps with stars. The clumps that has the lowest surface density, but still hosts a massive YSO candidate provides us with lower limits necessary for star formation. It is necessary for clumps to have high masses ($\textgreater 1.83 \times 10^{2}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$), high linewidths (v $\textgreater 1.18\;\mathrm{km/s}$), and high mass densities ($\textgreater 6.67 \times 10^{2}\;\mathrm{M_{\odot}\;pc^{-2}}$) in order for massive star formation to occur. This threshold was found by looking at the least massive $\mathrm{^{13}CO}$ clump that is forming a massive YSO. \\ \\ 5. A higher fraction of young and massive YSO candidates are found within clumps (7/10) than the more evolved low-mass YSOs (7/87). This is because the more evolved low-mass YSOs in this study are older, and therefore have moved away from their parental clump. Our inventory of young forming stars is not sensitive to the very embedded low-mass YSOs. \\ \\ 6. We look at the dependence of the size-linewidth relation to the mass surface density. There is a dependence of $\mathrm{\frac{\sigma}{r^{0.5}}}$ on $\mathrm{\Sigma}$. This is contradictory to Larson's scaling relationships. Assuming the clumps are is gravitational equilibrium and making relevant substitutions (see Section 5.1), we derive $\sigma=\left(\frac{\pi G}{5}\right)^{0.5} \Sigma^{0.5} r^{0.5}$. Larson's third scaling relation states that $\Sigma$ is approximately constant for all clouds. Re-arranging the equation we derived and taking into account Larson's third scaling relations leads to the conclusion that the slope of $\mathrm{\frac{\sigma}{r^{0.5}}}$ versus $\mathrm{\Sigma}$ should be 0. However we do not find the slope to be 0 (Figure 14). It is possible that Larson's scaling relationships are not universal. \\ \\ 7. The virial parameter of massive clumps in 30 Doradus forming multiple YSOs is similar to SDC335.579-0.272, an infrared dark cloud in the Milky Way that is most likely forming massive stars. \section{Acknowledgements} \noindent This research made use of astrodendro, a Python package to compute dendrograms of Astronomical data (http://www.dendrograms.org). This research also made use of Astropy (http://www.astropy.org). Meixner, Indebetouw, and Nayak were supported by NSF grant 1312902. Sabbi and Panagia were supported by STScI grant GO-12939. We are grateful for discussions with the following astronomers while writing this paper: Dr. Marta Sewilo, Dr. Olivia Jones, Dr. Bram Ochsendorf, Kirill Tchernyshov. \section{Appendix}
\section{Introduction}\label{intro} The Navier-Stokes (NS) equations \cite{navier1823memoire,leray1934mouvement,batchelor1967introduction,fefferman2006existence,foias2001navier,doering1995applied}, the fundamental partial differential equations (PDEs) that govern viscous fluid dynamics, date back to 1822. Since its introduction in 1958 the Cahn-Hilliard (CH) PDE \cite{cahn1958free}, the fundamental equation for the statistical mechanics of binary mixtures, has been used extensively in studies of critical phenomena, phase transitions \cite{chaikin2000principles,hohenberg1977theory,lifshitz1961kinetics,gunton1983m,bray1994theory,puri2009kinetics}, nucleation \cite{lothe1962reconsiderations}, spinodal decomposition \cite{onuki2002phase,badalassi2003computation,perlekar2014spinodal,cahn1961spinodal,berti2005turbulence}, and the late stages of phase separation \cite{berti2005turbulence,boffetta2012two}. If the two components of the binary mixture are fluids, the CH and NS equations must be coupled, where the resulting system of PDEs is usually referred to as Model H~\cite{hohenberg1977theory} or the Cahn-Hilliard-Navier-Stokes (CHNS) equations. \par\smallski The increasing growth of interest in the CHNS equations arises from the elegant way in which they allow us to follow the spatio-temporal evolution of the two fluids in the mixture \textit{and the interfaces between them}. These interfaces are diffuse, so we do not have to impose boundary conditions on the moving boundaries between two different fluids, as in other methods for the simulation of multi-phase flows \cite{bray1994theory,muskat1,muskat2}. However, in addition to a velocity field $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$, we must also follow the scalar, order-parameter field $\phi$, which distinguishes the two phases in a binary-fluid mixture. Here, interfacial regions are characterized by large gradients in $\phi$. The CHNS equations have been used to model many binary-fluid systems that are of great current interest\,: examples include studies of (a) the Rayleigh-Taylor instability \cite{cabot2006reynolds,celani2009phase}\,; (b) turbulence-induced suppression of the phase separation of the two components of the binary fluid \cite{perlekar2014spinodal}\,; (c) multifractal droplet dynamics in a turbulent, binary-fluid mixture \cite{nairita2016}\,; (d) the coalescence of droplets \cite{shardt2013simulations}\,; and (e) lattice-Boltzmann treatments of multi-phase flows \cite{perlekar2014spinodal,LBM}. \par\smallski The system of Cahn-Hilliard-Navier-Stokes (CHNS) equations are written as follows~\cite{celani2009phase,scarbolo2013turbulence,yue2004diffuse,scarbolo2011phase}\,: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ns} \left(\partial_t + \mbox{\boldmath$u$}\cdot \nabla\right)\mbox{\boldmath$u$} &=& -\nabla p/\rho + \nu\nabla^{2}\mbox{\boldmath$u$} - \alpha\mbox{\boldmath$u$} - (\phi \nabla \mu) \nonumber\\ &&-A\mbox{\boldmath$g$} + \mathbi{f},\\ \left(\partial_t + \mbox{\boldmath$u$}\cdot \nabla\right) \phi & = &\gamma \nabla^2 {\mu}\,, \label{ch} \end{eqnarray} where $p$ is the pressure, and $\rho$($=1$) is the constant density, together with the incompressibility condition $\nabla \cdot \mbox{\boldmath$u$} = 0$. In Eq.~\eqref{ns}, $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\equiv(u_x,\,u_y,\,u_z)$ is the fluid velocity and $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity. In the 2D case $u_z = 0$ and $\alpha$, the air-drag-induced friction, should be included, but in 3D we set $\alpha = 0$. $\phi(\mathbi{x},\,t)$ is the order-parameter field at the point $\mathbi{x}$ and time $t$ [with $\phi(\mathbi{x},\,t)>0$ in the lighter phase and $\phi(\mathbi{x},\,t)<0$ in the heavier phase]. The third term on the right-hand side of Eq.~\eqref{ns} couples $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ to $\phi$ via the chemical potential $\mu(\mathbi{x},\,t)$, which is related to the the free energy $\mathcal{F}$ of the Cahn-Hilliard system as follows\,: \begin{eqnarray}\label{mudef} \mu & = & \delta\mathcal{F}[\phi]/\delta \phi(\mathbi{x},\,t)\,,\\ \mathcal{F}[\phi] & = & \Lambda \int_{\mathcal{V}}\left[\shalf\|\nabla \phi\|^{2} + (\phi^{2}-1)^{2}/(4\xi^{2})\right]dV\,,\label{Fdef} \end{eqnarray} where $\Lambda$ is the energy density with which the two phases mix in the interfacial regime~\cite{celani2009phase}, $\xi$ sets the scale of the interface width, $\sigma = 2(2^{\frac{1}{2}})\Lambda/3\xi$ is the surface tension, $\gamma$ is the mobility \cite{yue2004diffuse} of the binary-fluid mixture, $A = (\rho_2-\rho_1)/(\rho_2+\rho_1)$ is the Atwood number, and $\mbox{\boldmath$g$}$ is the acceleration due to gravity. \par\smallski While solutions of the CHNS equations have been shown to be regular in the 2D-case \cite{abels2009longtime,gal2010asymptotic}, with an equivalent body of literature associated with the CH equations alone (mainly 2D) (see, e.g., Ref. \cite{elliott1986cahn}) a critical issue for the 3D-CHNS system (\ref{ns}) - (\ref{Fdef}) revolves around the smoothness of the contours of $\phi$ packed together within the fluid interfaces. The regularity of the solutions of the 3D Navier-Stokes (NS) equations alone is in itself a major open problem \cite{doering1995applied}; a coupling of the CH and the NS equations poses additional severe difficulties. For instance, how do we know whether a slope discontinuity, such as a cusp, might develop in a finite time in arbitrarily large spatial derivatives of $\phi$, thereby affecting the smoothness of these contours? Moreover, if such singularities do develop, how closely are they associated with the breakdown of regularity of the solutions of the 3D NS equations themselves? To answer such questions, we follow a strategy that is closely connected to an issue that once arose in studies of the incompressible 3D Euler equations\, (for a survey of the Euler literature see Refs. \cite{majda2001vorticity,gibbon2008three,bardos2007euler}). Since the time of Leray \cite{leray1934mouvement,foias2001navier,doering1995applied} it has been known that the finiteness of $\int_{\mathcal{V}}\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\|^{2}dV$ pointwise in time controls the regularity of solutions of the 3D incompressible NS equations, where $\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$} = \nabla \times \mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ is the vorticity. There are also a variety of alternative time integral criteria, such as the finiteness of $\int_{0}^{T}\\|\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\\|_{\infty}^{2}\,d\tau$ or $\int_{0}^{T}\left(\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{4}^{2}/ \\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{2}\right)d\tau$. In addition, other conditions exist involving the pressure \cite{Tran2016}. In contrast, prior to 1984, it was not known what variables control the regularity of solutions of the 3D Euler equations. Beale, Kato, and Majda \cite{beale1984remarks} then proved that the time integral $\int_{0}^{T^}\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{\infty}\,d\tau$ is the key object\,: if this integral becomes infinite at a finite time $T^{}$, then solutions have lost regularity at $T^{}$ (i.e., blow-up occurs), but there exists a global solution if, for every $T>0$, $\int_{0}^{T}\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{\infty}\,d\tau < \infty$. This result is now generally referred to as the BKM theorem. Its practical value is that only one simple integral needs to be monitored numerically. It also discounts the possibility that very large spatial derivatives of $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ could develop a discontinuity if the integral is finite. \par\smallski The main result of this paper is that we have shown that there exists a similar result for the 3D-CHNS system. It can be expressed very simply and takes its motivation from the energy $E(t)$ of the full system, which can be written as \begin{equation}\label{E2} E(t) = \int_{\mathcal{V}} \left[\shalf\Lambda\|\nabla\phi\|^{2} + \frac{\Lambda}{4\xi^{2}} \left(\phi^{2} - 1\right)^{2} + \shalf \|\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\|^{2}\right]\,dV\,. \end{equation} Given that this can be viewed as a combination of squares of $L^{2}$-norms, it suggests a corresponding $L^{\infty}$ version, which we call the \textit{maximal energy}\footnote{The $L^{\infty}$-norm of a function is also referred to as the sup- or maximum norm.}\,: \begin{equation}\label{Einf} E_{\infty}(t) = \shalf\Lambda\\|\nabla\phi\\|_{\infty}^{2} + \frac{\Lambda}{4\xi^{2}} \left(\\|\phi\\|_{\infty}^{2} -1\right)^{2} + \shalf \\|\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\\|_{\infty}^{2}\,. \end{equation} In Sec. \ref{E-thm} we prove a theorem which says that $\int_{0}^{T^{}} E_{\infty}(\tau)\,d\tau$ is the key object that controls regularity of solutions of the 3D CHNS equations exactly in the same fashion as $\int_{0}^{T^}\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{\infty}\,d\tau$ does for the 3D Euler equations \cite{beale1984remarks}. The proof of the theorem is technically complicated, so this is given in Appendix \ref{app1}. Our numerical calculations in that Section (Fig. 1 (left)) suggest that $E_{\infty}$ is indeed finite. \par\smallski In order to make a comparison with 3D Navier-Stokes results, we also calculate the time dependence of scaled $L^{2m}$-norms of other fields, such as the fluid vorticity ${\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}}$. The study of similar scaled norms has led to fruitful insights into the solutions of the 3D NS~\cite{donzis2013vorticity,gibbon2014regimes,gibbon2016high} and the 3D MHD equations \cite{gibbon2016depletion}. We find that plots of all these norms, versus time $t$, are ordered as a function of $m$ (curves with different values of $m$ do not cross)\,; and, as $m \to \infty$, these curves approach a limit curve that can be identified as the scaled $L^{\infty}$ norm. \par\smallski The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: In Sec. \ref{nummeth} we discuss the numerical methods that we use to study its solutions. Section \ref{E-thm} is devoted to the statement of our $E_{\infty}$ theorem and associated numerical results together with plots of the $L^{2m}$ norms mentioned in the last paragraph\,. Section \ref{con} contains concluding remarks. In the Appendix we describe the details of the proof of the theorem \section{Numerical Methods}\label{nummeth} We carry out direct numerical simulations (DNSs) of the 3D CHNS equations. For this we use a simulation domain that is a cubical box with sides of length $2\pi$ and periodic boundary conditions in all three directions. We use $N^3$ collocation points, a pseudo-spectral method with a $1/2$- dealiasing rule, and a second-order Adams-Bashforth method for time marching. In our DNSs we use the following two types of forcing: (a) In the first type, we use the gravity-driven Rayleigh Taylor instability (RTI) of the interface of a heavy fluid that is placed initially on top of a light fluid\,; this instability is of great importance in inertial-confinement fusion \cite{petrasso1994rayleigh,taleyarkhan2002evidence}, astrophysical phenomena \cite{cabot2006reynolds}, and in turbulent mixing, especially in oceanography~\cite{munk1998abyssal}\,. (b) In the second type, we have a forcing that yields a constant energy-injection rate~\cite{bhatnagar2014universal}. In our RTI studies, there is a constant gravitational field in the $\hat{z}$ direction\,; here we stop our DNS just before plumes of the heavy or light fluid wrap around the simulation domain in the $\hat{z}$ direction because of the periodic boundary conditions. Most of the DNSs of such CHNS problems, e.g., CHNS studies of the RTI, have been motivated by experiments \cite{waddell2001experimental,ramaprabhu2006limits,dalziel2008mixing}. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have investigated the growth of $L^{2m}$ norms of the quantities we have mentioned above. (For the RTI problem, some of these norms have been studied~\cite{rao2016nonlinear} by using the DNS results of Ref.~\cite{livescu2013numerical} for the miscible, two-fluid, incompressible 3D NS equations.) It behooves us, therefore, to initiate such DNS investigations of $L^{2m}$ norms of fields in the 3D CHNS equations. \par\smallski The last-but-one term in Eq.~(\ref{ns}) is used in our DNSs of the RTI\,; in these studies we set the external force $\mathbi{f} = 0$. We also carry out DNSs, with no gravity, but with a constant-energy-injection forcing scheme in which \begin{equation} \hat{\mathbi{f}} = P\Theta(k_f-k){\hat\mbox{\boldmath$u$}}(\mathbf{k},\,t) /(2E(k,\,t)), \label{aks_const} \end{equation} where $P$ is the energy-injection rate and $\Theta$ is the Heaviside function. For simplicity, our CHNS description of binary-fluid mixtures assumes that $\gamma$ is independent of $\phi$ and that both components of the mixtures have the same viscosity. We keep the diffusivity $D = \gamma\Lambda/\xi^{2}$ constant in all our DNSs. We give the parameters for our DNS runs {\tt{T1-T3}} in Table~\ref{table1}. \par\smallski \begin{table} \resizebox{0.8\linewidth}{!} { \begin{tabular}{\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|} \hline & $N$ & $A$ & $\nu$ & $D$ & $\sigma$ & ${\rm Ch}$ & ${\rm Gr}$&${\rm Re}_{\lambda}$\\ \hline \hline {\tt T1} & $256$ & $0.5$ & $0.00116$ & $0.0015$ & $0.23$ & $0.011$ &&\\ {\tt T2} & $128$ & $0$ & $0.0116$ & $0.0015$ & $0.23$ & $0.011$ & $1.2 \times 10^7$&$42.23$\\ {\tt T3} & $512$ & $0$ & $0.00116$ & $0.0015$ & $0.23$ & $0.011$ & $1.2\times 10^9$&$300$\\ \hline \end{tabular} } \caption{ The parameters $N$, $A$, $\nu$, $D$, $\sigma$, ${\rm Ch}$ and ${\rm Gr}$ for DNS runs {\tt T1-T3}. The number of collocation points is $N^3$, $A$ is the Atwood number, $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity, $D$ is the diffusivity, $\sigma$ is the surface tension, ${\rm Ch}$ is the Cahn number, and ${\rm Gr}$ is the Grashof number in runs {\tt{T2}} and {\tt{T3}}.} \label{table1} \end{table} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth]{fig1a} \put(-40,195){\bf (a)} \includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth]{fig1b} \put(-40,195){\bf (b)} \includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth]{fig1c} \put(-40,195){\bf (c)} \includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth]{fig1d} \put(-40,195){\bf (d)} \caption{(Color online) Isosurface plots of the $\phi$-field in the 3D CHNS equations illustrating the development of the RTI with large-wavelength perturbations in 3D (DNS run {\tt{T1}} in Table~\ref{table1}), with $256^3$ collocation points, at times (a)~$t=1$,~~(b)~$t=10$,~~(c)~$t=25$, and (d) $t=36$. The spatiotemporal development of this field is given in the Video {\tt{RTI\_Atwood=5e-1}} in You Tube \cite{suppmat}. } \label{3D_pseudocolor} \end{figure} \section{$E_{\infty}$-theorem and corresponding numerical results}\label{E-thm} In the first part of this Section (subsection A) we present our $E_{\infty}$ theorem. We then present our numerical results in subsection B. \subsection{An $E_{\infty}$-theorem}\label{Einfsubsect} Let us consider $n$ derivatives of both $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ and $\phi$ within $L^{2}$-norms such that, for $n\geq 0$, \begin{equation}\label{HPdef} H_{n} = \int_{\mathcal{V}} \|\nabla^{n}\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\|^{2}dV\,\quad{\rm and}\quad P_{n} = \int_{\mathcal{V}} \|\nabla^{n}\phi\|^{2}dV\,. \end{equation} Then the CHNS equivalent of the BKM theorem \cite{beale1984remarks} is the following (which we prove in Appendix \ref{app1})\,: \begin{theorem}\label{thm1} Consider the CHNS equations on a periodic domain $\mathcal{V} = [0,\,L]^{3}$ in three spatial dimensions. For initial data $u_{0} \in H_{m}$, for $m > 3/2$, and $\phi_{0}\in P_{m}$, for $m > 5/2$, suppose there exists a solution on the interval $[0,\,T^{})$ where $T^{}$ is the earliest time that the solution loses regularity, then \begin{equation}\label{thm1a} \int_{0}^{T^{}}E_{\infty}(\tau)\,d\tau = \infty\,. \end{equation} Conversely, there exists a global solution of the 3D CHNS equation if, for every $T > 0$, \begin{equation}\label{thm1b} \int_{0}^{T}E_{\infty}(\tau)\,d\tau < \infty\,. \end{equation} \end{theorem} \par\smallskip\noindent The finiteness, or otherwise, of $E_{\infty}(t)$ is thus critical to the regularity of solutions. This needs to be tested numerically from different initial conditions. One way is to plot finite $L^{m}$-norms of the energy, namely, \begin{equation}\label{Em} E_{m}(t) = \shalf\Lambda\\|\nabla\phi\\|_{m}^{2} + \frac{\Lambda}{4\xi^{2}} \left(\\|\phi\\|_{m}^{2} - 1\right)^{2} + \shalf \\|\mbox{\boldmath$u$}\\|_{m}^{2}, \end{equation} for increasing values of $m \geq 1$. We observe that $E_{m}(t)$ converges as $m$ increases\,: see Fig. \ref{Emlmplots} (top panels). This suggests that the integral criterion within Theorem \ref{thm1} is indeed finite and thus (\ref{thm1b}) holds leading to the regularity of these solutions, at least for the DNSs we carry out. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{fig2a} \put(-65,45){\bf (a)} \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{fig2b} \put(-65,45){\bf (b)} \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{fig2c} \put(-65,155){\bf (c)} \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{fig2d} \put(-65,155){\bf (d)} \caption{(Color online) (a) Plots against time $t$ of $E_{m}$ according to Eq.~\eqref{Em} for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses), and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles). These plots are for an RTI flow. (b) Plots against time $t$ of $E_{m}$ according to Eq.~\eqref{Em} for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses), and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles). These plots are for a flow with a constant-energy-injection forcing scheme (see Eq.~\eqref{aks_const}), with no gravity. (c) Plots against time $t$ of $\ell_{m}^{-1}$ for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses), and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles). These plots are for an RTI flow. (d) Plots against time $t$ of $\ell_{m}^{-1}$ for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses), and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles). These plots are for a flow with a constant-energy-injection forcing scheme. } \label{Emlmplots} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3a} \put(-125,100){\bf (a)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3b} \put(-125,100){\bf (b)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3c} \put(-125,100){\bf (c)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3d} \put(-125,100){\bf (d)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3e} \put(-125,100){\bf (e)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3f} \put(-125,100){\bf (f)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3g} \put(-125,100){\bf (g)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3h} \put(-125,100){\bf (h)} \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig3i} \put(-125,100){\bf (i)} \caption{(Color online) (a) Semilog (base $10$) plots versus time $t$ (with $256^3$ collocation (DNS run {\tt{T1}})) of (a) $D_{m}$ for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses) and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles)\,,~~ (b) $A_{m}$ (same color conventions as in (a))\,,~~ (c) $\lambda_m(t)$ (same color conventions as in (a))\, for the runs with RTI flows (DNS run {\tt{T1}}), and (d) $D_{m}$ for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses) and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles)\,,~~ (e) $A_{m}$ (same color conventions as in (d))\,,~~ (f) $\lambda_m(t)$ (same color conventions as in (d))\, for the runs with constant-energy-injection forcing scheme (DNS run {\tt{T2}}), (g) $D_{m}$ for $m=1$ (blue curve with squares), $m=2$ (green curve with inverted triangles), $m=3$ (red curve with diamonds), $m=4$ (light blue curve with pentagrams), $m=5$ (magenta curve with crosses) and $m=6$ (yellow curve with open circles)\,,~~ (h) $A_{m}$ (same color conventions as in (g))\,,~~ (i) $\lambda_m(t)$ (same color conventions as in (g))\, for the runs with constant-energy-injection forcing scheme (DNS run {\tt{T3}}) .}\label{3dplots} \end{figure} \subsection{Temporal Evolution of $D_m$}\label{Dmlm} The initial stages of the spatiotemporal development of the RTI in the 3D CHNS system is illustrated by the isosurface plots of the $\phi$ field in Fig.~\ref{3D_pseudocolor} (the spatiotemporal development of this field is given in the Video {\tt{RTI\_Atwood=5e-1}} in the Supplemental Material \cite{suppmat}). In RTI flows, the potential energy that is stored in the initial density field is converted to kinetic energy, which initiates fluid-mixing and a cascade of energy from large to small length scales\,; this gives rise to filamentary structures with enhanced gradients in $\phi$. The nonlinearity of the binary-fluid system is responsible for this energy cascade. For both the 3D Navier-Stokes and 3D MHD equations, a method was introduced to estimate the degree of nonlinear depletion in the vortex stretching term(s) \cite{donzis2013vorticity,gibbon2014regimes,gibbon2016high,gibbon2016depletion}. It involved the use of the following $L^{2m}$-norms of the vorticity field $\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$} = \nabla \times\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ defined by $\left(1\leq m < \infty \right)$, \begin{equation}\label{omegam} \Omega_{m}(t) = \left( L^{-3}\int_{\mathcal{V}}\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\|^{2m}dV \right)^{1/2m}\,, \end{equation} and also the following scaled dimensionless counterparts of $\Omega_{m}$ \begin{equation}\label{Dm} D_{m}(t) = \left(\varpi_0^{-1}\Omega_m\right)^{\alpha_m},\qquad \alpha_m=\frac{2m}{4m-3}\,, \end{equation} where $\varpi_{0} =\nu L^{-2}$ is the box-size frequency of the periodic box. Although the $\Omega_m$s must obey H\"older's inequality \begin{equation}\label{Omorder} \Omega_{m} \leq \Omega_{m+1}\,,\qquad\mbox{for}\qquad 1\leq m < \infty\,, \end{equation} no such natural ordering is enforced upon the $D_{m}$, because the $\alpha_m$ decrease with $m$ (see Eq.~\eqref{Dm}). We give the plots for $D_m$s for the RTI case in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(a) and for the constant-energy-injection scheme in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(d). It was shown in Ref.~\cite{gibbon2016high} that there are good reasons why $D_{m}$ and $D_{1}$ are such that\footnote{In \cite{gibbon2016high} a set of multiplicative positive constants $C_{m}$ were included.} \begin{equation}\label{DmD1} D_{m} \leq D_{1}^{A_{m}(t)}\,, \end{equation} with the additional relation that includes the time-dependent exponents $\lambda_{m}$ \begin{equation}\label{al} A_{m}(t) = \frac{\lambda_{m}(t)(m-1)+1}{4m-3}\,. \end{equation} It was observed numerically \cite{gibbon2014regimes} that the maxima of the $\lambda_{m}$ lay in the range $1.15-1.45$. For purposes of comparison between those calculations and our RTI simulation, we plot $A_{m}(t)$ versus $t$, in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(b), where \begin{equation}\label{Amdef} A_{m}(t)=\ln D_{m}/\ln D_{1}\,. \end{equation} We observe that the $A_{m}$ do not change significantly with $t$ but that they depend on $m$. We also give the plot of $A_m(t)$ versus $t$ for the case of constant-energy-injection in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(e). As in DNSs of the 3D Navier-Stokes equation \cite{gibbon2014regimes}, we find, for the 3D CHNS system, that $D_1$ lies well above the other $D_m$ (see Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(a) and Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(c)). We give the plots for $\lambda_{m}(t)$ in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(c) (for the RTI case) and in Fig.~\ref{3dplots}(f) (for the constant-energy-injection forcing scheme). In the 3D NS case, the $\lambda_{m}$ are related to the spectral exponents for the inertial-range, power-law form of the energy spectra \cite{gibbon2014regimes}\,; the analogous relation for the 3D CHNS case is not straightforward because the power-law ranges in such spectra depend on several parameters in the CHNS equations (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{nairita2016}). \par\smallski We also compute the temporal evolution of the $L^{2m}$-norms of the gradients of $\phi$ by using the definition of the inverse length scale $\ell_{m}^{-1}$ \begin{equation}\label{ell2def} \ell_{m}^{-2m} = \frac{\int_{\mathcal{V}} \|\nabla\phi\|^{2m}dV}{\int_{\mathcal{V}} \|\phi\|^{2m}dV}\,. \end{equation} Figures~\ref{Emlmplots}(a)-(d) show plots of $E_m$ and $\ell_{m}^{-1}$ versus time $t$ for different values of $m$. These are qualitatively similar to those for $D_m$ in so far as curves for different values of $m$ do not cross\,; they are ordered in $m$ such that $\ell_{m}^{-1} < \ell_{m+1}^{-1}$. Furthermore, both $\ell_{m}^{-1}$ and $E_m$ approach limiting curves as $m \rightarrow \infty$\,. (We mention in passing that errors increase, as $m$ increases. We present data for values of $m$ for which we have reliable data). This clustering of the $E_m$ suggests convergence to a finite value of $E_{\infty}$. \section{Conclusion}\label{con} The regularity of solutions of the 3D Navier-Stokes (3DNS) equations presents formidable difficulties. It remains to this day one of the outstanding open problems in modern applied mathematics \cite{fefferman2006existence}. Coupling these 3DNS equations to the 3D Cahn-Hilliard equations creates a set of 3D CHNS PDEs that govern an incompressible binary fluid, but, in so doing, creates a system where the already formidable difficulties with the 3D NS system are amplified many times over. The elegant and powerful proofs of regularity by Abels \cite{abels2009longtime} and Gal and Graselli \cite{gal2010asymptotic} in the 2D case show how much harder the coupled 2D CHNS system is to deal with than the 2D Navier-Stokes equations alone. The main challenges in the 3D system considered here lie in the behavior of not only arbitrarily large gradients of the velocity field $\mbox{\boldmath$u$}$ but also of arbitrarily large gradients of $\phi$, the order parameter. The $E_{\infty}$ theorem, stated in Sec. \ref{E-thm} and proved in Appendix \ref{app1}, is a conditional-regularity criterion on periodic boundary conditions that is realistically computable. The motivation for this result lies in the BKM theorem for the 3D Euler equations. Constantin, Fefferman and Majda \cite{constantin1996geometric} have reduced the $\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{\infty}$ within the BKM criterion to $\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{p}$ for finite $p\geq 2$, but at the heavy price of introducing technically complicated, local constraints on the direction of vorticity, which are difficult to compute. Thus, the original form of the BKM theorem, with its single requirement of $\\|\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}\\|_{\infty}$ being finite, remains the simplest regularity criterion to this day. Our $E_{\infty}$ theorem is the equivalent result for the 3D CHNS system. Our curves for $E_{m}$ versus time in Fig. \ref{Emlmplots} (left) suggest convergence to $E_{\infty}$, with increasing values of $m$, thereby indicating that solutions remain regular for as long as our DNSs remain valid, even though more resolution would be desirable in the future to investigate the delicate issue of possible finite-time singularities in solutions of the 3D CHNS equations. \begin{acknowledgements} We thank Prasad Perlekar, Samriddhi Sankar Ray, Akshay Bhatnagar, and Akhilesh Kumar Verma for discussions. J.D.G. thanks F\'ed\'eration Doeblin for support and the International Centre for Theoretical Sciences, Bangalore for hospitality during a visit in which this study was initiated. N.P. and R.P. thank University Grants Commission (India), Department of Science and Technology (India), and Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (India), for support and SERC (IISc) for computational resources. \end{acknowledgements} \begin{widetext}
\section{Introduction}\label{SecIntro} In a previous paper \citep{BuldgenCyg}, we studied the binaries $16$CygA and $16$CygB using the full Kepler dataset from \citet{Davies}. The system is in fact more complex since a red dwarf orbits the $A$ component and a Jovian planet orbits the $B$ component \citep{Cochran, Holman, Hauser}. We carried out a forward modelling process of both stars without taking into account binarity as a constraint and used our inversion techniques to further constrain their fundamental parameters, and demonstrated the importance of microscopic diffusion. The inversion technique provided strong constraints on the chemical composition and mixing of $16$CygA, the brightest of the two components. However, when carrying out the same inversion for $16$CygB, we faced the problem of the amplification of the observational error bars. The problem is well-known in the context of inversions, since the results are always a trade-off between amplifying the errors and fitting the target function of the inversion \citep{Pijpers}. In the context of asteroseismology, since more weight has to be given to the fit of the target function due to the small number of observed frequencies compared to the solar case, we are always limited in terms of error amplification. Trying to reduce the error bars by amplifying the trade-off parameters can result in a significant reduction of the quality of the fit, thus implying that what is gained by reducing the propagation of observational error bars is lost due to the poor quality of the averaging kernel. In the following sections, we re-analyse the trade-off problem of $16$CygB and show that the seismic information is sufficient to analyse this star independently with the $t_{u}$ indicator. To explain the trend seen with the inversion, we try unsuccessfully to restore the agreement by modifying the surface chemical composition of this star. Since this leads to inconsistencies with the $16$CygA results of our previous paper, we analyse the potential necessity of an additional mixing process, which has already been mentioned to explain the lithium depletion in this star \citep{Deal}. We emphasize that the solution we propose for consistency with the inversion result is hypothetical and is subject to the same limitations and model-dependencies as our previous study on $16$CygA. We compute models using a parametrised approach of the extra mixing which should not be considered as a physical solution but rather a hint that a certain amount of mixing is required in deep regions of the B component in order to reconcile the modelling of both components. The paper is structured as follows, we start by briefly presenting additional reference models in Sect \ref{SecRefMod}. We then present our inversion results as well as the regularisation in Sect \ref{SecInvRes}. These results are further analysed and discussed in Sect \ref{SecDisc} in light of the possible necessity for extra mixing in $16$CygB. We then conclude with the implications and perspectives of this study in Sect \ref{SecConc}. \section{Reference models}\label{SecRefMod} In this section, we will describe the forward modelling process that has been carried out to obtain the reference models for the inversion. The process has been already described in \citet{BuldgenCyg}, but we recall it here for the sake of clarity. Nevertheless, the number of models computed has been increased to improve the diagnostic process of the inversion and to ensure unbiased results. In practice, we computed these models independently from the modelling of $16$CygA presented in our previous paper. We used the frequency spectrum from \citet{Davies}, which was based on $928$ days of Kepler data \footnote{The frequency tables are public and can be found at the url: \url{http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2331/-/DC1}.}. A Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm was used to determine the optimal set of free parameters for our models. We used the CLES stellar evolution code and the LOSC oscillation code \citep{ScuflaireCles, ScuflaireLosc}. The stellar models used the CEFF equation of state \citep{CEFF}, the OPAL opacities from \citet{OPAL} supplemented at low temperatures by the opacities of \citet{Ferguson}. The nuclear reaction rates are those from the NACRE project \citep{Nacre}, including the updated reaction rate for the $^{14}\mathrm{N}(p,\gamma)^{15}\mathrm{O}$ reaction from \citet{Formicola} and convection was implemented using the classical, local mixing-length theory \citep{Bohm}. We also used the implementation of microscopic diffusion from \citet{Thoul}, for which three groups of elements are considered and treated separately: hydrogen, helium and the metals (all considered to have the diffusion speed of $^{56}Fe$). No additional transport mechanism, beside microscopic diffusion, was included in the models. No surface correction of the individual frequencies was used in this study since we used quantities that are naturally less sensitive to these effects. Moreover, since the inversion results for $16$CygA implied that microscopic diffusion had to be included in the stellar models and since both stars are very similar, we considered that we had to include atomic diffusion in the models of $16$CygB. We also emphasize that obtaining consistent results in age for both components is impossible if one considers that one component of the binary system is subject to microscopic diffusion effects while the other is not. Yet, we also want to stress that the implementation of microscopic diffusion has its own uncertainties. First, we consider here the implementation from \citet{Thoul} which considers only three components to the mixing; secondly, in their own paper, \citet{Thoul} consider the diffusion velocities obtained to be accurate within approximately $15 \%$; thirdly, it may be possible that radiative accelerations play a role in competing with gravitational settling effects. Thus, the use of microscopic diffusion as a solution to be consistent with the inversion results for $16$CygA is a first hypothesis of this study. It does not mean that another combination of mixing processes could not successfully reproduce the trends previously seen with the inversion technique for this star. In this study, we substantially increased the number of reference models used to carry out the inversions for $16$CygB but did not use any hypothesis on the chemical composition of this star. In fact, surface chemical composition differences between the $A$ and $B$ components have been claimed by \citet{Tucci} when carrying out a differential spectroscopy analysis between both stars. Moreover, although the centroid of the present surface helium abundance, $Y_{f}$, interval found by \citet{Verma} is the same, the scatter is larger for the $B$ component, and if microscopic diffusion is included in the stellar models, it is also clear that surface chemical composition differences will be seen since this mixing will not have the same efficiency for stars of different masses\footnote{The differences due to diffusion should nonetheless remain small.}. Nevertheless, it should be noted that chemical composition differences between $16$CygA and $16$CygB are still under some debate since their existence has been claimed by \citet{Ramirez} and \citet{Tucci} as well as by previous studies \citep[see][]{Deliyannis} but could not be confirmed by \citet{Schuler}. In \citet{Tucci}, one finds $\left[ \mathrm{Fe/H} \right]_{A}=0.101 \pm 0.008$ and $\left[ \mathrm{Fe/H} \right]_{B}=0.054 \pm 0.008$ whereas \citet{Schuler} finds $\left[ \mathrm{Fe/H} \right]_{A}=0.07 \pm 0.05$ and $\left[ \mathrm{Fe/H} \right]_{B}=0.05 \pm 0.05$. These results are not totally incompatible, and what is more striking is the difference in error bars between various studies. Moreover, these values depend on the reference solar metallicity assumed in the study since the observational constraint provided is the $\left[ \mathrm{Fe/H} \right]$ value which must be translated in a $\frac{Z}{X}$ value using the sun as a reference. In our previous paper, we used the most recent abundance tables given by AGSS09 \citep{AGSS} and found that they led to a better agreement with the inversion results for $16$CygA. In this study, we computed most models with the AGSS09 abundances but also used some models with the older GN93 abundances \citep{GN93}. We explain our motivations for using such models in Sect. \ref{SecDisc}. \begin{table}[t] \caption{Summary of observational properties of the system $16$CygA B used in this study.} \label{tabObs} \centering \begin{tabular}{r \| c \| c } \hline \hline & \textbf{$16$CygB} & \textbf{References} \\ \hline \textit{R ($\mathrm{R_{\odot}}$) }& $1.12 \pm 0.02$ & \citet{White} \\ \textit{$T_{\mathrm{eff,spec}}$ ($\mathrm{K}$)} & $5751 \pm 6$ &\citet{Tucci} \\ \textit{$T_{\mathrm{eff,phot}}$ ($\mathrm{K}$)} & $5809 \pm 39$ & \citet{White} \\ \textit{$L$ $(\mathrm{L_{\odot}})$} & $1.27 \pm 0.04$ & \citet{Metcalfe} \\ \textit{[Fe/H] (dex)} &$0.052 \pm 0.021$ & \citet{Ramirez} \\ \textit{$Y_{f}$} &$\left[0.218, 0.260\right]$ & \citet{Verma} \\ \textit{$<\Delta \nu>$} ($\mu \mathrm{Hz}$) &$117.36 \pm 0.55$ & \citet{Davies} \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} We summarise the observational constraints used for $16$CygB in table \ref{tabObs} and the fundamental parameters obtained for some of the reference models in table \ref{tabresB}. In this table, we also recall the intervals from the forward modelling process of $16$CygA obtained previously. The forward modelling war carried out starting from various initial conditions with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. The set-up of the minimization process was the following: \begin{itemize} \item Constraints: individual small frequency separations $d_{0,2}$ $d_{1,3}$, inverted mean density $(\bar{\rho})$ for which conservative error bars of $0.005$ $g/cm^{3}$ were considered, acoustic radius $(\tau)$ for which conservative error bars of $30$ $s$ were considered, present surface metallicity $(Z_{f}/X_{f})$ from \citet{Ramirez}, present surface helium abundance $(Y_{f})$ from \citet{Verma} and the effective temperature from \citet{Tucci}, for which we considered error bars of $30$K. \item Free parameters: Mass, age, initial hydrogen abundance $(X_{0})$, initial abundance of heavy elements $(Z_{0})$, mixing-length parameter $(\alpha_{MLT})$. \end{itemize} In total, we had $5$ free parameters for $31$ constraints. In addition to these constraints, we checked the values of the luminosity $L$, surface gravity $\log g$ and radius $R$ after the forward modelling to see if they were consistent with the constraints from the literature. Models which were completely inconsistent with these additional constraints were disregarded. An additional comment should be made on some error bars used in the forward modelling. Firstly, we considered the errors from \citet{Tucci} to be unrealistic and assumed a conservative $30$K error bar which is already very accurate but more consistent with other studies. Secondly, both the inverted mean density and acoustic radius are known to have underestimated error bars with the SOLA method, from the multiple hare and hounds we performed to calibrate the inversion techniques, we noticed that a error bars of $0.5\%$ were to be expected as a conservative error bar for the inverted values of the mean density. For the acoustic radius, the precision has to be assessed from the dispersion of the inverted values, in this particular case this lead to a precision of around $0.7 \%$ was achieved. Consequently, we used these conservative error bars in the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm rather than the error bars derived directly from the SOLA method. \begin{table}[t] \caption{Parameters of the reference models of $16$CygB} \label{tabresB} \centering \begin{tabular}{r \| c \| c} \hline \hline & \textbf{Reference $16$CygB models} &\textbf{Reference $16$CygA models} \\ \hline \textit{Mass ($\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$)}& $0.93$-$1.05$ & $0.96$-$1.08$\\ \textit{Radius ($\mathrm{R_{\odot}}$)}& $1.07$-$1.13$ & $1.19$-$1.24$\\ \textit{Age ($\mathrm{Gyr}$)} &$6.97$-$8.47$ &$6.90$-$8.30$\\ \textit{$L_{\odot}$ $(\mathrm{L_{\odot}})$} & $1.05$-$1.25$ & $1.48$-$1.66$\\ \textit{$Z_{0}$} & $0.0165$-$0.0194$ & $0.0155$-$0.0210$\\ \textit{$Y_{0}$} &$0.25$-$0.32$ & $0.250$-$0.299$\\ \textit{$\alpha_{\mathrm{MLT}}$} & $1.70$-$1.86$ & $1.67$-$1.97$\\ \textit{$D$} & $0.5$-$1.1$ & $0.0-1.1$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} We can see that the scatter of fundamental parameters is very similar to that obtained for $16$CygA. However, we only give the results for models including diffusion in table \ref{tabresB}, as can be seen by looking at the values of the $D$ parameter. This parameter is related to the implementation of diffusion we use, it is a multiplicative factor of the microscopic diffusion velocities such that if $D=1.0$, one uses the diffusion velocities of standard solar models. We can see that some models have radii and luminosities that are below the observed values. Thus, these models can already be rejected or at least questioned in terms of quality. The age and chemical composition intervals are completely consistent with the values obtained for the reference models of $16$CygA recalled in the third column of table \ref{tabresB}. We recall here that the models associated with ages above $7.4$ Gy were rejected for $16$CygA, based on the $t_{u}$ inversion results and their implications on microscopic diffusion and chemical composition. A successful modelling of the binary system implies finding similar ages and initial chemical composition for both stars as well as being consistent with the seismic, spectroscopic and interferometric constraints at hand. Ultimately, the models shall also be compatible with the inversion results. This is not an easy task and requires a careful analysis and a good trade-off between all of the constraints. \section{Inversion results}\label{SecInvRes} In this section, we present updated inversion results for $16$CygB. In our initial work, we faced the problem of large error bars for the $t_{u}$ inversion. These error bars implied that we could not derive any additional constraints on the structure of $16$CygB. In fact the inversion results showed that all models should be accepted, regardless of whether they included diffusion or not. However, we will show in the following sections that a more careful look at the frequency data can lead to an independent diagnostic with the inversion and provide additional interesting insights on the structure of this star. The inversion technique we present is based on the linear integral equations presented in \citet{Gough} derived for the squared isothermal sound speed $u=\frac{P}{\rho}$ and the helium mass fraction, $Y$. The basic equation of the inversion is then written: \begin{align} \frac{\delta \nu^{n,l}}{\nu^{n,l}}=\int_{0}^{R}K^{n,l}_{u,Y}\frac{\delta u}{u} dr + \int_{0}^{R} K^{n,l}_{Y,u} \delta Y dr, \label{EqFreqStruc} \end{align} where the notation $\frac{\delta x}{x}$ stands for the relative difference between observed quantities and quantities of the reference model, defined as follows: \begin{align} \frac{\delta x}{x}=\frac{x^{obs}-x^{ref}}{x^{ref}}. \label{eqreldiff} \end{align} The most striking difference between inversions in asteroseismology and inversions in helioseismology is the number of observed frequencies, leading to the fact that the classical linear kernel based inversion methods cannot be used to derive full structural profiles of observed stars. In previous studies, we have adapted the SOLA inversion techniques from \citet{Pijpers} to carry out inversions of structural integrated quantities \citep[See][for various examples.]{Reese, Buldgentu, Buldgentau}. Amongst the indicators derived, we defined a core condition indicator in \citet{Buldgentu} as follows: \begin{align} t_{u}=\int_{0}^{R}f(r)\left(\frac{du}{dr}\right)^{2}dr \label{EqtuRef}, \end{align} with $f(r)= r(r-R)^{2}\exp(-7r^{2})$, the weight function used for this inversion with $R$ the stellar radius and $r$ the radial coordinate associated with each layer inside the model, $u$ is the squared isothermal sound-speed previously defined. First, we recall a few basic equations of seismic inversion techniques. It is important to remember that seismic diagnostics using classical inversion techniques involve individual relative frequency differences (defined as in Eq. \ref{eqreldiff}). In that sense, any inverted result is generated from a recombination of these frequency differences. When we use the linear SOLA technique \citep{Pijpers}, we build a linear combination of frequency differences. In the case of the $t_{u}$ inversion, for example, we have: \begin{align} \sum_{i}^{N}c_{i}\frac{\delta \nu_{i}}{\nu_{i}} \equiv \left(\frac{\delta t_{u}}{t_{u}}\right)_{inv}, \label{EqtuDefInv} \end{align} with the $c_{i}$ being the inversion coefficients, which are determined by finding the optimal value of the SOLA cost function for given trade-off parameters values. The SOLA cost function is defined as follows for the $t_{u}$ indicator and denoted $\mathcal{J}_{t_{u}}$: \begin{align} \mathcal{J}_{t_{u}} = &\int_{0}^{1}\left[ K_{\mathrm{Avg}}-\mathcal{T}_{t_{u}}\right]^{2}dx +\beta \int_{0}^{1}K^ {2}_{\mathrm{Cross}}dx + \tan(\theta) \sum^{N}_{i}(c_{i}\sigma_{i})^{2} \nonumber \\ &+ \eta \left[ \sum^{N}_{i}c_{i}-k \right], \label{EqCostFunc} \end{align} where $\mathcal{T}_{t_{u}}$ is the target function associated with the indicator, $K_{\mathrm{Avg}}$ is the averaging kernel, and $K_{\mathrm{Cross}}$ the cross-term kernel, defined with respect to the fractional radius position $x=\frac{r}{R}$. $\eta$ is a Lagrange multiplier, $k$ is a regularization factor related to the non-linear generalization of indicator inversions \citep[see][for details.]{Buldgentu}, $\sigma_{i}$ are the errors associated with each individual frequency and $\beta$ and $\theta$ are the free parameters of the SOLA method, related to the trade-off with the cross-term and the amplification of observational errors and the accuracy of the fit of the target function. Nevertheless, for this particular inversion, no additional terms used to deal with surface effects have been added since they often bias the results and reduce the quality of the fit of the target function. This is also justified by the fact that the $t_{u}$ indicator probes core regions and that its target function has low amplitude in the surface. The averaging and cross-term kernels are defined as follows for the $(u,Y)$ structural pair, with $Y$ the helium mass fraction and $u=\frac{P}{\rho}$, the squared isothermal sound speed and the functions $K^{i}_{u,Y}$ and $K^{i}_{Y,u}$ the structural kernels associated with $u$ and $Y$ respectively: \begin{align} K_{\mathrm{Avg}}=\sum_{i}^{N}c_{i}K^{i}_{u,Y}, \\ K_{\mathrm{Cross}}=\sum_{i}^{N}c_{i}K^{i}_{Y,u}. \label{EqKernels} \end{align} The fact that we have two free parameters in the SOLA cost function is due to the ill-posed nature of the problem and leads to the well-known trade-off problem when using inversion techniques. In this particular case, the question of the trade-off is particularly important since we have three oscillation modes in particular that have larger error bars than the all the others and two of these could sometimes see their individual frequencies fitted within their error bars. Another specificity of asteroseismic inversions is that they are performed with little or no knowledge of the radius of the observed target, noted $R_{tar}$. In section $2.1$ of \citet{Buldgentu}, we analysed the impact of this problem on equations of the type of Eq. \ref{EqFreqStruc}. It was then shown that the inversion implicitely scaled the observed target to the same radius as the reference model used to perform the inversion while keeping its mean density constant. This meant that the target studied by the inversion was not defined by a mass $M_{tar}$ and a radius $R_{tar}$ but was a scaled target defined by a mass $\frac{M_{tar}R^{3}_{ref}}{R^{3}_{tar}}$ and a radius $R_{ref}$. This does not restrict the diagnostic potential of the inversion technique but means that if we want to compare results from various reference models, we need to compare values of $t_{u}/R^{6}_{tar}$ to get rid of the implicit scaling process introducing a dependency in $R_{ref}$ in the inversion process. \subsection{Analysis of the error contributions}\label{SecErrAn} In Fig. \ref{figError}, we illustrate in orange the initial inversion results of $t_{u}/R^{6}_{Tar}$ with their quite large error bars, $R_{Tar}$ being the target photospheric radius. They seemed disappointing since the kernel fits were excellent and implied that there were enough kernels to fit the target function of the $t_{u}$ inversions. This implied that the problem was simply stemming from the observational errors propagation term in the cost function of the SOLA method. The classical way to deal with this problem is to increase the $\theta$ parameter in the cost function thus reducing the propagation of observational errors. While this may be a solution, changing the $\theta$ parameter can lead lead to a much less accurate fit of the target function and thus reduces the quality of the inversion. This implies larger errors on the inverted result coming from the kernel fit as shown in \citet{Buldgentu}. From our previous test cases, we also know that around $50$ frequencies is sufficient to obtain an inverted value for $t_{u}$, especially if octupole modes are available. Consequently, we looked at the observed frequencies for which there were large uncertainties and found that the $\ell=3$, $n=14$ mode, the $\ell=3$, $n=15$ mode and the $\ell=3$, $n=16$ had much larger uncertainties than the other modes of similar radial order. The error bars on the individual frequencies were sometimes even larger than the frequency differences between $16$CygB and the computed reference models with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. This is of course somewhat inefficient since it implies that we are using frequency differences that cannot be exploited by the inversion techniques. In fact, frequency differences with large error bars can dominate the error contribution in the inversion results, especially if the inversion coefficient associated with the particular mode is important. This is in fact simply due to the form of the term associated with the error propagation in the SOLA cost-function which is written: \begin{align} \sum_{i}^{N}(c_{i}\sigma_{i})^{2}. \label{EqErrorContrib} \end{align} It is thus clear that modes with high inversion coefficients and large uncertainties contribute the most to the error propagation. Although the SOLA method tends to mitigate the impact of the modes with large uncertainties, the result is always a compromise between precision and accuracy. This trade-off is realized through the change of the free parameters of the inversion.In the context of asteroseismic inversions, the fact that each oscillation spectra has its own error bars, that each star is fitted individually within a given accuracy that can be variable and that each star occupies a different position in the HR diagram for which the linear approximation might be irrelevant to a certain degree, makes each inversion process unique. Therefore, from the mathematical point of view, each inversion has to be analysed differently, although trends in terms of inversion parameters can be seen and are understandable since they are linked to the data and model quality which can be objectively assessed. The trade-off problem of inversion techniques is illustrated by the so-called trade-off curves that can be seen in the original paper on the OLA method by \citet{Backus} or \citet{Pijpers} for the SOLA method. Typically, each frequency set defines the number of coefficient available, thus the resolution of the inversion. However, this resolution is mitigated by the error bars of these individual modes which limit the amplitude of the coefficient that can be built to fit the target function. The trade-off curve materializes this competition with respect to the parameter $\theta$ of the inversion. We describe a little bit more in depth the trade-off problem and the effect of eliminating modes in the frequency spectrum in Sect. \ref{secapperror}. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=9cm]{ErrorEffects} \caption{In orange, inversion results for the $t_{u}$ indicator and $\bar{\rho}$ with the full set of modes for $16$CygB. In green, inversion results for the same models excluding the modes with the largest error bars in the frequency set. The blue squares are associated with inversion results for which the trade-off parameter $\theta$ has been slightly enhanced. In red, blue and magenta, $t_{u}$ and $\bar{\rho}$ values in the reference models (See text for the explanation of the colour code).} \label{figError} \end{figure} Important error bars can indeed be seen for the $\ell=3$, $n=14$ mode, which is the octupole mode of lowest radial order. We know indeed from our previous test cases \citep[see][]{Buldgentu} that the $t_{u}$ inversion uses preferentially the low order modes and tends to benefit from the presence of octupole modes and use them as much as possible. Since this particular mode has the highest error bar, we wanted to see how eliminating it from the frequency set used for the inversion could help us obtain a smaller error propagation. As previously explained, inversion techniques use individual frequencies to extract information. However, this is only possible if the frequencies used by the inversions are not fitted within their observational error bars. Typically, if one eliminates a mode with large error bars, one reduces the amplification of the errors but also the resolution of the inversion. Ultimately, eliminating a mode from the frequency set is only justified if its detection is arguable or if it is already fitted within the error bars. Otherwise, reducing the error bars is more efficiently done by increasing slightly the value of the $\theta$ parameter. In the particular case of $16$CygB, some individual modes could be fitted within their error bars and thus could not bring any additional seismic constraints if used in an inversion process. Finally, eliminating the worst offenders in terms of error bars is a process that has also been described in helioseismic inversions \citep[see][]{BasuSun}, since they can have strong impact on SOLA inversions when adjusting the trade-off parameters for the inversion. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=18cm]{KernelEffects} \caption{Left panel: averaging kernels for the core conditions indicator $(t_{u})$ for various $\theta$ values and reduced frequency spectrum. Right panel: same figure for the cross-term kernels of the $t_{u}$ inversion. We used the $(u,Y)$ structural pair in both plots.} \label{figKernels} \end{figure} In Fig. \ref{figError}, we show the impact of the modes with the largest error bars on the final inversion error propagation and values of $t_{u}$ and $\bar{\rho}$ for reference models. The new result with reduced error bars are illustrated in green and light-blue. The green results are obtained by eliminating problematic modes and the light-blue results are those obtained by slightly increasing the value of the $\theta$ parameter. We associated the following colour code for the values inferred from the reference models: a blue cross means that the $t_{u}$ value agrees will all inversion results, a magenta cross that it agrees with some inversion results and a red cross that it does not agree with any result. We can see that eliminating the modes with large uncertainties reduces significantly the error bars on the inverted result, without changing much the actual inverted value. A change in the inverted value would have meant that the mode had a significant impact on the inversion result. In practice, this could be seen by a change in the fit of the target function by the averaging kernel. This could be the case if one had fewer individual frequencies and that the problematic oscillation mode was used by the inversion despite its large error bars. In figure \ref{figKernels}, we illustrate the change in the averaging and cross-term kernel fit that is induced by the elimination of the most problematic modes in terms of observational error bars and an increase of the trade-off parameter $\theta$. As was the case for the inverted $t_{u}$ values, the differences on the averaging kernels are minimal. Hence, an independent study of $16$CygB in terms of $t_{u}$ can be performed. In the next section, we present new inversions results using a greater number of models for different surface chemical compositions, yet within the observational constraints, and for different diffusion coefficients, in much the same way as what was done in our previous study, more focused on $16$CygA. \subsection{$t_{u}$ Inversion for $16$CygB}\label{SecRestu} In this section, we present the results for the $t_{u}$ inversions for $16$CygB. Using the reference models computed with our Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm and the more regularized inversions, we were able to obtain a value of $t_{u}$ for $16$CygB with lower error bars. However, the uncertainties are still non-negligible. Thus, we have to combine our analysis with other diagnostics and carefully discuss our final results, as was done in our previous study of $16$CygA. In Fig \ref{figBox}, we present our results for various models with various surface chemical composition and changes of the factor $D$ associated with atomic diffusion in CLES. The results we obtain are slightly model-dependent, which is very similar to what was obtained for $16$CygA, but the trend is in this particular case opposite to what was seen before. Indeed, in \citet{BuldgenCyg}, we saw that including microscopic diffusion provided much more consistent values of the $t_{u}$ indicator when compared to the inverted values. For $16$CygB, models with lower helium surface abundances, higher surface metallicities and less diffusion are favoured. In fact, reducing the $t_{u}$ value is directly related to a reduction of the gradient of $u=\frac{P}{\rho} \approx \frac{T}{\mu}$, with $T$ the temperature and $\mu$ the mean molecular weight. Consequently, reducing $t_{u}$ implies reducing the mean molecular weight gradient within the star or changing the temperature gradient in the regions where the $t_{u}$ indicator is sensitive. Reducing the mean molecular weight gradient can first be done by eliminating microscopic diffusion in the models. Indeed, this process tends to accumulate heavy elements in the deeper regions since for stars around $1.0M_{\odot}$, gravitational settling dominate the transport mechanism in the deep radiative regions. However, as stated before, not including this process leads to inconsistent ages and chemical compositions for both stars. Therefore, the reason for this discrepancy has to be explained using a more subtle effect. We show in Fig. \ref{figTuY} the differences in chemical composition and in the weight function involved in the integral expression for the $t_{u}$ indicator for two of our reference models in the chemical composition box. Model$_{1}$ is a model with a higher helium content $(Y_{S}=0.26)$, lower metallicity $((Z/X)_{S}=0.0208)$ and microscopic diffusion $(D=1.0)$, thus following the prescription derived from our previous study. Consequently, it is also less massive $(M=0.91 M_{\odot})$ and within the ``young'' range of our reference models $(Age=7.32Gy)$. Due to the higher helium content and efficient microscopic diffusion, this model is rejected by the $t_{u}$ inversion. Model$_{2}$ has a low helium content $(Y_{S}=0.22)$ and a higher metallicity $((Z/X)_{S}=0.0214)$ and a less efficient microscopic diffusion $(D=0.5)$. This model is significantly more massive than Model$_{1}$ $(M=1.01M_{\odot})$ but has a quite similar age of $7.54Gy$. The strong difference in mass is due to the well known degeneracy associated with the helium abundance. It should be noted that this model is validated by the $t_{u}$ inversion. This illustrates the fact that simply changing the surface chemical composition or microscopic diffusion has a strong impact on the fundamental parameters of the star and implies strong changes in the internal structure even if the model fits all the observational constraints (although Model$_{1}$ should be rejected due to its lower radius). Both models were chosen because they were extreme cases and illustrated well the strong degeneracy due to helium abundance. \subsection{Comparison with $16$CygA} If we consider again $16$CygA, the models with masses around $1.01M_{\odot}$, high helium content and ages $7.2$Gy around were considered to be the best models of this star since they reproduced the $t_{u}$ trend seen in our previous paper. This would mean that we would chose a model closer to Model$_{1}$ to be consistent in terms of the initial chemical composition of both components. However, since in this case we have to reduce the $t_{u}$ values, and thus apply the opposite changes to the chemical composition and microscopic diffusion, the $16$CygB have higher masses and ages (like Model$_{2}$ mentionned above), going up to $1.03M_{\odot}$ and $8.0$Gy. The fact that the inversion is able to distinguish between Model$_{1}$ and Model$_{2}$ proves again the diagnostic potential of this approach. In this particular case, due to the fact that both stars are within a binary system, we are even able to see whether our selected result will be consistent with the previously determined parameters for $16$CygA. Due to the very similar chemical composition derived spectroscopically and seismically, due to the results of independent forward modelling of both components leading to similar ages and initial chemical composition, we rather consider that the differences seen with the inversion technique is to be explained by inaccuracies in the models rather than considering the binary system to have merged from two isolated stars. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=18cm]{ResultsB} \caption{Left panel: mean density $(\bar{\rho})$ vs core conditions indicator $(t_{u})$ plot. The inversion results are plotted in orange with their respective error bars. The crosses are values for the reference models computed with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm with AGSS$09$, the black $\times$ shows one example of a model computed with GN$93$ and $Y_{f}=0.25$. Right panel: surface chemical composition box for $16$CygB. The colour code used allows direct trend comparisons between the surface chemical composition and the $t_{u}$ values. The size of the symbols is related to the intensity of microscopic diffusion, the smaller the symbol, the smaller the $D$ coefficient. The $+$ and the $\lozenge$ illustrate the impact of the metallicity on the $t_{u}$ value.} \label{figBox} \end{figure} We also illustrate in Fig. \ref{figBox} the results for one model using the GN$93$ abundances and models which were computed using the AGSS$09$ abundances and assuming a similar initial chemical composition to what was derived for $16$CygA in our previous study. These models show values of $t_{u}/R^{6}_{tar}$ around $3.7$ $g^{2}/cm^{6}$ whereas the model with GN$93$ is more consistent with the inversion results of $3.0\pm0.5$ $g^{2}/cm^{6}$. It is clear that models computed assuming the same ingredients as $16$CygA are incompatible from the point of view of the inversion. However, since these stars form a binary system and thus are thought to have formed together, we should be able to derive similar values of the initial chemical abundance and similar ages for both components of the system. This problem is also reflected in the effective temperature and radii determination. The well-known helium mass degeneracy leads to smaller radii for models with higher helium abundances, for example. We also tried using larger error bars on the effective temperature and looked at models with $T_{eff}$ between $5600$ $K$ and $5900$ $K$ to see if this could affect the results. Ultimately, no trend was found since they are ultimately related to the chemical abundances and the way the elements are mixed within the star. These effects are well-known to affect the position of the models in the HR diagram at the end of its evolution. Thus, in what follows, we will focus on these aspects to try to reconcile our models of $16$CygB with those of $16$CygA and the inverted results. In terms of precision and accuracy, it should be noted that neither the model-dependency, nor the regularisation can be held responsible for an inaccurate result. Hence, as shown in this section, in particular thanks to the large variety of reference models, we can see that surface chemical composition changes are not sufficient to explain the inverted values of $t_{u}$. In fact, taking $\theta=10^{-4}$ still implies very similar inversion results with reduced error bars and a slightly worse fit to the target function. Moreover, we know from our previous numerous test cases that the $t_{u}$ inversion provided accurate seismic diagnostic of core regions \citep[See][]{Buldgentu}. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=17cm]{StrucProfiles} \caption{Left panel: In blue, helium abundance profile $(Y)$ for one model with a lower surface helium abundance, around $0.22$. In red, $Y$ profile for a model with a higher surface abundance, around $0.26$. Right panel: the profile of the target function of the core conditions indicator $(t_{u})$ is plotted in corresponding colours for both models.} \label{figTuY} \end{figure} \subsection{Influence of physical parameters on $t_{u}$} When analysing the effects of microscopic diffusion, the problem is even worse, since if we trust the values of $Y_{f} \in \left[ 0.24\; 0.25 \right]$ for the final surface helium abundance of $16$CygA, we should obtain higher $Y_{f}$ values for its less-massive counterpart due to the fact that its convective envelope goes slightly deeper and implies less-efficient microscopic diffusion. One should note that similar conclusions can be drawn for the surface heavy element abundance of this star. In fact, increasing the amount of heavy elements in the stars increases the opacity in the deep radiative regions where the $t_{u}$ indicator is sensitive (see Fig. \ref{figKernels}). Thus, it implies an increase of the temperature gradient, $\frac{dT}{dr}$. Now, since $t_{u}\propto \left(\frac{du}{dr} \right)^{2}$ (see Eq. \ref{EqtuRef}), it is worth looking more in depth at the behaviour of this indicator with changes in the stellar structure. Using the ideal gaz approximation, we have a straightforward relation between $u$, $T$ and $\mu$. \begin{align} \left(\frac{du}{dr}\right)^{2}&\approx \frac{T^{2}}{\mu^{2}}\left(\frac{d \ln T}{dr}-\frac{d \ln \mu}{dr}\right)^{2}. \label{EqGrad} \end{align} \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=17cm]{GradientsmuT} \caption{Left panel: plot showing the difference of the gradient of the natural logarithm of temperature $(T)$ and that of the mean molecular weight $(\mu)$ for models including different mixing processes: the green curve is for a model with microscopic diffusion, the blue curve is for a model with a constant turbulent diffusion coefficient and the red curve is for an exponentially decaying turbulent diffusion coefficient. Right panel: the gradient of the natural logarithm of the mean molecular weight and of the temperature for the same models as in the left panel, the colour code has been respected.} \label{figStruc} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=17cm]{GradXn2} \caption{Left panel: plot showing the hydrogen gradient of the same models as in Fig. \ref{figStruc}. Left panel: plot showing the Brunt-Väisälä frequency of these models.} \label{figStruc2} \end{figure} This formula implies that the behaviour of the indicator depends on the values of the gradients themselves. As can be seen in the right panel of Fig. \ref{figStruc}, it is not always straightforward to say whether an increase of the mean molecular weight gradient through diffusion will imply an increase of $t_{u}$. For example, below $0.1$ R, with $R$ the stellar radius, it will be the case because diffusion will increase the depth of the minimum just below $0.1$ R. However, adding extra mixing around $0.2$ R or $0.3$ R will smooth the transition towards the chemically homogeneous convective envelope (around $0.7$ for this model) thereby decreasing the value of $t_{u}$. Similarly, increasing the temperature gradient below $0.1$ will reduce $t_{u}$, and reducing $\frac{dT}{dr}$ above $0.1$ (thus sharpening the transition towards the convective envelope) will imply the same reduction for the indicator. One can see these effects in Fig. \ref{figStruc} where we illustrated the impact of different types of mixing on the temperature and $\mu$ gradients and thus on the $t_{u}$ indicator. This gives us a clue as to what could be modified in the models to reconcile the inversion results with the other constraints. However, it does not mean that this is the only solution to the problem we presented previously. For the sake of illustration, we also illustrate the hydrogen gradient and the Brunt-Väisälä frequency of these models, showing the change of the slope of the hydrogen gradient at the bottom of the convective zone but also a significant deplacement of the base of the convective zone for these models due to the use of the new opacities from the OPAS project. The OPAS opacities are new opacity tables specifically designed for solar-like conditions, where great care has been given to the details of the absorption lines considered. These models also used the latest version of the OPAL equation of state \citep{Rogerseos}. These changes of course affect the stratification below the convective zone and thus the behaviour of the $t_{u}$ indicator. Turbulent diffusion also implied a change of the Brunt-Väisälä frequency in the very deep regions (below $0.1$ R), this is particulary seen for the model associated with constant turbulent diffusion. In practice, all thermodynamic quantities are coupled through the equation of state. For example, adding a mixing process will affect the chemical composition, thus the mean molecular weight, but it will also affect the opacity and indirectly the temperature gradient. Consequently, the $t_{u}$ inversion offers a new insight on some differences between the target and the reference model, but does not provide the physical cause of the observed differences in structure. \section{Impact of physical ingredients on the core conditions indicator}\label{SecDisc} \subsection{Adding extra mixing} Because of the $t_{u}$ inversion results, we are faced with a very peculiar problem. We have two stars, in a binary system, with very similar surface chemical composition, similar masses and radii, that show significantly different seismic behaviours when carrying out inversions of their structure. The problem is that the models for both stars cannot be consistent with the inversion results and simultaneously present similar chemical composition and age. Small discrepancies in chemical composition between both stars have proven not to be sufficient to eliminate the discrepancy with the inverted $t_{u}$ values. Therefore, we had to assume that something was neglected in the models for $16$CygB, or $16$CygA, or for both stars. In what follows, we study supplementary models including a parametrized approach for an additional mixing process. The physical nature of this mixing process is not discussed here, but we demonstrate that the $t_{u}$ indicator is, as expected, able to discriminate between various processes inside the star. Figure \ref{figBoxMix} shows various $t_{u}$ inversion results for different implementations of diffusion yielding different chemical compositions. At first, we still wish to see whether there is a way reconcile the chemical composition of $16$CygB with that of $16$CygA. The parametrization of this additional mixing is based on an implementation of turbulent diffusion used in previous studies \citep[see][for details]{Miglio}. We tested different implementations of this mixing. First, we added a constant turbulent diffusion coefficient of around $20cm^{2}s^{-1}$ acting in the entire stellar structure and computed a few models fitting the observational constraints for $16$CygB. The impact of the constant turbulent diffusion coefficient is quite strong. Indeed, gradients are quickly attenuated and the $t_{u}$ value decreases, as can be seen in Fig. \ref{figBoxMix} with the positions of the blue $\lozenge$ in the left panel. However, disagreement with other constraints is quickly found if this mixing is further increased. For example, it is impossible to fit the individual small frequency separations when the extra mixing is too important although the acoustic radius, the mean density and other constraints of the cost function of the forward modelling can be accurately fitted. We also computed models with a diffusion coefficient implemented as an exponential decay starting either from the bottom of the convective envelope or from the surface. Two parameters are used for this formalism, one multiplicative constant and the rate of exponential decay. From previous studies \citep{Miglio}, we know that a multiplicative coefficient of around $100cm^{2}s^{-1}$ is consistent with the effects of rotation expected in solar-like stars. This value was used as a benchmark for the order of magnitude of the mixing, but we did not limit ourselves to this value since we wanted to investigate the effects of this parametric implementation on the $t_{u}$ indicator. We thus allowed changes of up to $\pm 50cm^{2}s^{-1}$ in the value of this diffusion coefficient. From Fig. \ref{figBoxMix}, where the models with the implementation of turbulent diffusion as an exponential decay starting from the surface are represented by blue $+$, we can see that it can indeed help to reconcile the models with the $t_{u}$ values for $16$CygB, even if a higher present surface helium value is considered, as had to be done for $16$CygA. The fundamental parameters of these models are presented in table \ref{tabNewresB}, we note that they have slightly higher masses and ages than the models without turbulent diffusion for the same chemical composition. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=18cm]{ResultsBMix} \caption{Left panel: mean density $(\bar{\rho})$ vs core conditions indicator $(t_{u})$ plot. The inversion results are plotted in orange with their respective error bars. The $\times$ are values for the reference models computed with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm without extra mixing. The $\square$ are related to models with a decaying exponential turbulent diffusion coefficient starting at the bottom of the convective enveloppe. The $+$ show models with a decaying exponential diffusion coefficient starting from the surface and the $\lozenge$ use a constant turbulent diffusion coefficient. The $$ depict models using the new OPAS opacities and the decaying exponential coefficient starting from the surface. Right panel: surface chemical composition box for $16$CygB. The colour code allows direct trend comparisons between the surface chemical composition and the $t_{u}$ and $\bar{\rho}$ values as in Fig. \ref{figBox}.} \label{figBoxMix} \end{figure} As expected, additional mixing can indeed help to reconcile the chemical compositions of both stars, but does not reconcile them in age since some of the models computed with the extra mixing have ages up to $8$Gy even if most are still around $7.4-7.7$Gy. It is also noticeable that the masses of the models in the present study tend to be slightly higher than those previously found in \citet{BuldgenCyg} using constraints from the $16$CygA modelling. However, all of these models are still consistent with the radius, luminosity and $\log g$ constraints from the litterature. A clear trend is also seen in the fact that increasing the mixing improves the agreement between the reference models and the inversion. However, as the models come closer to the inverted values for $t_{u}$, they tend to be less consistent with the small frequency separation values, meaning that the extra mixing should not be too intense. Indeed, reducing the rate of exponential decay (thereby extending the effects of extra mixing to lower regions) or increasing directly the turbulent diffusion coefficient leads to the same disagreement with the small frequency separations. To better understand the problems here, we plot the effects of the extra mixing on both the metallicity and helium profiles in Fig. \ref{figProfMix}. We see that the main effect is to reduce a metallicity peak right under the convective region. The more reduced the peak is, the closer the $t_{u}$ values to the inverted ones. But in the meantime, we also degrade the agreement with the small frequency separations. Changes are also seen for the helium profile right under the convection zone. During the fitting process with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm, this affects the initial helium abundance required to be within the constraints from \citet{Verma} and thus indirectly the hydrogen profile and thus the metallicity constraint. \begin{figure}[t] \flushleft \includegraphics[width=18cm]{StrucProfilesMix} \caption{Left panel: helium abundance plot for three models with different implementations of turbulent diffusion. For the red curve, a constant mixing coefficient was applied throughout the structure and the evolution of the model. For the blue curve, we used an exponential decay starting from the base of the convective envelope of the model. For the green curve, we used an exponential decay starting from the surface of the model. For the magenta curve, we used a model including only microscopic diffusion. Right panel: The metallicity profiles of the three models described above.} \label{figProfMix} \end{figure} \subsection{Changing the opacities} To further investigate the problem, we computed additional models with the new OPAS opacities \citep{Mondet,Lepennec} including atomic diffusion and the implementation of turbulent diffusion using a exponential decaying function starting from the surface. We used our forward modelling approach to compute these models and analysed whether they models could agree better with both the small frequency separations and the inverted values of $t_{u}$. As stated before, adding extra mixing could reduce the agreement with the small frequency separations if its intensity was too high. However, when using the new opacities, we were able to further increase the intensity of the extra mixing, and thus the agreement with the $t_{u}$ inversion, without degrading the agreement with the small frequency separations. As such, they provide a partial help to the problem of fitting the all constraints, as can be seen from the position of the blue $$ in Fig. \ref{figBoxMix}, but do not solve completely the problem. We can see the influence of these increased opacities, slightly moving deeper the base of the convective envelope and changing the efficiency of the mixing right below the base of the convective zone. We recall here that these models were still selected with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm using the observational constraints of $16$CygB. The fundamental parameters of these models computed with were very similar to those obtained previously, but these models tended to show a slightly lower luminosity around $1.18L_{\odot}$ and mass around $0.98M_{\odot}$ and are thus responsible for the "lower" part of the intervals given in table \ref{tabNewresB}. \begin{table}[t] \caption{Parameters of the models of $16$CygB with extra mixing and OPAS opacities} \label{tabNewresB} \centering \begin{tabular}{r \| c \| c } \hline \hline & \textbf{ $16$CygB models} & \textbf{ $16$CygB models } \\ & \textbf{(Mixing)} & \textbf{(OPAS + mixing)}\\ \hline \textit{Mass ($\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$)}& $0.98$-$1.00$ & $0.96$-$0.99$\\ \textit{Radius ($\mathrm{R_{\odot}}$)}& $1.07$-$1.10$ & $1.07$-$1.09$\\ \textit{Age ($\mathrm{Gyr}$)} &$7.2$-$7.6$ & $7.3$-$7.5$\\ \textit{$L_{\odot}$ $(\mathrm{L_{\odot}})$} & $1.19$-$1.22$ & $1.17$-$1.20$\\ \textit{$Z_{0}$} & $0.0180$-$0.0190$ & $0.185$-$0.019$\\ \textit{$Y_{0}$} & $0.28$-$0.30$ & $0.28-0.30$\\ \textit{$\alpha_{\mathrm{MLT}}$} & $1.78$-$1.90$ & $1.75$-$1.8$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} It can also be seen that when using a turbulent diffusion coefficient decaying from the lower boundary of the convective region, the effect on $t_{u}$ is slightly more efficient, as illustrated by the position of the blue $\square$ in the $\bar{\rho}-t_{u}$ diagram of Fig. \ref{figBoxMix}. Nevertheless, we did not seek here to fine-tune the parameters in this study since we are using a parametric approach to the problem without any physical background. At this stage, we can already conclude that reconciling both models in terms of chemical composition and age will also probably need to remodel $16$CygA to analyse whether effects other than diffusion could not be held responsible for the trend in $t_{u}$ previously observed. In that sense, looking at constraints from the lithium abundance \citep{King} and combining these constraints in the modelling of both stars might change the derived fundamental parameters by a few percents. \section{Conclusion}\label{SecConc} In this paper, we updated our study of the $16$Cyg binary system by focusing our attention on $16$CygB. From a re-analysis of the data, we were able to extract information from the $t_{u}$ inversion and analyse the impact of extra mixing on the $t_{u}$ values and other classical seismic indicators. First, we illustrated and solved the problem associated with the propagation of observational errors for inversions in $16$CygB by analysing the impact of trade-off parameters and the presence of modes which in some cases were useless for the inversion technique. Ultimately, this approach could be used in similar situations for other observed targets. From the $t_{u}$ inversion, we were able to expose a problem in the surface chemical composition of $16$CygB when compared to its companion. We computed a new set of models for this star, varying the surface chemical composition and restricting the effect of diffusion. We then observed that when the models were consistent with the inversion results, they were systematically inconsistent with the surface chemical composition we obtained for $16$CygA. Since changing the chemical composition was not the solution, we sought to implement an extra mixing process in the models of $16$CygB and tried to analyse its potential impact on the $t_{u}$ values. As intuitively guessed, an extra mixing in the form of turbulent diffusion was found to be able to reconcile the models both with the surface chemical composition of $16$CygA and the inversion results. Furthermore, using the new OPAS opacity tables further improved the agreement with the inversion. One could argue that other implementations could be tested, such as extra mixing in the form of undershooting using the prescription of \citet{Zahn} as was found in HD $52265$ by \citet{Lebreton}. However, as was described in \citet{Lebreton}, this extra mixing would leave an oscillatory pattern in the $rr_{01}$ and $rr_{10}$ seismic indicators. Due to the quality of the seismic data of $16$CygB, we were able compute these indicators and found no evidence for an oscillatory pattern but rather a decreasing trend with frequency that is well reproduced by models without undershooting. To conclude, we can state that various physical processes could improve the agreement. For example, a change in opacity would further change the results of the forward modelling process and thus the stellar parameters obtained with the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm, these new models could potentially be in agreement with the inversion of the $t_{u}$ indicator. In this study, extra mixing in the form of turbulent diffusion was invoked to reduce the disagreement between the inversion and the models. However, we did not seek to provide a physical explanation for this mixing and while it helps reducing the disagreement, further studies need to be performed to completely solve the problem. One first point would be to re-analyse $16$CygA in the scope of the impact of extra mixing. Indeed, we have shown here that turbulent diffusion can change the $t_{u}$ values. It is also well-known that rotation induces such type of extra mixing and it is believed to be responsible for the destruction of lithium in stars. Therefore, a first step would be to perform a thorough study of the impact of extra mixing on lithium abundances and inversion results for $16$CygA. The case of $16$CygB should be re-analysed afterwards, since it is well-known that this star shows even lower lithium abundances and is believed to have triggered thermohaline diffusion by accreting planetary matter \citep[See][]{Deal}. As such, combining spectroscopic and seismic constraints in this binary system may provide new insights on stellar modelling of solar-like stars. Moreover, additional indicators obtained through inversions seem to be a promising way to analyse the boundaries of convective envelopes. Consequently, from the sensitivity of seismic inversions and the quality of additional constraints, we are convinced that a re-analysis of the $16$Cyg binary system with new stellar models should shed new lights on extra mixing processes in stellar interiors. \begin{acknowledgements} G.B. is supported by the FNRS (``Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique'') through a FRIA (``Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l'Industrie et l'Agriculture'') doctoral fellowship. This article made use of an adapted version of InversionKit, a software developed in the context of the HELAS and SPACEINN networks, funded by the European Commissions's Sixth and Seventh Framework Programmes. \end{acknowledgements}
\section{Introduction} Eigenspace Representations for Riemannian symmetric spaces play a crucial rule in the research both of Group representations and Geometric Analysis. Many mathematicians have a great interest in the conditions for which the eigenspace representations are irreducible. In fact, Robert Steinberg[S1] has made a great contribution to it, by using purely invariant theory of finite reflection groups. However, our approach is by using both of Mackey little group method and invariant theory. What's more, the main part of our proof is just accourding to a monomorphism. Therefore, it makes the proof much simpler. Also, Sigurdur Helgason is another master, who has classified the irreducibility about the eigenspace representations with respect to both of the compact type and the noncompact type [H1] of the symmetric space $G/K$. What's more, when $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes O(n)$, $K=O(n)$, the eigenspace about $G/K\cong \mathbb{R}^{n}$ becomes $\varepsilon_{\lambda}(\mathbb{R}^{n})=\{f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{n})\mid Lf=-\lambda^{2}f\}$, where $L$ denotes the ususal Laplacian on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. And Helgason also proved the natural action of $G$ on $\varepsilon_{\lambda}(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ is irreducible if and only if $\lambda\neq 0$[H2]. In this paper, we prove a more general result. We find a generic property under which the eigenspace representations for $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K$, where $K$ is a finite pseudo-reflection group are irreducible. \begin{definition} finite pseudo-reflection groups if $K$ is a finite subgroup of $GL(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ and $M\in K$, then $M$ is called a pseudo-reflection if precisely one eigenvalue of $M$ is not equal to one. We call $K$ is a finite pseudo-reflection group if $K$ is a finite subgroup of $O(n)$, which is generated by pseudo-reflections. \end{definition} The main idea of the proof is as follows: On one hand, we use Mackey little group method to get induced representations of $G$, which are irreducible. On the other hand, for any such representation $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K}\chi$, which satisfies the generic property, we use matrix coefficient method to get a monomorphism from it to some eigenspace representation$(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, which satisfies the same property. The amazing part is we know dim$Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K}\chi$=$\mid K\mid$ and will prove dim$E_{\lambda}\leq \mid K\mid$ by using invariant theory. Therefore, $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K}\chi$ is equivalent to $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ and $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is irreducible. This paper is as follows. In Sect.2, we give the definitions of semidirect product of $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K$, eigenspace representations of $G$ and the generic property. What's more, we recall the basic knowledge of Mackey litte group method. In Sect.3,we show there is a monomorphism from the unitary irreducible induced representations of $G$ to some eigenspace representations both of which satisfy the generic property. In Sect.4, we show the dimension of any eigenspace of $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K$ is smaller or equal to the order of $K$ by using invariant theory. Thus,the eigenspace representations, which satisfy the generic property are irreducible. In Sect.5, we illustrate the circumstances for a particular example when $K$ is equal to the Dihendral group $D_n$. \section{Notation and Preliminaries} \begin{definition} semidirect product Let $K$ be a finite pseudo-reflection group, Define \begin{equation} \varphi:K\rightarrow Aut(\mathbb{R}^{n}) \end{equation} \begin{equation} A\mapsto A \end{equation} Then \begin{equation} \begin{split} &(x_1,k_1)\rtimes (x_2,k_2)=(x_1+k_1\cdot x_2,k_1\cdot k_2)\\ &(x,k)^{-1}=(-k^{-1}\cdot x,k^{-1}). \end{split} \end{equation} Under this definition,we have the identification \begin{equation} \mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K/K\cong \mathbb{R}^{n} \end{equation} \end{definition} \begin{definition} Eigenspace Representations Let $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K$, where $K$ is a finite pseudo-reflection group. $D(G/K)$ is the algebra of all differential operators on $G/K$ which are invariant under $K$. For each homomorphism \ $\chi:D(G/K)\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$, consider the joint eigenspace \begin{equation} E_{\chi}=\{f\in C^{\infty}(G/K)\mid Df=\chi(D)f \ \forall D\in D(G/K)\} \end{equation} Let $T_{\chi}$ denote the natural representation of $G$ on this eigenspace, \begin{equation} (T_{\chi}(g)f)(x)=f(g^{-1}\cdot x) \end{equation} for $g\in G, f\in E_{\chi},x\in G/K. $ \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Fourier transform gives a $K$-equivalent from the space $D(\mathbb{C}^{n})$ of constant coefficient differential operators on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ onto the space $\mathbb{C}[x_1,\cdots,x_n]$. In particular, it gives an isomorphism of $D(G/K)$ onto $\mathbb{C}[x_1,\cdots,x_n]^{K}$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} The homomorphisms of $\mathbb{C}[x_1,\cdots,x_n]^{K}$ into $\mathbb{C}$ are precisely $\chi_{\lambda}:P\mapsto P(\lambda)$, where $\lambda$ is some element in $\mathbb{C}^{n}$. \end{lemma} From Lemma 2.3[J] and Lemma 2.4[H3], we obtain for any $P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1},\cdots ,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n})\in D(G/K)$, where $P(x_{1},\cdots ,x_{n})\in \mathbb{C}[x_1,\cdots,x_n]$ any $\chi:D(G/K)\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$, there exists a unique \begin{equation} \lambda=\left( \begin{array}{c} \lambda_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \lambda_{n} \\ \end{array} \right) \end{equation} s.t. \begin{equation} \chi(P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1},\cdots,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}))=P(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_n) \end{equation} Therefore, for any homomorphism $\chi:D(G/K)\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$, we have \begin{equation} E_{\chi}=\{f\in C^{\infty}(G/K)\mid P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1},\cdots,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n})f=P(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_n)f, \forall P(x_1,\cdots,x_n)\in \mathbb{C}[x_1,\cdots,x_n]^{K}\} \end{equation} For simplicity, we denote $E_\chi=E_\lambda$ from now on. \end{definition} \begin{definition} Generic Property Let $\chi$ be any character on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, then there exists \begin{equation} \lambda=\left( \begin{array}{c} i\lambda_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ i\lambda_{n} \\ \end{array} \right)\in \mathbb{C}^{n} \end{equation} where $\lambda_{i}\in \mathbb{R}$,$i=1,\cdots,n$ s.t. \begin{equation} \chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x} \ for \ any \ x=\left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ x_{n} \\ \end{array} \right)\in \mathbb{R}^{n} \end{equation} We say $\chi(\ or \ \lambda)$ is generic if for any $g\neq e \ g\in K,g\cdot \lambda\neq \lambda$ holds. We say $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ satisfies the generic property if the same condition holds. \end{definition} \smallskip \textbf{Mackey little group method} If $\psi$ is an irreducible representation of $G=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K$, then it can be constructed(up to equivalence) as follows. If $\chi$ is a character on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, let $K_{\chi}$denote its $K$-normalizer, so $G_{\chi}=\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K_{\chi}$ is the $G$-normalizer of $\chi$. Write $\widetilde{\chi}$ for the extension of $\chi$ to $G_{\chi}$ given by $\widetilde{\chi}((x,k))=\chi(x)$; it is a well defined character on $G_{\chi}$. If $\gamma$ is an irreducible unitary representation of $K_{\chi}$, let $\widetilde{\gamma}$ denote its extension of $G_{\chi}$ given by $\widetilde{\gamma}((x,k))=\gamma(k)$. Denote $\psi_{\chi,\gamma}=Ind_{G_{\chi}}^{G}(\widetilde{\chi}\bigotimes \widetilde{\gamma})$. Then there exists choices of $\chi$ and $\gamma$ such that $\psi=\psi_{\chi,\gamma}$. We say $\psi_{\chi,\gamma}$ satisfies the generic property if $\chi$ is generic. \section{The monomorphism} In this section, we first introduce some lemmas, and then we use these lemmas to show there exists a monomorphism from the induced representations to some eigenspace representations both of which satisfy the generic property. \begin{lemma}\label{twist} In the notation of Section 2, $\psi_{\chi,\gamma}$ has a $K$-fixed vector if and only if $\gamma$ is the trivial 1-dimensional representation of $K_{\chi}$. In that case, $\psi_{\chi,\gamma}=Ind_{G_{\chi}}^{G}(\widetilde{\chi})$ \ and the $K$-fixed vector is given(up to scalar multiple)by $u((x,k))=e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x}$, if $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The representation space $H_{\psi}$ of $\psi=\psi_{\chi,\gamma}$ consists of all $L^{2}$ functions $f:G\rightarrow H_{\gamma}$ such that $f(g^{'}\cdot (x^{'},k^{'}))=\gamma(k^{'})^{-1}\cdot \chi(x^{'})^{-1}\cdot f(g^{'})$\ for $g^{'}\in G,x^{'}\in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ and $k^{'}\in K_{\chi}$, and $\psi$ acts by $(\psi(g)f)(g^{'})=f(g^{-1}\cdot g^{'})$. Now suppose that $0\neq f\in H_{\psi}$ is fixed under $\psi(k)$. If $k^{'}\in K_{\chi}$, then $\gamma(k^{'})\cdot f(1)=f(1)$. If $f(1)=0$, then $f(G_{\chi})=0$ and $K$-invariance says $f=0$, contrary to assumption. Thus $f(1)\neq 0$ and irreducibility of $\gamma$ forces $\gamma$ to be trivial. Conversely, if $\gamma$ is trivial and $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$, then $f((x,k))=e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x}$ is a nonzero $K$-fixed vector in $H_{\psi}$. And it is the only one, up to scalar multiple, because any two $K$-fixed vectors must be proportional. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} In the notation of Section 2, $Ind_{G_{\chi}}^{G}(\widetilde{\chi})$ is equivalent to the subrepresentation of $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$, which is generated by the $K$-fixed vector $u((x,k))=e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x}$. Here $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$. In addtion, both of these two representations are irreducible. \end{lemma} \begin{remark} If the induced representation satisfies the generic proporty, then $K_{\chi}=\{e\}$. From Lemma 3.1, 3.2[J], we obtain $\psi_{\chi,\gamma}=Ind_{G_{\chi}}^{G}(\widetilde{\chi})$ is equivalent to $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$, which is generated by the $K$-fixed vector $u((x,k))=e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x}$. \end{remark} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} Let $(\Phi,V)=Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$, which satisfies the generic property. Then $(\Phi^{c},V^{})$ is generated by $u^{}=(\ ,u)$, where $(f_{1},f_{2})=\int_{G}f_{1}(g)\overline{f_{2}(g)}dg$ for any $f_{1},f_{2}\in V$ and $u((x,k))=e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x}$ is the $K$ fixed vector in $V$, if $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The representation space $V$ of $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$ consists of all $L^{2}$ functions $f:G\rightarrow V$ such that $f(g^{'}\cdot (x^{'},e))=\chi(x^{'})^{-1}\cdot f(g^{'})$\ for $g^{'}\in G,x^{'}\in \mathbb{R}^{n}$. Therefore, $(f_{1},f_{2})=\int_{G}f_{1}(g)\overline{f_{2}(g)}dg$ for any $f_{1},f_{2}\in V$ is a inner product, which satisfies \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &(\Phi(g_{0})f_{1},\Phi(g_{0})f_{2})=\int_{G}\Phi(g_{0})f_{1}(g)\overline{\Phi(g_{0})f_{2}(g)}dg\\ &=\int_{G}f_{1}(g_{0}^{-1}\cdot g)\overline{f_{2}(g_{0}^{-1}\cdot g)}d(g_{0}^{-1}\cdot g)=\int_{G}f_{1}(g)\overline{f_{2}(g)}dg=(f_{1},f_{2}). \end{split} \end{equation} for any $f_{1},f_{2}\in V$, $g_{0}\in G$. On one hand, let $v_{1},\cdots ,v_{n}$ be an orthonormal basis of $V$. Then denote $v_{i}^{}=(\ ,v_{i})\in V^{}$. It's easy to check $v_{1}^{},\cdots , v_{n}^{}$ is a basis of $V^{}$. Let $E:V\rightarrow V^{}$ s.t. $v_{i}\mapsto v_{i}^{}$. be a linear map. Then $E$ is isomorphic as a linear map. From Remark 3.3, we know $V$ is irreducible and $V$ is generated by $u((x,k))$. Let $v_{k}=\sum_{i}l_{ki}\Phi(g_{i})u$,$\Phi(g_{i})u=\sum_{j}a_{ij}v_{j}$. Then for $\forall v\in V$, we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &v=\sum_{k}m_{k}v_{k}=\sum_{k}m_{k}(\sum_{i}l_{ki}\Phi(g_{i})u)\\ &=\sum_{i}(\sum_{k}m_{k}l_{ki})\Phi(g_{i})u\\ &=\sum_{i}n_{i}\Phi(g_{i})u=\sum_{i}n_{i}(\sum_{j}a_{ij}v_{j}). \end{split} \end{equation} Therefore, the element of $V$ is of the form $\sum_{i}n_{i}(\sum_{j}a_{ij}v_{j})$ \ $\forall n_{i}\in \mathbb{C}$. Since $E$ is bijective, we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &V^{}=\{\sum_{i}n_{i}(\sum_{j}a_{ij}v_{j}^{}),n_{i}\in \mathbb{C}\}\\ &=\{\sum_{i}\overline{n_{i}}(\sum_{j}\overline{a_{ij}}v_{j}^{}),n_{i}\in \mathbb{C}\} \end{split} \end{equation} On the other hand, if $\Phi(g)u=\sum_{i}k_{i}v_{i}$, we have $\Phi^{c}(g)u^{}=\Sigma_{i}\overline{k_{i}}v_{i}^{}$\label{l-invariant elements} This can be proved as follows: If we let $u=\sum_{i}m_{i}v_{i}$,and let $u^{}=\sum_{i}\overline{m_{i}}v_{i}^{}$ Then we have the following result \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &(u^{},v)=\sum_{i}\overline{m_{i}}v_{i}^{}(v)\\ &=\sum_{i}\overline{m_{i}}(v,v_{i})\\ &=(v,\sum_{i}m_{i}v_{i})=(v,u) \end{split} \end{equation} Therefore \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)=(u^{},\Phi(g^{-1})v)\\ &=(\Phi(g^{-1})v,u)=(v,\Phi(g)u)\\ &=(v,\sum_{i}k_{i}v_{i})=\sum_{i}\overline{k_{i}}v_{i}^{}(v) \end{split} \end{equation} Combining (3.7) and (3.9), we obtain \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &V^{}=\{\sum_{i}\overline{n_{i}}(\sum_{j}\overline{a_{ij}}v_{i}^{}),n_{i}\in \mathbb{C}\}\\ &=\{\sum_{i}\overline{n_{i}}\Phi^{c}(g_{i})u^{},n_{i}\in \mathbb{C}\}. \end{split} \end{equation} $\therefore u^{}$ generates $V^{}$. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} For any $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, which satisfies the generic property, we can find a representation $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)=(\Phi,V)$, which satisfies the same condition such that there exists monomorphism from $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$ to $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$. Here $G=\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} For any $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, we consider $(\Phi,V)=Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{G}(\chi)$, where $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$. Let $H=\{f_{v}(g)=\langle \Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v\rangle \ \forall v\in V\}$. It's easy to get $(\pi,H)$ is a representation of $G$, where $\pi(g_{0})f(g)=f(g_{0}^{-1}\cdot g)$ for any $g_{0}\in G$. On one hand, we show $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n} \rtimes K}(\chi)$ is equivalent to $(\pi,H)$. Let $F:V\rightarrow H$ by $v\mapsto f_{v}(g)=(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)$. It's easy to get $F$ is linear and surjective. Next, we prove $E$ is injective. Suppose $f_{v}(g)=0 \ \forall g\in G$. From Theorem 3.4, we know $u^{}$ generates $V^{}$. If $v\neq 0$, we can find a $v^{}\in V^{}$ s.t. $(v^{},v)=1$. However, from $(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)=0 \ for \ \forall g\in G$, we get $(v^{},v)=0$ a contradiction. $\therefore v=0$ Therefore, $F$ is bijective, which implies $F$ is isomorphism as a linear map. Next,for any $h\in G,v\in V$ \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &F\circ \Phi(h)v=(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},\Phi(h)v)\\ &=(\Phi^{c}(h^{-1})\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)=(\Phi^{c}(h^{-1}g)u^{},v)\\ &=f_{v}(h^{-1}g)=\pi(h)f_{v}(g)=\pi(h)\circ F\circ v. \end{split} \end{equation} $\therefore F\circ \Phi(h)=\pi(h)\circ F$ \ for any $h\in G$. Therefore, $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ is equivalent to $(\pi,H)$. On the other hand,we show $(\pi,H)$ is a subrepresentation of $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$. Firstly, $f_{v}(g)$ is smooth. And for any $k\in K,g\in G$, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &f_{v}(gk)=(\Phi^{c}(gk)u^{},v)=(\Phi^{c}(g)\Phi^{c}(k)u^{},v)\\ &=(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)=f_{v}(g). \end{split} \end{equation} $\therefore f_{v}(gk)=f_{v}(g)$ For any $g\in G,k\in K$. $\therefore f_{v}(g)$ is $K$-right invariant smooth function of $G$. We can regard $f_{v}(g)$ as a function, which belongs to $C^{\infty}(G/K)$. Secondly, for any $g=(x_{0},k_{0})=(x_{0},e)(0,k_{0})$ \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &f_{v}(g)=(\Phi^{c}(g)u^{},v)\\ &=(\Phi^{c}((x_{0},e)(0,k_{0})u^{},v)=(\Phi^{c}((x_{0},e))u^{},v)\\ &=(u^{},\Phi((x_{0},e)^{-1})v)=(u^{},e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x_{0}}v). \end{split} \end{equation} For any $P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\cdots ,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}})\in D(G/K)$, from Lemma 2.3, we have $P(x_{1},\cdots ,x_{n})\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\cdots x_{n}]^{K}.$ From K acts on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ by $K\times \mathbb{R}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n} \ (k,x)\mapsto k\cdot x$ and $(\Psi(k)e^{})(e)=e^{}(k^{-1}\cdot e)$ \ for any $e\in \mathbb{R}^{n},e^{}\in (\mathbb{R}^{n})^{} and \ k\in K$. We obtain the induced action $\Psi: K\times (\mathbb{R}^{n})^{}\rightarrow (\mathbb{R}^{n})^{}$ by \ $(k,\left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ \cdot\\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ x_{n} \\ \end{array} \right))$ $\rightarrow k^{T}\cdot \left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot\\ x_{n} \\ \end{array} \right)$ If we denote $k^{T}\cdot \left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ x_{n} \\ \end{array} \right)=\left( \begin{array}{c} \Psi(k)x_{1} \\ \cdot \\ \cdot \\ \cdot\\ \Psi(k)x_{n} \\ \end{array} \right)$, then we have $P(\Psi(k)x_{1},\cdots ,\Psi(k)x_{n})=P(x_{1},\cdots ,x_{n}) \ \forall k\in K$. Note that $k\cdot k^{T}=I$. Therefore \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\cdots ,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}})f_{v}(g)=(u^{},(P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\cdots ,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}})e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x_{0}})v)\\ &=(u^{},P(\Psi(k^{T})\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\Psi(k^{T})\lambda_{n})e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x_{0}}v)\\ &=(u^{},P(\Psi(k^{-1})\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\Psi(k^{-1})\lambda_{n})e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x_{0}}v)\\ &=P(\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\lambda_{n})(u^{},e^{\lambda^{T}\cdot k^{T}\cdot x_{0}}v)\\ &=P(\lambda_{1},\cdots ,\lambda_{n})f_{v}(g). \end{split} \end{equation} For any $P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\cdots ,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{n}})\in D(G/K)$ $\therefore f_{v}(g)\in E_{\lambda}$, which implies $H\subseteq E_{\lambda}$. This proves the theorem. \end{proof} \begin{remark} From the construction of $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$, we can see if $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ satisfies the generic property then its correspondence $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ satisfies the same property. What's more, once $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is fixed, then $\lambda$ is unique, thus $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ is unique. Therefore, if we let $A=\{$the irreducible representation $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$, which satisfies the generic property$\}$; $B=\{$Eigenspace Representation $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, which satisfies the generic property$\}$, there is a one-one correspondence between $A$ and $B$. \end{remark} \begin{remark} For any finite pseudo-reflection group $K$, any $\chi$ of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ which is generic, there is a simple fact: \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)=\bigoplus_{k\in K}\chi^{k} \end{equation} Therefore dim $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)=\mid K\mid$ \end{remark} \section{Irreducibility for eigenspace representations} In this section we first recall the invariant theory about finite groups and then use it to show the eigenspace representations which satisfy the generic property are irreducible. \textbf{Notations} Let $K$ be any finite pseudo-reflection group and let $I(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ denote the set of $K$-invariants in $S(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ and $I_{+}(\mathbb{R}^{n})\subset I(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ the set of $K$-invariants without constant term. Similarly, we define $I_{+}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})\subset I((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})\subset S((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$. An element $h\in S^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$ is said to be $K$-harmonic if $\partial(J)h=0$ \ for all $J\in I_{+}(\mathbb{R}^{n})$. Here \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} (\partial(X)f)(Y)=(\frac{d}{dt}f(Y+tX))_{t=0},f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{n});X,Y\in \mathbb{R}^{n}. \end{equation} Let $H^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$ denote the set of $K$-harmonic polynomial functions.Put $H((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})=S((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})\bigcap H^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$. For simplicity, we let $S=S^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$,$I=I^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$, $H=H^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$, $I_{+}\subset I$ be the space of invariants without constant term, $J$ the ideal $I_{+}S$. \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Let $K$ be a compact group of linear transformations of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ over $R$. Then $S((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})=I((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})\cdot H((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$ and therefore $S^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})=I^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})H^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$. That is, each polynomial $P$ on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ has the form $p=\sum_{k}i_{k}h_{k}$, where $i_{k}$ is $G$-invariant and $h_{k}$ harmonic. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Let $K$ be a finite pseudo-reflection group acting on the n-dimensional real vector space $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. Then the algebra $I^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$ of invariants is generated by n homogeneous elements, which are algebraically independent. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Let $K$ be a finite pseudo-reflection group, then we obtain $\sum_{0}^{\infty}dim(I^{k})t^{k}=\frac{1}{\mid G\mid}\sum_{g\in K}(det(I-tg))^{-1}$, where $I$ is the identity operator on $(\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c}$ and $I^{k}$ denotes the subspaces consisting of homogeneous elements of degree $k$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Let $K$ be a finite pseudo-reflection group acting on the real vector space $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. Let $j_{1},\cdots ,j_{n}$ be homogeneous generators for the algebra $I^{c}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$ of $K$-invariants. Let $d_{1},\cdots ,d_{n}$be their respective degrees. Then \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \Pi_{i=1}^{n}d_{i}=\mid K\mid. \end{equation} Where $\mid K\mid$ denotes the order of $K$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By general theory(see[S2],PP.100), we have $trdeg(Q/C)=trdeg(Q/K)+trdeg(K/C)$. And we observe from it the $j_{i}$ are algebraically independent. Let $j\in I^{k}$, the space of homogeneous invariants of degree k. Then $j$ is a linear combination of monomials $j_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots j_{n}^{a_{n}}$ for which \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} a_{1}d_{1}+\cdots +a_{n}d_{n}=k. \end{equation} By the algebraic independence of the $j_{i}$, it follows that dim($I^{k}$) equals the number of nonnegative integral solutions $(a_{1},\cdots ,a_{n})$ to (4.7). Hence \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{0}^{\infty}dim(I^{k})t^{k}=(1-t^{d_{1}})^{-1}\cdots (1-t^{d_{n}})^{-1} \end{equation} Combining this with Lemma 4.4[H3], we conclude \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \mid K\mid\cdot \prod_{1\leq i\leq n}(1+t+\cdots +t^{d_{i}-1})^{-1}=\sum_{\sigma \in K}\cdot \prod_{1\leq j\leq n}\frac{1-t}{1-tC_{\sigma_{j}}} \end{equation} If the $C_{\sigma_{j}}$ are the eigenvalues of $\sigma$ counted with multiplicity. Letting $t\rightarrow 1$, only the term $\sigma=1$ on the right gives a contribution, so we obtain the formula of the lemma. \end{proof} \begin{lemma}\label{twist} Let $j_{1}\cdots j_{m}\in I$ such that $j_{1}\notin\sum_{2}^{m}j_{s}I$. If $q_{1}\cdots q_{m}\in S$ are homogeneous elements such that $\sum_{1}^{m}j_{s}q_{s}=0$, then $q_{1}\in J$. \end{lemma} \begin{theorem}\label{equal} Let $K$ be a finite pseudo-reflection group and let the notation be as above. Then dim$H$=$\mid K\mid$ and the mapping $\phi:j\bigotimes h\rightarrow jh$ extends to a linear bijection of $I\bigotimes H$ onto $S$. Moreover, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{k\geq 0}(dimH^{k})t^{k}=\prod_{1\leq i\leq n}(1+t+\cdots +t^{d_{i}-1}) \end{equation} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We know from Lemma 4.2[H3] that $\phi$ is surjective. To prove that it is injective, we must show that if $\Sigma_{r,s}a_{r,s}i_{r}h_{s}=0$, where $a_{r,s}\in \mathbb{C}$ and $\{i_{r}\}$and $\{h_{s}\}$ are homogeneous bases of the vector spaces $I$ and $H$, respectively, then $a_{r,s}=0$. We write the relation in the form \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{s}h_{s}(\sum_{r}a_{r,s}i_{r})=0. \end{equation} Put \ $I_{s}=\sum_{r}a_{r,s}i_{r}$. We have to prove that each $I_{s}=0$ and for this it suffices to consider the case in which each $I_{s}$ is homogeneous and deg$h_{s}+degI_{s}$ the same for all $s$. Suppose there were an $I_{s}\neq 0$. We write it in the form \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} I_{s}=\sum a_{m_{1},\cdots m_{n},s}j_{1}^{m_{1}}\cdots j_{n}^{m_{n}} \end{equation} with nonzero coefficients $a_{m_{1},\cdots m_{n},s}$. Then \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{(m)}(\sum_{s}a_{m_{1},\cdots m_{n},s}h_{s})j_{1}^{m_{1}}\cdots j_{n}^{m_{n}}=0, \end{equation} and at least one of the monomials $j_{1}^{m_{1}}\cdots j_{n}^{m_{n}}$ is not in the ideal in $I$ generated by the others. The corresponding term \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{s}a_{m_{1},\cdots m_{n},s}h_{s} \end{equation} then belongs to $J$ according to Lemma 4.10[H3]. But by $S^{k}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})=(I_{+}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})S((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{}))^{k}+H^{k}((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{})$, this term will have to vanish and then the linear independence of the $h_{s}$ gives the contradiction $a_{m_{1},\cdots m_{n},s}=0$. The identification $I\bigotimes H=S$ implies the identity \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \sum_{k\geq 0}(dimI^{k})t^{k}\sum_{l\geq 0}(dimH^{l})t^{l}=\sum_{m\geq 0}(dimS^{m})t^{m}. \end{equation} Since the right-hand side equals $(1-t)^{-n}$ the formula for $(dimH^{l})t^{l}$ follows from (4.8). Putting $t=1$, we obtain the formula dim$H$=$\mid K\mid$ form Lemma 4.5[S]. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{Main Theorem} In the notation above, for each $\lambda\in \mathbb{C}^{n}$, we have dim$E_{\lambda}\leq \mid K\mid$. Furthermore, for the case when $\lambda$ is generic, $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is irreducible. If we let $A=\{Ind_{R^{n}}^{R^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ $\mid \chi$ is generic $\}$, $B=\{(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})\mid E_{\lambda}$ is generic$\}$. Then there exists equivalent one-one correspondence between the elements of $A$ and $B$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} From the conclusion of Theorem 4.11[H3], dim$H$=$\mid K\mid$. Let $h_{1},\cdots h_{\mid K\mid}$ be a basis of $H$ and let $H_{1},\cdots H_{\mid K\mid}$ be the corresponding members of $S((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c}))$. [Under the identification of $(\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c}$ and $((\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c})^{}$ by means of $B$, which is a nondegenerate symmetric bilinear form on $(\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c}\times (\mathbb{R}^{n})^{c}]$. Let $f\in E_{\lambda}$ and put for $x_{0}\in R^{n}$ \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} C_{i}(f)=(\partial(H_{i})f)(x_{0})(1\leq i\leq \mid K\mid). \end{equation} Since $S=IH$, it is clear that if $C_{1}(f)=\cdots C_{\mid K\mid}(f)=0$, then $f=0$. Thus the mapping \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} f\mapsto (C_{1}(f),\cdots ,C_{\mid K\mid}(f)) \end{equation} is one-to-one linear mapping of $E_{\lambda}$ into $\mathbb{C}^{\mid K\mid}$. So dim$E_{\lambda}\leq \mid K\mid$. Thus we have proved the first statement of the theorem. For the second part, for any $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ which satisfies the generic property, from the conclusion of Theorem 3.10, there exists $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ which satisfies the same property and a monomorphism from $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)$ to $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$. Therefore, dim$Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)\leq$ dim$E_{\lambda}\leq \mid K\mid$. However, according to Remark 3.16, we obtain dim$Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)=\mid K\mid$. Then dim$Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)=$ dim$E_{\lambda}= \mid K\mid$. Therefore $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}^{\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K}(\chi)\cong (T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, which $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is irreducible. Furthermore,from Theorem 3.10, Remark 3.15 and the conclusion above, we obtain there exists equivalent one-one correspondence between the elements $A$ and $B$. \end{proof} \section{The $D_{n}$ case} In this section, we use the knowledge of previous sections to calculate explicitly for a particular example when $G=R^{2}\rtimes D_{n}$, $K=D_{n}$. Here $D_{n}$ is the dihendral group, its elements have the following form: \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} R_{k}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} cos\frac{2\pi k}{n} & -sin\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ sin\frac{2\pi k}{n} & cos\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ \end{array} \right) \end{equation} and \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} S_{k}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} cos\frac{2\pi k}{n} & sin\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ sin\frac{2\pi k}{n} & -cos\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ \end{array} \right) \end{equation} \textbf{$D_{n}$ acts on $(\mathbb{R}^{2})^{}$} Each $g\in D_{n}\subset GL(\mathbb{R}^{2})$ acts on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and on $(\mathbb{R}^{2})^{}$ by standard action and $(\Psi(g)e^{})(e)=e^{}(g^{-1}\cdot e)$, respectively. These actions extend to automorphisms of $S(\mathbb{R}^{2})$ and $S((\mathbb{R}^{2})^{*})$. According to the above definition, we can calculate the action explicitly. Let $e_{1}=\left( \begin{array}{c} 1 \\ 0 \\ \end{array} \right)$ \ $e_{2}=\left( \begin{array}{c} 0 \\ 1 \\ \end{array} \right)$ \ $x_{i}(e_{j})=\delta_{ij}$ \ $1\leq i,j\leq 2$. Let $\Psi(R_{k})x_{1}=a_{1}\cdot x_{1}+ a_{2}\cdot x_{2}$, where $\Psi$ is defined in the proof of Theorem 3.10, Then \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &a_{1}=\Psi(R_{k})x_{1}(e_{1})=x_{1}(R_{k}^{-1}\cdot e_{1})=x_{1}(R_{k}^{T}\cdot e_{1})\\ &=x_{1}(\left( \begin{array}{c} cos\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ -sin\frac{2\pi k}{n} \\ \end{array} \right))=cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\\ &a_{2}=\Psi(R_{k})x_{1}(e_{2})=x_{1}(R_{k}^{-1}\cdot e_{2})=sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}. \end{split} \end{equation} $\therefore \Psi(R_{k})x_{1}=cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2}. $ Similarly,$\Psi(R_{k})x_{2}=-sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2}. $ $\therefore \Psi(R_{k})\left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \\ \end{array} \right)=R_{k}^{T}\cdot \left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \\ \end{array} \right)$ Similarly,$\Psi(S_{k})\left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \\ \end{array} \right)=S_{k}^{T}\cdot \left( \begin{array}{c} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \\ \end{array} \right)$ $\forall 0\leq k\leq n-1$. \begin{lemma}\label{twist} For a finite group $G\subseteq GL(\mathbb{R}^{n})$, let $\mid G\mid=g$, then $C[x_{1},\cdots ,x_{n}]^{G}$ is generated by the $\left( \begin{array}{c} g+n \\ n \\ \end{array} \right)$ polynomials \ $\frac{1}{g}\sum_{M\in G}M\cdot f$, as $f$ ranges over all $\left( \begin{array}{c} g+n \\ n \\ \end{array} \right)$ monomials in the variables $x_{1},\cdots ,x_{n}$ \ of degree at most $g$. \end{lemma} \begin{remark} The above lemma is in fact showed by Nother(see[ZS],PP.275-276.]. Note that $D_{n}$ is a finite pseudo-reflection group. If we combine above lemma, the above calculation and Lemma 4.3, we can calculate $\mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$ explicitly. Let's look at the following Proposition. \end{remark} \begin{prop} For general $n\geq 3$, we obtain $\mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}=\mathbb{C}[z\cdot \overline{z},z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}]$, where $z=x_{1}+i\cdot x_{2}$. \end{prop} \begin{proof} We consider $f_{1}=x_{1}^{2}$ and $f_{2}=x_{1}^{n}$. According to Lemma 5.4, $\sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{1}$,$\sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{2}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. Note that for any $m\in N$, the following equations hold \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{m}=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{m}\\ &=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(cos\frac{2\pi(n-k)}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin\frac{2\pi(n-k)}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{m}=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}-sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{m}\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}-sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{m}. \end{split} \end{equation} Therefore, according to the above calculation, we obtain \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{1}=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}-sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{2}+\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(cos\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{2}\\ &=2\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(cos^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}^{2}+sin^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2}^{2})\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}((1+cos\frac{4\pi k}{n})\cdot x_{1}^{2}+(1-cos\frac{4\pi k}{n})\cdot x_{2}^{2}). \end{split} \end{equation} For $n\geq 3$, $\frac{4\pi}{n}\neq 2\pi k$ $\therefore \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{i\cdot \frac{4\pi k}{n}}=0$, which implies $\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}cos\frac{4\pi k}{n}=0$ $\therefore \sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{1}=n\cdot (x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2})$ \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \therefore z\cdot \overline{z}=(x_{1}+i\cdot x_{2})(x_{1}-i\cdot x_{2})=x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}} \end{equation} Next, we prove $z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. The general idea is as follows: Firstly, we compute when $n=2m+1$, $z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. What's more, using the same method, we can compute when $n=2m,z^{2m}+\mid z\mid^{2m}+\overline{z}^{2m}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. Since $\mid z\mid^{2m}=(x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2})^{m}$, $z^{2m}+\overline{z}^{2m}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. Now, we give the concrete proof as follows: When $n=2m+1$, let $z=ae^{i\theta}=x_{1}+i\cdot x_{2}$. Therefore, $\mid z\mid=\sqrt{x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2}}$. \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{2}\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}((cos^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}-sin^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{2m+1}+(cos^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{1}+sin^{2}\frac{2\pi k}{n}\cdot x_{2})^{2m+1})\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}((\frac{e^{i\cdot \frac{2\pi k}{n}z}+e^{-i\cdot \frac{2\pi k}{n}\overline{z}}}{2})^{2m+1}+(\frac{e^{-i\cdot \frac{2\pi k}{n}z}+e^{i\cdot \frac{2\pi k}{n}\overline{z}}}{2})^{2m+1})\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(( \frac{a\cdot e^{i\cdot (\theta+\frac{2\pi k}{n})}+a\cdot e^{-i\cdot (\theta+\frac{2\pi k}{n})}}{2})^{2m+1}+(\frac{a\cdot e^{i\cdot (\theta-\frac{2\pi k}{n})}+a\cdot e^{-i\cdot (\theta-\frac{2\pi k}{n})}}{2})^{2m+1})\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\sum_{l=0}^{2m+1}\frac{C_{2m+1}^{l}a^{2m+1-l}e^{i(\theta+\frac{2\pi k}{n})(2m+1-l)}a^{l}e^{-i(\theta+\frac{2\pi k}{n})}}{2^{2m+1}}\\ &+\sum_{l=0}^{2m+1}\frac{C_{2m+1}^{l}a^{2m+1-l}e^{i(\theta-\frac{2\pi k}{n})(2m+1-l)}a^{l}e^{-i(\theta-\frac{2\pi k}{n})}}{2^{2m+1}})\\ &=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\sum_{l=0}^{2m+1}\frac{C_{2m+1}^{l}a^{2m+1}e^{i\theta(2m+1-2l)}e^{i\frac{2m+1-2l}{n}2\pi k}}{2^{2m+1}}\\ &+\sum_{l=0}^{2m+1}\frac{C_{2m+1}^{l}a^{2m+1}e^{i\theta(2m+1-2l)}e^{-i\frac{2m+1-2l}{n}2\pi k}}{2^{2m+1}}). \end{split} \end{equation} Note that \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} e^{i\frac{2m+1-2l}{n}2\pi}=1\Longleftrightarrow l=2m+1, 0\Longleftrightarrow e^{-i\frac{2m+1-2l}{n}2\pi}=1 \end{equation} Therefore, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\sum_{M\in D_{n}}M\cdot f_{2}=\frac{1}{2^{2m+1}}(C_{2m+1}^{0}a^{2m+1}e^{i\theta (2m+1)}+C_{2m+1}^{0}a^{2m+1}e^{i\theta (2m+1)}\\ &+C_{2m+1}^{2m+1}a^{2m+1}e^{-i\theta (2m+1)}+C_{2m+1}^{2m+1}a^{2m+1}e^{-i\theta (2m+1)})\\ &=\frac{2}{2^{2m+1}}((ae^{i\theta})^{2m+1}+(ae^{-i\theta})^{2m+1})\\ &=\frac{1}{2^{2m}}(z^{2m+1}+\overline{z}^{2m+1}). \end{split} \end{equation} Therefore, when $n=2m+1,z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. Similarly, we can show when $n=2m,z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$. Therefore, $z\cdot \overline{z}$ and $z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n} \in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}$ for $\forall n\geq 3$. Since $z\cdot \overline{z}$ and $z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}$ are algebraiclly independent, according to Lemma 4.3, we obtain $\mathbb{C}[x_{1},x_{2}]^{D_{n}}=\mathbb{C}[z\cdot \overline{z},z^{n}+\overline{z}^{n}]$. \end{proof} \begin{remark} According to Lemma 2.3, for every $E_{\lambda}$,$\exists \left( \begin{array}{c} \mu_{1}^{\lambda} \\ \mu_{2}^{\lambda}\\ \end{array} \right)\in \mathbb{C}^{2}$ \ s.t. \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} E_{\lambda}=\{f\in \varepsilon(R^{2})\mid \frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}f=\mu_{1}^{\lambda}f \ \ ((\frac{\partial}{\partial z})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})^{n})f=\mu_{2}^{\lambda}f\} \end{equation} \end{remark} \begin{remark} Let notation as above, \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &H=\{f\in \varepsilon(R^{2})\mid \frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}f=0 \ \ ((\frac{\partial}{\partial z})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})^{n})f=0 \}\\ &=\mathbb{C}\bigoplus \mathbb{C}Z\bigoplus \mathbb{C}\overline{Z}\bigoplus \mathbb{C}Z^{2}\bigoplus \mathbb{C}\overline{Z}^{2}\bigoplus\cdots \bigoplus \mathbb{C}Z^{n-1}\bigoplus \mathbb{C}\overline{Z}^{n-1}\bigoplus \mathbb{C}(Z^{n}-\overline{Z}^{n}). \end{split} \end{equation} Therefore, dim$H$=$2n$=$\mid D_{n}\mid$. \end{remark} \begin{prop} Let $\chi(x)=e^{-\lambda^{T}\cdot x}$, where $\lambda=\left( \begin{array}{c} \lambda_{1} \\ \lambda_{2} \\ \end{array} \right)$ be generic. Then $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{2}}^{\mathbb{R}^{2}\rtimes D_{n}}(\chi)$ is equivalent to $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$, where $E_{\lambda}=\{f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{2})\mid \frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}f=\frac{1}{4}(\lambda_{1}^{2}+ \lambda_{2}^{2})f \ \ ((\frac{\partial}{\partial z})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})^{n})f=\frac{1}{2^{n}}((\lambda_{1}-i\lambda_{2})^{n}+(\lambda_{1}+i\lambda_{2})^{n})f\}$ Furthermore, $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is irreducible and all eigenspace representations of $\mathbb{R}^{2}\rtimes D_{n}$, which satisfy the generic property is of this form. \end{prop} \begin{proof} According to Theorem 4.14, we obtain $Ind_{\mathbb{R}^{2}}^{\mathbb{R}^{2}\rtimes D_{n}}(\chi)$ is equivalent to $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$. Therefore $(T_{\lambda},E_{\lambda})$ is irreducible. Note that $\frac{\partial}{\partial z}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}-\frac{i}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}}$, $\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}+\frac{i}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}}$. Therefore, we have \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}=P_{1}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})\\ &=(\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}-\frac{i}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})(\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}+\frac{i}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})\\ &=\frac{1}{4}((\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}})^{2}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})^{2})\\ &(\frac{\partial}{\partial z})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})^{n}=P_{2}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})\\ &=\frac{1}{2^{n}}((\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}-i\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}}+i\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})^{n}). \end{split} \end{equation} Then we obtain \begin{equation}\label{l-invariant elements} \begin{split} &E_{\lambda}=\{f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{2})\mid P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})f= P(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})f, \ \forall P(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})\in D(\mathbb{R}^{2}\rtimes D_{n}/D_{n})\}\\ &=\{f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{2})\mid P_{1}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})f= P_{1}(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})f,P_{2}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}},\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})f=P_{2}(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})f\}\\ &=\{f\in \varepsilon(\mathbb{R}^{2})\mid \frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}f=\frac{1}{4}(\lambda_{1}^{2}+ \lambda_{2}^{2})f \ \ ((\frac{\partial}{\partial z})^{n}+(\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}})^{n})f=\frac{1}{2^{n}}((\lambda_{1}-i\lambda_{2})^{n}+(\lambda_{1}+i\lambda_{2})^{n})f\}. \end{split} \end{equation} Finally, from the conclusion of Remark 3.15, we can get all eigenspace representations of $\mathbb{R}^{2}\rtimes D_{n}$, which satisfy the generic property is of this form. \end{proof} \begin{remark} In this paper, we mainly consider the irreducibility of the eigenspace representations of $G=\mathbb{R}^{n}\rtimes K$, where $K$ is a finite pseudo-reflection group. In fact, the same problem for the general case when $K$ is any closed subgroup of $O(n)$ is also of great value. \end{remark}
\section{Introduction} Linear water wave theory is a widely used approach for describing the behaviour of surface waves in the presence of rigid boundaries. In particular, this theory is a common tool for determining sloshing frequencies and modes in containers occupied by a homogeneous fluid, that is, having constant density. The corresponding boundary spectral problem usually referred to as the sloshing problem has been the subject of a great number of studies over more than two centuries (a historical review can be found, for example, in \cite{FK}). In the comprehensive book \cite{KK}, an advanced technique based on spectral theory of operators in a Hilbert space was presented for studying this problem. In the framework of the mathematical theory of linear water waves, substantial work has been done in the past two decades for understanding the difference between the results valid for homogeneous and two-layer fluids (in the latter case the upper fluid occupies a layer bounded above by a free surface and below by a layer of fluid whose density is greater than that in the upper one). These results concern wave/structure interactions and trapping of waves by immersed bodies (see, for example, \cite{CL}, \cite{LC}, \cite{KMM} and references cited therein), but much less is known about the difference between sloshing in containers occupied by homogeneous and two-layer fluids. To the author's knowledge, there is only one related paper \cite{KS} with rigorous results for multilayered fluids, but it deals only with the spectral asymptotics in a closed container. Thus, the first aim of the present paper is to fill in this gap at least partially. Another aim is to consider the so-called inverse sloshing problem; that is, the problem of recovering some physical parameters from known spectral data. The parameters to be recovered are the depth of the interface between the two layers and the density ratio that characterises stratification. It is demonstrated that for determining these two characteristics for fluids occupying a vertical-walled container with a horizontal bottom, one has to measure not only the two smallest sloshing eigenfrequencies, which must satisfy certain inequalities, but also to analyse the corresponding free surface elevations. \subsection{Statement of the direct problem} Let two immiscible, inviscid, incompressible, heavy fluids occupy an open container whose walls and bottom are rigid surfaces. We choose rectangular Cartesian coordinates $(x_1,x_2,y)$ so that their origin lies in the mean free surface of the upper fluid and the $y$-axis is directed upwards. Then the whole fluid domain $W$ is a subdomain of the lower half-space $\{ -\infty < x_1, x_2 < +\infty,\, y<0 \}$. The boundary $\partial W$ is assumed to be piece-wise smooth and such that every two adjacent smooth pieces of $\partial W$ are not tangent along their common edge. We also suppose that each horizontal cross-section of $W$ is a bounded two-dimensional domain; that is, a connected, open set in the corresponding plane. (The latter assumption is made for the sake of simplicity because it excludes the possibility of two or more interfaces between fluids at different levels.) The free surface $F$ bounding above the upper fluid of density $\rho_1>0$ is the non-empty interior of $\partial W \cap \{ y=0 \}$. The interface $I=W\cap \{y=-h\}$, where $0<h< \max \{ \|y\|:\,(x_1,x_2,y)\in \partial W \}$, separates the upper fluid from the lower one of density $\rho_2>\rho_1$. We denote by $W_1$ and $W_2$ the domains $W\cap \{y>-h\}$ and $W\cap \{y<-h\}$ respectively; they are occupied by the upper and lower fluids respectively. The surface tension is neglected and we suppose the fluid motion to be irrotational and of small amplitude. Therefore, the boundary conditions on $F$ and $I$ may be linearised. With a time-harmonic factor, say $\cos \omega t$, removed, the velocity potentials $u^{(1)} (x_1,x_2,y)$ and $u^{(2)} (x_1,x_2,y)$ (they may be taken to be real functions) for the flow in $W_1$ and $W_2$ respectively must satisfy the following coupled boundary value problem: \begin{eqnarray} && u^{(j)}_{x_1 x_1} + u^{(j)}_{x_2 x_2} + u^{(j)}_{yy} = 0 \quad \mbox{in} \ W_j,\quad j=1,2, \label{lap} \\ && u^{(1)}_y = \nu u^{(1)}\quad \mbox{on}\ F, \label{nuf} \\ && \rho \left( u^{(2)}_y - \nu u^{(2)} \right) = u^{(1)}_y - \nu u^{(1)}\quad \mbox{on}\ I, \label{nui} \\&& u^{(2)}_y = u^{(1)}_y \quad \mbox{on}\ I, \label{yi} \\ && \partial u^{(j)}/\partial n = 0\quad \mbox{on}\ B_j\quad j=1,2. \label{nc} \end{eqnarray} Here $\rho=\rho_2/\rho_1 >1$ is the non-dimensional measure of stratification, the spectral parameter $\nu$ is equal to $\omega^2/g$, where $\omega$ is the radian frequency of the water oscillations and $g$ is the acceleration due to gravity; $B_j=\partial W_j\setminus (\bar F\cup \bar I)$ is the rigid boundary of $W_j$. By combining \eqref{nui} and \eqref{yi}, we get another form of the spectral coupling condition \eqref{nui}: \begin{equation} (\rho -1) u^{(2)}_y = \nu \left( \rho u^{(2)} - u^{(1)} \right) \quad \mbox{on}\ I. \label{nui2} \end{equation} We also suppose that the orthogonality conditions \begin{equation} \int_F u^{(1)}\,\D x = 0\quad \mbox{and}\quad \int_I \left( \rho u^{(2)} - u^{(1)} \right)\,\D x = 0,\quad \D x = \D x_1 \D x_2, \label{ort} \end{equation} hold, thus excluding the zero eigenvalue of \eqref{lap}--\eqref{nc}. When $\rho =1$, conditions \eqref{nui} and \eqref{yi} mean that the functions $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(2)}$ are harmonic continuations of each other across the interface $I$. Then problem \eqref{lap}--\eqref{nc} complemented by the first orthogonality condition \eqref{ort} (the second condition \eqref{ort} is trivial) becomes the usual sloshing problem for a homogeneous fluid. It is well-known since the 1950s that the latter problem has a positive discrete spectrum. This means that there exists a sequence of positive eigenvalues $\{ \nu_n^W \}_1^\infty$ of finite multiplicity (the superscript $W$ is used here and below for distinguishing the sloshing eigenvalues that correspond to the case, when a homogeneous fluid occupies the whole domain $W$, from those corresponding to a two-layer fluid which will be denoted simply by $\nu_n$). In this sequence the eigenvalues are written in increasing order and repeated according to their multiplicity; moreover, $\nu_n^W\to \infty$ as $n\to \infty$. The corresponding eigenfunctions $\{ u_n \}_1^\infty \subset H^1 (W)$ form a complete system in an appropriate Hilbert space. These results can be found in many sources, for example, in the book \cite{KK}. \section{Variational principle} Let $W$ be bounded. It is well known that the sloshing problem in $W$ for homogeneous fluid can be cast into the form of a variational problem and the corresponding Rayleigh quotient is as follows: \begin{equation} R_W (u) = \frac{\int_W \|\nabla u\|^2 \,\D x \D y}{\int_F u^2 \,\D x}. \label{Rayhom} \end{equation} For obtaining the fundamental eigenvalue $\nu_1^W$ one has to minimize $R_W (u)$ over the subspace of the Sobolev space $H^1 (W)$ consisting of functions that satisfy the first orthogonality condition \eqref{ort}. In order to find $\nu_n^W$ for $n>1$, one has to minimize \eqref{Rayhom} over the subspace of $H^1 (W)$ such that each its element $u$ satisfies the first condition \eqref{ort} along with the following equalities $\int_F u\,u_j\,\D x = 0$, where $u_j$ is either of the eigenfunctions $u_1,\dots,u_{n-1}$ corresponding to the eigenvalues $\nu_1^W, \dots, \nu_{n-1}^W$. In the case of a two-layer fluid we suppose that the usual embedding theorems hold for both subdomains $W_j$, $j=1,2$ (the theorem about traces on smooth pieces of the boundary for elements of $H^1$ included). This impose some restrictions on $\partial W$, in particular, on the character of the intersections of $F$ and $I$ with $\partial W\cap \{ y<0 \}$. Then using \eqref{nui2}, it is easy to verify that the Rayleigh quotient for the two-layer sloshing problem has the following form: \begin{equation} R (u^{(1)},u^{(2)}) = \frac{\int_{W_1} \left\| \nabla u^{(1)} \right\|^2\,\D x \D y + \rho \int_{W_2} \left\| \nabla u^{(2)} \right\|^2\,\D x \D y }{\int_F \left[ u^{(1)} \right]^2\,\D x + (\rho - 1)^{-1} \int_I \left[ \rho u^{(2)} - u^{(1)} \right]^2\,\D x}. \label{Raytwo} \end{equation} To determine the fundamental sloshing eigenvalue $\nu_1$ one has to minimize $R (u^{(1)},u^{(2)})$ over the subspace of $H^1 (W_1) \oplus H^1 (W_2)$ defined by both orthogonality conditions \eqref{ort}. In order to find $\nu_n$ for $n>1$, one has to minimize \eqref{Raytwo} over the subspace of $H^1 (W_1) \oplus H^1 (W_2)$ such that every element $\left( u^{(1)},\,u^{(2)} \right)$ of this subspace satisfies the equalities \[ \int_F u^{(1)}\,u_j^{(1)}\,\D x = 0 \quad \mbox{and} \quad \int_I \left[ \rho u^{(2)} - u^{(1)} \right]\, \left[ \rho u_j^{(2)} - u_j^{(1)} \right] \D x = 0 , \quad j=1, \dots, n-1 , \] along with both conditions \eqref{ort}. Here $\big( u_j^{(1)}, \, u_j^{(2)} \big)$ is either of the eigensolutions corresponding to $\nu_1, \dots, \nu_{n-1}$. Now we are in a position to prove the following assertion. \begin{proposition}\label{prop1} Let $\nu_1^W$ and $\nu_1$ be the fundamental eigenvalues of the sloshing problem in the bounded domain $W$ for homogeneous and two-layer fluids respectively. Then the inequality $\nu_1 < \nu_1^W$ holds. \end{proposition} The restriction that $W$ is bounded is essential as the example considered in Proposition~4 below demonstrates. \begin{proof} If $u_1$ is an eigenfunction corresponding to $\nu_1^W$, then \[ \nu_1^W = \frac{\int_W \|\nabla u_1\|^2\,\D x \D y}{\int_F u_1^2\,\D x} \, . \] Let $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(2)}$ be equal to the restrictions of $\rho u_1$ and $u_1$ to $W_1$ and $W_2$, respectively. Then the pair $\left( u^{(1)},\,u^{(2)} \right)$ is an admissible element for the Rayleigh quotient \eqref{Raytwo}. Substituting it into \eqref{Raytwo}, we obtain that \[ R (\rho u_1, u_1) = \frac{\int_{W_1} \left\| \nabla u_1 \right\|^2\,\D x \D y + \rho^{-1} \int_{W_2} \left\| \nabla u_1 \right\|^2\,\D x \D y }{\int_F u_1^2\,\D x}. \] Comparing this equality with the previous one and taking into account that $\rho >1$, one finds that $R (\rho u_1, u_1) < \nu_1^W$. Since $\nu_1$ is the minimum of \eqref{Raytwo}, we conclude that $\nu_1 < \nu_1^W$. \end{proof} \section{Containers with vertical walls \\ and horizontal bottoms} Let us consider the fluid domain $W = \{ x = (x_1,x_2) \in D, \, y\in (-d,0) \}$, where $D$ is a piece-wise smooth two-dimensional domain (the container's horizontal cross-section) and $d \in (0, \infty]$ is the container's constant depth. Thus, the container's side wall $\partial D\times (-d,0)$ is vertical, the bottom $\{ x \in D, \, y=-d \}$ is horizontal, whereas the free surface and the interface are $F=\{ x \in D, \, y=0 \}$ and $I=\{ x \in D, \, y=-h \}$ respectively, $0<h<d$. For a homogeneous fluid occupying such a container, the sloshing problem is equivalent to the free membrane problem. Indeed, putting \[ u(x,y) = v(x) \cosh k(y+d) \quad \big( \, u(x,y) = v(x) \, \E^{k y} \ \mbox{when} \ d = \infty \, \big) , \] one reduces problem \eqref{lap}--\eqref{nc} with $\rho = 1$, complemented by the first orthogonality condition \eqref{ort} to the following spectral problem: \begin{equation} \nabla_x^2 v + k^2 v = 0\ \ \mbox{in}\ \ D,\quad \partial v / \partial n_x = 0 \ \ \mbox{on}\ \ \partial D,\ \ \int_D v\,\D x = 0, \label{fm} \end{equation} where $\nabla_x = (\partial/\partial x_1,\partial/\partial x_2)$ and $n_x$ is a unit normal to $\partial D$ in ${\RR}^2$. It is clear that $\nu^W$ is an eigenvalue of the former problem if and only if $k^2$ is an eigenvalue of (\ref{fm}) and \begin{equation} \nu^W = k\tanh kd\quad \mbox{when}\ d<\infty \quad \big( \, \nu^W = k \quad \mbox{when} \ d=\infty \, \big) , \quad k>0. \label{nuW} \end{equation} It is well-known that problem (\ref{fm}) has a sequence of positive eigenvalues $\{ k_n^2 \}_1^\infty$ written in increasing order and repeated according to their finite multiplicity, and such that $k_n^2\to \infty$ as $n\to \infty$. The corresponding eigenfunctions form a complete system in $H^1 (D)$. Let us describe the same reduction procedure in the case when $W$ is occupied by a two-layer fluid and $d<\infty$. Putting \begin{eqnarray} && u^{(1)} (x,y) = v (x)\,[ A \cosh k(y+h) + B \sinh k(y+h) ], \label{u1} \\ && u^{(2)} (x,y) = v (x)\,C \cosh k(y+d), \label{u2} \end{eqnarray} where $A,B$ and $C$ are constants, one reduces problem \eqref{lap}--\eqref{nc} and \eqref{ort}, $\rho > 1$, to problem \eqref{fm} combined with the following quadratic equation: \begin{multline} \nu^2 \cosh kd - \nu k\, [ \sinh kd + (\rho -1) \cosh kh\, \sinh k(d-h) ] \\ + k^2 (\rho -1) \sinh kh\, \sinh k(d-h) = 0 , \quad k > 0 . \label{qe} \end{multline} Thus $\nu$ is an eigenvalue of the former problem if and only if $\nu$ satisfies \eqref{qe}, where $k^2$ is an eigenvalue of (\ref{fm}). Indeed, the quadratic polynomial in $\nu$ on the left-hand side of \eqref{qe} is the determinant of the following linear algebraic system for $A$, $B$ and $C$: \begin{eqnarray} A=C\,\left[ \cosh k(d-h) - \nu^{-1} (\rho -1)\,k\,\sinh k(d-h) \right],\ \ B=C\,\sinh k(d-h), \label{ABC} \\ A\, ( k\,\sinh kh - \nu\,\cosh kh ) + C\,\sinh k(d-h)\, ( k\,\cosh kh - \nu\,\sinh kh) = 0 . \label{AC} \end{eqnarray} The latter arises when one substitutes expressions \eqref{u1} and \eqref{u2} into the boundary condition \eqref{nuf} and the coupling conditions \eqref{nui} and \eqref{yi}. This homogeneous system defines eigensolutions of the sloshing problem provided there exists a non-trivial solution, and so the determinant must vanish which is expressed by \eqref{qe}. Let us show that the roots $\nu^{(+)}$ and $\nu^{(-)}$ of \eqref{qe} are real in which case \begin{equation} \nu^{(\pm)} = k\,\frac{b \pm \sqrt \mathcal{D}}{2 \,\cosh kd} > 0 \, , \label{nupm} \end{equation} where the inequality is a consequence of the formulae \begin{eqnarray} && b = \sinh kd + (\rho -1)\,\cosh kh\, \sinh k(d-h), \label{b} \\ && \mathcal{D} = b^2 - 4\,(\rho -1)\,\cosh kd\,\sinh kh\,\sinh k(d-h) . \label{D} \end{eqnarray} Since $\mathcal{D}$ is a quadratic polynomial of $\rho -1$, it is a simple application of calculus to demonstrate that it attains the minimum at \[ \rho -1 = \frac{2 \, \cosh kd \, \sinh kh - \sinh kd \, \cosh kh}{\cosh^2 kh \, \sinh k(d-h)} \, , \] and after some algebra one finds that this minimum is equal to \[ \frac{4\,\cosh kd\,\sinh kh\,\sinh k(d-h)}{\cosh^2 kh} >0, \] which proves the assertion. Thus we arrive at the following. \begin{proposition}\label{prop2} If $W$ is a vertical cylinder with horizontal bottom, then the sloshing problem for a two-layer fluid occupying $W$ has two sequences of eigenvalues \[ \left\{ \nu_n^{(+)} \right\}_1^\infty \quad and \quad \left\{ \nu_n^{(-)} \right\}_1^\infty \] defined by $\eqref{nupm}$ with $k=k_n > 0$, where $k_n^2$ is an eigenvalue of problem $(\ref{fm})$. The same eigensolution $(u^{(1)}, u^{(2)})$ corresponds to both $\nu_n^{(+)}$ and $\nu_n^{(-)}$, where $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(2)}$ $($sloshing modes in $W_1$ and $W_2$ respectively$)$ are defined by formulae $\eqref{u1}$ and $\eqref{u2}$ with $v$ belonging to the set of eigenfunctions of problem $(\ref{fm})$ that correspond to $k^2_n;$ furthermore, $C$ is an arbitrary non-zero real constant, whereas $A$ and $B$ depend on $C$ through $\eqref{ABC}$. \end{proposition} Next we analyse the behaviour of $\nu_n^{(\pm)}$ as a function of $\rho$. \begin{proposition}\label{prop3} For every $n=1,2,\dots$ the functions $\nu_n^{(-)}$ and $\nu_n^{(+)}$ are monotonically increasing as $\rho$ goes from $1$ to infinity. Their ranges are \[ (0,\, k_n\tanh k_n h) \quad and \quad (k_n\tanh k_n d,\,\infty) \] respectively. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} In order to prove the proposition it is sufficient to show that \begin{eqnarray} \frac{\partial (b\pm \sqrt{\mathcal{D}}\,)}{\partial \rho} = \sinh k(d-h) \Big\{ \cosh kh \pm \mathcal{D}^{-1/2} \big[ \cosh kh\, \sinh kd \nonumber \\ + (\rho -1) \cosh^2 kh\, \sinh k(d-h) - 2 \cosh kd\, \sinh kh \big] \Big\} > 0 \, . \label{drho} \end{eqnarray} Since \[ \frac{\partial (b + \sqrt{\mathcal{D}}\,)}{\partial \rho} \Bigg\|_{\rho =1} = \frac{2\sinh^2 k(d-h)}{\sinh kd} > 0 \quad \mbox{and}\quad \frac{\partial (b - \sqrt{\mathcal{D}}\,)}{\partial \rho} \Bigg\|_{\rho \to \infty} = 0 \, , \] inequality \eqref{drho} is a consequence of the following one: \[ \pm \frac{\partial^2 (b\pm \sqrt{\mathcal{D}})}{\partial \rho^2} = \frac{4\, \cosh kd \, \sinh kh \, \sinh^3 k(d-h)}{\mathcal{D}^{3/2}} > 0 \quad \mbox{for all}\ \rho > 1 . \] The second assertion immediately follows from the first one and formulae \eqref{nupm}--\eqref{D}. \end{proof} Combining Proposition~3 and formula \eqref{nuW}, we arrive at the following assertion. \begin{corollary}\label{corol1} The inequalities $\nu_n^{(-)} < \nu_n^W < \nu_n^{(+)}$ hold for each $n=1,2,\dots$ and every $\rho >1$. \end{corollary} Dividing \eqref{nupm} by $k$ and letting $k=k_n$ to infinity, it is straightforward to obtain the following. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma1} For every $\rho >1$ the asymptotic formula \[ \nu_n^{(\pm)} \sim \frac{\rho + 1 \pm \|\rho - 3\|}{4}\,k_n \quad as\ n \to \infty, \] holds with the exponentially small remainder term; here $k^2_n$ is an eigenvalue of $(\ref{fm})$. \end{lemma} In other words there are three cases: \begin{eqnarray} && \mbox{(i)\ if}\ \rho =3,\ \mbox{then}\ \nu_n^{(\pm)} \sim k_n\ \mbox{as}\ n\to \infty; \\ && \mbox{(ii)\ if}\ \rho >3,\ \mbox{then}\ \nu_n^{(-)}\sim k_n\ \mbox{and}\ \nu_n^{(+)} \sim (\rho - 1) \, k_n / 2 \ \mbox{as}\ n\to \infty; \\ && \mbox{(iii)\ if}\ \rho \in (1,3),\ \mbox{then}\ \nu_n^{(-)} \sim (\rho - 1) \, k_n / 2 \ \mbox{and}\ \nu_n^{(+)} \sim k_n\ \mbox{as}\ n\to \infty. \end{eqnarray} Combining these relations and the asymptotic formula $\nu_n^W \sim k_n$ as $n\to \infty$ (it is a consequence of formula (\ref{nuW}) defining $\nu_n^W$ when a homogeneous fluid occupies $W$), we obtain the following. \begin{corollary}\label{corol2} As $n\to \infty$, we have that $\nu_n^{(-)} \sim \nu_n^W$ when $\rho \geq 3$, whereas $\nu_n^{(+)} \sim \nu_n^W$ provided $\rho\in (1,3]$. \end{corollary} Another corollary of Lemma~1 concerns the distribution function $\mathcal{N} (\nu)$ for the spectrum of problem \eqref{lap}--\eqref{nc} and \eqref{ort}. This function is equal to the total number of eigenvalues $\nu_n$ that do not exceed $\nu$. An asymptotic formula for $\mathcal{N} (\nu)$ immediately follows from Lemma~1 and the asymptotic formula for the distribution of the spectrum for the Neumann Laplacian (see \cite{CH}, Chapter~6). \begin{corollary}\label{corol3} The distribution function $\mathcal{N} (\nu)$ of the spectrum for the sloshing of a two-layer fluid in a vertical cylinder of cross-section $D$ has the following asymptotics \[ \mathcal{N} (\nu) \sim \left[ \frac{4}{(\rho -1)^2} + 1 \right] \frac{\|D\|\,\nu^2}{4\pi} \quad as \ \nu \to \infty . \] Here $\|D\|$ stands for the area of $D$. \end{corollary} It should be also mentioned that in \cite{KS} the asymptotics for $\mathcal{N} (\nu)$ was obtained for a multi-layer fluid occupying a bounded closed container. It follows from Lemma~1 and Corollary~2 that the asymptotic formula for the distribution function of the spectrum $\left\{ \nu_n^W \right\}_1^\infty$ is similar to the above one, but the first term in the square brackets must be deleted. Moreover, in the case of homogeneous fluid the same asymptotic formula (up to the remainder term) holds for arbitrarily shaped fluid domains (see \cite{KK}, Section~3.3). Since the first term in the square brackets tends to infinity as $\rho\to 1$, the transition from the two-layer fluid to the homogeneous one in the asymptotic formula for $\mathcal{N} (\nu)$ is a singular limit in the sense described in \cite{Ber}. Similar effect occurs for modes trapped by submerged bodies in two-layer and homogeneous fluids as was noted in \cite{LC}. In conclusion of this section, it should be noted that in the case of an infinitely deep vertical cylinder it is easy to verify that $\nu = k$ is an eigenvalue of the sloshing problem for a two-layer fluid if and only if $k^2$ is an eigenvalue of problem (\ref{fm}). Comparing this assertion with that at the beginning of this section we obtain the following. \begin{proposition}\label{prop4} In an infinitely deep vertical-walled container, the sloshing problem for a two-layer fluid has the same set of eigenvalues and the same eigenfunctions of the form $v(x) \, \E^{k y}$, $k>0$, as the sloshing problem for a homogeneous fluid in the same container; here $k^2$ is an eigenvalue and $v$ is the corresponding eigenfunction of problem $(\ref{fm})$. \end{proposition} \section{Inverse problem} Let a given container $W$ be occupied by a two-layer fluid, but now we assume that the position of the interface between layers and the density of the lower layer are unknown. The density of the upper layer is known because one can measure it directly. The sequence of eigenvalues $\left\{ \nu_n^W \right\}_1^\infty$ corresponding to the homogeneous fluid is also known because it depends only on the domain $W$. The inverse problem we are going to consider is to recover the ratio of densities $\rho$ and the depth of the interface $h$ from measuring some sloshing frequencies on the free surface. Say, let the fundamental eigenvalue $\nu_1$ is known along with the second-largest one. The formulated inverse problem is not always solvable. Indeed, according to Proposition~4, {\it it has no solution when $W$ is an infinitely deep container with vertical walls}. Moreover, the inverse problem is trivial for all domains when it occurs that $\nu_1 = \nu_1^W$. In this case Proposition~1 implies that the fluid is homogeneous, that is, $\rho =1$ and $h=d$. Therefore, we restrict ourselves to the case of vertically-walled containers having the finite depth $d$ in what follows. \subsection{Reduction to transcendental equations} In view what was said above, the inverse problem for $W=D\times (-d,0)$ can be stated as follows. Find conditions that allow us to determine $\rho > 1$ and $h \in (0,d)$ when the following two eigenvalues are known: the fundamental one $\nu_1$ and the smallest eigenvalue $\nu_N$ that is greater than $\nu_1$. Thus $N$ is such that $k^2_{n} = k^2_1$ for all $n=1,\dots,N-1$, which means that the fundamental eigenvalue $k_1^2$ of problem (\ref{fm}) is of multiplicity $N-1$ (of course, $\nu_1$ has the same multiplicity). For example, if $D$ is a disc, then the multiplicity of $k_1^2$ is two (see \cite{Bandle}, Section~3.1), and so $\nu_N=\nu_3$ in this case. According to formula (\ref{nupm}), we have that $\nu_1 = \nu_1^{(-)}$. Hence the first equation for $\rho$ and $h$ is as follows: \begin{equation} b_1 - \sqrt {\mathcal{D}_1} = \frac{2\,\nu_1}{k_1} \cosh k_1 d . \label{eq1} \end{equation} Here $b_1$ and $\mathcal{D}_1$ are given by formulae \eqref{b} and \eqref{D} respectively with $k=k_1$. To write down the second equation for $\rho$ and $h$ we have the dilemma whether \begin{equation} \nu_N=\nu_N^{(-)} \quad \mbox{or} \quad \nu_N=\nu_1^{(+)} \, ? \label{dil} \end{equation} Let us show that either of these options is possible. Indeed, Proposition~3 implies that $\nu_N = \nu_N^{(-)}$ provided $\rho -1$ is sufficiently small. On the other hand, let us demonstrate that there exists a triple $(\rho, d, h)$ for which $\nu_N = \nu_1^{(+)}$. For this purpose we have to demonstrate that the inequality \[ \nu_N^{(-)} = k_N \frac{b_N - \sqrt {\mathcal{D}_N}}{2\cosh k_N d} \geq k_1 \frac{b_1 + \sqrt {\mathcal{D}_1}}{2\cosh k_1 d} = \nu_1^{(+)} \] holds for some $\rho$, $d$ and $h$. As above $b_j$ and $\mathcal{D}_j$, $j=1,N$, are given by formulae \eqref{b} and \eqref{D}, respectively, with $k=k_j$. Let $h=d/2$, then we have \[ 4\,\nu_j^{(\pm)} = k_j \left\{ (\rho +1)\,\tanh k_j d \pm \left[ (\rho +1)^2 \, \tanh^2 k_j d + 8\,(\rho -1) \frac{1 - \cosh k_j d} {\cosh k_j d} \right]^{1/2} \right\} , \] and so \[ 4\, \left[ \nu_N^{(-)} - \nu_1^{(+)} \right] \to k_N \left( \rho + 1 - \|\rho -3\| \right) - k_1 \left( \rho + 1 + \|\rho -3\| \right) \quad \mbox{as} \ d \to \infty . \] The limit is piecewise linear function of $\rho$, attains its maximum value $4(k_N - k_1)$ at $\rho =3$ and is positive for $\rho\in (1 + 2\,(k_1/k_N),\, 1 + 2\,(k_N/k_1))$. Summarising, we arrive at the following. \begin{proposition}\label{prop5} Let $k_N^2$ be the smallest eigenvalue of problem $(\ref{fm})$ other than $k_1^2$, and let $\nu_N^{(-)}$ be the sloshing eigenvalue defined by $\eqref{nupm}$--$\eqref{D}$ with $k=k_N$. Then {\rm (i)} $\nu_N^{(-)} < \nu_1^{(+)}$ when $\rho -1 > 0$ is sufficiently small $($of course, its value depends on $d$, $h$ and the domain $D);$ {\rm (ii)} $\nu_N^{(-)} > \nu_1^{(+)}$ when $\rho\in (1 + 2\,(k_1/k_N),\, 1 + 2\,(k_N/k_1))$, $h=d/2$ and $d$ is sufficiently large $($of course, its value depends on $\rho$ and $D)$. \end{proposition} \noindent Obviously, assertion (ii) can be extended to values of $h$ that are sufficiently close to $d/2$. \subsection{Options for the second equation} Let us develop a procedure for determining which of the two equalities \eqref{dil} can be chosen to complement equation \eqref{eq1} in order to find $\rho$ and $h$. Our procedure is based on an analysis of the free surface elevations corresponding to the measured values $\nu_1$ and $\nu_N$. Indeed, when a two-layer fluid oscillates at the frequency defined by some $\nu_j$, the free surface elevation is proportional to the trace $u^{(1)}_j (x,0)$ (see, for example, \cite{Lamb}, Section~227). According to formula \eqref{u1}, the trace $u^{(1)}_1 (x,0)$ is a linear combination of linearly independent eigenfunctions $v_1 (x),\dots,v_{N-1} (x)$ corresponding to the fundamental eigenvalue $k_1^2$ of problem \eqref{fm}; of course, its multiplicity is taken into account. By Proposition~2 the free surface elevation associated with $\nu_1^{(+)}$ is also proportional to a linear combination of $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$. Since these functions are known, one has to determine whether the measured free-surface elevation corresponding to $\nu_N$ can be represented in the form of such a combination and only in such a form. If this is the case, then $\nu_N = \nu_1^{(+)} < \nu_N^{(-)}$ and the following equation \begin{equation} b_1 + \sqrt {\mathcal{D}_1} = \frac{2\,\nu_N}{k_1} \cosh k_1 d \label{eq+} \end{equation} forms the system for $\rho$ and $h$ together with \eqref{eq1}. Besides, it can occur that the measured free-surface elevation corresponding to $\nu_N$ can be represented in two forms, one of which is a linear combination of $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$, whereas the other one involves the function $v_{N}$ as well as other eigenfunctions that correspond to the eigenvalue $k_N^2$ of problem \eqref{fm} along with $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$. It is clear that this happens when $\nu_N = \nu_1^{(+)} = \nu_N^{(-)}$. Indeed, if all coefficients at the former functions vanish, then the profile is represented by $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$, otherwise not. In this case, equation \eqref{eq1} can be complemented by either equation \eqref{eq+} or the following one: \begin{equation} b_N - \sqrt {\mathcal{D}_N} = \frac{2\,\nu_N}{k_N} \cosh k_N d . \label{eq2} \end{equation} Of course, it is better to use the system that comprises equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+} because the right-hand side terms in these equations are proportional. If the measured free-surface elevation corresponding to $\nu_N$ cannot be represented as a linear combination of $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$, then $\nu_N = \nu_N^{(-)} < \nu_1^{(+)}$, in which case the elevation is a linear combination of eigenfunctions that correspond to the eigenvalue $k_N^2$ of problem \eqref{fm} the second largest after $k_1^2$. In this case, equation \eqref{eq1} must be complemented by \eqref{eq2}. Thus we arrive at the following procedure for reducing the inverse sloshing problem to a system of two equations. \vspace{2mm} \noindent {\bf Procedure.} {\it Let $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$ be the set of linearly independent eigenfunctions of problem \eqref{fm} corresponding to $k_1^2$. If the observed elevation of the free surface that corresponds to the measured value $\nu_N$ has a representation as a linear combination of $v_1,\dots,v_{N-1}$, then $\rho$ and $d$ must be determined from equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+}. Otherwise, equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} must be used.} \vspace{2mm} The simplest case is when the fundamental eigenvalue of problem \eqref{fm} is simple, that is, $N=2$. Then the above procedure reduces to examining whether the free surface elevations corresponding to $\nu_1$ and $\nu_2$ are proportional or not. In the case of proportionality, equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+} must be used. Equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} are applicable when there is no proportionality. \section{Solution of the transcendental systems} In this section we consider the question how to solve systems \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2}, and \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+} for finding $\rho$ and $h$. \subsection{System \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+}} Equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq+} can be easily simplified. Indeed, the sum and difference of these equations are as follows: \[ b_1 = \frac{\nu_N + \nu_1}{k_1}\, \cosh k_1 d \quad \mbox{and} \quad \mathcal{D}_1 = \left( \frac{\nu_N - \nu_1}{k_1} \right)^2 \cosh^2 k_1 d \, . \] Substituting the first expression into the second equation (see formulae \eqref{b} and \eqref{D}), we obtain \begin{equation} (\rho - 1)\, \sinh k_1 h\, \sinh k_1 (d-h) = \frac{\nu_N\, \nu_1}{k_1^2} \, \cosh k_1 d \, , \label{rho1+} \end{equation} whereas the first equation itself has the following form: \begin{equation} (\rho - 1)\, \cosh k_1 h\, \sinh k_1 (d-h) = \frac{\nu_N + \nu_1}{k_1}\, \cosh k_1 d - \sinh k_1 d \, . \label{rho2+} \end{equation} The last two equations immediately yield \[ \tanh k_1 h = \frac{\nu_N \, \nu_1}{k_1 \, (\nu_N + \nu_1 - \nu_1^W)} \, , \] where formula \eqref{nuW} is applied. Thus we are in a position to formulate the following. \begin{proposition}\label{prop6} Let $\nu_1$ and $\nu_N \neq \nu_1$ be the smallest two sloshing eigenvalues measured for a two-layer fluid occupying $W=D\times (-d,0)$. Let also \[ 0 < \frac{\nu_N \, \nu_1}{k_1\, (\nu_N + \nu_1 - \nu_1^W)} < \tanh k_1 d \, , \] where $k_1^2$ is the fundamental eigenvalue of problem $\eqref{fm}$ in $D$ and $\nu_1^W$ is defined by formula $\eqref{nuW}$ with $k=k_1$. If Procedure guarantees that $\rho$ and $h$ satisfy equations $\eqref{eq1}$ and $\eqref{eq+}$, then \[ h = \frac{1}{k_1} \tanh^{-1} \, \frac{\nu_N\, \nu_1}{k_1\, (\nu_N + \nu_1 - \nu_1^W)} \, , \] whereas $\rho$ is determined either by $\eqref{rho1+}$ or by $\eqref{rho2+}$ with this $h$. \end{proposition} We recall that $\tanh^{-1} z = \frac{1}{2} \ln \frac{1+z}{1-z}$ (see \cite{AS}, Section~4.6). \subsection{System \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2}} Since equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} have the same form, we treat them simultaneously. Eliminating square roots, we get \begin{eqnarray} (\rho -1)\, \sinh k_j (d-h) \left( \nu_j \cosh k_j h - k_j \sinh k_j h \right) \\ = \frac{\nu_j}{k_j} \left( \nu_j\cosh k_j d - k_j \sinh k_j d \right), \quad j=1,N, \end{eqnarray} which is linear with respect to $\rho -1$. Taking into account formula \eqref{nuW}, we write this system in the form: \begin{eqnarray} && \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! (\rho -1)\, \sinh k_j (d-h) \left( k_j \sinh k_j h - \nu_j \cosh k_j h \right) \nonumber \\ && \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ = \frac{\nu_j}{k_j} \left( \nu_j^W - \nu_j \right) \cosh k_j d , \quad j=1,N, \label{sys1} \end{eqnarray} where the right-hand side term is positive in view of Corollary~1. We eliminate $\rho -1$ from system \eqref{sys1}, thus obtaining the following equation for $h$: \begin{eqnarray} && \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \frac{\nu_1}{k_1} \left( \nu_1^W - \nu_1 \right) \cosh k_1 d\, \sinh k_N (d-h) \left( k_N \sinh k_N h - \nu_N \cosh k_N h \right) \nonumber \\ && \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! - \frac{\nu_N}{k_N} \left( \nu_N^W - \nu_N \right) \cosh k_N d \,\sinh k_1 (d-h) \left( k_1 \sinh k_1 h - \nu_1 \cosh k_1 h \right) = 0. \label{eqh1} \end{eqnarray} Let us denote by $U (h)$ the expression on the left-hand side and investigate its behaviour for $h\geq 0$, because solving equation \eqref{eqh1} is equivalent to finding zeroes of $U (h)$ that belong to $(0,d)$. It is obvious that $U (d) = 0$, and we have that \[ U (0) = - \nu_N\,\nu_1 \left( \frac{\nu_1^W - \nu_1}{k_1} \, \cosh k_1 d \, \sinh k_N d - \frac{\nu_N^W - \nu_N}{k_N}\, \cosh k_N d\, \sinh k_1 d \right). \] After applying formula \eqref{nuW}, this takes the form: \begin{equation} U (0) = \left( \nu_N^W\, \nu_1 - \nu_N\, \nu_1^W \right) \frac{\nu_N\, \nu_1}{k_N\,k_1} \cosh k_N d \, \cosh k_1 d \, , \label{-0} \end{equation} and so $U (0)$ is positive, negative or zero simultaneously with $\nu_N^W \, \nu_1 - \nu_N \, \nu_1^W$. We have that \begin{eqnarray} U' (h) = \frac{\nu_1 \, k_N \, \cosh k_1 d}{k_1} \, (\nu_1^W - \nu_1) \, \left[ k_N \, \sinh k_N (d-2h) + \nu_N \, \cosh k_N (d-2h) \right] \\ - \frac{\nu_N \, k_1 \, \cosh k_N d}{k_N} \, (\nu_N^W - \nu_N) \, \left[ k_1\, \sinh k_1 (d-2h) + \nu_1 \, \cosh k_1 (d-2h) \right] \, , \\ \frac{U'' (h)}{2} = \frac{\nu_N \, k_1^2 \, \cosh k_N d}{k_N} \,(\nu_N^W - \nu_N) \, \left[ k_1 \, \cosh k_1 (d-2h) + \nu_1 \, \sinh k_1 (d-2h) \right] \\ - \frac{\nu_1 \, k_N^2 \, \cosh k_1 d}{k_1} \, (\nu_1^W - \nu_1) \, \left[ k_N \, \cosh k_N (d-2h) + \nu_N\, \sinh k_N (d-2h) \right] \, . \end{eqnarray} Then formula \eqref{nuW} yields the following asymptotic formula: \begin{eqnarray} U (h) \sim (d-h) \, (\nu_N^W - \nu_N) \, (\nu_1^W - \nu_1) \left[ \frac{\nu_1 \, k_N}{k_1} - \frac{\nu_N \, k_1}{k_N} \right] \cosh k_N d \, \cosh k_1 d \nonumber \\ \mbox{as} \ d-h \to +0 . \label{asym} \end{eqnarray} Since equation \eqref{eqh1} is obtained under the assumption that $\nu_N = \nu_N^{(-)}$ and $\nu_1 = \nu_1^{(-)}$, Corollary~1 yields that each factor in the asymptotic formula is positive except for the difference in the square brackets. The next lemma gives a condition providing a relationship between the value $U (0)$ and the behaviour of $U (h)$ for $h < d$ and sufficiently close to $d$. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma2} If the following inequality holds: \begin{equation} \frac{\nu_1\,k_N}{k_1} - \frac{\nu_N\,k_1}{k_N} \leq 0, \label{-} \end{equation} then $U (0) < 0$ and $U (h) < 0$ when $h < d$ and sufficiently close to $d$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let us prove the inequality $U (0) < 0$ first. Since \[ \nu_N^W \, \nu_1 - \nu_N \, \nu_1^W = \nu_1\, k_N \, \tanh k_N d - \nu_N \, k_1 \, \tanh k_1 d , \] according to formula \eqref{nuW}. Furthermore, it follows from \eqref{-} that \begin{equation} \nu_N^W \, \nu_1 - \nu_N \, \nu_1^W \leq \nu_N \, k_1^2 \, d \left[ \frac{\tanh k_N d}{k_N d} - \frac{\tanh k_1 d}{k_1 d} \right] < 0 , \label{par} \end{equation} because $z^{-1} \tanh z$ is a monotonically decreasing function on $(0,+\infty)$ and $k_1 < k_N$. Then \eqref{-0} implies that $U (0) < 0$. If inequality \eqref{-} is strict, then the second assertion immediately follows from the asymptotic formula \eqref{asym}. In the case of equality in \eqref{-}, the asymptotic formula \eqref{asym} must be extended to include the second-order term with respect to $d-h$ (see the second derivative above). Thus we obtain that \begin{eqnarray} && U (h) \sim (d-h)^2 \Bigg\{ \frac{\nu_N \, k_1^2 \, \cosh k_N d}{k_N} \,(\nu_N^W - \nu_N) \, \left[ \, k_1 \, \cosh k_1 d - \nu_1 \, \sinh k_1 d \, \right] \\ && \ \ \ \ - \frac{\nu_1 \, k_N^2 \, \cosh k_1 d}{k_1} \, (\nu_1^W - \nu_1) \, \left[ \, k_N \, \cosh k_N d - \nu_N \, \sinh k_N d \, \right] \Bigg\} \ \ \ \mbox{as} \ d-h \to +0 . \end{eqnarray} Applying the equality $\nu_N=\nu_1\,(k_N/k_1)^2$ along with formula \eqref{nuW}, we write the expression in braces as follows: \[ \nu_1 \, k_N \, k_1^{-1} \cosh k_N d \, \cosh k_1 d \left[ (\nu_N^W - \nu_N) \, (k_1^2 - \nu_1 \nu_1^W) - (\nu_1^W - \nu_1)\, (k_N^2 - \nu_N \nu_N^W) \right] \, , \] and we have in the square brackets \[ k_1^2 \, \nu_N^W - k_N^2 \, \nu_1^W + \nu_N^W \, \nu_1^W \, \nu_N - \nu_N^W \, \nu_1^W \, \nu_1 + \nu_1^W \, \nu_N \, \nu_1 - \nu_N^W \, \nu_N \, \nu_1 \, . \] Substituting $\nu_N=\nu_1\,(k_N/k_1)^2$, we see that this expression is the following quadratic polynomial in $\nu_1$: \[ \left( \nu_1^W - \nu_N^W \right) (k_N/k_1)^2 \, \nu_1^2 + \nu_N^W \, \nu_1^W \left[ (k_N/k_1)^2 - 1 \right] \nu_1 + \nu_N^W\, k_1^2 - \nu_1^W \, k_N^2 \, . \] Its first and third coefficients are negative (for the latter one this follows from formula \eqref{par} because it is equal to the expression in the square brackets multiplied by a positive coefficient). On the other hand, the second coefficient is positive. Therefore, the last expression is negative when $\nu_1 >0$, which implies that the right-hand side of the last asymptotic formula is negative. This completes the proof of the second assertion. \end{proof} Immediate consequences of Lemma 2 are the following two corollaries. \begin{corollary}\label{corol4} If inequality $\eqref{-}$ holds, then equation $\eqref{eqh1}$ for $h$ $($and the inverse sloshing problem for a two-layer fluid occupying $W)$ either has no solution or have more than one solution. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Inequality \eqref{-} implies that $U (0) < 0$ and $U (h) < 0$ for $h < d$, but sufficiently close to $d$. Hence $U (h)$ either has no zeroes on $(0,d)$, or has more than one zero. \end{proof} \begin{corollary}\label{corol5} Let $\nu_1$ and $\nu_N \in (\nu_1, \, \nu_N^W)$ be the smallest two measured sloshing eigenvalues for a two-layer fluid occupying $W=D\times (-d,0)$. Then a necessary condition that equation $\eqref{eqh1}$ has a unique solution $h$ is the simultaneous validity of the following two inequalities: \begin{equation} \frac{\nu_1 \,k_N}{k_1} - \frac{\nu_N \,k_1}{k_N} > 0 \quad and \quad \nu_N^W \, \nu_1 - \nu_N \, \nu_1^W < 0 . \label{NC} \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Let equation \eqref{eqh1} have a unique solution on $(0,d)$. According to Corollary~4, inequality \eqref{-} contradicts to this assumption, and so the first inequality \eqref{NC} must hold. Then the asymptotic formula \eqref{asym} implies that $U (h) >0$ when $h < d$ and is sufficiently close to $d$. Hence the assumption that equation \eqref{eqh1} have a unique solution on $(0,d)$ implies that either the second inequality \eqref{NC} is true or $\nu_N^W \, \nu_1 = \nu_N\, \nu_1^W$. Let us show that this equality is impossible which completes the proof. Indeed, according to formula \eqref{-0}, the latter equality means that $U (0) = 0$, and so \[ U (h) \sim h \left( \nu_N^W \, \nu_1^W - \nu_N \, \nu_1 \right) \left( \frac{\nu_1 \, k_N}{k_1} - \frac{\nu_N \, k_1}{k_N} \right) \cosh k_N d \, \cosh k_1 d \ \ \mbox{as} \ h \to +0. \] Here the formula for $U'$ is used along with \eqref{nuW} and the fact that $\nu_N^W \, \nu_1 = \nu_N \, \nu_1^W$. Since the first inequality \eqref{NC} is already shown to be true, we have that $U (h) >0$ when $h \neq 0$, but is sufficiently close to $+0$. Since we also have that $U (h) >0$ when $h < d$ and is sufficiently close to $d$, we arrive at a contradiction to the assumption that equation \eqref{eqh1} has a unique solution on $(0,d)$. \end{proof} Now we are in a position to formulate the following \begin{proposition}\label{prop7} Let $\nu_1$ and $\nu_N \in (\nu_1,\, \nu_N^W)$ be the smallest two sloshing eigenvalues measured for a two-layer fluid occupying $W=D\times (-d,0)$. If inequalities \eqref{NC} hold for $\nu_1$ and $\nu_N$, then either of the following two conditions is sufficient for equation $\eqref{eqh1}$ to have a unique solution $h\in (0,d):$ {\rm (i)} $U' (h)$ vanishes only once for $h\in (0,d);$ {\rm (ii)} $U'' (h) < 0$ on $(0,d)$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Inequalities \eqref{NC} and formulae \eqref{-0} and \eqref{asym} imply that $U (0) < 0$ and $U (h) > 0$ for $h < d$ and sufficiently close to $d$. Then either of the formulated conditions is sufficient to guarantee that equation $\eqref{eqh1}$ has a unique solution on $(0,d)$. \end{proof} It is an open question whether equation $\eqref{eqh1}$ can have more than one solution (consequently, at least three solutions), when inequalities \eqref{NC} are fulfilled. \section{Conclusions} We have considered direct and inverse sloshing problems for a two-layer fluid occupying an open container. Several results obtained for the direct problem include: (i) variational principle and its corollary concerning inequality between the fundamental sloshing eigenvalues for homogeneous and two-layer fluids occupying the same bounded domain. (ii) Analysis of the behaviour of eigenvalues for containers with vertical walls and horizontal bottoms. It demonstrates that there are two sequences of eigenvalues with the same eigenfunctions corresponding to eigenvalues having the same number in each of these sequences. The elements of these sequences are expressed in terms of eigenvalues for the Neumann Laplacian in the two-dimensional domain which is a horizontal cross-section of the container. (iii) In the particular case of infinitely deep container with vertical boundary, eigenvalues and eigenfunctions for homogeneous and two-layer fluids are the same for any depth of the interface. This makes senseless the inverse sloshing problem in a two-layer fluid occupying such a container. Inverse sloshing problem for a two-layer fluid, that occupies a container of finite constant depth with vertical walls, is formulated as the problem of finding the depth of the interface and the ratio of fluid densities from the smallest two eigenvalues measured by observing them at the free surface. This problem is reduced to two transcendental equations depending on the measured eigenvalues. There are two systems of such equations and to obtain these systems one has to take into account the behaviour of the observed free surface elevation. Sufficient conditions for solubility of both systems have been found. {\small
\section{Introduction} Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is a non-invasive, inexpensive and easy-to-perform brain stimulation technique which modifies neural excitability \cite{nitsche2000}. Over the last decades, similar to other techniques like transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) \cite{CHW:Bar85,CHW:Gom2013}, tES became an important instrument in both neuroscientific research and medical therapy \cite{paulus2011,priori1998,miniussi,Hermann2013,Thut2011, butson2012}. It formed the basis for new therapies for diseases such as depression \cite{depressionz}, Parkinson's disease \cite{parkinsonz}, Alzheimer's disease \cite{alzheimerz}, stroke \cite{strokez} and memory loss \cite{memoryz}. It was also shown that tES might help in the treatment of chronical pain \cite{pain2z}. Moreover brain stimulation techniques are important instruments in neuroscientific research as they give a new opportunity to reveal causal links between evoked brain activity and cognitive processes \cite{Hermann2013,miniussi,Thut2011}. In the conventional version of tES, two large electrode pads (sponges) are attached to the skin and a low direct or alternating current (0.5--2 mA) is applied to the head \cite{paulus2011,priori1998}. This current penetrates partly to the brain \cite{CHW:Hol2006,CHW:Wag2014} where it can increase or decrease the cerebral excitability \cite{paulus2011,nitsche2000,priori1998}. In order to investigate the reaction of the brain to systematic changes in brain oscillations, researchers have recently started to use tES in parallel with electroencephalography (EEG) measurements (see e.g. \cite{helfrich,zaehle}). Among these approaches is the high definition tES (HD-tES) \cite{CHW:Dat2013,CHW:Laa2013,CHW:Sch2015} in which, instead of two large pads, a larger number of smaller sized gel electrodes are used to target specific cortical structures. Especially for HD-tES, but also for two sponge pad scenarios, computer optimization approaches and realistic head volume conductor modeling were proposed to achieve better focality and intensity in the target brain areas \cite{CHW:Dmo2011,strokez,CHW:Sch2015}. One of the first questions researchers are confronted to in tES modeling and its combination with EEG is the choice of the electrode model. This paper focuses on boundary condition based approaches. In particular, we investigate the complete electrode model (CEM) \cite{purs1,ollikainen2000,CHW:Som92,cheng,phdvauk} which covers a comprehensive set of electrode boundary conditions and can be applied for both tES and EEG. The CEM incorporates a detailed description of the skin-electrode interface including its contact surface, impedance and normal current distribution also known as the shunting effect, i.e., current circulation on the contact surface, which alters the underlying electric potential \cite{purs1,ollikainen2000}. The CEM can be advantageous in contemporary tES simulations, for example, to replace saline soaked sponge electrode models \cite{tdcscem, datta,CHW:Wag2014,CHW:Sch2015}, and especially in HD-tES in which multiple stimulation electrodes are used and where it delivers a more flexible approach since it does not necessitate modelling the sponges in the computational domain. In comparison to the CEM, we test two important reduced approaches, the gap model (GAP) and the classical point electrode model (PEM) which are applicable for tES and EEG, respectively. While both of these models ignore the shunting currents described above, they differ in the incorporation of size and form of the electrodes, which is ignored in the well-known PEM, but taken into account in the GAP. Since it has been investigated that size and form of stimulation electrodes have an impact on the focality of tES \cite{altse}, we do not use the PEM as a model for stimulation electrodes. In this study, we aim to find out the accuracy and differences of the present electrode approaches for realistic scenarios of tES and parallel tES/EEG. As an example case we use a realistic numerical setting which approximates the stimulation of the auditory cortex. The results obtained suggest, among other things, that GAP and GAP/PEM are sufficiently accurate for tES and parallel tES/EEG simulation studies, respectively. The significant differences between CEM and GAP were observed mainly in the skin compartment, where only CEM explains the heating effects characteristic to tES. We also suggest that the conventional sponge models can be duplicated by the CEM with respect to the essential features of tES. This paper is organized as follows: The theory section \ref{sectheory} includes a brief review of the electrode models, and the methods section \ref{secmethods} gives a detailed description of the numerical experiments. Section \ref{secresults} presents the results which are then discussed in Section \ref{secdiscussion} and concluded in Section \ref{secconclusion}. \section{Theory} \label{sectheory} Let $\Omega$ be the head domain and $e_\ell$, $\ell = 1, 2, \ldots, L$ a set of $L$ electrodes on its exterior boundary $\partial \Omega$ with surface contact area $\left\|e_\ell \right\|$ and potential $U_\ell$. The current applied to the $\ell$-th electrode is denoted by $I_\ell$. For an active (tES) and passive (EEG) electrode, it holds that $\|I_\ell\| \geq 0$ and $I_\ell = 0$, respectively. Following from the Kirchhoff's law, we assume that the total sum of the currents is zero, i.e., $\sum_{i=1}^L I_\ell =0$. In other words, we do not take into account small current losses that might exist. Furthermore, the divergence of the total current density $\vec{J}$ in $\Omega$ is zero, that is, \begin{equation}0=\nabla \cdot \vec{J}=\nabla \cdot \left(\vec{J}^p-\sigma \nabla u\right) \quad \hbox{or} \quad \nabla \cdot (\sigma \nabla u) = \nabla \cdot \vec{J}^p \quad \hbox{in} \quad \Omega \label{eq1}\end{equation} with $u$ denoting the scalar electric potential field, $\sigma$ the conductivity distribution of the head and $\vec{J}^p$ the primary current density (neural activity) in the brain. Equation (\ref{eq1}) follows from the Maxwell's equations via the quasi-static approximation \cite{CHW:Plo67}, and it predicts the potential field for both tES and EEG. The right-hand side of (\ref{eq1}) is relevant only with respect to the EEG measurements in which $\vec{J}^p$ is to be detected. Namely, the stimulation potential field can be obtained by setting the right-hand side to zero, i.e., \begin{equation} \label{zero_eq} \nabla \cdot \left( \sigma \nabla u \right) = 0. \end{equation} \subsection{Complete electrode model} In order to solve (\ref{eq1}), one can apply the following CEM boundary conditions \cite{cheng}: \begin{eqnarray} \label{cemboundary} 0 = \sigma \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}(\vec{x}) , & \quad \hbox{in } \, \, \, \partial \Omega \backslash \cup_{\ell=1}^L e_\ell, \\ \label{cemboundary2} I_\ell = \int_{e_\ell}{\sigma \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}(\vec{x}) dS}, & \quad \hbox{for } \, \ell = 1, 2, \ldots, L,\\ \label{cemboundary3} {U_\ell} = u(x) +\tilde{Z}_\ell \sigma \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}(\vec{x}) , & \quad \hbox{for } \, \ell = 1, 2, \ldots, L, \, \, \, \vec{x} \in e_\ell. \end{eqnarray} The first one of these is the assumption that no currents pass the part of the scalp that is not covered by electrodes. The second one states that the total current flux through the $\ell$-th electrode equals to the applied current $I_\ell$. According to the third one, the $\ell$-th electrode voltage $U_\ell$ is the sum of the skin potential and the skin-electrode potential jump $\tilde{Z}_\ell \sigma \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}(\vec{x})$ in which $\tilde{Z}_\ell$ (Ohm $\hbox{m}^2$) is a pointwise effective contact impedance (ECI). For simplicity, we assume that ECI is of the form $\tilde{Z}_\ell = Z_\ell \|e_\ell\|$ with $Z_\ell$ (Ohm) denoting the average contact impedance (ACI) of the electrode. Consequently, the integral form of (\ref{cemboundary3}) can be written as \begin{equation} \label{u_ell} {U_\ell} = \frac{1}{\| e_\ell \|} \int_{e_\ell} u \, dS + {Z}_\ell { I_\ell }, \end{equation} i.e., $U_\ell$ is the sum of the mean skin potential and the potential jump ${Z}_\ell { I_\ell }$. Additionally, the zero potential level is defined as $\sum_{I=1}^{L}U_\ell = 0$. Thus, the potential field $u \in S$ can be approximated by solving the following weak form (\ref{app1}) {\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt}\begin{eqnarray} \textnormal{CEM: }\qquad\int_\Omega \sigma \nabla u \cdot \nabla v \, d V = \! \! &-& \int_\Omega (\nabla \cdot \vec{J}^p) v \, dV\nonumber \\ &+& \sum_{\ell = 1}^L \frac{I_\ell}{\| e_\ell \|} \int_{e_\ell} v \, dS \nonumber \\ \! \! &+& \sum_{\ell = 1}^L \frac{1}{{Z}_\ell \| e_\ell \|^2} { \int_{e_\ell} u \, dS \! \int_{e_\ell} v \, dS} \nonumber \\ \!\! & - & \sum_{\ell = 1}^L\frac{1}{{Z}_\ell \| e_\ell \|} \int_{e_\ell} u v \, d S \, \hbox{ for all } \, v \! \in \! \mathcal{S} \! \subset \! H^{1}(\Omega) \label{weak_form} \end{eqnarray}} in which $\mathcal{S}$ is a suitably chosen subspace of $H^{1}(\Omega)$, i.e., the Sobolev space of square integrable functions with square integrable first-order partial derivatives. In this study, we use the finite element method to discretize $\Omega$. Consequently, $\mathcal{S}$ is assumed to be spanned by continuous finite element basis functions. In the weak form (\ref{weak_form}) of the CEM, the left-hand side defines a diffusion operator, the first two terms on the right-hand side correspond to neural and stimulation sources, respectively, and the third and fourth term describe the shunting effects: Due to their lower resistance currents tend to flow through the electrodes rather than the skin if the ACI is low enough (Figure \ref{fig1}). The higher the ACI, the weaker are the shunting effects. \\ Since currents distribute more freely underneath the electrode there is an equalizing effect on the potential underneath the electrode, which leads to a constant potential in the most extreme case (Figure \ref{fig2}). \subsection{Reduced models} In GAP, the second CEM boundary condition (\ref{cemboundary2}) is replaced with the following pointwise formula \begin{equation} \label{gap_boundary} \sigma \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}(\vec{x}) = \frac{I_\ell}{\left\|e_\ell\right\|} \quad \, \hbox{ for all } \, \quad \vec{x} \in e_\ell, \quad \ell = 1, 2, \ldots, L. \end{equation} That is, the normal current density through the skin is assumed to be constant on each electrode (hence shunting effects are not taken into account). Furthermore, the third condition (\ref{cemboundary3}) is assumed to hold only in its integral form (\ref{u_ell}). The resulting weak form is given by (\ref{app1}) \begin{eqnarray} \label{weak_form_gap} \textnormal{GAP: }\qquad\int_\Omega \sigma \nabla u \cdot \nabla v \, d V = &-&\int_\Omega \! (\nabla \cdot \vec{J}^p) v \, dV\nonumber\\ &+& \sum_{\ell = 1}^L \frac{I_\ell}{\| e_\ell \|} \! \int_{e_\ell} \! \! v \, dS \, \hbox{ for all } \, v \! \in \! \mathcal{S}. \end{eqnarray} The PEM boundary conditions follow from both the CEM and the GAP, if the support of each electrode tends to one point, i.e., $ e_\ell \to \vec{p}_\ell$ and $\|e_\ell\| \to 0$ for $\ell = 1, 2, \ldots, L$. By taking the limit $\frac{1}{\| e_\ell \|} \int_{e_\ell} f \, dS \to f(\vec{p}_\ell)$, the $\ell$-th electrode voltage (\ref{u_ell}) is of the form $U_\ell = u(\vec{p}_\ell) + I_\ell Z_\ell$ and the weak forms (\ref{weak_form}) and (\ref{weak_form_gap}) are now given by \begin{eqnarray} \label{weak_form_pem} \textnormal{PEM: }\qquad\int_\Omega \sigma \nabla u \cdot \nabla v \, d V = &-&\int_\Omega (\nabla \cdot {J}^p) v \, dV \! \nonumber\\ &+& \! \sum_{\ell = 1}^L {I_\ell}v(\vec{p}_\ell) \, \hbox{ for all } \, v \! \in \! \mathcal{S}. \end{eqnarray} For the absence of the impedance-dependent terms of (\ref{weak_form}) in (\ref{weak_form_pem}) and (\ref{weak_form_gap}), i.e.\ for the omission of the shunting effects (Figure \ref{fig1}), PEM and GAP can be interpreted as reduced electrode models compared to CEM. For $I_l=0$ the GAP model can be seen as the limit case of the CEM, where $Z_l$ is raised to infinity. Based on (\ref{weak_form_pem}) and (\ref{weak_form_gap}) it is obvious that for EEG where the stimulation currents do not exist, GAP and PEM yield the same approximation for $u$ up to a constant (zero-potential). Furthermore, for small enough electrodes, each of the models CEM, PEM and GAP result in a similar approximation, that is, $CEM \approx PEM \approx GAP$. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \begin{tabular}{cc} \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pem.pdf}& \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{cem.pdf}\\ GAP/PEM& CEM \end{tabular} \caption{Illustration of expected currents with and without shunting currents.} \label{fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[b] \centering \begin{tabular}{cc} \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{shunting_low.png}& \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{shunting_high.png}\\ CEM (ACI 1 Ohm) & PEM/GAP \end{tabular} \caption{Comparison of potential distributions in combined EEG and tES simulations, using different models. Anode and cathode are placed above the left and right ear. (\textit{Note that $1$ Ohm is a very low ACI which is used here to illustrate the effects of the CEM. For a more realistic ACI (e.g. $5$kOhm) the difference to the GAP is hardly visible.})} \label{fig2} \end{figure} \section{Methods} \label{secmethods} \subsection{Head model} The head model of this study is based on T1- and T2- weighted magnetic resonance images (MRI) of a healthy 25-year old male subject that were registered accordingly and segmented into the most important head tissues \cite{purs1}. As a result of this procedure, non-intersecting surfaces of skin, skull compacta and spongiosa, brain grey matter and eyes were constructed. A constrained Delaunay tetrahedralization (CDT) was performed resulting in a tetrahedral mesh with 628,032 nodes and 3,912,563 tetrahedral elements. The conductivity values (in $Sm^{-1}$) for the different compartments were chosen to be 0.43 for skin \cite{CHW:Dan2011}, 0.0064 for skull compacta and 0.02865 for skull spongiosa \cite{CHW:Akh2002,CHW:Dan2011}, 1.79 for the CSF \cite{CHW:Bau97}, 0.33 for the brain \cite{CHW:Dan2011} and 0.505 for the eyes \cite{CHW:Ram2006}. \subsection{Electrodes} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{confi.png} \caption {Electrode configuration} \label{confi} \end{figure} We utilized a set of 79 electrodes which was positioned on the head surface according to the 10/10 system using the CURRY\footnote{http://compumedicsneuroscan.com/} software. The electrodes were formed as a combination of surface triangles (Figure \ref{confi}). The anode and cathode of tES were associated with two $24\,mm$ diameter electrodes placed over the ears similar to the stimulation of the auditory cortex. The EEG electrodes were assumed to have the average diameter of $12 \, mm$. In all tests, we used a stimulation current of $1\,\mathrm{mA}$ injected and extracted above the left and right ear, respectively, i.e. through the tES anode and cathode. The stimulation potentials and currents within the head were computed using the tES/EEG electrode model combinations described in Table \ref{table:config}. Of these, CEM/CEM and GAP/PEM were of the primary interest, CEM/PEM was tested in order to distinguish between the shunting of tES and EEG electrodes, and {$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$/$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$} was investigated in order to find out the effects of a very low ACI. \begin{table}[t] \caption{The electrode model combinations utilized for tES and EEG tested in the numerical experiments.} \label{table:config} \begin{indented} \item[] \begin{tabular}{@{}lll} \br Name & tES model & EEG model \\ \mr CEM/CEM & CEM, ACI 5 kOhm & CEM, ACI 5 kOhm \\ {$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$/$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$} & CEM, very low ACI 1 Ohm & {CEM}, very low ACI 1 Ohm \\ {GAP/PEM} & GAP & PEM \\ {CEM/PEM} & CEM, ACI 5 kOhm & PEM \\ \br \end{tabular} \end{indented} \end{table} \subsection{Computation} The head domain $\Omega$ was discretized using the finite element method. For the linearity of (\ref{weak_form}) with respect to ${\bf I} = (I_1, I_2, \ldots, I_L)$, the resulting linear system is of the form ${\bf x} = {\bf R}{\bf I}$ where ${\bf R}$ is a resistivity matrix and ${\bf x}$ is a discretization of $u$ (\ref{app2}). The final form of ${\bf R}$ depends on the finite element mesh, basis functions, as well as on the chosen electrode model. In this study, we employed a tetrahedral mesh together with a set of first-order (nodal) Lagrange basis functions. A detailed description and derivation of ${\bf R}$ can be found in \cite{phdvauk,magsten}. After the calculation of $u$, the volume current density $-\sigma \nabla u$ in the brain was evaluated. In order to illustrate the differences between the investigated models, the following current angle and magnitude differences were evaluated for each tetrahedron: \begin{equation} \hbox{Angle}(j_1,j_2)= \arccos\,\left(\frac{\left\langle j_1,j_2\right\rangle}{\left\\|j_1\right\\|\left\\|j_2\right\\|}\right), \quad \!\!\! \hbox{Magnitude}(j_1,j_2)=\frac{\left\\|j_1\right\\|}{\left\\|j_2\right\\|}. \end{equation} \section{Results} \label{secresults} \subsection{Current densities in head and brain} \begin{table}[t] \caption{Current extrema in brain $B$ and head $\Omega$ in $\frac{mA}{m^2}$.} \label{table:currents} \begin{indented} \item[] \begin{tabular}{@{}llllll} \br & \centre{2}{$B$} & \centre{2}{$\Omega$} \\ & \crule{2} & \crule{2} \\ & Min & Max & Min & Max \\ \mr CEM/CEM & 3.052 & 89.52 & 7.5e-3& 4.217e4 \\ {$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$/$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$} & 2.870 & 83.26 & 5.6e-3& 5.812e4 \\ {GAP/PEM} & 3.053 & 89.55 & 7.5e-3& 4.216e4 \\ {CEM/PEM} &3.053 & 89.55 & 7.5e-3 & 4.217e4 \\ \br \end{tabular} \end{indented} \end{table} \begin{figure}[b] \centering \begin{tabular}{c c} \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{ellow2.png}& \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pemanode2.png}\\ {CEM (ACI 1 Ohm)} & {GAP} \end{tabular} \caption[Visualization of shunting effect at the anode.]{Visualization of the surface current density at the anode. In CEM currents become stronger on the edges due to the shunting effect, i.e., current circulation on the contact surface, which is well visible only for low impedance value (ACI $1$ Ohm). In GAP, the normal current density is constant over the contact surface, meaning that the shunting effect is absent.} \label{edgecurrents} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[!] \begin{center} \begin{framed} GAP/PEM \\ \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_PEMb.jpg} \\ Brain \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3.5cm]{brain_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_PEM.jpg} \\ Head \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3.5cm]{head_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \end{framed} \begin{framed} $\hbox{CEM}_{1}$/$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$ \\ \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{current_low_brain.jpg} \\ Brain \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3.5cm]{brain_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{differences.jpg} \\ Head \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3.5cm]{head_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \end{framed} \end{center} \caption{Currents in brain and head for GAP/PEM and $\hbox{CEM}_{1}$/$\hbox{CEM}_{1}$. Visible differences occur in the skin compartment under the electrodes (red ovals). } \label{fig:Currents} \end{figure} Table \ref{table:currents} gives an idea of typical current strength in the brain and head compartments: One can observe that, with the exception of CEM$_{1}$/CEM$_{1}$, the differences are minor. Omitting CEM$_{1}$/CEM$_{1}$, the greatest differences in the maximal current density can be found between GAP/PEM and the other tested model combinations, indicating that those differences are related to the GAP (reduced) stimulation model. Compared to the GAP/PEM, in models incorporating the CEM the maximum on the scalp is increased, while the maximum inside the brain is decreased. The reason for this phenomenon can be seen in Figure \ref{edgecurrents} which shows the current density on the anode for CEM and GAP. Although the effect is only shown for CEM$_{1}$/CEM$_{1}$ here, the same tendency can be expected for every value of the ACI (whereby a higher ACI leads to a weaker effect). As illustrated in the Figure, in CEM, the currents tend to concentrate on the edges of the electr odes, be cause the CEM allows for the current to distribute freely over the whole electrode. Since currents tend to flow through the (low impedance) skin rather than through the (high impedance) skull they will take the shortest way and leave the electrode at the edges. These strong currents are reflected by the maximum values in Table \ref{table:currents}. In contrast, the GAP forces the current density going through the electrode to be constant in the normal direction. However, the effects shown in Figure \ref{edgecurrents} are not as strong for the realistic CEM, and therefore differences due to this phenomenon are small. Figure \ref{fig:Currents} shows the currents in brain and head for GAP/PEM and CEM$_{1}$/CEM$_{1}$. It is visible here again that the injected current tends to flow through the skin instead of the brain, where only a minor part of the current is led to. The current patterns show that effects can mainly be expected under the electrodes, whereas the current flow in the head is unaffected even for low impedance values. \subsection{Angle and magnitude differences}\label{sec:anglemag} \begin{table}[t] \caption{Maximal and minimal angle magnitude differences in brain and head.} \label{table:magnitude} \begin{indented} \item[] \begin{tabular}{@{}llllll} \br & & \centre{2}{$B$} & \centre{2}{$\Omega$} \\ & & \crule{2} & \crule{2} \\ & & Min & Max & Min & Max \\ \mr Angle ($\mbox{}^\circ$) &{CEM/CEM vs.\ GAP/PEM} & $\sim 0$ & \- 0.040 & $\sim 0$ & 1.04 \\ &{CEM/PEM} vs.\ {GAP/PEM} & $\sim 0$ & \- 0.041 & no diff. & 0.21 \\ &{CEM/CEM} vs.\ {CEM/PEM} &$\sim 0$ & \- 0.024 & no diff. & 1.04\\ \mbox{} \\ Mag.\ (\%) & {CEM/CEM} vs.\ {GAP/PEM} & -0.086 & \- 0.010 & -1.71& 1.31 \\ & {CEM/PEM} vs.\ {GAP/PEM} & -0.041 & \- 0.036 & -0.46 & 0.35 \\ & {CEM/CEM} vs.\ {CEM/PEM} &-0.059 & -0.003 & -1.72 & 1.30 \\ \br \end{tabular} \end{indented} \end{table} Angle and magnitude differences were evaluated in order to get exact numerical data of the modeling characteristics. Maximal and minimal angle and magnitude differences are presented in Table \ref{table:magnitude}. As expected, the currents differ the most when the CEM/CEM is compared to GAP/PEM, but even then differences lie below $2^{\circ}$ and $2\,\%$, respectively. In case of the brain, which is the primary target of the tES stimulation, the differences are below $0.05^{\circ}$ and $0.1 \, \%$. Overall, differences in the brain are sufficiently small to be ignored in all cases.\\ Changing the model at the stimulation electrodes (CEM/PEM vs. GAP/PEM) has a bigger influence on the brain than a model change at the passive electrodes (CEM/CEM vs. CEM/PEM), while it is the other way around on the scalp. Figure \ref{fig:Currentdiffs} visualizes the distribution of angle and magnitude differences in the head and brain using the example of CEM/CEM vs.\ GAP/PEM. One can observe here as well, that differences occur mainly in the skin compartment, but hardly in the brain. Furthermore, differences in the skin compartment are mainly visible next to electrodes, which corresponds to the expectations, as differences will mainly reflect shunting effects. However, this also means that shunting effects will mainly have a local influence, and differences in the other parts of the head will be much lower. Although differences in the brain are very low, the patterns in the brain show that differences occur mainly near to the stimulation electrodes. This supports the observation that the shunting effects at the stimulating electrodes have a bigger influence on the brain than those at the measurement electrodes. \begin{figure}[!] \begin{center} \begin{framed} Angle differences ($\mbox{}^\circ$) \\ \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_Ab.jpg} \\ Brain \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3cm]{CUR_Ab_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_A.jpg} \\ Head \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3cm]{CUR_A_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \end{framed} \begin{framed} Magnitude differences (\%)\\ \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_MAGb.jpg} \\ Brain \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3cm]{CUR_MAGb_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{5.3cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=5cm]{CUR_MAG.jpg} \\ Head \end{center} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}{0.7cm} \begin{center} \includegraphics[height=3cm]{CUR_MAG_colorbar.png} \\ \end{center} \end{minipage} \end{framed} \end{center} \caption{Comparison of CEM/CEM and GAP/PEM in brain and head} \label{fig:Currentdiffs} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} \label{secdiscussion} In this study, we compared different boundary electrode modeling approaches for forward simulation in tES and parallel tES/EEG. These models include the complete electrode model (CEM) and two important reduced approaches: the point electrode model (PEM) and the so-called gap model (GAP). Different combinations of these were tested for tES/EEG electrodes. The main emphasis was on the comparison of CEM/CEM and GAP/PEM. Additionally, CEM/PEM was tested in order to investigate the influence of EEG induced noise, and the effects of low ACI were explored via the combination CEM$_{1}$/CEM$_{1}$, where CEM$_{1}$ was a CEM approach with a low ACI. It was observed that the CEM/CEM will not lead to significant orientation differences in the current density compared to GAP/PEM. This holds especially for the brain, where differences are shown to be below $0.05 ^\circ$ and magnitude differences below $0.1\%$, suggesting that there are no relevant differences in current distribution. The highest differences occur near to the electrodes themselves, but even here highest differences lie under $1.1^\circ$ and $2\%$, respectively. Hence, for stimulation focality it will not be relevant which of the presented models is used. Moreover, based on the results, orientation differences in the brain occur mainly due to stimulation electrodes. As stimulation approaches we investigated the CEM and GAP. The PEM was not covered, since it is a well known fact that the size of stimulation electrodes has a strong impact on focality and current magnitudes \cite{altse}. One can therefore assume that the use of the PEM in tES does not make much sense, especially if large stimulation electrodes are used. This observation is supported by the applied studies which typically incorporate the size of the electrodes \cite{tdcscem, datta}. Hence, it is also obvious that the PEM can be used for EEG analysis, where it is currently the standard model. The shunting effects present in the CEM were observed to have the biggest impact in the skin compartment. It is well-known that, in tES, the skin-electrode current density tends to be stronger on the edges of the stimulation electrodes and therefore can heat (burn) the skin. Our study confirms that the shunting effects have an impact on this tendency as the magnitude of edge currents is increased for the CEM. Hence, the CEM could also be an appropriate model to investigate the heating of the skin. The CEM may allow one, via pointwise control of the ECI, to design electrodes that yield more equal current distribution under the contact patch than the existing alternatives which can lead to heating. Such a design could also serve the general goal to focus the stimulation currents to given areas within the brain, avoiding nuisance currents in other parts of the head, e.g., in the skin. The boundary electrode models of this study are non-standard approaches in tES although the PEM was sometimes used for stimulation in the past \cite{CHW:Suh2009}. Instead, it is very common to model electrodes as sponges with the conductivity of saline \cite{CHW:Wag2014}. This is due to the fact that stimulation electrodes in tES are indeed often large saline soaked sponges \cite{tdcscem}. Nevertheless, the sponge model has also been applied to disc electrodes in combination with saline gel \cite{datta, CHW:Dat2013}. In the sponge model, the current is assumed to be applied through the sponges, and it is supposed that either the resulting potential \cite{tdcscem} or the current density is constant over the whole electrode \cite{CHW:Wag2014, Sadlier2010}. In terms of the presented boundary electrode models, one can argue that the latter case, i.e., the assumption of constant current densities over the whole electrode, describes the application of the GAP, whereas the form er case describes the CEM with a vanishing contact impedance, i.e., a model with maximal shunting currents. However, it is more likely that both approaches lead to results similar to a classical CEM, as the sponge can be seen as a representation of the shunting electrode. An important future work direction is to investigate the actual differences between the CEM and both versions of the sponge model. In such a study one will need to take into account that the actual shape of the sponge is not well-known in all cases, especially when saline gel is used instead of a classical sponge \cite{CHW:Dat2013}. On the other hand, contact impedances on the electrodes can be measured exactly, which is why the CEM can be advantageous. In addition, the CEM does not necessitate adding sponges to the computational model and thus the mesh is more flexible and easier to construct. For these aspects, it is necessary to compare the accuracy of both approaches pertaining to real data. Another future direction is to model HD-tES stimulation patterns in parallel EEG/tES using the presented boundary condition based approach instead of the sponge model. In such a context, small high-definition electrodes can be used for both tES and EEG and several stimulating patt erns can be investigated using a single electrode configuration \cite{datta}. Consequently, the resistivity matrix could be studied as a whole in order to cover all possible linearly independent current patterns. Here, our results suggest that the gap model might be sufficient enough to replace both CEM and sponge model. For their intensity in the skin compartment, finding the significance of the shunting effects with respect to the density of the electrode configuration is also an interesting research topic. \section{Conclusion} \label{secconclusion} Advanced boundary condition based electrode modeling is an interesting alternative for tES and parallel tES/EEG studies. The present results suggest that the shunting effects present in the CEM are minor regarding practical brain stimulation applications. The reduced approaches GAP and PEM were found to be sufficient for modeling EEG and tES electrodes, respectively. The shunting effects present in the CEM were observed to have the biggest impact in the skin compartment. Interesting future directions motivated by this study include the exploration of the CEM in comparison with the sponge models of tES, for variable current patterns and dense electrode configurations of HD-tES as well as for avoiding nuisance electrode currents. \section*{Acknowledgement} This work was partially supported by the Priority Program 1665 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (WO1425/5-1), the EU project ChildBrain (Marie Curie Innovative Training Networks, grant agreement no. 641652), Academy of Finland project () and the Academy of Finland Center of Excellence in Inverse Problems.
\section{Introduction} \indent Let $B^3$ denote the unit ball in $\mathbb{R}^3$, centred at the origin. The critical points of the area functional on compact surfaces in $B^3$ whose boundaries are free to move in $\partial B$ are minimal surfaces that intersect $\partial B$ orthogonally. \\ \indent The simplest examples of free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$ are the flat equatorial disk and the critical catenoid, which will be described in details below. Fraser and Schoen \cite{FraSch1} constructed embedded examples of genus zero with any number of boundary components by finding metrics on surfaces of this topological type that maximize the first Steklov eigenvalue with fixed boundary length. The gluing construction of Pacard, Folha and Zolotareva \cite{PacFolZol} yielded free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$ of genus zero or one, and with any number of boundary components greater than a large constant. The existence of examples with three boundary components and arbitrarily large genus has been announced by M. Li and Kapouleas. Although expected, it is not clear yet whether a free boundary minimal surface in $B^3$ can be of arbitrary genus and have any number of boundary components. \\ \indent There are classifications theorems that single out the flat equatorial disk and the critical catenoid from among free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$. Some of them will be reviewed in Section 2. In this work, we sought for a new characterisation of the flat equatorial disk and the critical catenoid in terms of the length of their second fundamental forms. It turns out that a pinching condition on this quantity, that takes into account the support function of the surface, is sufficient. The result we obtained is the following: \begin{Thm}\label{maintheorem} Let $\Sigma^2$ be a compact free boundary minimal surface in $B^{3}$. Assume that for all points $x$ in $\Sigma$, \begin{equation} \label{pinch} \|A\|^2(x)\langle x,N(x)\rangle^2\leqslant 2, \end{equation} \noindent where $N(x)$ denotes a unit normal vector at the point $x\in \Sigma$ and $A$ denotes the second fundamental form of $\Sigma$. Then \begin{itemize} \item[$i)$] either $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2\equiv 0$ and $\Sigma$ is a flat equatorial disk; \item[$ii)$] or $\|A\|^2(p)\langle p,N(p)\rangle^2=2$ at some point $p\in\Sigma$ and $\Sigma$ is a critical catenoid. \end{itemize} \end{Thm} \indent The result above bears some resemblance with the following theorem, which answered a question raised by the work of Simons \cite{Sim}: \begin{Thm}[Chern-do Carmo-Kobayashi \cite{ChedoCKob}, Lawson \cite{Law}] Let $\Sigma^n$ be a closed minimal hypersurface in the unit sphere $S^{n+1}$. Assume that \begin{equation} \|A\|^2\leqslant n. \end{equation} Then \begin{itemize} \item[$i)$] either $\|A\|^2\equiv 0$ and $\Sigma^n$ is an equator; \item[$ii)$] or $\|A\|^2\equiv n$ and $\Sigma^n$ is a Clifford hypersurface (product of two round spheres of appropriate radii and dimensions). \end{itemize} \end{Thm} \indent However, the proof of our theorem is quite different and some steps are true only in low dimensions. It would be interesting to know if our result can be generalised to higher ambient dimension and submanifold co-dimensions, providing a full analogy between the results of \cite{ChedoCKob} and this free boundary setting. \section{The flat equatorial disk and the critical catenoid} \indent The flat equatorial disks are defined by the intersection of the unit ball $B^3$ with a plane containing the origin. \\ \indent The flat equatorial disks are the only totally geodesic free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$. Nitsche \cite{Nit} has shown that they are in fact the only immersed free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$ that are homeomorphic to a disk. An interesting generalisation of his result to higher codimensions was obtained by Fraser and Schoen in \cite{FraSch2}. In a different direction, it is known that the flat equatorial disk has the least possible area among free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$ (see for example \cite{RosVer}, Proposition 3, or \cite{FraSch3}, Theorem 5.4). This was generalised by Brendle \cite{Bre}. Finally, flat equatorial disks are the only free boundary minimal surfaces with Morse index equal to one (a more general statement can be found in \cite{FraSch1}, Theorem 3.1). \\ \indent Critical catenoids, on the other hand, are the only non-flat free boundary minimal surfaces in $B^3$ that are invariant under rotations around a given axis. They can be analytically defined as the image of the conformal maps \begin{multline} X : (t,\theta) \in [-t_0,t_0]\times S^1 \\ \mapsto a_0\cosh(t)\cos(\theta)e_1+a_0\cosh(t)\sin(\theta)e_2 + a_0t e_3 \in \mathbb{R}^3 \end{multline} \noindent where $\{e_1,e_2,e_3\}$ is some orthonormal basis of $\mathbb{R}^3$. The constant $t_0$ is the unique positive solution to the equation $t\sinh(t)=\cosh(t)$, while $a_0=(t_0\cosh(t_0))^{-1}$. These constants are chosen in such way that the map $X$ is conformal and its image is a piece of a catenoid contained in $B^3$, meeting $\partial B$ orthogonally, and whose axis of symmetry is the line generated by the vector $e_3$. \\ \indent It has been conjectured that the critical catenoid is the only embedded free boundary minimal annulus in $B^3$ (for example, in \cite{FraLi}, Conjecture 1.1). McGrath \cite{Mcg} showed that this conjecture is true under the additional assumption that the surface is symmetric with respect to reflections through three mutually orthogonal planes. Fraser and Schoen \cite{FraSch1} proved that the critical catenoid is the only free boundary minimal annulus that is immersed in $B^3$ by its first Steklov eigenfunctions. It would be also very interesting to classify the critical catenoid only by its Morse index. \\ \indent Regarding our main result, we observe that, in the parametrization $X$ given above, the second fundamental form and the support function are given by \begin{equation} \|A\|^2 = \frac{2}{a_0^2\cosh^4(t)} \quad \text{and} \quad \langle x,N\rangle^2 = a_0^2\left(1 - \frac{t\sinh(t)}{\cosh(t)}\right)^2. \end{equation} \indent In particular, since $\|t\|\leq t_0$, \begin{equation} \|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2 = \frac{2}{\cosh^6(t)}\left(\cosh(t) - t\sinh(t)\right)^2 \leqslant 2. \end{equation} \noindent Notice that the maximum value $2$ is attained at $t=0$, that is, on the circle defined by the intersection of the given critical catenoid and the plane through the origin that is orthogonal to its axis of symmetry. \section{Proof of the Theorem} \indent In this section, we explain the proof of our main result. The key observation is to relate the pinching condition (\ref{pinch}) to a condition on the Hessian of the distance function of points on $\Sigma$ to the origin. \begin{lemma}\label{distancefunction} Let $\Sigma^2$ be a free boundary minimal surface in $B^3$. Let $f$ be the function defined by \begin{equation} f(x)=\frac{\|x\|^2}{2}, \quad x\in\Sigma. \end{equation} Then, \begin{itemize} \item[$i)$] $\nabla^\Sigma f(x)=x$ for all $x\in\partial\Sigma$. \item[$ii)$] For each $x\in\Sigma$, the eigenvalues of $\Hess_\Sigma f(x)$ are given by $$ 1-\frac{\|A\|(x)}{\sqrt{2}}\langle x,N(x)\rangle \ \ \mbox{and} \ \ 1 +\frac{\|A\|(x)}{\sqrt{2}}\langle x,N(x)\rangle . $$ \end{itemize} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} In order to prove $i)$, we first note that $\nabla^\Sigma f(x)=x^T$ for all $x\in\Sigma$, where $(\cdot)^T$ stands for the orthogonal projection onto $T_x\Sigma$. Since $\Sigma$ meets $\partial B$ orthogonally along $\partial\Sigma$, $x\in T_x\Sigma$ for all $x\in\partial\Sigma$ and the assertion follows. \\ \indent Given $x\in\Sigma$, let $N$ be a local unit normal vector field in a neighbourhood of $x$. For all $X,Y\in T_x\Sigma$, we have \begin{align} \Hess_\Sigma f(x)(X,Y)&=XY(f)-(\nabla_XY)(f)\\ &=X\langle x,Y\rangle-\langle x,\nabla_XY\rangle\\ &=\langle X,Y \rangle+\langle x, D_XY\rangle-\langle x,\nabla_XY\rangle\\ &=\langle X,Y\rangle-\langle A(X),Y\rangle\langle x,N(x)\rangle\\ &=\langle X-A(X)\langle x, N(x)\rangle, Y\rangle. \end{align} \indent Therefore the eigenvalues of $\Hess_\Sigma f(x)$ are given by \begin{equation} 1-k_1\langle x,N(x)\rangle \quad \text{and} \quad 1-k_2\langle x,N(x)\rangle, \end{equation} \noindent where $k_1\leqslant k_2$ are the principal curvatures of $\Sigma$ at $x$. Since $\Sigma$ is minimal, $k_1=-\|A\|(x)/\sqrt{2}$ and $k_2=\|A\|(x)/\sqrt{2}$. This finishes the proof of $ii)$. \end{proof} \indent Under the assumptions of our theorem, we then conclude that the function $f$ defined in Lemma \ref{distancefunction} must be convex. This imposes very strong restrictions on the geometry of the surface $\Sigma$. \begin{proposition}\label{structureofC} Let $\Sigma^2$ be a compact free boundary minimal surface in $B^3$. Define \begin{equation} \mathcal{C} = \{p\in \Sigma;\, \|p\|=\min_{x\in \Sigma} \|x\|\}. \end{equation} \indent If $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2\leq 2$ on $\Sigma$, then \begin{itemize} \item[$i)$] either $\mathcal{C}$ contains a single point $p\in\Sigma\setminus\partial\Sigma$, in which case $\Sigma$ must be a flat equatorial disk; \item[$ii)$] or $\mathcal{C}$ is a simple closed geodesic in $\Sigma\setminus\partial\Sigma$ and $\Sigma$ is homeomorphic to an annulus. \end{itemize} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} \indent Let $f:\Sigma\to\mathbb{R}$ be defined as in Lemma \ref{distancefunction}. We claim that $\mathcal{C}$ is a totally convex subset of $\Sigma$. Recall that a subset $A$ of a Riemannian manifold $(M^n,g)$ is totally convex when any geodesic in $M^n$ joining two points in $A$ actually lies in $A$ (see, for example, \cite{CheGro}). In fact, given $p,q\in\mathcal{C}$, let $\gamma:[0,1]\to\Sigma$ be a geodesic such that $\gamma(0)=p$ and $\gamma(1)=q$. By item (2) in Lemma \ref{distancefunction}, the geometric condition $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2\leq 2$ on $\Sigma$ is equivalent to $\Hess_\Sigma f\geq 0$ on $\Sigma$. Hence, $(f\circ \gamma)^{\prime\prime}(t)\geq 0$ for all $t\in[0,1]$, that is, $f\circ \gamma$ is convex on $[0,1]$. By the definition of $\mathcal{C}$, as $f\circ \gamma$ attains its minimum at $t=0$ and $t=1$ we conclude that $(f\circ \gamma)(t)\equiv \min_\Sigma f$. Therefore $\gamma([0,1])\subset\mathcal{C}$ and the claim follows. \\ \indent Since $\Sigma$ meets $\partial B$ orthogonally, the geodesic curvature $k_g$ of $\partial \Sigma$ in $\Sigma$, computed with respect to the unit outward pointing conormal, satisfies $k_g\equiv 1$. In particular, $\partial\Sigma$ is strictly convex in $\Sigma$. This implies that for all $p,q\in\Sigma$ there exists a minimising geodesic in $\Sigma$ joining $p$ to $q$. Thus, the totally convex set $\mathcal{C}$ is connected. Also, $\mathcal{C}$ is contained in the interior of $\Sigma$, because the gradient of $f$ is non-zero on $\partial \Sigma$ and points outwards, by Lemma \ref{distancefunction}, item $i)$. \\ \indent Now, let us suppose that $\mathcal{C}$ contains only one point $p\in\Sigma\setminus \partial \Sigma$. Given $[\alpha]\in\pi_1(\Sigma,p)$, let us assume that $[\alpha]$ is a nontrivial homotopy class. Since $\partial\Sigma$ is strictly convex, we can find a geodesic loop $\gamma:[0,1]\to\Sigma$, $\gamma(0)=\gamma(1)=p$, such that $\gamma\in[\alpha]$. Since $\mathcal{C}$ is totally convex, $\gamma([0,1])\subset\mathcal{C}$. But $\mathcal{C}=\{p\}$ and $[\alpha]$ is non-trivial, which is a contradiction. Therefore $\Sigma$ is homeomorphic to a disk. By Nitsche's Theorem \cite{Nit}, $\Sigma$ is a flat equatorial disk. \\ \indent Finally, suppose that $\mathcal{C}$ does not consist of a single point. By Nitsche's result, $\Sigma$ cannot be homeomorphic to a disk. Let $p\in\mathcal{C}$ and let $[\alpha]\in\pi_1(\Sigma,p)$ be a non-trivial homotopy class. As above, since $\partial\Sigma$ is strictly convex, we can find a geodesic loop $\gamma:[0,1]\to\Sigma$, $\gamma(0)=\gamma(1)$, such that $\gamma\in[\alpha]$. We claim that $\gamma^\prime(0)=\gamma^\prime(1)$, $\gamma([0,1])$ is a simple curve and $\mathcal{C}=\gamma([0,1])$. In fact, if $\gamma^\prime(0)\neq\gamma^\prime(1)$, then, because $\mathcal{C}$ is totally convex, it is possible to join points on $\gamma$ near the break at $p$ by minimising geodesics and find an open set $U\subset\mathcal{C}$, which is a contradiction as $\Sigma$ is minimal. By similar reasoning, $\gamma$ has to be simple and $\mathcal{C}=\gamma([0,1])$, so that $\mathcal{C}$ is a simple closed geodesic. Since the above argument also shows that any geodesic loop based at $p$ must be contained in $\mathcal{C}$, we conclude that $\pi_1(\Sigma,p)=\mathbb{Z}$, that is, $\Sigma$ is homeomorphic to an annulus. \end{proof} \indent The following corollary is a direct consequence of the above proof. \begin{corollary}\label{corollary1} Let $\Sigma^2$ be a compact free boudary minimal surface in $B^3$. If $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2<2$ on $\Sigma$, then $\Sigma$ is a flat equatorial disk. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Since $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2<2$, by item $ii)$ of Lemma \ref{distancefunction} it follows that the function $f$ defined in Proposition \eqref{distancefunction} is strictly convex, that is, $\Hess_\Sigma f>0$ on $\Sigma$. By item $i)$ of the same Lemma, $f$ attains its mininum value on the interior of $\Sigma$. By the strict convexity of $f$, the set of minima contains a single point. Thus, Proposition \ref{structureofC} implies that $\Sigma$ is a flat equatorial disk. \end{proof} \indent In order the finish the proof of our main result, it remains only to analyse the situation where the function $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2$ attains the maximum value $2$ at some point on $\Sigma$. \begin{proposition} Let $\Sigma^2$ be a compact free boundary minimal surface in $B^3$. If $\|A\|^2\langle x,N\rangle^2\leq 2$ on $\Sigma$ and $\|A\|^2(p)\langle p,N(p)\rangle^2=2$ at some point $p\in\Sigma$, then $\Sigma$ is a critical catenoid. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $f:\Sigma\to\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ be defined as in Lemma \ref{distancefunction} and Proposition \ref{structureofC}, respectively. Since $\|A\|^2(p)\langle p,N(p)\rangle^2=2$ at some point $p\in\Sigma$, the surface $\Sigma$ cannot be homeomorphic to a disk, for in this case it would be totally geodesic as a consequence of Nitsche's Theorem \cite{Nit}. Thus, by Proposition \ref{structureofC}, $\Sigma$ is homeomorphic to an annulus and $\mathcal{C}$ is a simple closed geodesic, say $\gamma:[0,\ell]\to\Sigma$, parametrized by arc length, in $\Sigma\setminus\partial\Sigma$. In particular, $\inf_\Sigma f>0$. \\ \indent Let $R>0$ be given by $R^2/2=\inf_\Sigma f$ and let $S_R\subset\mathbb{R}^3$ be the sphere of radius $R$ centred at the origin. We claim that $\gamma$ is a great circle in $S_R$. In fact, by definition of $R$, we have that $\Sigma\subset\{x\in\mathbb{R}^3:\|x\|\geqslant R\}$ and $\Sigma\cap S_R=\gamma([0,\ell])$. This implies that $T_{\gamma(s)}\Sigma=T_{\gamma(s)}S_R$ for all $s\in[0,\ell]$. Since $\gamma$ is a geodesic of $\Sigma$, we then conclude that $\gamma$ is also a geodesic of $S_R$, that is, $\gamma$ is a great circle of $S_R$. \\ \indent If $e_3$ denote a unit vector in $\mathbb{R}^3$ that is orthogonal to the plane containing the great circle $\gamma$, then $\{\gamma'(s),e_3\}$ is an orthonormal basis of $T_{\gamma(s)}\Sigma$ for all $s\in[0,\ell]$. \\ \indent Let $u(x)=\langle x\wedge N(x),e_3\rangle$, $x\in\Sigma$, where $\wedge$ denotes the cross product in $\mathbb{R}^3$. The function $u$ is the infinitesimal normal speed of the variation of $\Sigma$ by rotations around the $e_3-$axis. As such, $u$ is a Jacobi function of $\Sigma$, that is, \begin{equation} \Delta_\Sigma u+\|A\|^2u=0\ \ \mbox{on} \ \ \Sigma, \ \ \mbox{and} \ \ \frac{\partial u}{\partial \nu}=u \ \ \mbox{on} \ \ \partial\Sigma. \end{equation} \noindent Moreover, $u$ vanishes identically if and only if $\Sigma$ is a surface of revolution around the $e_3-$axis. \\ \indent Clearly, $\gamma([0,\ell])$ is contained in $u^{-1}(0)$, which immediately implies that $d u(\gamma(s))\gamma^\prime(s)=0$ for all $s\in[0,\ell]$. On the other hand, as $\gamma^\prime(s)$ is a principal direction of $\Sigma$ at $\gamma(s)$, so it is the orthogonal direction $e_3\in T_{\gamma(s)}\Sigma$. Thus, $dN_{\gamma(s)}e_3$ is parallel to $e_3$ and \begin{equation} du(\gamma(s))e_3=\langle e_3\wedge N(\gamma(s)), e_3\rangle + \langle \gamma(s)\wedge dN_{\gamma(s)}e_3,e_3\rangle=0. \end{equation} \indent The above argument has shown that every point in the circle $\mathcal{C}$, which is contained in $u^{-1}(0)$, is a critical point of $u$. But this implies that $u$ vanishes identically on $\Sigma$. In fact, should this not be true, the nodal set $u^{-1}(0)$ of the Jacobi function $u$ would contain only isolated critical points, by a result due to S. Y. Cheng (\cite{Che}, Theorem 2.5). And this would be a contradiction. \\ \indent Thus, $\Sigma$ is an free boundary minimal annulus of revolution around the $e_3-$axis in $B^3$. In other words, $\Sigma$ is a critical catenoid. \end{proof} \noindent \textbf{Acknowledgements:} L. A. is supported by the ERC Start Grant PSC and LMCF 278940 and I. N. is supported by CNPq-Brazil. Both authors are grateful to Andr\'e Neves, Celso Viana, Rafael Montezuma Fernando Cod\'a Marques, Ben Sharp and Alessandro Carlotto for their kind interest in this work. \\
\section{Introduction} The top quark is by far the heaviest elementary particle observed with a mass of 173 GeV. Due to its large mass, its coupling to the Higgs boson is very close to unity and this leads to the question whether the top quark has a significant role in electroweak symmetry breaking. Additionally its lifetime is shorter than the hadronization and the spin decorrelation time, ($1/\Gamma_t < 1/ \Lambda_{QCD}$) and ($1/\Gamma_t < m_t/\Lambda^2_{QCD}$), which therefore allows to study directly the bare quark properties. The top quark properties can be altered by new physics, allowing to test the standard model (SM) and probe for beyond the standard model (BSM). \section{Charge Asymmetry} The SM predicts a charge asymmetry in top pair production which is symmetric at the leading order (LO), and asymmetric at the next-to-leading order (NLO) due to QCD interference effects. Many new physics models predict a charge asymmetry at LO, therefore it is a powerful variable to constrain new physics. The LHC has a charge-symmetric, proton-proton, initial state and the top quark pairs are produced in gluon-gluon fusion and quark-antiquark annihilation processes. The valance quarks carry a larger fraction of the proton momentum which leads top quarks to be produced in forward-backward direction and anti-top quarks centrally. This asymmetry can be expressed as a function of the top quark pair rapidities: \begin{equation} = \frac{N(\Delta\|y\| > 0 ) - N(\Delta\|y\| < 0) }{N(\Delta\|y\| > 0) + N(\Delta\|y\| < 0)} \end{equation} where $\Delta\|y\|~=~\|y_t\| - \|y_{\bar{t}}\|$, or by using the decay products of the top pairs as a function of the lepton pseudo-rapidities in dilepton final state: \begin{equation} A^{lep}_C = \frac{N(\Delta\|\eta\| > 0 ) - N(\Delta\|\eta\| < 0) }{N(\Delta\|\eta\| > 0) + N(\Delta\|\eta\| < 0)} \end{equation} where $\Delta\|\eta\|~=~\|\eta_{\ell^+}\| - \|\eta_{\ell^-}\|$. Theoretical predictions for these values are $\sim~1\%$ in the SM.\\ The CMS~\cite{cms} collaboration measured the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ charge asymmetry with different methods and in different final states at 8 TeV with 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data. The first measurement is done in single-lepton final state events, with an unfolding procedure applied for detector effects, inclusively and differentially as a function of the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ system rapidity $\|y_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}\|$, transverse momentum $p^{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}_{T}$ and invariant mass $m_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}$ ~\cite{Khachatryan:2015oga}. The results are $A_C = [-0.35\pm0.72(\textrm{stat).}\pm0.31(\textrm{sys.})]\%$ and $A_C = [0.10\pm0.68(\textrm{stat.})\pm0.37(\textrm{sys.})]\%$ for the inclusive full space and fiducial space measurements respectively. The differential measurements are in agreement with the SM and the results are compared with predictions from an effective field theory that involves the effective axial-vector coupling of the gluons~\cite{Gabrielli:2011zw, Gabrielli:2011jf}. The measurement excludes new physics scales below 1.5 TeV at the $95\%$ confidence level. Another inclusive measurement is done in the same final state with a template technique ~\cite{Khachatryan:2015mna} based on a parametrization of the SM. The result $A_C = [0.33\pm0.26(\textrm{stat.})\pm0.33(\textrm{sys.})]\%$ is the most precise measurement up to date. The charge asymmetry measurement is also done in the dilepton final state using the unfolding method \cite{Khachatryan:2016ysn} . As opposed to the single-lepton analyses, the dilepton analyses also includes an asymmetry calculation based on the lepton pseudo-rapidities The results are $A^{lep}_C = [0.3\pm0.6(\textrm{stat.}\pm0.3(\textrm{sys.})]\%$ and $A_C = [1.1\pm1.1(\textrm{stat.})\pm0.7(\textrm{sys.})]\%$ for the inclusive full space measurements, the results can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:CA}. All the measurements are in agreement with the SM. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{AC_1.pdf} \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{AC_2.pdf} \caption{Dependence of the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ and leptonic charge asymmetries $A_C$ (left) and $A^{lep}_C$ obtained from the unfolded distributions in data (points) on $M_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}$ \cite{Khachatryan:2016ysn} . Parton-level predictions from the MC@NLO simulation and calculations at NLO (QCD+EW)~\cite{Bernreuther:2012sx} are shown by dashed and solid histograms, respectively.} \label{fig:CA} \end{figure} \section{Spin Correlations} The top quarks decay before their spins decorrelate, therefore their spin correlation is propagated to the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ decay products. The SM predicts the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ spins to be correlated and the spin correlation strength can be defined as the asymmetry between the number of $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ pairs with aligned and anti-aligned pairs. The first analysis from CMS at 8 TeV with 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data is in muon+jets final state, and the measurement is done by using a matrix element method~\cite{Khachatryan:2015tzo}. The discriminating variable used for the event likelihood fit is the ratio of the SM (correlated) and uncorrelated $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ pairs. The fraction of the SM $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ pairs is measured to be $f^{SM} = 0.72\pm 0.09(\textrm{stat.}) ^{+0.15}_{-0.13}(\textrm{sys.})$. The second analysis from CMS is, also at 8 TeV with 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data, performed in the dilepton final state using the angular distributions and asymmetry variables of the leptons unfolded to the parton level and as a function of the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ system variables $m_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}$, $\|y_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}\|$ , and $p^{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}}_{T}$ \cite{Khachatryan:2016xws}. The fraction of the SM $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ pairs is measured to be $f^{SM} = 1.12^{+0.12}_{-0.15}$. \section{CP Violation} In the SM, charge conjugate and parity symmetry (CP) violation in the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ production pairs is predicted to be very small. The CMS collaboration has measured the CP violation in $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ production and decay at 8 TeV with 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{CMS:2016tnr}. The measurement is done by exploiting the T-odd triple product observables, which are odd under CP transformation. The CP violation can be assessed by measuring a non-zero value of the asymmetry: \begin{equation} A_{CP} (O_i) = \frac{N_{events}(O_i > 0 ) - N_{events}(O_i < 0 ) } { N_{events}(O_i > 0 ) + N_{events}(O_i < 0 ) } \end{equation} where $O_i$ are the observables as a function of the four-momenta of the decay products. The asymmetry is calculated as a function of these observables and no evidence for CP-violation is observed. The distribution of an observable and $A_{CP}$ as a function of one observable can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:CP}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{CP_1.pdf} \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{CP_2.pdf} \caption{Distribution of the observables of data and simulation (SM) in the signal region in combined channels before the background subtraction~\cite{CMS:2016tnr}. Each observable is given in the units of $m_t^3$ (left). Summary of the $A_{CP} $ measurements performed for one observable in all the channels (right). } \label{fig:CP} \end{figure} \section{$\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$ +V production cross sections} The $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$V measurement by CMS at 8 TeV with 19.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data is done by using event reconstruction discriminators with a multivariate analysis in all possible leptonic final states~\cite{Khachatryan:2015sha}. The first observation of $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}Z$ and measurement of its cross section with 6.4 standard deviations is reported to be $\sigma_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}Z} = 242^{+65}_{-55}~\textrm{fb}$. The $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}W$ cross section is measured with 4.8 standard deviations, $\sigma_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}W} = 382^{+117}_{-102}~\textrm{fb}$. Additionally constraints on the axial and vector components of the tZ coupling and on dimension-six operators were put. The other analysis presented by the CMS collaboration is measurement of $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$Z cross section at 13 TeV with 2.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{CMS:2016ium}. The measurement is done in three- and four-lepton final states with a binned likelihood fit to extract cross section and measured $\sigma_{\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}Z} = 1065^{+352}_{-313}(\textrm{stat.})^{+168}_{-142}(\textrm{sys.})~\textrm{fb}$ with 3.6 standard deviations. The limits on the tZ coupling from the first analysis and the number of selected events in three lepton analysis from the second analysis can be seen in Fig.\ref{fig:ttV}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{ttV_1.pdf} \includegraphics[width=.425\textwidth]{ttV_2.pdf} \caption{Difference between the profile likelihood and the best fit profile likelihood functions for the relative vector and axial components of the tZ coupling, contours corresponding to the best fit and the 1, 2, and 3 standard deviation CLs are shown in lines (left) ~\cite{Khachatryan:2015sha}. Number of events in the $\textrm{t}\bar{\textrm{t}}$Z three-lepton signal regions (right)~\cite{CMS:2016ium}. } \label{fig:ttV} \end{figure}
\section{Introduction} Galaxy cluster mass measurements are the dominant source of systematic uncertainty in cosmological constraints derived from the space-time abundance of galaxy clusters. This was acutely illustrated by the {\em Planck}\ collaboration's finding of tension between the \hbox{$\Lambda$CDM}\ cosmology parameters favored by cluster counts and those derived by combining the primary cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies with non-cluster data \citep[PXX][]{PlanckXX1303.5080,PlanckXXIV1502.01597}. While the discrepant findings could reflect a relatively large neutrino mass or more exotic physics, the confidence in such statements is limited by systematic uncertainties in mass measurements \citep{Rozo1302.5086}. The fundamental issue is that cluster halo mass is not directly observable. While N-body simulations have calibrated the space density of massive halos to good precision \citep[e.g.,][and references therein]{Bhattacharya1005.2239, Murray1306.6721}, application to cluster counts on the sky requires the use of scaling relations between halo mass and observable cluster properties, often termed mass proxies. In the case of {\em Planck}\ clusters detected through the Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect, the required relation is between SZ signal strength and mass. In principle, scaling relations can be calibrated with hydrodynamic simulations that properly account for most relevant physical processes. The approach is currently limited, however, by uncertainties in the baryon physics associated with galaxy feedback mechanisms \citep{Ragone-Figueroa2013, Dubois2013, LeBrun2014, Martizzi2014, Genel2014}. Nevertheless, the fidelity of the simulations is high enough to provide insights into the general form of the scaling relations and into important sources of systematic error. In practice, empirical approaches are used to establish scaling relations. The {\em Planck}\ analysis employed X-ray observations from XMM-{\em Newton}\ to derive masses based on the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium (HSE) of the intra-cluster medium (ICM) \citep{Arnaud0910.1234}. For decades, hydrodynamic simulations have indicated that HSE is not exact, with expectations that HSE masses underestimate true values by typically tens of percent, depending on scale and the exact modeling of baryon physics \citep[e.g.,][]{Evrard1990, Rasia2006, Nagai2007, Piffaretti2008, Rasia2012, Battaglia2013, Nelson1308.6589}. Combining XMM-{\em Newton}\ and {\it Chandra} data, \citet{Mahdavi2013} found a 15\% systematic difference in HSE masses. Moreover, the X-ray instrument calibration errors can also affect masses at the ten-percent level \citep{Donahue1405.7876,Rozo2014a}. Gravitational lensing offers a powerful, independent alternative to HSE masses, but individual weak lensing mass estimates are noisy due to the sensitivity of the broad lensing kernel to material along the line-of-sight \citep{Hoekstra2003} and to halo triaxiality \citep{Becker2011}. Detailed lensing image simulations by \citet{Meneghetti2010a} found that weak lensing mass estimates incur smaller bias than X-ray HSE values, with mean biases of a few percent. Independent work by \citet{Becker2011} supports this result, but mean underestimates of up to 10\% have also been reported \citep{Rasia2012}. The bias depends in part on the method of extracting cluster mass from the lensing data, so precise estimates of systematic error require careful modeling of the full data acquisition and analysis workflow. The {\em Planck}\ cluster cosmology findings motivate deeper investigation into the mass calibration for that sample. Here, we have relied on recent results from the Cluster Lensing and Supernova survey with Hubble \citep[CLASH, ][]{Postman2012} collaboration, who have measured lensing masses from imaging data of exquisite depth and wavelength coverage for a sample of 25 X-ray and lensing selected galaxy clusters \citep{Merten2015,Umetsu2014, Zitrin2015}. In particular, we used the reconstruction method presented in \citep{Merten2015} to obtain 22 CLASH mass estimates.\footnote{There is not enough data for the remaining three CLASH clusters, namely, MACS0647+7015, MACS2129-0741 and Abell1423. For instance, there is no wide-field 3+-band Subaru data available for the cluster Abell1423.} After cross-matching the CLASH and {\em Planck}\ cluster catalogs, we measured the SZ signal of 22 CLASH clusters in the publicly available {\em Planck}\ dataset for any CLASH clusters not included in the original {\em Planck}\ cluster catalog. We then used the CLASH cluster sample to place tight constraints on the SZ scaling relation of galaxy clusters, and discuss the import of our results for the cosmological interpretation of the {\em Planck}\ cluster counts. The layout of the paper is as follows. In Sect.~\ref{sec:catalogs} we summarize the methods used to compute the CLASH and {\em Planck}\ mass estimates for the 21 clusters in common, while in Sect.~\ref{sec:mass_comparison} we compare these estimates. In Sect.~\ref{sec:analysis} we introduce our models for the CLASH selection function and for the measurements, that is, the mass-observable distribution, including both observational uncertainties and intrinsic covariance between lensing and SZ signals. We construct the posterior probability distribution and perform different Bayesian analyses in Sect.~\ref{sec:results} to constrain the model parameters. In Sects.~\ref{sec:discussion} and \ref{sec:conclusion} we discuss our results and then conclude with final remarks. Unless otherwise specified, we have adopted a fiducial flat cosmology with $\Omega_{\rm M} = 0.3 = 1 - \Omega_\Lambda$ (see Table~\ref{tab:cosmo_params}), and all masses are given within $R_{500}$, the radius at which the mean mass density within the cluster reaches 500 times the critical density at the redshift of the cluster: $M = (4\pi/3)R^3_{500} (500 \rho_{\rm c})$, with $\rho_{\rm c} = 3H^2(z)/8\pi G$. We refer to the {\em Planck}\ mass proxy (see below) as $M_{\rm PL}$ and to the CLASH lensing mass as $M_{\rm CL}$. These measurements are noisy realizations of the true SZ mass proxy, $M_{\rm SZ}$, and true lensing mass, $M_{\rm L}$. \section{Masses and mass proxies} \label{sec:catalogs} \subsection{CLASH lensing masses} The CLASH survey \citep{Postman2012} is a Hubble Space Telescope (HST) multi-cycle treasury program targeting 25 massive galaxy clusters in the redshift range $0.18 < z < 0.89$ and over a mass range $0.5\times10^{15}\ h^{-1} \mbox{M}_\odot \lesssim M_{\textrm{vir}} \lesssim 2.0\times10^{15}\ h^{-1} \mbox{M}_\odot$. The sample of 25 clusters was further subdivided into an X-ray selected sub-sample (20 clusters), and a strong-lensing selected sub-sample (five clusters, also referred to as the high-magnification sub-sample). For a complete definition of the two sub-sets, see \citet{Postman2012}. Each cluster was observed for 20 HST orbits in 16 broad photometric passbands. These data are supplemented with a three-to-five band Subaru/Suprime-Cam and ESO/WFI optical imaging to enable weak lensing measurements of the cluster profiles out to their virial radii. The combination of HST and ground-based wide-field data allows for a comprehensive weak-and strong-lensing analysis. We have used a total of 22 CLASH clusters, of which 19 belong to the X-ray selected sub-sample and three belong to the high-magnification subset. The lensing reconstructions of the X-ray selected clusters have recently been presented in \citet{Merten2015} and \citet{Umetsu2014}, while mass estimates for the high-magnification clusters have in part been presented in \citet{Medezinski2013} and \citet{Umetsu2014}. Recently, \citet{Umetsu2016} and \citet{Zitrin2015} reconstructed the surface mass density profiles of 20 and 25 clusters (complete CLASH sample), respectively. In all cases, a combination of weak and strong lensing was used to derive reliable masses. A thorough description of the input data and reconstruction techniques used in this work, is given by \citet{Merten2015}. Here, we only provide a brief summary. Masses were derived with the \texttt{SaWLens} code \citep{Merten2009} that consistently combines weak and strong lensing in a non-parametric fashion on adaptively refined grids. The method was thoroughly tested with realistic lensing scenarios and numerically simulated clusters \citep{Meneghetti2010a, Rasia2012}, and has been used multiple times for the reconstruction of real galaxy clusters \citep{Merten2009, Merten2011, Umetsu2012, Patel2014}. For the CLASH analysis, \texttt{SaWLens} combines constraints from HST strong lensing, HST weak lensing and wide-field ground-based weak lensing (except for CLJ1226+3332 whose mass was reconstructed using HST data only) into a single reconstruction of the cluster's gravitational potential from which it derives the surface-mass density. NFW fits to the surface-mass density provide the desired total 3-dimensional mass of the halo at any given radius. Error bars for the lensing reconstruction were derived from 1000 bootstrap resamplings of the input weak-lensing shear catalogs, including their photometric redshift uncertainties,\footnote{During the bootstrap the redshift uncertainty of a given WL galaxy was also sampled. Then the angular distance ratio $D_s/D_{ls}$ for each individual galaxy was calculated, which was then averaged and used to convert the convergence map into a physical surface-density map. } and by randomly sampling the allowed redshift range of strong-lensing multiple image systems. Candidate systems are treated by random inclusion or exclusion in each bootstrap. From the bootstrap realizations, we have derived the covariance matrix of the surface-mass density bins, which is then taken into account during the NFW profile fitting \citep[see][for details]{Merten2015}. In particular, as discussed in \citet{Merten2015}, the mass estimate of the system CLJ1226+3332 shows only a mild tension within the errors with an independent study by \citet{Jee2009}. The uncertainties in the source redshift distribution are taken into account by the error estimation of the SaWLens method, which is based on a combination of bootstrapping and a resampling of source redshifts within their uncertainties. These CLASH mass errors account for a number of systematics in the lensing reconstruction, including shape scatter in the weak lensing catalogs, redshift uncertainties in the weak lensing background and strong-lensing multiple-image populations, mis-identifications of strong-lensing features and uncertainty in the central peak position of the mass distribution. Sources of systematic error not covered by this analysis include correlated and un-correlated structure within the cluster field, effects of tri-axiality and general error stemming from the fact that we fit a simplified 1D analytical form of the density profile to a complex mass distribution. These unaccounted sources of systematic error in CLASH mass estimates have recently been estimated by \citet{Umetsu2014} to be $\sim$8\%, and a detailed comparison of the SaWLens mass reconstructions to a set of numerical simulations that mimic the CLASH selection functions has been presented in \citet{Meneghetti2014}. In Sect.~\ref{sec:results} we will account for this systematic uncertainty using a Gaussian distribution with standard deviation of 8\% \citet{Umetsu2014}, and also the left-skewed distribution for the 3D and true mass ratio found by \citet{Meneghetti2014}, as priors on the lensing mass scale. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{./planck_clash_masses_dpi.pdf} \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{./planck_clash_mass_ratio_dpi.pdf} \caption{Mass comparison and mass bias estimates. On the {\em left}, we plot the CLASH lensing masses as a function of the {\em Planck}\ SZ mass proxy. Red points represent clusters found in the PSZ1 (13 objects) and blue those of the remaining objects at lower signal-to-noise (eight clusters); open circles identify the three clusters in the high-magnification subsample. The solid line is the equality line. The strongest outlier in the upper left corner is CLJ1226 at $z=0.89$, the highest redshift object in the sample. The {\em right-hand panel} plots $\rho = M_{\rm PL} / M_{\rm CL}$ as a function of CLASH mass together with its uncertainty $\Delta\rho$ (see text) in the same color scheme. The green line and band correspond to the sample mean, $\avg{\rho}_{\rm s}$, and its standard deviation obtained from a bootstrap analysis: $E(\avg{\rho}_{\rm s}) = 0.72 \pm 0.059$, where $E$ indicates a calculation over the bootstrap and $\avg{\rho}_{\rm s}$ is calculated as the inverse-variance weighted mean. Similarly, the magenta line and band represent the bootstrap mean and uncertainty of the unweighted mean: $E(\avg{\rho}_{\rm s}) = 0.76 \pm 0.052$. The dashed line indicates zero mass bias. \\} \label{fig:data} \end{figure} \subsection{{\em Planck}\ SZ mass proxy} \label{sec:Mpl} We attempted to measure the SZ mass proxy for each of the 22 CLASH clusters. Of these, 13 are found in the {\em Planck}\ Catalog of SZ Sources \citep[PSZ1,][]{psz1} and an additional eight are detected in the {\em Planck}\ temperature maps, albeit at lower significance than for clusters in the PSZ1. The remaining system, MACSJ1311-03, lies in a dusty region of the sky and has a negative signal-to-noise ratio in the {\em Planck}\ data. It is unusable, and we remove this system from our analysis, leaving 21 clusters. The SZ mass proxy for each cluster is extracted following the same procedure as for the PSZ1. Here, we only provide a brief summary of the method. For each CLASH cluster, we extract $10 \deg \times 10 \deg$ tangential maps centered on the cluster position for each of the six {\em Planck}\ High Frequency Instrument (HFI) channels. The maps were filtered with the SZ Matched MultiFilter \citep[MMF3,][]{melin2006}, varying the characteristic scale, $\theta_s$, of the filter. For each system, the filter provided a degeneracy curve relating the SZ signal strength, $Y_{500}$, to the characteristic scale, $\theta_s$. We break this degeneracy curve with an X-ray prior on the signal-size relation \citep[Eq. 20 of][]{PlanckXX1303.5080}, obtaining the cluster signal strength, $Y_{500}$, and scale, $\theta_s$, independently, and then convert the latter to $M_{\rm PL}$. The upper and lower values for $M_{\rm PL}$ are obtained following the same method, but using $Y_{500} \pm \sigma_{Y_{500}}$ versus $\theta_s$ for the degeneracy curve, where $\sigma_{Y_{500}}$ is the error on the signal provided by the MMF at each characteristic scale. Details are given in Sect. 7.2.2 of~\cite{psz1}. We note that, in this work, the {\em Planck}\ masses were derived when centering the filters on the fiducial CLASH cluster position, irrespective of the PSZ1\ location. This reflects the fact that {\em Planck}\ positions are more uncertain than those from the CLASH catalog. Because of this, our new SZ measurements differ slightly from, but remain consistent with, the values published in the PSZ1. The inverse-variance weighted average of the ratio of the masses inferred from the SZ between the PSZ1\ and our CLASH-centered estimates is $0.99 \pm 0.03$. \begin{table} \caption{Cluster redshifts, {\em Planck}\ and CLASH mass estimates.} \label{table:catalog} \centering \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5} \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{c \| c \| c \| c } \hline\hline {Cluster}& $z$ & $M_{\rm PL} [10^{14} h^{-1} \mbox{M}_\odot]$ & $M_{\rm CL} [10^{14} h^{-1} \mbox{M}_\odot]$ \\ \hline Abell-383 & 0.188 & $2.41 \pm 0.49$ & $6.12 \pm 0.61$ \\ Abell-2261 & 0.225 & $5.33 \pm 0.31$ & $9.48 \pm 1.67$ \\ MACSJ1206-08 & 0.439 & $7.09 \pm 0.47$ & $6.05 \pm 0.94$ \\ RXJ1347-1145 & 0.451 & $7.55 \pm 0.52$ & $7.97 \pm 1.94$ \\ MACSJ0329-02 & 0.45 & $2.60 \pm 0.87$ & $5.05 \pm 0.84$ \\ MS2137-2353 & 0.313 & $2.56 \pm 0.63$ & $6.79 \pm 0.49$ \\ MACSJ0744+39 & 0.686 & $3.86 \pm 0.82$ & $4.88 \pm 0.39$ \\ MACSJ1115+0129 & 0.352 & $4.55 \pm 0.49$ & $5.43 \pm 0.87$ \\ Abell-611 & 0.288 & $3.38 \pm 0.58$ & $5.70 \pm 0.50$ \\ RXJ1532.8+3021 & 0.363 & $2.75 \pm 0.71$ & $3.44 \pm 0.75$ \\ MACSJ1720+3536 & 0.391 & $3.77 \pm 0.55$ & $5.29 \pm 0.80$ \\ RXJ2129+0005 & 0.234 & $3.20 \pm 0.45$ & $4.30 \pm 0.45$ \\ MACSJ1931-26 & 0.352 & $4.56 \pm 0.55$ & $4.50 \pm 0.44$ \\ Abell-209 & 0.206 & $5.58 \pm 0.31$ & $6.27 \pm 0.64$ \\ RXCJ2248-4431 & 0.348 & $7.99 \pm 0.30$ & $7.66 \pm 1.08$ \\ MACSJ0429-02 & 0.399 & $3.23 \pm 0.77$ & $5.32 \pm 1.35$ \\ MACSJ1423+24 & 0.545 & $4.07 \pm 0.73$ & $4.09 \pm 0.84$ \\ CLJ1226+3332 & 0.89 & $2.45 \pm 1.03$ & $10.81 \pm 0.92$ \\ MACSJ0717+37 & 0.548 & $8.49 \pm 0.48$ & $9.68 \pm 0.77$ \\ MACSJ1149+22 & 0.544 & $6.44 \pm 0.53$ & $7.06 \pm 0.30$ \\ MACSJ0416-24 & 0.42 & $3.87 \pm 0.62$ & $4.33 \pm 0.46$ \\ \hline \end{tabular}} \end{table} \section{Mass comparison} \label{sec:mass_comparison} The left-hand panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:data} compares the CLASH masses to the {\em Planck}\ SZ mass proxy, with the red points representing clusters in the PSZ1\ and blue the additional lower signal-to-noise clusters. The three circled data points identify the CLASH clusters selected for their high lensing magnification. The redshift value and both {\em Planck}\ and CLASH mass estimates of each cluster are summarized in Table~\ref{table:catalog}. The CLASH lensing masses tend to be larger than the {\em Planck}\ proxy values, and there is a ``wall'' of clusters at low {\em Planck}\ mass ($M_{\rm PL}=2\times 10^{14}\ h^{-1}\mbox{M}_\odot$) reaching to high lensing masses and that would appear to be related to the CLASH selection function. Our subsequent analysis indeed finds an effective mass cutoff for CLASH selection around $(4-5) \times 10^{14}\ h^{-1}\mbox{M}_\odot$. The biggest outlier, in the upper left corner in blue, is CLJ1226 at \mbox{$z=0.89$}, the highest redshift object in the CLASH sample. Following other work \citep[e.g.,][]{vonderLinden2014, Hoekstra2015, Simet2017}, we began by assuming that the sample mean mass ratio, $\avg{M_{\rm PL}/M_{\rm CL}}_s$, is an unbiased estimator of the mass bias, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, between the {\em Planck}\ mass and true halo mass, $M_{500}$. The right-hand panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:data} shows the mass ratio $\rho = M_{\rm PL}/M_{\rm CL}$ for each of the clusters. Its uncertainty is calculated as $(\Delta (\ln\rho))^2 = (\Delta (\lnM_{\rm PL}))^2 + (\Delta (\lnM_{\rm CL}))^2$ and no correlation is assumed for the {\em Planck}\ and CLASH mass errors. We first calculated the inverse-variance weighted mean: $\avg{\rho}_s = 0.72\pm 0.057$. We also estimate the uncertainty with a bootstrap, using the \textsf{boot} function from the Bootstrap R package \citep{boot}, to obtain $E(\avg{\rho}_s) = 0.72 \pm 0.059$, where $E$ indicates a calculation over the bootstrap. The uncertainties on the cluster mass ratios are at best approximate, having been calculated using the measured ratios for each cluster, which tends to overweight (underweight) low (high) valued excursions and pull the inverse-variance weighted mean to smaller values. An unweighted mean with bootstrap errors, as per \citet{vonderLinden2014}, results in a slightly higher value of $E(\avg{\rho}_s) = 0.76 \pm 0.052$ (magenta line and band). These initial results are all in agreement with those obtained by the Canadian Cluster Comparison Project \citep[CCCP,][]{Hoekstra2015} and the Weighing the Giants program \citep[WtG,][]{vonderLinden2014}. We note that three of our CLASH clusters were selected for their previously known high magnification, rather than based on their X-ray properties, as is true for the bulk of the sample; these objects are indicated in Fig.~\ref{fig:data}. The X-ray selection would more naturally lend itself to our modeling of the selection function. To check for any sensitivity to these objects, we also performed our bootstrap analysis without them (i.e., on the other 18, X-ray selected, clusters). The results do not change significantly. Curiously, when eliminating these high magnification clusters, presumably more likely to have large masses, we find a slight increase in the mass bias, namely, $E(\avg{\rho}_s) = 0.68 \pm 0.066$. This can be appreciated by eye from Fig.~\ref{fig:data}, where these three clusters all lie close to the equality line. The simple analysis performed above is not completely satisfactory for a variety of reasons. Moreover, it is important to note that the average for this estimator is strictly over an ensemble including both measurement errors and intrinsic, potentially correlated astrophysical scatter at fixed true mass. \cite{Meneghetti2014} found that the intrinsic scatter in CLASH lensing-deduced masses is expected to be log-normal with a standard deviation of (10-15)\%, although it is potentially larger due to the impact of correlated structure\footnote{Recently, \citet{Shirasaki2016} reported that the scatter of about $20\%$ in the thermal SZ and weak lensing relation, found from observations \citep{Marrone2012}, is due to projections of correlated structures and the bias in the lensing determined cluster radius.}, that was not fully accounted for in the \cite{Meneghetti2014} simulations \citep[see also][]{Becker2011}. Intrinsic scatter in the {\em Planck}\ mass proxy is related to the scatter in SZ signal at fixed halo mass, estimated at $\sim 10\%$ according to numerical simulations \citep[e.g.,][]{Nagai2007, Stanek2010}. The exact way this propagates to the {\em Planck}\ mass is not quantified. One would also expect a positive correlation between the lensing and SZ signals because both are a linear projection along the line-of-sight \citep{Noh01052011, Angulo2012}. Finally, the simple analysis above has no means of accounting for selection criteria in the cluster sample (especially for a rather small and peculiar sample like CLASH), which is critical for interpreting the relation between the observed mass ratio and the mass bias of the SZ masses relative to true halo mass. The Bayesian approach presented in the next section aims to address these shortcomings and thereby provide a more robust result and error analysis. \section{Bayesian analysis} \label{sec:analysis} The goal of our Bayesian analysis is to constrain models for the distribution of lensing and {\em Planck}\ masses given true halo mass and, simultaneously, an approximate form of the CLASH selection function. Our primary objective is the mass bias parameter, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, quantifying the bias between the {\em Planck}\ mass proxy and true halo mass. With the Bayesian analysis, we can incorporate important astrophysical effects, such as the correlation between SZ and lensing signals, and evaluate their importance. The first task is to construct the posterior probability distribution for the model parameters given the data. Our data consist of a set of {\em Planck}-\ and CLASH-determined masses and spectroscopic redshifts that we arrange into three data vectors, $\vec{M_{\rm PL}}$, $\vec{M_{\rm CL}}$ and $\vec{z_{\rm spec}}$, respectively. Each vector has as many elements as clusters in our sample, $N_{\rm clus}=21$. From these data and a model for the distribution of their uncertainties, we wish to determine the true cluster masses, $\vec{M_{500}}$, and the mass bias, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, as defined below. \subsection{Model} The observed {\em Planck}\ and CLASH masses are noisy Gaussian realizations of the underlying SZ and lensing masses, denoted $M_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm L}$, respectively. That is, $P(M_{\rm PL}\|M_{\rm SZ})$ is a Gaussian distribution of mean $M_{\rm SZ}$ and variance given by the {{\em Planck}} measurement error. The same holds for $P(M_{\rm CL}\|M_{\rm L})$. The masses $M_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm L}$ are in turn related to the true halo mass $M_{500}$ via a bivariate log-normal distribution. We took the mean of these quantities to be \begin{eqnarray} \avg{\lnM_{\rm SZ} \| M_{500}} & = & \ln(1- b_{\rm SZ}) + \alpha_{\rm SZ} \ln\left(\frac{M_{500}}{M_0}\right) , \label{eq:avgmsz} \\ \avg{\lnM_{\rm L} \| M_{500}} & = & \ln(1- b_{\rm L}) + \alpha_{\rm L} \ln\left(\frac{M_{500}}{M_0}\right). \label{eq:avgml} \end{eqnarray} In these expressions, it is understood that $M_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm L}$ are in units of the pivot mass, $M_0$. The intrinsic scatter in $\lnM_{\rm SZ}$ ($\lnM_{\rm L}$) at fixed mass is denoted via $\sigsz$ ($\sigl$), the correlation coefficient between the two scatters is $r_{\rm{SZ, L}\vert M_{500}}$ (but for simplicity we denote it by $r$), and we adopt a pivot mass as the median of the CLASH lensing masses, i.e., $M_0 = 5.7 \times 10^{14} \, h^{-1} \mbox{M}_\odot$. The parameter $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:avgmsz}) is the mass bias we seek to calibrate the mass scale of the {\em Planck}\ clusters. It accounts for any source of bias, instrumental (e.g., X-ray satellite calibration) or astrophysical (e.g., violation of hydrostatic equilibrium in the ICM). Although defined here through a different equation than in the {\em Planck}\ cluster counts analysis \citep{PlanckXX1303.5080, PlanckXXIV1502.01597}, we show in Appendix~\ref{sec:connection} that it is the same mass bias parameter. In fact, we view our parametrization as a formally more correct way of defining the bias parameter $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, because it clearly identifies the connection of this parameter to the data within the context of a generative model. Our results will therefore be of direct relevance to the cluster cosmology analysis presented by {\em Planck}. Similarly, the parameter $(1 - b_{\rm L})$ characterizes any potential systematic bias in the CLASH lensing masses. Any such bias would depend on the method used to extract the lensing masses, as well as specifics of the observations themselves, and can only be accurately estimated through survey-specific numerical simulations. Generic simulations \mbox{\citep{Meneghetti2010a, Becker2011}} suggest that lensing masses for rich cluster systems, such as those in our sample, are unbiased at the few percent level, while \citet{Rasia2012} report underestimates of up to 10\%. \citet{Meneghetti2014} simulated the CLASH sample in detail and concluded that lensing masses are unbiased, with $\sim (10-15)\%$ scatter, although they did not simulate the complete strong+weak lensing measurement analysis. These studies provide a general idea of the level of possible bias and scatter, and we expect that in the near future simulations will improve the determination of these parameters and the slope of the mass dependence. The probability of a CLASH cluster having data $(M_{\rm PL},M_{\rm CL}, z_{\rm spec})$ is $$P(M_{\rm PL}, M_{\rm CL} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}) P(z_{\rm spec} \vert z) dM_{\rm PL} dM_{\rm CL} dz_{\rm spec},$$ where \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:mass_dist} P(M_{\rm PL}, M_{\rm CL} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}) & = & \int d\lnM_{\rm SZ} d\lnM_{\rm L} \ P(M_{\rm PL} \vert M_{\rm SZ}) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace{-1cm} \times P(M_{\rm CL} \vert M_{\rm L}) P(\lnM_{\rm SZ}, \lnM_{\rm L} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}), \end{eqnarray} $\vec{p}$ is the vector of scaling relation parameters ($b_{\rm SZ}, \alpha_{\rm SZ}, \sigsz, b_{\rm L}, \alpha_{\rm L}, \sigl, r$) and $P(z_{\rm spec} \vert z)$ is a delta function centered at $z_{\rm spec}$. We consider the true mass and redshift of a cluster ($M_{500}, z$) as nuisance parameters. The posterior probability distribution of our model parameters is then \begin{equation}\label{eq:posterior} {\cal{L}}(\vec{M}, \vec{z}, \vec{p} \vert \vec{d}) \propto P_0(\vec{M}, \vec{z} \vert \vec{p}) \prod_i P(M_{\rm PL}^{(i)}, M_{\rm CL}^{(i)} \vert \mu, \vec{p}) P(z_{\rm spec}^{(i)} \vert z), \end{equation} where the product is over all galaxy clusters, the vector $\vec{M}$ comprises the true cluster masses, $\vec{d}$ the data ($\vec{M_{\rm PL}}, \vec{M_{\rm CL}}, \vec{z_{\rm spec}}$), and we have dropped a normalization constant (the marginal probability of the data) that depends only on $\vec{d}$. We adopted the priors listed in Table~\ref{tab:priors} on our scaling relation parameters, leaving only $P_0(\vec{M}, \vec{z})$, the prior on the mass and redshift vectors, $\vec{M}$ and $\vec{z}$, respectively. The prior $P_0(\vec{M}, \vec{z})$ depends on the expected mass and redshift distribution of CLASH-detected clusters. Let $n_{\rm det}(M_{500}, z)$ be this distribution. Assuming CLASH selects clusters in the redshift range ${z_{\rm min}}$ to ${z_{\rm max}}$, the probability distribution of finding a cluster with mass $M^{(i)}$ and redshift $z^{(i)} \in [{z_{\rm min}}, {z_{\rm max}}]$ is \begin{equation} P(M^{(i)}, z^{(i)}) \ dM dz = \frac{n_{\rm det}(M^{(i)}, z^{(i)})}{\mathcal{N}}\ dM dz, \end{equation} where $\mathcal{N}$ is the normalization factor defined by \begin{equation} \int_{{z_{\rm min}}}^{{z_{\rm max}}} dz \int_0^\infty dM \, P(M, z) = 1, \end{equation} which yields \begin{equation} \mathcal{N} = N_{\rm det} = \int_{{z_{\rm min}}}^{{z_{\rm max}}} dz \int_0^\infty dM \, n_{\rm det}(M, z). \end{equation} Thus, we obtain that the prior is \begin{equation} P_0(\vec{M}, \vec{z}) = \prod_i \frac{n_{\rm det}(M_{500}^{(i)}, z^{(i)})}{N_{\text{det}}}, \end{equation} and our posterior becomes \begin{equation} {\cal{L}}(\vec{M}, \vec{z}; \vec{p} \vert \vec{d}) = \prod_i \frac{n_{\rm det}(M_{500}, z)}{N_{\text{det}}} P(M_{\rm PL}^{(i)}, M_{\rm CL}^{(i)} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}) P(z_{\rm spec}^{(i)} \vert z). \end{equation} We marginalized over our nuisance parameters by integrating over the vectors $\vec{M}$ and $\vec{z}$ to obtain \begin{equation}\label{eq:post} {\cal{L}}(\vec{p} \vert \vec{d}) = \prod_i {\cal{L}}_i (\vec{p} \vert \vec{d}), \end{equation} where we defined \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:post_i} {\cal{L}}_i (\vec{p} \vert \vec{d}) \equiv & \frac{1}{N_{\text{det}}} \int_{{z_{\rm min}}}^{{z_{\rm max}}} dz \int_{0}^\infty dM_{500} \ n_{\rm det}(M_{500}, z) \nonumber \\ & \times \ P(M_{\rm PL}^{(i)}, M_{\rm CL}^{(i)} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}) P(z_{\rm spec}^{(i)} \vert z). \end{eqnarray} Given that the redshift distribution is a delta function, Eq.~\eqref{eq:post_i} reduces to \begin{equation}\label{eq:post_i2} {\cal{L}}_i \equiv \frac{1}{N_{\text{det}}} \int_{-\infty}^\infty d\lnM_{500} \ n_{\rm det}(M_{500}, z_{\rm spec}^{(i)}) P(M_{\rm PL}^{(i)}, M_{\rm CL}^{(i)} \vert M_{500}, \vec{p}), \end{equation} where ${z_{\rm min}} \leq z_{\rm spec}^{(i)} \leq {z_{\rm max}}$. Together with Eq.~\eqref{eq:post}, this is our final expression for the posterior distribution over the parameter space. It is worth noting that this posterior is equivalent to the one built taking into account the Poisson distribution of the missing clusters and then marginalizing over the number of these undetected objects (see, e.g., \cite{Mantz2010}). We then modeled the selection function, that is, the mass-redshift distribution of the CLASH sample. Despite the detailed study by \cite{Meneghetti2014} quantifying the effects of the CLASH selection criteria on the determination of the concentration-mass relation, it is difficult to extract a precise selection function in terms of cluster mass from their simulations. We therefore adopted the following approach. We assumed that CLASH selection in mass is redshift independent over the range $[{z_{\rm min}}, {z_{\rm max}}]$, and that the probability of a cluster being included in the sample is a function that goes to zero at low mass and to unity at high mass. We modeled this with an error function: \begin{equation}\label{eq:sel_func} f(M_{500}) = \frac{1}{2} \left[ 1 + \text{erf}\left( \frac{\ln M_{500} - \ln M_{\rm cut}}{\sqrt{2} \sigma_{\rm cut}} \right) \right], \end{equation} and treated the low-mass cutoff, $M_{\rm cut}$, and $\sigma_{\rm cut}$, ${z_{\rm min}}$ and ${z_{\rm max}}$ as free parameters to be determined by the data themselves. We took the mass-redshift distribution as \begin{equation}\label{eq:M_z_dist} n_{\rm det} (M_{500}, z) = f(M_{500}) \frac{dn(M_{500}, z)}{d\lnM_{500}} \frac{d^2V}{dzd\Omega}, \end{equation} where $dn/d\lnM_{500}$ is the halo mass function and $d^2V/dzd\Omega$ is the comoving volume element per unit solid angle, $d\Omega$. Throughout this paper, we have adopted the \citet{Tinker2008} multiplicity function with $M_{500}$ defined in terms of the critical density, and the $\hbox{$\Lambda$CDM}$ cosmological parameters used to estimate both {\em Planck}\ and CLASH masses as listed in Table~\ref{tab:cosmo_params}. \begin{table} \begingroup \newdimen\tblskip \tblskip=5pt \caption{Fiducial cosmological parameters} \label{tab:cosmo_params} \nointerlineskip \vskip -3mm \footnotesize \setbox\tablebox=\vbox{ \newdimen\digitwidth \setbox0=\hbox{\rm 0} \digitwidth=\wd0 \catcode`=\active \def{\kern\digitwidth} \newdimen\signwidth \setbox0=\hbox{+} \signwidth=\wd0 \catcode`!=\active \def!{\kern\signwidth} \halign{#\hfil\tabskip=2em & \hfil#\tabskip=2em & \hfil#\tabskip=0pt\cr \noalign{\vskip 3pt\hrule \vskip 1.5pt \hrule \vskip 5pt} Parameter & Value \cr \noalign{\vskip 3pt\hrule\vskip 1pt} $H_0$ (km s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$) & $70.0$ \cr $\Omega_b$ & $0.049$ \cr $\Omega_m$ & $0.3$ \cr $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ & $0.7$ \cr $\sigma_8$ & $0.816$ \cr $n_s$ & $0.967$ \cr \noalign{\vskip 1pt\hrule\vskip 1pt}}} \endPlancktable \endgroup \end{table} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=1.05\textwidth]{./esmcmc_all_params_final.pdf} \caption{Results of the full-parameter MCMC analysis with $1.4\times 10^{6}$ points (Case 1, Sect.~\ref{sec:res_all_free}). The contours correspond to the two-dimensional $68.3\%$, $95.4\%$, $99.7\%$ confidence regions on parameter pairs after marginalizing over the other parameters and the true mass and redshift [see Eqs.~\eqref{eq:post_i2}, \eqref{eq:sel_func} and \eqref{eq:M_z_dist}]. The histograms show the one-dimensional posterior marginal distributions for each parameter.\\} \label{fig:esmcmc_1} \end{figure} \subsection{Priors} Our complete set of model parameters is \begin{equation} \vec{p} = \{\alpha_{\rm SZ},b_{\rm SZ},\sigsz,\alpha_{\rm L},b_{\rm L},\sigl,r,M_{\rm cut},\sigma_{\rm cut},{z_{\rm min}},{z_{\rm max}}\}, \end{equation} comprising four scaling relation parameters for the mean mass values ($\alpha_{\rm SZ},b_{\rm SZ},\alpha_{\rm L},b_{\rm L}$), three scatter parameters ($\sigsz,\sigl,r$), and four selection function parameters ($M_{\rm cut},\sigma_{\rm cut},{z_{\rm min}},{z_{\rm max}}$). The primary parameter of interest in this work is the bias, $b_{\rm SZ}$, of the SZ mass proxy and for which we adopted a flat prior. The parameter $b_{\rm L}$ is the possible bias in the CLASH lensing masses, for which we adopt the same flat prior as for $b_{\rm SZ}$ or a Gaussian prior with zero mean and standard deviation equal to 0.08 \citep{Umetsu2014}; we also performed analyses with fixed values of $\alpha_{\rm L}=1$, $b_{\rm L} = 0.0$, that is, unbiased lensing masses, and $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = 1$. Table~\ref{tab:priors} summarizes the weak priors adopted on all other parameters. \begin{table} \begingroup \newdimen\tblskip \tblskip=5pt \caption{Summary of priors} \label{tab:priors} \nointerlineskip \vskip -3mm \footnotesize \setbox\tablebox=\vbox{ \newdimen\digitwidth \setbox0=\hbox{\rm 0} \digitwidth=\wd0 \catcode`=\active \def{\kern\digitwidth} \newdimen\signwidth \setbox0=\hbox{+} \signwidth=\wd0 \catcode`!=\active \def!{\kern\signwidth} \halign{#\hfil\tabskip=2em & \hfil#\tabskip=2em & \hfil#\tabskip=0pt\cr \noalign{\vskip 3pt\hrule \vskip 1.5pt \hrule \vskip 5pt} Parameter & Interval (flat) & Gaussian \cr \noalign{\vskip 3pt\hrule\vskip 1pt} $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$ & $[0.5, 1.5]$ & -- \cr $1 - b_{\rm SZ}$ & $[0.001, 2.0]$ & -- \cr $\sigsz$ & $[0.01, 1.0]$ & -- \cr $\alpha_{\rm L}$ & $[0.5, 1.5]$ & -- \cr $1 - b_{\rm L}$ & $[0.001, 2.0]$ & $\text{G}(1.0, 0.08)$ \cr $\sigl$ & $[0.01, 1.0]$ & -- \cr $r$ & $[-1.0, 1.0]$ & -- \cr \hline \cr $M_{\rm cut} (h^{-1}\mbox{M}_\odot)$ & $[10^{12}, 10^{16}]$ & -- \cr $\sigma_{\rm cut}$ & $[0.01, 0.9]$ & -- \cr ${z_{\rm min}}$ & $[0.0, 0.188]$ & -- \cr ${z_{\rm max}}$ & $[0.89, 2.188]$ & -- \cr \noalign{\vskip 1pt\hrule\vskip 1pt}}} \endPlancktable \endgroup \end{table} \subsection{Algorithm} The posterior function is implemented in the Numerical Cosmology library \citep[NumCosmo,][]{DiasPintoVitenti2014}. The model and data objects are named \textsf{NcClusterPseudoCounts} and \textsf{NcDataClusterPseudoCounts}, respectively. The latter implements the $-2\ln{\cal{L}}$ function and the former comprises, among other functions, $f(M_{500})$, $n_{\rm det}$, $N_{\rm det}$ and the integral of Eq.~\eqref{eq:post_i2}. In order to optimize computation time, we numerically calculate the three-dimensional integral over $\lnM_{500}$, $\lnM_{\rm SZ}$ and $\lnM_{\rm L}$ using the Divonne algorithm from the Cuba library \footnote{http://www.feynarts.de/cuba/}. The Gaussian probability distributions for the {\em Planck}\ and CLASH masses, and the bivariate log-normal distribution for $M_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm L}$ (Eq.~\ref{eq:mass_dist}) are written in the \textsf{NcClusterMassPlCL} object. A detailed description of the mass function calculation is presented in \citet{Penna-Lima2014}. The python script (mass\_calibration\_planck\_clash.py) to reproduce the analyses presented in this work is distributed and available with NumCosmo\footnote{https://github.com/NumCosmo/NumCosmo}. As an illustration, our code takes about 22 hours to carry out a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) study with $10^6$ points, using 100 chains and 40 cores. \begin{table} \caption{Results -- The mean and $68\%$ CI of the marginal posterior distributions} \label{table:mean} \centering \begingroup \setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt} \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5} \resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{ \begin{tabular}{c \| c \| c \| c \| c \| c \| c } \hline\hline \vtop{\hbox{\strut Fixed parameters}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{0.3cm}\strut Prior on $b_{\rm L}$}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut None}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\strut Flat}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut None}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\strut Gaussian}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut None (without CLJ1226)}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{0.9cm} \strut Gaussian}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut $\alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\strut Gaussian}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{0.3cm} \strut Gaussian}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c }{\vtop{\hbox{\strut $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$, $b_{\rm L} = 0.0$}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{1.3cm} \strut --}}} \\ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ & Median $\pm 1\sigma$ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ \\ \hline $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$ & $1.03^{+0.29}_{-0.33}$ & $1.05^{+0.29}_{-0.37}$ & $1.06^{+0.29}_{-0.35}$ & $1.04^{+0.31}_{-0.36}$ & -- & -- \\ $1 - b_{\rm SZ}$ & $0.71^{+0.45}_{-0.19}$ & $0.73^{+0.10}_{-0.09} $ & $0.78^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ & $0.73^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$ & $0.73^{+0.09}_{-0.08}$ & $0.74 \pm 0.07$ \\ $\sigsz$ & $0.29^{+0.11}_{-0.14}$ & $0.28^{+0.12}_{-0.16}$ & $0.26^{+0.12}_{-0.13}$ & $0.31^{+0.11}_{-0.12}$ & $0.32^{+0.12}_{-0.09}$ & $0.32^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ \\ $\alpha_{\rm L}$ & $0.91^{+0.36}_{-0.26}$ & $0.87^{+0.39}_{-0.25}$ & $0.81^{+0.33}_{-0.19}$ & -- & -- & -- \\ $1 - b_{\rm L}$ & $0.95^{+0.43}_{-0.23}$ & $0.996^{+0.076}_{-0.073}$ & $1.001 \pm 0.07$ & $0.993 \pm 0.08$ & $0.991^{+0.08}_{-0.07}$ & -- \\ $\sigl$ & $0.20^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$ & $0.20^{+0.08}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.09}_{-0.07}$ & $0.17 \pm 0.10$ & $0.16^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ & $0.17^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$ \\ $r$ & $0.03^{+0.49}_{-0.63}$ & $0.01^{+0.49}_{-0.66}$ & $0.16^{+0.51}_{-0.84}$ & $-0.04^{+0.54}_{-0.60}$ & $-0.07^{+0.53}_{-0.61}$ & $-0.05^{+0.47}_{-0.56}$ \\ \hline $\lnM_{\rm cut}$ & $34.13^{+0.44}_{-0.49}$ & $33.95^{+0.25}_{-0.17}$ & $33.93^{+0.30}_{-0.18}$ & $33.93^{+0.23}_{-0.15}$ & $33.94^{+0.23}_{-0.16}$ & $33.98^{+0.57}_{-0.15}$ \\ $\sigma_{\rm cut}$ & $0.19^{+0.20}_{-0.11}$ & $0.17^{+0.14}_{-0.10}$ & $0.19^{+0.15}_{-0.11}$ & $0.15^{+0.12}_{-0.09}$ & $0.16^{+0.12}_{-0.10}$ & $0.18^{+0.14}_{-0.10}$ \\ ${z_{\rm min}}$ & $0.14^{+0.04}_{-0.12}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ \\ ${z_{\rm max}}$ & $1.48^{+0.48}_{-0.41}$ & $1.50^{+0.44}_{-0.42}$ & $1.08^{+1.11}_{-0.28}$ & $1.50^{+0.48}_{-0.42}$ & $1.50^{+0.49}_{-0.42}$ & $1.48^{+0.46}_{-0.40}$ \\ \hline \end{tabular}} \endgroup \end{table} \section{Results} \label{sec:results} We explored six cases with the Bayesian analysis and present the results in Table~\ref{table:mean} and in Figs.~\ref{fig:esmcmc_1} and \ref{fig:esmcmc_2}. In the first full-parameter case, we leave all 11 parameters free and consider a flat prior on $b_{\rm L}$ to understand the degeneracies inherent in the system. As there is nothing to tie-down the overall mass scale of the sample, degeneracies appear between the mass bias parameter, $b_{\rm SZ}$, the lensing mass calibration, $b_{\rm L}$, and the mass cut of the selection function. In our second study, we also perform a full-parameter analysis, but now applying the Gaussian prior on $b_{\rm L}$ in order to evaluate the effect of the lensing systematics on the determination of $b_{\rm SZ}$. We then examined three other cases by progressively adding strong constraints on the slopes of the lensing and SZ relations and also on $b_{\rm L}$, namely: (i) $\alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$, (ii) $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$, (iii) $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$ and $b_{\rm L} = 0.0$. Overall, fixing these parameters changes little on the constraints of the others, as shown in Table~\ref{table:mean}. Finally, we carried out a full-parameter study excluding the cluster CLJ1226 at $z = 0.89$. We observe an impact on SZ and lensing biases and scatters, but these results are consistent with the constraints of the other five cases within the $68.3\%$ confidence interval (CI). \subsection{Case 1: All parameters free, flat prior on $b_{\rm L}$} \label{sec:res_all_free} For our first study, we computed the joint posterior distribution for the full parameter set describing the SZ- and lensing-mass distribution and the selection function. We ran 100 chains using the \textsf{NcmFitESMCMC} algorithm, an ensemble sampler with affine invariance for MCMC analysis from NumCosmo, requiring convergence of the variance of the fit parameters and $-2\ln{\cal{L}}$, and of the multivariate potential scale reduction factor (MPSRF). The latter should be at least smaller than $1.2$, and $\text{Var}(-2\ln{\cal{L}})$ should be close to 22, since we are fitting 11 parameters. We computed a total of $1.5 \times 10^{6}$ sampling points and considered a burn-in of $10^{5}$ points, obtaining ${\rm MPSRF} \simeq 1.04$ and $\text{Var}(-2\ln{\cal{L}}) \simeq 19.5$. As a consistency check, we also calculated these values for different burn-in sizes, namely 10 equally spaced points between $[10^4, 10^5]$, confirming the convergence status of the chains. Figure~\ref{fig:esmcmc_1} shows the $68.3\%$, $95.4\%$ and $99.7\%$ confidence regions for parameter pairs, as well as the one-dimensional marginal distribution for each parameter. It is worth noting that, in high-dimensional parameter space MCMC does not provide, in general, accurate estimates for the best fit\footnote{For instance, consider a n-dimensional unit Gaussian, whose maximum is at the origin. The probability of the number of samples to be close to the maximum is small, since the volume of a high-dimensional sphere is concentrated in a narrow annulus at the surface \citep{Unpingco2016}.} \citep{Lewis2002,Hobson2009}. Therefore, in Table 4 we quote the mean and the $68.3\%$ CI of the marginal posterior of each parameter. We determined the $68.3\%$ CI of the i-th parameter $p_i$ by finding the points $p_i^-$ and $p_i^+$ such that the probability $\text{Pr}(p_i^- \leqslant p_i \leqslant \bar{p}_i) = 34.15\%$ (68.27\%/2) and $\text{Pr}(\bar{p}_i \leqslant p_i \leqslant p_i^+) = 34.15\%$, respectively, where $\bar{p_i}$ is the mean of $p_i$. In general, the marginal distributions are highly non-Gaussian. The parameters are very degenerate in this first, unconstrained exploration, most notably the slopes $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$ and $\alpha_{\rm L}$, the correlation $r$ and ${z_{\rm max}}$. We see in Fig.~\ref{fig:esmcmc_1} that their confidence regions cover the entire range of values defined by their flat priors, and that their errors are of the order of $50\%$ and larger (see Table~\ref{table:mean}, column ``none, flat''). The mass bias parameter, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, is strongly correlated with the lensing mass calibration, $(1-b_{\rm L})$, and both are strongly anti-correlated with $M_{\rm cut}$. The former correlation is easily understood, because the mass bias is obviously tied to halo mass through the lensing measurements; changing the lensing calibration correspondingly changes the mass bias parameter. The anti-correlation between $b_{\rm L}$ and $M_{\rm cut}$ is a result of the lack of any absolute mass tie-down in this full parameter exploration: the system is attempting to calibrate the overall mass scale, and hence the lensing mass bias, through the selection function mass cut-off. This anti-correlation then spills into $b_{\rm SZ}$ through its correlation with $b_{\rm L}$. The SZ and lensing scatters are reasonably well constrained by the data, with large values, $\sigsz \gtrsim 0.6$ and $\sigl \gtrsim 0.4$, disfavored. At $0.20$, the mean for $\sigl$ is consistent with expectations based on the simulations by \cite{Meneghetti2014}. We also see from Fig.~\ref{fig:esmcmc_1} that $\sigsz$ ($\sigl$) is moderately anti-correlated with $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$ ($\alpha_{\rm L}$). We note this anti-correlation refers to the uncertainties in $\sigsz$ and $\sigl$, and not to the correlation coefficient between these two, which is unconstrained by the data. \subsection{Case 2: All parameters free, Gaussian prior on $b_{\rm L}$} \label{sec:case2} Similarly to the previous study, we now fit the 11 parameters considering a Gaussian prior on $b_{\rm L}=0.0 \pm 0.08$ \citep{Umetsu2014, Meneghetti2014}. We performed an MCMC analysis generating $8.5 \times 10^{5}$ sample points. With a burn-in size of $10^{5}$, we obtained ${\rm MPSRF} \simeq 1.03$ and $\text{Var}(-2\ln{\cal{L}}) \simeq 15.9$. The marginal distributions and the $68.3\%$, $95.4\%$ and $99.7\%$ confidence regions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:esmcmc_2}. Given the lack of correlation between $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$, $\sigsz$, $\alpha_{\rm L}$, $\sigl$, $r$, $\sigma_{\rm cut}$, ${z_{\rm min}}$ and ${z_{\rm max}}$ with $b_{\rm L}$, there is no improvement in their constraints (see third column of Table~\ref{table:mean}). The main differences concern $b_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm cut}$, which were strongly correlated with $b_{\rm L}$ in Case 1. We drastically reduce the uncertainty on $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, by about $70\%$ with mean $0.73$ and $68.3\%$ CI of $[0.64, 0.83]$. Similarly, for $\lnM_{\rm cut}$ the decrease in the $68.3\%$ CI is $\sim60\%$. In addition, fixing the mass scale tightens the correlation between $\ln M_{\rm cut}$ and $\sigma_{\rm cut}$. Another effect of the $b_{\rm L}$ prior is to weaken the correlation between $b_{\rm SZ}$ and $M_{\rm cut}$, confirming that their previous strong correlation leaks through from their relation to $b_{\rm L}$. This means that our constraints on the mass bias, $b_{\rm SZ}$, are relatively insensitive to the selection function as long as the lensing measurements robustly tie-down the mass scale. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=1.05\textwidth]{./esmcmc_all_params_blprior.pdf} \caption{Results of the full-parameter MCMC analysis assuming a Gaussian prior of $b_{\rm L}=0\pm 0.08$, with $8.5\times 10^{5}$ points (Case 2, Sect.~\ref{sec:case2}) and following the format of Fig.~\ref{fig:esmcmc_1}.\\} \label{fig:esmcmc_2} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Other cases} \label{sec:other_cases} We now consider more specific cases by fixing (i) $\alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$, (ii) $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$, and (iii) $\alpha_{\rm SZ} = \alpha_{\rm L} = 1.0$ and $b_{\rm L} = 0.0$ in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:avgmsz}--\eqref{eq:avgml}. This last corresponds the case of calibrating the overall scale of the {\em Planck}\ mass proxy assuming the CLASH masses are unbiased. We ran 100 chains, computing $5 \times 10^5$ points with a burn-in of $10^5$ for each case. The respective results are given in the fifth, sixth and seventh columns of Table~\ref{table:mean}. All three cases indicate that the constraints are limited by the small statistics of the sample. In general, the parameters are not correlated and, therefore, fixing the SZ and lensing slopes of the mass scaling relations do not tighten the constraints on the remaining parameters. The main difference is the reduction in $\sim 30\%$ of the $68.3\%$ CI of $(1 - b_{\rm SZ})$, when considering the extreme case (iii), in which there are no systematics in the lensing masses. In fact, the uncertainty on $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ in Case 2 is the quadrature sum of the statistical uncertainty here and the Gaussian uncertainty on $b_{\rm L}$: $0.1=\sqrt{0.07^2+0.08^2}$, as could be expected. It is worth mentioning that the regularity of these three $(1 - b_{\rm SZ})$ estimates lends support to the conservative result presented in Sect.~\ref{sec:case2}. We also fit the 11 parameters removing the outlier CLJ1226 from the cluster catalog. Running also 100 chains, we generated $5 \times 10^5$ points to reach ${\rm MPSRF} \simeq 1.09$ and $\text{Var}(-2\ln{\cal{L}}) \simeq 22.06$. From Fig.~\ref{fig:data}, we would expect an increase in the correlation, a decrease in the SZ and lensing scatters and in both bias parameters, since the outlier seems to require a spreader distribution to include it. The results, displayed in the fourth column of Table~\ref{table:mean}, confirm these expectancies. For instance, $1-b_{\rm SZ} = 0.78$, $\sigma_l = 0.13$ and $r = 0.16$, although they are not statistically significant. We note that the results of all six cases are consistent, in part due to the broad constraints on the parameters, and that future applications of our methodology to larger catalogs promise to break the degeneracies. \subsection{Non-Gaussian prior} \label{sec:case7} The results presented so far show that the constraints on $b_{\rm SZ}$ are strongly dependent of $b_{\rm L}$. In addition to the flat and Gaussian priors on $b_{\rm L}$, and the unbiased case ($b_{\rm L} = 0.0$), we now consider one last case study with a non-Gaussian prior. This new prior is based on the result presented in \citet{Meneghetti2014}. The authors obtained the distribution of the 3D lensing-true mass ratio considering the NFW profile (among others). This is a left-skewed distribution in the interval $(1-b_L) \in [0.8, 1.1]$, which we use as a prior on $b_L$ and show in Fig.~\ref{fig:bl_meneghetti} (blue dashed line) labeled as the Meneghetti prior. In this case we ran 100 chains, computing $6\times 10^5$ sampling points (burn-in size of $10^5$). The posterior distributions of $(1-b_{\rm L})$ and $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:bl_meneghetti} and \ref{fig:bsz_meneghetti}, respectively. We compared them with the posteriors obtained from the MCMC analysis considering the flat prior. Similar to the previous cases, we see the strong effect on $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ due to the prior on $(1-b_{\rm L})$. Table~\ref{table:mean_meneghetti} displays the mean and the 68.3\% CI of all 11 parameters for the Gaussian and Meneghetti priors, second and third columns respectively. For instance, as the Meneghetti prior restricts $b_{\rm L}$ to a narrower interval, naturally its error bar is accordingly reduced in comparison to the flat and Gaussian priors, namely, $(1-b_{\rm L}) = 0.964_{-0.057}^{+0.034}$. As expected, given the form of the Meneghetti prior (blue dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:bl_meneghetti}), the lensing-mass proxy now presents a small bias. Consequently, the SZ bias increases by 3\% to $(1-b_{\rm SZ}) = 0.69_{-0.09}^{+0.08}$, in comparison to the Gaussian prior centered in $b_{\rm L} = 0$, whereas the error bar decreases due to the narrower $b_{\rm L}$ interval. It is worth mentioning that both results are in accordance within $68.3\%$ CI. On the other hand, the parameters of the selection function, $M_{\rm cut}$ and $\sigma_{\rm cut}$, increase in both their mean values and their uncertainties even when compared to the flat-prior case (see Tables~\ref{table:mean} and \ref{table:mean_meneghetti}). This is due to the anti-correlation between $b_{\rm L}$ and $M_{\rm cut}$. The $(1-b_{\rm L})$ interval, [0.8, 1.1], favors larger values of $M_{\rm cut}$ and, consequently, $\sigma_{\rm cut}$. The remaining parameters present no significant modification compared to the previous cases. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{./Bl_prior_data_pdata.pdf} \caption{Prior distributions for the lensing mass bias parameter, $b_{\rm L}$. The blue dashed line represents the Meneghetti prior, i.e., the 3D lensing-true mass ratio distribution \citep{Meneghetti2014}. The other curves give the $1-b_{\rm L}$ posterior distributions in the case of flat (red line) and Meneguetti (black line) priors obtained from the MCMC analyses of the CLASH-{\em Planck}\ cluster sample (data).} \label{fig:bl_meneghetti} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{./Bsz_data_pdata.pdf} \caption{The posterior distribution of $1-b_{\rm SZ}$ for the flat (red line) and Meneguetti (black line) priors.} \label{fig:bsz_meneghetti} \end{figure} \begin{table} \caption{Results -- The mean and $68\%$ CI of the marginal posterior distributions} \label{table:mean_meneghetti} \centering \begingroup \setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt} \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5} { \begin{tabular}{c \| c \| c } \hline\hline \vtop{\hbox{\strut Fixed Parameters}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{0.3cm}\strut Prior on $b_{\rm L}$}} & \multicolumn{1}{c \|}{\vtop{\hbox{\strut None}\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\hspace{-0.3cm} \strut Gaussian}}} & \multicolumn{1}{c }{\vtop{\hbox{\hspace{0.3cm} \strut None }\vspace{0.2cm}\hbox{\strut Meneghetti}}} \\ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ & Mean $\pm 1\sigma$ \\ \hline $\alpha_{\rm SZ}$ & $1.05^{+0.29}_{-0.37}$ & $1.03^{+0.29}_{-0.32}$ \\ $1 - b_{\rm SZ}$ & $0.73^{+0.10}_{-0.09} $ & $0.69^{+0.08}_{-0.09}$ \\ $\sigsz$ & $0.28^{+0.12}_{-0.16}$ & $0.28^{+0.12}_{-0.15}$ \\ $\alpha_{\rm L}$ & $0.87^{+0.39}_{-0.25}$ & $0.83^{+0.41}_{-0.21}$ \\ $1 - b_{\rm L}$ & $0.996^{+0.076}_{-0.073}$ & $0.964^{+0.034}_{-0.057}$ \\ $\sigl$ & $0.20^{+0.08}_{-0.11}$ & $0.20^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$ \\ $r$ & $0.01^{+0.49}_{-0.66}$ & $0.04^{+0.48}_{-0.65}$ \\ \hline $\lnM_{\rm cut}$ & $33.95^{+0.25}_{-0.17}$ & $34.14^{+0.97}_{-0.24}$ \\ $\sigma_{\rm cut}$ & $0.17^{+0.14}_{-0.10}$ & $0.22^{+0.21}_{-0.12}$ \\ ${z_{\rm min}}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ & $0.13^{+0.04}_{-0.11}$ \\ ${z_{\rm max}}$ & $1.50^{+0.44}_{-0.42}$ & $1.50^{+0.44}_{-0.43}$ \\ \hline \end{tabular}} \endgroup \end{table} \clearpage \pagebreak \clearpage \pagebreak \section{Discussion} \label{sec:discussion} Our basic result is a constraint on the {\em Planck}\ mass bias parameter of $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.73\pm 0.10$ ($0.69_{-0.09}^{+0.08}$). This value applies at the median mass of our sample, $M_0 = 5.7\times 10^{14}h^{-1}$, and our fit is consistent with no mass dependence, although with large uncertainty. Obtained by fitting all 11 parameters and assuming the Gaussian (Meneghetti) prior on $b_{\rm L}$ (Cases 2 and 7, Sects.~\ref{sec:case2} and \ref{sec:case7}, second and third columns Table~\ref{table:mean_meneghetti}, respectively), these results agree within the uncertainties with the constraints in the five other case studies, as well as with the sample mean ratio from Sect.~\ref{sec:mass_comparison}. They improve on the latter by folding in astrophysical effects, such as intrinsic, correlated scatter, and the influence of the CLASH selection function. We have used {\em Planck}\ as a follow-up to the CLASH sample and, as a consequence, are not affected by the selection (Malmquist\footnote{Classical Malmquist bias applies to a flux limited sample and refers to the fact that intrinsically more luminous objects are over-represented because they can be seen over larger volumes than less luminous sources. In common practice, Malmquist bias is the term applied generally, but inaccurately, to effects related to sample selection.}) bias noted by \citet{Battaglia2016}\footnote{The authors referred to this correction as an Eddington bias correction. Eddington bias is not a sample selection effect, but rather due to dispersion in an observable in the presence of a steep abundance function. While discussing Eddington bias at an earlier point in their paper, the correction made to WtG and CCCP results due to missing clusters is more appropriately referred to as Malmquist bias.}. This bias arises in the WtG and CCCP studies because some of their clusters do not have {\em Planck}\ detections\footnote{We note, however, that we are unable to use one cluster in our CLASH sample because of its negative signal-to-noise value.}. \citet{Battaglia2016} attempted to correct the WtG and CCCP results for this effect by assigning {\em Planck}\ masses to the undetected clusters. Without knowing which masses to assign, however, this correction is of course uncertain, as they discuss (see also below). Selection effects in our study would come through the CLASH sample definition. Our Bayesian approach aims to fully account for any such effects by incorporating the sample selection function into the analysis, and will do so to the extent that our model of the selection function is accurate. Ideally, we would like to know the sample selection function a priori. The CLASH sample selection is complex, and \citet{Meneghetti2014} use detailed numerical simulations to evaluate its impact on determination of the mass-concentration relation for clusters. Unfortunately, it is not straightforward to extract a selection function in terms of true halo mass from this work. We have instead opted to parameterize the CLASH selection function with the expected cosmological mass function and a smooth, but generic cutoff. By studying their relation to the other parameters, we conclude that the exact values for the selection function parameters do not significantly impact our final constraint on the SZ mass bias. This statement, however, is only as good as the generic form that we have employed for the selection function. Our result improves on previous cluster mass calibrations by explicitly accounting for sample selection and associated uncertainties. Moreover, we consistently account for other statistical effects, such as Eddington bias, related to dispersion in the cluster observables and to their possible correlation. This is clear from our likelihood expression (Eq.~\ref{eq:post_i2}), which is a convolution of the steep prior on true mass ($M_{500}$) with the multivariate cluster observable distribution. The Bayesian analysis also provides information on the intrinsic dispersion of the SZ proxy and lensing masses, and their correlation. In all seven cases, we find a 13-20\% scatter for the lensing mass, in good agreement with expectations \citep{Meneghetti2014}. The estimates also indicate a 30\% scatter for the SZ mass proxy, notwithstanding, it is not well constrained, and remains consistent with the $\sim 10\%$ scatter expected from simulations \citep[e.g.,][]{Nagai2007}. Unfortunately, we are unable to establish a meaningful constraint on the correlation, $r$. We note that our results for the intrinsic lensing and SZ scatter masses are compatible with, respectively, the lensing and hydrostatic equilibrium scatters obtained by \citet{Sereno2015}. We find a value for the {\em Planck}\ SZ mass bias that is consistent with the constraints $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.688\pm 0.072$ and $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.76\pm 0.05$ (stat) $\pm 0.06$ (syst) reported, respectively, by the WtG and CCCP lensing programs \citep{vonderLinden2014, Hoekstra2015}. This agreement holds even after the correction to the WtG and CCCP values proposed by \citet{Battaglia2016}, apart from the most extreme cases. This is satisfying because the samples and the lensing mass extraction methodologies differ significantly. The wide-field ground-based data for WtG and CCCP is augmented in CLASH by deep, 16-band HST data for weak -and strong-lensing, which the {\tt SaWLens} reconstruction method combines into a single two-dimensional reconstruction. While doing so, it makes no assumption about the underlying mass distribution causing the lensing signal. This method differs to the aforementioned studies, which either rely on parametric fits or an aperture mass applied to the weak-lensing shear data only. The different mass estimates differ thus in both reconstruction methodology and input data. The LoCuSS collaboration finds $(1 - b_{\rm SZ}) = 0.95 \pm 0.04$, based on their sample of 50 clusters at $0.15<z<0.3$ \citep{Smith2016}. They show that within the uncertainties their result is consistent with both CCCP and WtG results discussed above, when the CCCP and WtG samples are restricted to clusters at $z<0.3$. Moreover, the LoCuSS weak-lensing cluster masses for five clusters in the CLASH sample are in excellent agreement with CLASH measurements \citep{Okabe2016}. This implies that $1 - b_{\rm SZ}$ may evolve with redshift. Specifically, Smith et al. found $(1 - b_{\rm SZ}) = 0.6 \pm 0.1$ for WtG and $(1 - b_{\rm SZ}) = 0.7 \pm 0.1$ for CCCP, both at $z > 0.3$. These measurements at $z > 0.3$ are fully consistent with our basic results of $(1 - b_{\rm SZ}) = 0.73 \pm 0.10$ ($0.69_{-0.09}^{+0.08}$), based on a sample that is dominated by clusters at $z > 0.3$. The primary motivation for all these studies is to quantify the extent of the tension between constraints from the primary CMB and cluster counts found by {\em Planck}. The greatest source of uncertainty in this tension is presently the {\em Planck}\ cluster mass calibration. In \cite{PlanckXX1303.5080, PlanckXXIV1502.01597}, the mass bias is defined through the SZ signal - halo mass relation, where no bias ($b_{\rm SZ}=0$) corresponds to the mass calibration based on XMM-{\em Newton}\ X-ray observations, as detailed in the appendix of \citet{PlanckXX1303.5080}. Our definition here is based on the {\em Planck}\ SZ mass proxy, $M_{\rm PL}$, described in Sect.~\ref{sec:Mpl}. While not immediately obvious, Appendix~\ref{sec:connection} demonstrates that the two are equivalent and that the mass bias constrained here is in fact the same as that used in the {\em Planck}\ cluster cosmology analyses. Figure~\ref{fig:cosmology} summarizes the implications for the {\em Planck}\ cluster cosmology results. In it we assemble a number of recent mass calibration results and compare them to the value of $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.58\pm 0.04$ required (yellow band) by the {\em Planck}\ primary CMB cosmology, as deduced in \citet{PlanckXXIV1502.01597} when leaving the mass bias parameter free. Measurements published before the 2013 {\em Planck}\ cosmology results are also included in the figure. These earlier studies do not report results in terms of the mass bias parameter, but rather the normalization of the $Y$-$M$ relation. The mass bias parameter, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, is a parameterization of this amplitude that became standard afterwards when referring to the {\em Planck}\ cluster mass scale. In the figure, P11 refers to the work by \citet{P11} that defines the reference point where $b_{\rm SZ}=0$. The values labeled M10 and V09 are obtained by rewriting the amplitude of the $Y$-$M$ relation of \citet{Rozo2014b} in terms of the $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ parameter. These amplitudes were derived using a self-consistent method of propagating scaling relations that has since been improved upon by \citet{evrard2014}. The point R09 is the predicted amplitude for $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ derived from the combined SZ and weak lensing signals of maxBCG galaxy clusters using the same methods of \citet{Rozo2014b}. The R14 point corresponds to the preferred scaling relation of \citet{rozo2014c}, which combined the maxBCG and V09 $Y$-$M$ scaling relation, correcting the former downwards in mass by 10\%, and the latter upwards in mass by 21\%. These two sets of scaling relations were then combined at the likelihood level to arrive at the R14 point. The PXX point corresponds to \citet{PlanckXX1303.5080}, who took $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.8$ as their fiducial value, but adopted a top-hat systematic error budget $(1-b_{\rm SZ})\in [0.7,1]$, delineated here by the error bars. The WtG and CCCP points correspond to the work of \citet{vonderLinden2014} and \citet{Hoekstra2015}, who calibrated $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ based on a comparison of the SZ masses from {\em Planck}\ with their weak lensing mass estimates using the subsample of {\em Planck}\ clusters with weak lensing follow up from each of these groups. \citet{Battaglia2016} noted that the incomplete overlap of the cluster samples introduces a bias in the recovered $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$ parameter (Malmquist bias), and we indicate the suggested corrections from \citet{Battaglia2016} in Figure ~\ref{fig:cosmology}. The uncertainty on this correction increases the error bars. The Simet15 point comes from \citet{Simet2017}, based on a stacked weak lensing analysis of the MCXC cluster catalog. Finally, the LoCUSS point is a $(1-b_{SZ})$ estimate from the LoCUSS collaboration \citep{Smith2016} that compares the Planck and lensing mass estimates. The two main results from this paper are the points labeled CLASH(G) and CLASH(M), referring to the Gaussian and Meneghetti priors. Their error bars are larger than the comparable studies by WtG and CCCP because, in the Gaussian case, for instance, we have incorporated an 8\% uncertainty, centered at zero, on any potential bias in lensing mass estimates. All of the mass calibrations lie above the range favored by the {\em Planck}\ primary CMB cosmology, although almost none of the more recent values does so with notable significance on its own. It is important to reduce the uncertainties in cluster mass calibration to obtain a more clear understanding of the existence of any tension between the cluster counts and the primary CMB constraints. As a final note, we consider the effect of the lower reionization optical depth, $\tau$, reported by \citet{Adam2016} in an updated analysis of large angular scale polarization in {\em Planck}. The CMB determines the combination $A_{\rm s}e^{-2\tau}$ to high precision, where $A_{\rm s}$ is the power spectrum amplitude on large scales and is $\propto \sigma_8^2$, assuming all other cosmological parameters are fixed. Lowering the optical depth therefore lowers $\sigma_8$ from the primary CMB and moves the yellow band in Fig.~\ref{fig:cosmology} upwards. Taking the central value of $\tau=0.058$ given by \citet{Adam2016}, we estimate that the center line of the yellow band increases by $\sim 8$\% to $(1-b_{\rm SZ}) \approx 0.63$. \section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion} We are in the process of gaining considerable insight into the cluster mass scale thanks to recent samples of tens of clusters with high quality lensing mass determinations, now reaching statistical constraints of $\sim 10\%$. These constraints are fundamental to cluster cosmology. Fig.~\ref{fig:cosmology} summarizes recent determinations of the {\em Planck}\ cluster mass bias parameter and compares them to earlier mass bias estimates and to the value required by the {\em Planck}\ primary CMB cosmology. The lensing based determinations (R09, R14, WtG, Simet, CCCP, CLASH) mostly display a coherent picture within the statistical uncertainties. While the value for $1-b_{\rm SZ}$ reported by LoCUSS is inconsistent with ours, LoCUSS sees a strong redshift evolution in $1-b_{\rm SZ}$, and their final $1-b_{\rm SZ}$ value is dominated by clusters that are lower redshift than the bulk of the CLASH sample. Our result is consistent with LoCUSS for $z>0.3$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:cosmology}, as discussed in Sect.~3.2 of \citet{Smith2016}. Malmquist and Eddington bias affect some of the points to an uncertain degree. \citet{Battaglia2016} estimated the Malmquist bias corrections on the WtG and CCCP determinations, which we indicate in the figure. Our constraint fully accounts for these, as well as astrophysical effects. Other systematic effects may remain, however, at an important level. For example, in our study we adopted a generic form for the CLASH selection function. It would be far better to have a form that is well motivated from simulations, something that continued examination of the \citet{Meneghetti2014} simulations could afford. Similarly, detailed simulations are needed to evaluate the possible bias in lensing mass measurements (i.e., $b_{\rm L}$ and $\alpha_{\rm L}$). They must reproduce both the sample selection and the specific lensing mass extraction methodology. The technique to achieve such comprehensive simulations exists, but the studies have yet to be performed. It is important to emphasize in this light that each cluster cosmology sample must be analyzed in its own specific context. With these recent advances we have perhaps learned more about {\em how} to calibrate the mass scale than we have actually improved understanding of the tension between the {\em Planck}\ primary CMB and cluster cosmology constraints. All mass scale determinations lie high relative to the preferred CMB value, although in each case the significance is low. This is also true of our measurement. In this context, it is important to note that the lower optical depth to reionization recently reported by \citet{Adam2016} shifts the yellow band in Fig.~\ref{fig:cosmology} upwards from a center line of $(1-b_{\rm SZ})=0.58$ to $(1-b_{\rm SZ})\approx 0.63$, according to our approximate calculation. Progress in understanding is encouraging and emphasizes the importance of improving constraints beyond the current level. With such progress on relatively small samples, the future looks promising with large lensing programs like {\em Euclid}\ \citep{Laureijs2011}, WFIRST \citep{Spergel2013} and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope \citep{LSST2009} that will produce samples of thousands of objects thanks to their wide-field surveying. In addition, CMB lensing, already observed over large sky areas by {\em Planck}, SPT and ACT, adds a powerful and independent method for mass measurements \citep{melin2015, baxter2015, madhavacheril2015}. The Bayesian methodology presented here will be important to extract the full potential of these large datasets. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{./massbias_comp_wband.pdf} \caption{Mass bias parameter, $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$, measured in different studies compared to the values preferred by the {\em Planck}\ base $\Lambda$CDM fit to the primary CMB anisotropies \citep{PlanckXXIV1502.01597}, shown as the yellow band. For reference, we translate results published before the {\em Planck}\ 2013 cosmological constraints became available to values for $(1-b_{\rm SZ})$. These are P11 \citep{Planck2011}, M10, V09, R09 \citep{Rozo2014b} and R14 \citep{rozo2014c}. PXX is the 2013 SZ cluster cosmology analysis by {\em Planck}\ \citep{PlanckXX1303.5080} and represents the top-hat range used as a prior in that analysis. The WtG and CCCP points are, respectively, from \citet{vonderLinden2014} and \citet{Hoekstra2015}, with the red arrows showing the corrections estimated by \citet{Battaglia2016}; the error bars increase to include the uncertainty on this correction. The \citet{Simet2017}, based on lensing stacks of the MCXC catalog, and the LoCUSS \citep{Smith2016} results are reproduced as labeled. See text for details.} \label{fig:cosmology} \end{figure} \begin{acknowledgements} MPL was supported by National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - Brazil (CNPq grant 202131/2014-9 and PCI/MCTIC/CBPF program). MPL and JGB thank Sandro Vitenti for valuable discussions, and Graham Smith for suggestions. ER acknowledges support from DOE grant DE-SC0015975 and from the Sloan Foundation, grant FG-2016-6443. JM has received funding from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Unions Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under REA grant agreement number 627288. Part of this research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. \end{acknowledgements} \bibliographystyle{aa}
\section{Introduction} Brownian motion \cite{brown1828xxvii,einstein1905molekularkinetischen} provides an elegant description of diffusion processes. A simplified model can be elaborated as a trajectory that consists of successive random steps, where the step size and direction vary according to a given statistical distribution. The extension to spin drift and diffusion \cite{Yang2010RandomWalk} of such a random walk model is a powerful tool to describe the spin dynamics in solid state systems. Spin drift and diffusion can also be described in terms of the quasi-classical kinetic equation \cite{Stanescu2007PhysRevB, Kleinert2007DriftB1, Sinova2012PRB, shen2014theory} and Monte Carlo simulations \cite{ohno2008datta,walser2012direct}. Tuning the spin-orbit couplings (SOCs) in a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) due to structural (Rashba) and bulk (Dresselhaus) inversion asymmetry is an intensely studied method for the coherent control of spin dynamics, which is the motivation \cite{datta1990electronic} and one of the central goals of spintronics research \cite{wolf2001spintronics, RevModPhys.76.323, awschalom2007challenges, behin2010proposal}. Since the initial proposal of the ballistic spin transistor \cite{datta1990electronic}, generalizations have been developed to make it robust against spin-independent scattering \cite{Schliemann2003spinFET, ohno2008datta, chuang2015all, Souma2015SpinBlockerDoubleWell}, in order to preserve the spin at a certain orientation. Persistent spin helix (PSH) states were shown to exhibit long spin lifetimes even in the presence of cubic Dresselhaus SOC \cite{bernevig2006exact, koralek2009emergence, Sinova2011StrongSOC, Luffe2011PhysRevB.84.075326, walser2012direct, schliemann2016persistent}. The PSH was first experimentally observed via transient spin-grating spectroscopy \cite{Weber2007PSHLifetime,koralek2009emergence}. Time-resolved Kerr rotation experiments successfully mapped the diffuse dynamics of optically pumped spin packets \cite{walser2012direct, Chen2014PhysRevB.90.121304, Altmann2015PhysRevB.92.235304, altmann2016current, kunihashi2016drift} in the PSH regime. Lateral confinement was shown \cite{Altmann2014PhysRevB.90.201306, Altmann2015PhysRevB.92.235304} to further suppress spin decay by restricting the diffusion to one dimension. The Rashba SOC can be controlled via gate voltages \cite{Nitta1997PhysRevLett.78.1335, Studer2009PhysRevLett.103.027201} to achieve or fine tune the PSH regime \cite{Kohda2012PhysRevB.86.081306, ishihara2013direct}. Signatures of the PSH regime and measurements of the SOC were also investigated in weak-localization measurements \cite{sasaki2014direct} and Raman scattering \cite{Raman2014PhysRevB.89.085406}. The effects of a drift field \cite{Kleinert2007DriftB1, Yang2010RandomWalk} on the dynamics of the PSH states were recently observed \cite{altmann2016current}, allowing a direct measurement of the cubic Dresselhaus coupling $\beta_3$. More recently, for two-subband systems, it was shown \cite{Fu2015Skyrmion} that a crossed-PSH regime (Rashba SOC with opposite sign in each subband) leads to nontrivial spin patterns, which may lead to a topological Hall effect \cite{binz2008chirality}. In this paper we extend the random walk model for spin drift and diffusion \cite{Yang2010RandomWalk} to incorporate effects of an external magnetic field $\bm{B}$ and two subbands, including the intersubband spin-orbit couplings \cite{bernardes2006spin, EsmerindoPRL2007, calsaverini2008intersubband, dettwiler2017Stretchable, fu2015spin, Fu2015Skyrmion, Souma2015SpinBlockerDoubleWell} ($\Gamma$ and $\eta$), as well as the usual intrasubband Rashba ($\alpha$) and linear ($\beta_1$) and cubic ($\beta_3$) Dresselhaus terms for $[001]$-oriented 2DEG in zinc-blende semiconductors (e.g., GaAs). We identify two possible scenarios regarding the intersubband scattering (ISS) rate. For weak ISS, the subbands are effectively uncoupled, yielding independent ensembles. The precession pattern is given by an incoherent sum of the magnetization of the individual subbands, which shows a checkerboard pattern with long spin lifetime in the crossed-PSH regime, in agreement with Ref.~\onlinecite{Fu2015Skyrmion}. On the other hand, for strong ISS, the resulting dynamics is dominated by subband-averaged SOCs, which will be driven out of the PSH regimes by the fast subband dynamics, yielding a circular (Bessel) pattern with short spin lifetime. Before discussing the two-subband systems, we first revisit the single-subband random walk model \cite{Yang2010RandomWalk} to investigate the effects of magnetic fields, drift velocity, and the initial broadening of optically pumped spin packets. We show that a finite in-plane drift field (e.g., along $y \parallel [110]$) leads to distinct precession patterns and relaxation rates for the PSH regimes $\alpha = \pm(\beta_1-\beta_3)$, which we label as \PSHp and \PSHm, respectively. Our \PSHp solution matches previous discussions in the literature \cite{bernevig2006exact, koralek2009emergence, Stanescu2007PhysRevB, Yang2010RandomWalk, altmann2016current}. More interestingly, for the \PSHm regime, the drift velocity shifts the maximum spin lifetime away from the precise PSH tuning. The resulting precession pattern is also strongly affected by the initial broadening of the spin packet. We derive analytical solutions for the narrow and wide packet limits and compare with numerical simulations. Additionally, we show that a magnetic field combined with a finite drift velocity adds corrections to both the precession frequency and the spin pattern wavelength. This paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:rwmodel} we introduce the random walk model to establish the notation and identify its main aspects and limitations. Next, in Sec.~\ref{sec:Single}, we discuss in detail the diffusive dynamics for the single-subband case. We present analytical approximate solutions valid for a wide range of parameters near the PSH regimes. These are compared with exact numerical solutions. Here we also discuss the expected effects of finite magnetic fields. The two-subband case is discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:twosubbands}. We consider a two-subband 2DEG with intraband Rashba and Dresselhaus SOCs, as well as intersubband SOC. We close the paper with general remarks and the conclusions. \section{Random Walk For Spin Diffusion} \label{sec:rwmodel} The random walk \cite{brown1828xxvii,einstein1905molekularkinetischen,Yang2010RandomWalk} (RW) is characterized by the random motion of a particle, which here is an electron that scatters via different processes (e.g., impurity sites, defects, electron-electron scattering, phonons). In between scattering events the electron ballistically travels a distance $\Delta\bm{r} = \bm{v}\tau_r$, where both the velocity $\bm{v}$ and the scattering time $\tau_r$ are random variables. Here, $\bm{v} = v_F \hat{\theta} + \bm{v}_d$, where $\hat{\theta}$ is a uniformly random direction (along the $xy$ plane), $v_F$ is the Fermi velocity, and $\bm{v}_d = \tau e \bm{E}/m$ is the drift velocity due to the electric field $\bm{E}$. Since the scattering events are independent, the scattering time $\tau_r$ is expected to obey a Poissonian distribution, such that $\mean{\tau_r} = \tau$ and $\mean{\tau_r^2} = 2\tau^2$. Throughout the ballistic motion, the electron spin precesses due to external magnetic fields or internal velocity-dependent spin-orbit fields. The average scattering time $\tau$ is considered to be short compared with the spin precession period, which allows us to describe below the ballistic spin evolution perturbatively. Considering only non-magnetic scattering, the spin is preserved at each collision, but its precession direction changes due to the SOC. This description leads to a model that is consistent with the Dyakonov-Perel dynamics, which is adequate for typical semiconductors, e.g., GaAs, where this is the dominant mechanism for spin decay. Let us start with a discrete time dynamics labeled by the step index $n$. The position of the electron at the time step $n+1$ is then $\bm{r}_{n+1} = \bm{r}_n + \bm{v}_n \tau_n$. The velocity $\bm{v}_n$ and the time interval $\tau_n$ depend on the step $n$ as they are randomized at each collision. During $\tau_n$ the motion is ballistic and the spin evolution is given as \begin{equation} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \bm{s} = \bm{\Omega} \times \bm{s}. \end{equation} Typically, the precession term $\bm{\Omega}$ is given by external magnetic fields and the SOCs. But for now let us keep it arbitrary, with the only constraint that the equation above is linear in $\bm{s}$. An approximate solution for $\|\Omega_n\tau_n\| \ll 1$ is obtained iterating the equation above up to second order, yielding \begin{equation} \bm{s}_{n+1} \approx \bm{s}_n + \tau_n \bm{\Omega}_n\times\bm{s}_n + \dfrac{\tau_n^2}{2}\bm{\Omega}_n \times (\bm{\Omega}_n \times \bm{s}_n). \label{eq:ssol} \end{equation} Here $\bm{\Omega}_n \equiv \bm{\Omega}(\bm{v}_n)$ varies in each time step because the SOC depends on $\bm{v}_n$. For an ensemble of spins, the magnetization profile $\bm{m}_{n+1}(\bm{r})$ at time step $n+1$ can be written in terms of a joint probability $P_{n+1}(\bm{r}; \bm{s})$ of finding an electron at time step $n+1$ at position $\bm{r}$ having spin $\bm{s}$, \begin{equation} \bm{m}_{n+1}(\bm{r}) = \int \bm{s} P_{n+1}(\bm{r}; \bm{s}) d\Sigma, \label{eq:mint} \end{equation} where the integral runs over the Bloch sphere. Since the scattering process is random, the joint probability can be written as the average result of all possible paths from $n$ to $n+1$ that lead to an electron at $\bm{r}$ with spin $\bm{s}$, \begin{equation} P_{n+1}(\bm{r}; \bm{s}) = \mean{ P_{n}(\bm{r}-\bm{v}_{n}\tau_n; \bm{s}-\Delta \bm{s}_{n}) }, \label{eq:joint} \end{equation} where $\Delta \bm{s}_{n} = \bm{s}_{n+1}-\bm{s}_n$, and $\mean{\cdots}$ denotes the average over the momentum direction $\hat{\theta}$ and the scattering time $\tau_n$. To recover a differential equation for $\bm{m}(\bm{r},t)$, one expands the average above around $\mean{ P_{n}(\bm{r}; \bm{s}) }$ up to second order in $\bm{v}_n \tau_n$ and zero order in $\Delta\bm{s}_n$. Combining all expressions above and converting the discrete time back to the continuum, we get \begin{align} \nonumber \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} \bm{m}(\bm{r},t) &= \Big(\Lambda_{dd} + \Lambda_{pr}\Big)\bm{m}(\bm{r},t),\\ \label{eq:diffmag} \Lambda_{dd} &= -\bm{v}_d\cdot\bm{\nabla} + \tau\nabla^2_v,\\ \nonumber \Lambda_{pr} &= \begin{pmatrix} - \tau\mean{\Omega_y^2} & \tau\mean{\Omega_x \Omega_y} & \Xi_y\\ \tau\mean{\Omega_x \Omega_y} & - \tau\mean{\Omega_x^2} & -\Xi_x\\ -\Xi_y & \Xi_x & -\tau\mean{\Omega_x^2}-\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2} \end{pmatrix} \end{align} where the diagonal term $\Lambda_{dd}$ drives the drift and diffusion process, while the matrix $\Lambda_{pr}$ dictates the spin precession and relaxation. The new terms above read \begin{align} \nabla^2_v &= \mean{v_x^2}\partial^2_x + \mean{v_y^2}\partial^2_y,\\ \Xi_x &= \mean{\Omega_x} - 2\tau\Big[ \mean{v_x\Omega_x}\partial_x + \mean{v_y\Omega_x}\partial_y \Big],\\ \Xi_y &= \mean{\Omega_y} - 2\tau\Big[ \mean{v_x\Omega_y}\partial_x + \mean{v_y\Omega_y}\partial_y \Big], \end{align} where we have assumed $\Omega_z = 0$ for simplicity. This is the case in a $[001]$-oriented 2DEG, where Rashba and Dresselhaus SOC contributions are in-plane. The extra terms for a finite $\Omega_z$ are shown in Appendix \ref{app:omegaz}. The resulting Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} differs from those of Ref.~\onlinecite{Yang2010RandomWalk} as we consider here the Poissonian distribution of the scattering time, such that $\mean{\tau_n} = \tau$ and $\mean{\tau_n^2} = 2\tau$. Moreover, we keep Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} in a general form that will allow us to include the external magnetic field and consider two subbands. \subsection{Numerical implementation and q-space} The averages that define Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} are simple expressions of the system parameters (see next section and the appendices). Therefore, the only numerical task remaining is to properly solve the initial value problem. Applying a spatial Fourier transform ($\bm{r} \rightarrow \bm{q}$), the derivatives become $\partial_{x/y} \rightarrow -i q_{x/y}$, and the solution in $q$ space is simply \begin{equation} \bm{\tilde{m}}(\bm{q},t) = e^{\tilde{\Lambda} t}\bm{\tilde{m}}(\bm{q},0), \label{eq:mkspace} \end{equation} where $\bm{\tilde{m}}(\bm{q},0)$ is the Fourier transform of the initial packet, and $\tilde{\Lambda}$ is the Fourier transform of the matrices $\Lambda_{dd}$ and $\Lambda_{pr}$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. Namely, $\tilde{\Lambda}$ is obtained with the replacements: $-\bm{v}_d\cdot\bm{\nabla} \rightarrow i \bm{v}_d\cdot\bm{q}$, $\nabla^2_v \rightarrow \tilde{\nabla}^2_v = -(\mean{v_x^2}q_x^2 + \mean{v_y^2}q_y^2)$, and $\bm{\Xi} \rightarrow \bm{\tilde{\Xi}} = \mean{\bm{\Omega}} + 2i\tau\mean{(\bm{v}\cdot\bm{q})\bm{\Omega}}$. Hereafter we use the symbol $\sim$ to refer to quantities in $q$ space. The matrix exponential $e^{\tilde{\Lambda} t}$ can be easily calculated in terms of its eigenvalues and eigenvectors. Therefore, the only relevant numerical \cite{*[{The numerical calculations are developed using the \href{www.julialang.org}{Julia} language [}] [{].}] julia} task is to perform the two-dimensional inverse Fourier transform ($\bm{q} \rightarrow \bm{r}$) at different times $t$ to obtain $\bm{m}(\bm{r},t)$. Since no extra approximations are involved, we shall consider the numerical evolution as exact solutions of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. \subsection{Initial broadening} In optical pump-probe experiments, the initial magnetization packet is set by the laser spot, which here is characterized by the initial broadening $\Gamma_0$. Therefore, in general we shall consider isotropic Gaussian packets polarized along $z$, i.e., $\bm{m}(\bm{r},0) \propto e^{-\frac{1}{2}(r/\Gamma_0)^2} \hat{z}$, as the initial condition for Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. For analytical solutions, we also use initial delta-packets, $\bm{m}(\bm{r},0) = \delta(\bm{r})\hat{z}$, which corresponds to the limit $\Gamma_0 \rightarrow 0$. Intuitively, one would expect that the $\delta$-packet solution could be used to obtain the dynamics of any other initial packet via convolution. However, for the \PSHm regime, we derive two different analytical but approximate solutions of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} by neglecting distinct terms in $\Lambda_{pr}$. While one approximation is compatible with a narrow packet, the other is appropriate for broad packets. Consequently, since we do not have a general exact solution for a $\delta$ packet, one cannot convolve the approximate $\delta$-packet solution to broad packets. \section{Single Subband} \label{sec:Single} The theoretical analysis of the drift field on the diffuse spin dynamics were first presented in Refs.~\onlinecite{Kleinert2007DriftB1, Yang2010RandomWalk} for a single-subband system, and recently observed experimentally \cite{altmann2016current}. In this section we explore and extend these results using the RW model. We show new analytical solutions for the \PSHm regime ($\alpha \approx -\beta_1 + \beta_3$), and include the effects of external magnetic fields. Additionally, we compare the solutions for spatially wide and narrow initial packets. Away from these limits, we solve the RW model numerically for comparison. The Hamiltonian for the single-subband 2DEG is $H = \varepsilon_1 + \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}k^2 + \frac{\hbar}{2} \bm{\sigma}\cdot \bm{\Omega}$, where the SOC is given by the Rashba ($\alpha$) and linear and cubic Dresselhaus ($\beta_1$ and $\beta_3$) terms as \begin{equation} \bm{\Omega} = \dfrac{2}{\hbar} \begin{pmatrix} (+\alpha+\beta_{1})k_y + 2\beta_{3}\dfrac{k_x^2-k_y^2}{k^2}k_y\\ (-\alpha+\beta_{1})k_x - 2\beta_{3}\dfrac{k_x^2-k_y^2}{k^2}k_x\\ 0 \end{pmatrix}. \label{eq:OmegaSOC} \end{equation} Here $x \parallel [1\bar{1}0]$ and $y\parallel [110]$. Treating the SOC as a weak perturbation to the band structure, the velocity is simply $\bm{v}(\bm{k}) = \hbar \bm{k}/m$. Therefore the averages $\mean{\cdots}$ over the random motion direction $\hat{\theta}$ shall be read as an average of $\bm{k}$ over the Fermi circle $\|\bm{k}\| = k_F$. Considering the drift velocity $\bm{v}_d = v_d \hat{y}$ we find $\mean{\Omega_y} = \mean{\Omega_x \Omega_y} = \mean{v_x\Omega_x} = \mean{v_y\Omega_y} = 0$. The other averages remain finite and are shown in Appendix \ref{app:single}. Within this section we will use the parameters shown in Table \ref{tab:single}. \begin{table}[hb!] \caption{Parameters considered for the single-subband discussion. The value of the Rashba coefficient $\alpha$ varies from the \PSHm to the \PSHp regime in the range $-(\beta_1-\beta_3) \leq \alpha \leq (\beta_1-\beta_3)$. The cubic Dresselhaus term near the Fermi level is $\beta_3 \approx \gamma\pi n_s/2$, and $\gamma = 11$~eV\AA$^3$ is the bulk Dresselhaus coefficient. } \label{tab:single} \begin{center} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{cll} Parameter & Value & Description\\ \hline $m$ & $0.067m_0$ & Effective mass (GaAs)\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{$-(\beta_1-\beta_3) \leq \alpha \leq (\beta_1-\beta_3)$} & Rashba SOC\\ $\beta_1$ & 3.7~meV\AA & Linear Dresselhaus SOC\\ $\beta_3$ & 0.7~meV\AA & Cubic Dresselhaus SOC\\ $n_s$ & $4\times 10^{11}$~cm$^{-2}$ & 2DEG density\\ $\tau$ & 1~ps & Average scattering time\\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \end{center} \end{table} To go forward and find analytical solutions of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} we must make approximations. We will consider the \PSHp ($\alpha \approx \beta_1-\beta_3$) and \PSHm ($\alpha \approx -\beta_1+\beta_3$) regimes. These regimes are different because we keep the drift velocity fixed along $\hat{y}$. Equivalently, for a fixed set of SOC coefficients one could alternate between the PSH$^\pm$ regimes switching the drift velocity direction \cite{altmann2016current} between $\hat{x}$ and $\hat{y}$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./narrowvsalpha.pdf} \caption{Transition from \PSHm to \PSHp as a function of $\alpha$ for an initially narrow packet, $m_z(\bm{r},0) = \delta(\bm{r})$. Each panel is for a different value of $\alpha$, which ranges from the (a) \PSHm to (e) \PSHp regime. The labels indicate the value of $\alpha$ in meV\AA. These and the following images are saturated for better visualization of the magnetization patterns.} \label{fig:narrowvsalpha} \end{figure} \subsection{\texorpdfstring{\PSHp: $\alpha \approx \beta_1-\beta_3$}{PSH+}} \label{sec:pshp} To establish the approximations for the \PSHp regime, let us compare the nondiagonal terms $\tilde{\Xi}_x$ and $\tilde{\Xi}_y$ in the Fourier space of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. The intensity of $\tilde{\Xi}_x = \mean{\Omega_x} + 2i\tau q_y \mean{v_y\Omega_x}$ scales with $(\alpha+\beta_1)$, while $\tilde{\Xi}_y = 2i\tau q_x \mean{v_x\Omega_y}$ scales with $(\alpha-\beta_1)$; see Appendix \ref{app:single}. Since our initial packages are always isotropic, the ranges of $q_x$ and $q_y$ are similar, which allow us to approximate both $\|q_x\|$ and $\|q_y\| \lesssim 1/\Gamma_0$ to compare the intensities of $\tilde{\Xi}_x$ and $\tilde{\Xi}_y$. For $\alpha \approx \beta_1-\beta_3$ and $\beta_3 \ll \alpha + \beta_1$, we have $\|\tilde{\Xi}_x\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_y\|$. We can split the matrix in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} in two blocks: a one-dimensional block composed of the $m_x(\bm{r},t)$ component only, and a two-dimensional block composed of the remaining components, $m_y(\bm{r},t)$ and $m_z(\bm{r},t)$. These blocks are coupled by $\tilde{\Xi}_y$. If the difference between eigenvalues of these blocks is large compared to their coupling, one can neglect $\tilde{\Xi}_y$. The approximate eigenvalues of the $yz$ subspace are then \begin{equation} \tilde{\lambda}^\pm_{yz} \approx \tilde{\lambda}_0 -\tau\left(\mean{\Omega_x^2}+\dfrac{\mean{\Omega_y^2}}{2}\right) \pm i \, \tilde{\Xi}_x, \end{equation} where we have used $\|\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}\| \ll \|\tilde{\Xi}_x\|$, which follows from the scaling of these quantities with $(\alpha \pm \beta_1)$. The eigenvalue of the $x$ subspace is $\tilde{\lambda}_x = \tilde{\lambda}_0-\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}$. The common diagonal term $\tilde{\lambda}_0 = i v_d q_y -\tau\tilde{\nabla}^2_v$ dictates the drift and diffusion. In terms of these eigenvalues, the condition to neglect the coupling $\tilde{\Xi}_y$ reads $\|\tilde{\lambda}_{yz}^\pm - \tilde{\lambda}_x\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_y\|$. This is satisfied near the \PSHp regime, but fails near the \PSHm regime. Therefore we can always neglect $\tilde{\Xi}_y$ near the \PSHp regime, and the precession is dominated by the lower block of the matrix in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}, corresponding to the $(m_y, m_z)$ subspace. The numerical solutions in Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha} and Fig.~\ref{fig:qw} show a transition between these two regimes near $\alpha = -0.7$~meV\AA. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./qw.pdf} \caption{(a) Wave number $\kappa_y$ and (b) frequency $\omega$ extracted from Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha}. For $\alpha < -0.7$~meV\AA~ the stripes vanish accompanied by discontinuities in $\kappa_y$ and $\omega$. The \PSHp solutions given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:qyplus} and Eq.~\eqref{eq:wplus}, shown as thick dashed lines, match well the numerical data for $\alpha > 0$.} \label{fig:qw} \end{figure} The approximation $\tilde{\Xi}_y \rightarrow 0$ allows us to write the $q$-space solution, Eq.~\eqref{eq:mkspace}, in simple terms and calculate the inverse Fourier transform to obtain the $z$ component of the magnetization profile, which reads \begin{align} \label{eq:PSHplus} m_z^+(\bm{r},t) &= \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-\gamma_p t} \cos(\kappa_y y + \omega t),\\ \rho(\bm{r},t) &= \dfrac{1}{\Gamma_{x,t}\Gamma_{y,t}} e^{-\frac{x^2}{2\Gamma_{x,t}^2}} \; e^{-\frac{(y-v_d t)^2}{2\Gamma_{y,t}^2}}, \end{align} where the broadenings are $\Gamma_{x,t}^2 = 2Dt$, $\Gamma_{y,t}^2 = 2(D+\tau v_d^2)t$ and the diffusion coefficient is $D = \tau v_F^2/2$. The term $\rho(\bm{r},t)$ drives the drift and diffusion, and it is common to all following solutions discussed hereafter. The wave vector $\kappa_y$, frequency $\omega$, and relaxation rate $\gamma_p$ are defined by $\Omega$ averages (see Appendix \ref{app:pshp}). In terms of the SOC coefficients, up to leading order in $v_d/v_F$, these are \begin{align} \label{eq:qyplus} \kappa_y &\approx \dfrac{2m}{\hbar^2}\left[ \alpha + \beta_{1} - \beta_{3} -8\beta_3\dfrac{v_d^2}{v_F^2}\right],\\ \label{eq:wplus} \omega &\approx -\dfrac{2m}{\hbar^2}v_d\beta_{3}\left(1 - 6\dfrac{v_d^2}{v_F^2}\right), \end{align} \begin{multline} \gamma_p \approx \dfrac{\tau m^2}{\hbar^4}v_F^2 \Bigg[ 3 \beta_3^2 + (\alpha-\beta_1+\beta_3)^2 \\ - 4 \dfrac{v_d^2}{v_F^2} (\alpha - \beta_1 - 9\beta_3)\beta_3 \Bigg]. \label{eq:gammap} \end{multline} The $\kappa_y$, $\omega$, $\gamma_p$ and $D$ above match those of Refs.~\onlinecite{Salis2014Dynamics, altmann2016current} for small $v_d$. In contrast, our relaxation rate $\gamma_p$ and diffusion constant $D$ are twice those of Ref.~\onlinecite{Yang2010RandomWalk} due to the Poissonian distribution of the scattering time $\tau_r$ considered here. The resulting pattern of $m_z^+(\bm{r},t)$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha}(e), where we compare it with the numerical solutions beyond the PSH$^\pm$ regimes. The stripes of oscillating spins constitute a magnetization wave moving along $y$ with velocity $-\omega/\kappa_y \approx v_d\beta_3/2\beta_1$, and an envelope profile $\rho(\bm{r},t)$. Figure \ref{fig:qw} shows that the analytical solution above is valid over a wide range of $\alpha$ beyond the \PSHp regime. Figures \ref{fig:gamma}(a) and \ref{fig:gamma}(b) show the decay time $1/\gamma_p$ as a function of $\alpha$, comparing the analytical solution of Eq.~\eqref{eq:gammap} with the numerical simulations for different $v_d$. The precise agreement validates the approximations above. With increasing $v_d$, the peak of maximum lifetime shifts to larger $\alpha$ and looses intensity, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma}(d). This effect is more pronounced for the \PSHm regime, which we discuss next. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./gamma2.pdf} \caption{(a), (b) Decay time $1/\gamma$ as a function of $\alpha$ for different $v_d$ (in nm/ps). The circles were extracted as exponential fits to the numerical solutions in Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha}. The analytical solutions (solid lines) match the numerical data for $\alpha<0$ using the \PSHm $1/\gamma_n$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:gamman}], while for $\alpha > 0$ it matches the \PSHp $1/\gamma_p$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:gammap}]. (c), (d) Peak position ($\alpha$) and intensity ($1/\gamma$) as a function of $v_d$ for the PSH$^\pm$ peaks, respectively. } \label{fig:gamma} \end{figure} \subsection{\texorpdfstring{\PSHm: $\alpha \approx -\beta_1+\beta_3$}{PSH-}} \label{sec:pshm} While the \PSHp regime was already introduced in Ref.~\onlinecite{Yang2010RandomWalk}, in this section we show that the \PSHm regime presents novel solutions for the random walk problem. Particularly, the spin precession pattern in this regime is sensitive to the initial package broadening, and the relaxation rate strongly depends on the drift velocity. For the \PSHm regime, $\alpha \approx -\beta_1+\beta_3$, we get now $\|\tilde{\Xi}_y\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_x\|$, due to their scaling with $(\alpha \pm \beta_1)$. This suggests a splitting of the matrix in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} into an $xz$ block weakly coupled to the $x$ term by $\tilde{\Xi}_x$. However, one can only consider the coupling to be weak if the difference between the eigenvalues of the blocks is much bigger than their coupling. Noticing that $\mean{\Omega_x^2} \ll \mean{\Omega_y^2}$, the eigenvalues of the uncoupled blocks ($\tilde{\Xi}_x = 0$) are \begin{align} \tilde{\lambda}_y &= \tilde{\lambda}_0 -\tau \mean{\Omega_x^2},\\ \tilde{\lambda}_{xz}^\pm &\approx \tilde{\lambda}_0 -\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2} \pm i\,\tilde{\Xi}_y. \end{align} Therefore, the decoupling condition becomes $\|\tilde{\lambda}_y - \tilde{\lambda}_{xz}^\pm\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_x\|$. As in the \PSHp regime, the range of $q_x$ and $q_y$ is about $\|q_x\| = \|q_y\| \lesssim 1/\Gamma_0$, which we use to estimate $\tilde{\Xi}_x$ and $\tilde{\Xi}_y$. We find two possible scenarios to satisfy the decoupling: (i) narrow initial packages, $\Gamma_0 \ll \Gamma_C$, and (ii) wide initial packages, $\Gamma_0 \gg \Gamma_C$. The critical initial broadening $\Gamma_C$, around which the transition occurs, is \begin{equation} \Gamma_C \approx \dfrac{2 \mean{v_x\Omega_y}}{\mean{\Omega_y^2}} \approx \dfrac{\hbar^2}{2m\beta_1} \left[ 1 + \dfrac{\beta_3}{\beta_1} \right]. \end{equation} For the set of parameters used here we find $\Gamma_C \approx 1.8$~$\mu$m; see Fig.~\ref{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad}. Next, we discuss the narrow ($\Gamma_0 \ll \Gamma_C$) and wide ($\Gamma_0 \gg \Gamma_C$) initial packet cases separately. \subsubsection{\texorpdfstring{Initially narrow packet: $\Gamma_0 \ll \Gamma_C$}{Initially narrow packet}} \label{sec:narrow} For $\Gamma_0 \ll \Gamma_C$ the precession is set by the $xz$ block of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}, since $\|\tilde{\Xi}_y\| \propto 1/\Gamma_0$ in $\tilde{\lambda}_{xz}^\pm$ becomes large. Within this subspace, we can solve Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} analytically to find \begin{equation} m_z^-(\bm{r},t) = \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-\gamma_n t} \cos(\kappa_x x), \label{eq:PSHminusNarrow} \end{equation} where $\rho(\bm{r},t)$ is the same drift-diffusion term from the \PSHp regime, $\gamma_n$ is the relaxation rate, and the wave number $\kappa_x = \mean{v_x\Omega_y}/\mean{v_x^2}$, which up to leading order in $v_d/v_F$ reads \begin{equation} \kappa_x \approx \dfrac{2m}{\hbar^2}\left[-\alpha+\beta_1-\beta_3+2\beta_3 \dfrac{v_d^2}{v_F^2}\right]. \label{eq:qxminus} \end{equation} This magnetization profile is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha}(a) as a function of $y$ and time $t$ for $x=0$ and $v_d = 30$~nm/ps. In accordance to the equation above, there is no precession along $y$. For typical parameters we find that, although small, the coupling $\tilde{\Xi}_x \approx \mean{\Omega_x} \propto v_d$ has to be included to properly describe $\gamma_n$ for finite $v_d$. We include this coupling into the solution using second-order perturbation theory to correct the eigenvalue $\tilde{\lambda}_{xz}^\pm \rightarrow \tilde{\lambda}_{xz}^\pm + \delta\tilde{\lambda}_{xz}$, where \begin{equation} \delta\tilde{\lambda}_{xz} \approx \dfrac{1}{2\tau}\dfrac{\mean{\Omega_x}^2}{\mean{\Omega_y^2}-\mean{\Omega_x^2}}, \end{equation} and the resulting relaxation rate reads \begin{equation} \gamma_n \approx \tau\left(\mean{\Omega_y^2}+\dfrac{\mean{\Omega_x^2}}{2}-\dfrac{\mean{v_x\Omega_y}^2}{\mean{v_x^2}}\right) + \delta\tilde{\lambda}_{xz}, \label{eq:gamman} \end{equation} which strongly depends on the drift velocity as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:gamma}(a)-\ref{fig:gamma}(c). The resulting expression for $\gamma_n$ in terms of the SOCs is long (not shown). In contrast to the \PSHp regime, for increasing $v_d$ the \PSHm peak of maximum lifetime strongly shifts away from $\alpha = -(\beta_1-\beta_3)$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./PSHminus-vsbroad.pdf} \caption{Magnetization pattern at the \PSHm regime for initially wide packets for different initial broadenings $\Gamma_0$, as indicated in each panel in $\mu$m. Figure \ref{fig:narrowvsalpha}(a) corresponds to the $\Gamma_0 \rightarrow 0$ limit. The spin flip only occurs for $\Gamma_0 \gtrsim \Gamma_C \approx 2$~$\mu$m. In panel (a), for $\Gamma_0 = 1$~$\mu$m, the magnetization fades away for $t > 3000$~ps, but does not flip, while in panel (b) a node forms around $t = 3000$~ps. From panels (c) to (f) the transition instant $t_c$ shifts towards smaller $t$ with increasing $\Gamma_0$. Equation \eqref{eq:nodetime} defines $t_c \approx 100$~ps in the limit $\Gamma_0 \rightarrow \infty$. Black line contours are guides to the eye.} \label{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad} \end{figure} \subsubsection{\texorpdfstring{Initially wide packet: $\Gamma_0 \gg \Gamma_C$}{Initially wide packet}} \label{sec:wide} For $\Gamma_0 \gtrsim \Gamma_C$ we cannot split the matrix in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} into simpler blocks. Here, both $\tilde{\Xi}_x$ and $\tilde{\Xi}_y$ are relevant. However, a qualitative description can be found in the limit $\Gamma_0 \rightarrow \infty$, such that $\tilde{\Xi}_x \rightarrow \mean{\Omega_x}$ and $\tilde{\Xi}_y \rightarrow 0$. The precession dynamics is given by the $yz$ block. Although small, the only relevant coupling remaining is $\tilde{\Xi}_x \approx \mean{\Omega_x} \propto v_d$. Consequently, a small, yet finite drift velocity is required to observe this regime. Within these approximations, it is easy to solve Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} in Fourier space and return with the inverse transform to obtain \begin{multline} \label{eq:PSHminusBroad} m_z^-(\bm{r}, t) = \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-\gamma_w t}\\ \times \left[ \cosh(\xi t) - \dfrac{\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}}{2\xi}\sinh(\xi t) \right]. \end{multline} Here the broadenings in $\rho(\bm{r},t)$ are approximately constant, $\Gamma_{x,t} = \Gamma_{y,t} \approx \Gamma_0$, due to the large initial broadening $\Gamma_0$. The relaxation rate $\gamma_w$ and hyperbolic frequency $\xi$ are shown in terms of the $\Omega$ averages in Appendix \ref{app:pshm}. For $\alpha \approx -(\beta_1-\beta_3)$ and up to leading order in $\beta_3/\beta_1$ and $v_d/v_F$, $\gamma_w$ and $\xi$ coincide, \begin{equation} \gamma_w \approx \xi \approx \dfrac{m^2}{\hbar^4} \left[ 4v_F^2 + 8(v_d^2-v_F^2)\dfrac{\beta_3}{\beta_1} \right] \tau \beta_1^2. \end{equation} Asymptotically for $t\rightarrow \infty$, Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHminusBroad} becomes $m_z^-(\bm{r}, t) \approx \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-(\gamma_w-\xi)t}(1-\frac{\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}}{2\xi})$. The factor $(1-\frac{\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}}{2\xi}) < 0$ implies that the magnetization should flip at some instant, as we discuss below. The total relaxation rate in this asymptotic limit becomes \begin{equation} \gamma_w - \xi \approx \dfrac{2m^2}{\hbar^4}(v_F^2 + 18v_d^2)\tau \beta_3^2 + \dfrac{1}{2\tau} \dfrac{(v_d \beta_3)^2}{(v_F \beta_1)^2}, \end{equation} which is of the same order as the relaxation rates $\gamma_n$ and $\gamma_p$ of the narrow \PSHm and the \PSHp regimes, respectively. The magnetization [see Fig.~\ref{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad}(f)] will have a single nodal line at a time $t = t_c$ set by the transcendental equation \begin{align} \tanh(\xi t_c) &= \dfrac{2\xi}{\tau\mean{\Omega_y^2}} \approx 1 - \dfrac{\hbar^4}{8m^2 \tau^2} \dfrac{(v_d\beta_3)^2}{(v_F\beta_1)^4}, \label{eq:nodetime} \end{align} where the approximate value is taken up to leading order in $v_d/v_F$ and $\beta_3/\beta_1$. For $v_d = 0$ there is no nodal line, i.e., $t_c \rightarrow \infty$. For our set of parameters in Table \ref{tab:single} and $v_d = 30$~nm/ps we find $t_c \approx 115$~ps. However, the analytical solution above is only valid in the limit $\Gamma_0 \rightarrow \infty$. More precisely, this limit requires $\|\tilde{\Xi}_x\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_y\|$, which yields \begin{equation} \Gamma_0 \gg \Gamma_W = \dfrac{2\tau \mean{v_x\Omega_y}}{\mean{\Omega_x}} \approx 2\tau \dfrac{v_F^2\beta_1}{v_d\beta_3}, \end{equation} with $\Gamma_W \approx 30$~$\mu$m. This is much wider than the typical laser spot used in recent experiments, where $\Gamma_0$ is $\sim$(sub)micron. Nonetheless, the numerical solutions for $\Gamma_0$ near the transition from the narrow to the wide \PSHm regimes are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad}. The single nodal line is already visible for $\Gamma_0 = \Gamma_C \gtrsim 2$~$\mu$m, while its instant $t_c$ strongly depends on $\Gamma_0$. For $\Gamma_0 > 30$~$\mu$m the numerical data matches $t_c = 115$~ps (not shown). \subsection{Beyond the PSH regimes and general discussion} \label{sec:Beyond} To guide our discussion, let us consider a one-subband system similar to the sample discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{altmann2016current}. The relevant parameters are shown in Table~\ref{tab:single}, for which we get the Fermi velocity $v_F \approx 274$~nm/ps, and the diffusion constant $D \approx 38$~$\mu\text{m}^2$/ps. Starting with a $\delta$ packet, $m_z(\bm{r},0) = \delta(\bm{r})$, the numerical drift and diffusion pattern of $m_z(y,0)$ at $x=0$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha} for $v_d = 30$~nm/ps and different values of $\alpha$. The exact \PSHp occurs in panel (e), while the exact \PSHm is shown in panel (a). These match Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHplus} and Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHminusNarrow}, respectively. For $\alpha \gtrsim -0.7$~meV\AA~ the stripes in the magnetization pattern are clearly visible. We can track the node lines to extract the wave number $\kappa_y$ and frequency $\omega$ to compare with the zeros of the cosine in Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHplus}. These are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:qw}. In the experiment of Ref.~\onlinecite{altmann2016current} the authors measure $\kappa_y$ and $\omega$ for a fixed $\alpha$ near the \PSHp regime and vary the electric field strength (or $v_d$). The numerical data in Fig.~\ref{fig:qw} show that the \PSHp solutions remain valid for a wide range of $\alpha$ around the exact \PSHp regime. Far from the \PSHp regime, near $\alpha = -0.7$~meV\AA~ both $\kappa_y$ and $\omega$ diverge as the stripes vanish. In Fig.~\ref{fig:qw} we calculate $\kappa_y$ and $\omega$ only for magnetization maps that have enough nodal lines to establish a periodicity ($\alpha > -0.7$~meV\AA), otherwise we set $\kappa_y = \omega = 0$ ($\alpha < -0.7$~meV\AA). The relaxation rate $\gamma$ is minimum ($1/\gamma$ is maximum) at the PSH regimes, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma} for $v_d = 0$. There we compare $\gamma$ extracted from the numerical solutions of Fig.~\ref{fig:narrowvsalpha} with the analytical expressions of our PSH$^\pm$ approximate solutions, Eq.~\eqref{eq:gammap} and Eq.~\eqref{eq:gamman}. For any $v_d$, the strength of the \PSHp and the \PSHm peaks are similar. However, their position shifts away from the PSH$^\pm$ conditions, i.e., $\alpha = \pm (\beta_1-\beta_3)$, with increasing $v_d$. This new feature is more pronounced for the \PSHm regime, and cannot be neglected if one desires to explore this case experimentally. The magnetization dynamics may strongly depend on the initial broadening $\Gamma_0$ of the packet, which is set by the laser spot of the pump beam. For the \PSHp regime, a wide packet solution can be extracted from the $\delta$ packet by convolution, as was done in Ref.~\onlinecite{altmann2016current}. In contrast, for initially wide packets, the dynamics of Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHminusBroad} may dominate in the \PSHm regime. Figure \ref{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad} shows the transition between the narrow and wide \PSHm regimes from the numerical solutions of Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. In the narrow \PSHm regime ($\Gamma_0 \ll \Gamma_C$) the spin precession is static, given by $\cos(\kappa_x x)$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSHminusNarrow}. For $x=0$, the magnetization is constant and one only observes the drift and diffusion process along $y$. For $\Gamma_C < \Gamma_0 < \Gamma_W$, the system is transitioning from the narrow to the wide regime. Within this range we only have numerical solutions, which qualitatively match the wide \PSHm regime ($\Gamma_0 > \Gamma_W$); i.e., the magnetization flips only once. As seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSHminus-vsbroad} for $\Gamma_0$ within the transition range, the nodal line moves to smaller $t$ with increasing $\Gamma_0$. It matches the wide \PSHm regime for $\Gamma_0 > \Gamma_W \sim 30$~$\mu$m (not shown). The magnetization flip of the \PSHm regime requires a finite drift velocity; see Eq.~\eqref{eq:nodetime}. Here we always consider $v_d \ll v_F$, introducing the drift as a small shift of the Fermi circle. For the wide \PSHm regime, the drift velocity appears in $\mean{\Omega_x} \propto v_d$ (see Appendix \ref{app:pshm}), and affects $\xi = \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\tau^2\mean{\Omega_y^2}-4\mean{\Omega_x}^2}$. For large $v_d$, the square root would become negative and $\xi$ purely imaginary. This indicates that for large $v_d$, the wide \PSHm regime would show oscillations and stripes as in the \PSHp regime. However, a large $v_d$ is not consistent with the RW model. Nonetheless, we interpret the single nodal line of the wide \PSHm regime as the first node of these speculative drift-induced oscillations. \subsection{External Magnetic Field} \label{sec:magnetic} Consider the Zeeman term from an in-plane magnetic field $\bm{B} = (B_x, B_y, 0)$. It adds to the Hamiltonian as $H_Z = \frac{1}{2}g\mu_B \bm{B}\cdot\bm{\sigma}$, and complements the spin precession adding $\bm{\Omega}_B = g\mu_B\bm{B}/\hbar$ to $\bm{\Omega}$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:OmegaSOC}, \textit{i.e.} $\bm{\Omega} \rightarrow \bm{\Omega} + \bm{\Omega}_B$. Here $g$ is the effective $g$ factor and $\mu_B$ is the Bohr magneton. Consequently, the magnetic field yields corrections to the $\Omega$-averages in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}; see Appendix \ref{app:magnetic}. Particularly, a finite $B_y$ makes $\mean{\Omega_x\Omega_y}$ and $\mean{v_y\Omega_y}$ finite, while the previous analytical PSH solutions require them to be zero. Therefore we shall focus on cases where only the $B_x$ component is finite, i.e. an in-plane magnetic field transverse to the drift velocity. For $\bm{B} = B_x \hat{x}$, the corrected $\Omega$ averages are $\mean{\Omega_x} \rightarrow \mean{\Omega_x} + \mean{\Delta \Omega_x}$, $\mean{\Omega_x^2} \rightarrow \mean{\Omega_x^2} + \mean{\Delta \Omega_x^2}$, $\mean{v_y\Omega_x} \rightarrow \mean{v_y\Omega_x} + \mean{\Delta v_y\Omega_x}$, where the corrections are \begin{align} \mean{\Delta\Omega_x} &= \dfrac{g\mu_B}{\hbar} B_x,\\ \mean{\Delta\Omega_x^2} &= \left(\dfrac{g\mu_B}{\hbar} B_x\right)^2 + \dfrac{4m}{\hbar^2} \dfrac{g\mu_B}{\hbar} B_x v_d (\alpha+\beta_1-2\beta_3),\\ \mean{\Delta v_y\Omega_x} &= v_d \dfrac{g\mu_B}{\hbar} B_x. \end{align} \subsubsection{\texorpdfstring{\PSHp and $B_x$}{PSH+ and Bx}} For $gB_x > 0$, the $\Omega$-average corrections above will not affect the approximations used to get the analytical \PSHp solution. But for $gB_x < 0$, the corrections will reduce the intensity of $\tilde{\Xi}_x$, which may invalidate the condition $\|\tilde{\Xi}_x\| \gg \|\tilde{\Xi}_y\|$. In general, our \PSHp solution will hold for positive $gB_x$, and for small negative $gB_x$ that does not break the inequality. The corrected wave number $\kappa_y \rightarrow \kappa_y+\kappa_{B}$ and frequency $\omega \rightarrow \omega + \omega_B$ are \begin{align} \kappa_B &= \dfrac{g\mu_B B_x}{\hbar}\dfrac{2v_d}{v_F^2 + 2v_d^2} \approx \dfrac{g\mu_B B_x}{\hbar} \dfrac{2v_d}{v_F^2} ,\\ \omega_B &= \dfrac{g\mu_B B_x}{\hbar}\dfrac{v_F^2}{v_F^2 + 2v_d^2} \approx \dfrac{g\mu_B B_x}{\hbar}\left(1-\dfrac{2v_d^2}{v_F^2}\right). \end{align} For $v_d \ll v_F$, only $\omega$ is affected by $B_x$: the Zeeman frequency simply adds to the frequency of the cubic SOC. This can be understood because in the \PSHp situation the effective SOC magnetic field is mostly aligned with $B_x$. Therefore, $B_x$ leads to an additional tilt of the oscillation stripes, which has been used in Ref.~\onlinecite{walser2012direct} to determine the SOC. \subsubsection{\texorpdfstring{\PSHm and $B_x$}{PSH- and Bx}} In general, for a system near the \PSHm regime, a strong $B_x$ will invalidate the approximations used to obtain analytical solutions. However, a small $B_x$ can be used to manipulate the nodal line in the single magnetization flip of the wide \PSHm regime. The magnetic field adds a term to $\xi \rightarrow \xi + \xi_B$, with \begin{multline} \xi_B \approx -\dfrac{\hbar^2}{8m^2}\dfrac{\beta_1+2\beta_3}{\tau v_F^2 \beta_1^3}(g\mu_B B_x)^2 \\ + \dfrac{\hbar}{2m}\dfrac{v_d\beta_3}{\tau v_F^2\beta_1^2}g\mu_BB_x. \end{multline} For $v_d = 0$, the magnetic correction of $\xi$ modifies the transcendental equation for $t_c$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:nodetime}], yielding \begin{equation} \tanh(\xi t_c) \approx 1 - \dfrac{\hbar^6}{32 m^4\tau^2}\dfrac{ (g\mu_BB_x)^2}{v_F^4 \beta_1^4}. \end{equation} Therefore a small $B_x$ can play the role of the drift velocity and induce a magnetization flip for the wide \PSHm regime. \section{Two subbands} \label{sec:twosubbands} The inter- and intrasubband SOCs were extensively studied in Refs.~\onlinecite{bernardes2006spin, EsmerindoPRL2007, calsaverini2008intersubband, dettwiler2017Stretchable, fu2015spin, Fu2015Skyrmion}, including a proposal for a crossed persistent spin helix \cite{Fu2015Skyrmion} (cPSH) and an intrinsic mechanism for edge spin accumulation \cite{khaetskii2016giant, Felix2013SpinHall}. In this section we investigate this cPSH within the RW model. The cPSH occurs when the subbands are set to opposite PSH regimes; e.g., the first subband is on the \PSHp, while the second is on the \PSHm regime. The magnetization profile of this crossed regime is not yet explored experimentally. Here we find two possible scenarios for the two-subband RW model. In the first case, Sec.~\ref{sec:weak2}, we consider the intersubband scattering (ISS) to be weak, such that the dynamics of the electrons of the first and second subband are independent. The resulting magnetization is an incoherent sum of the magnetization of each subband, and leads to a checkerboard pattern similar to the cPSH of Ref.~\onlinecite{Fu2015Skyrmion}. The second scenario, Sec.~\ref{sec:strong2}, corresponds to a regime of strong ISS. The random scattering events allow the electrons to quickly visit the Fermi circles of both subbands, allowing us to consider the subbands as semiclassical random variables. In this case each electron feels an average field that now includes an average over the subbands. Particularly, we will discuss situations where one subband is near the \PSHp regime, while the other is near the \PSHm. This can occur in wide quantum wells, where the Hartree repulsion creates effective triangular wells with opposite slopes at each side of the heterostructure \cite{Felix2013SpinHall}. In Ref.~\onlinecite{Felix2013SpinHall} the symmetric and antisymmetric wave functions are nearly degenerate, allowing a rotation towards wave functions located on the left and right triangular wells. Another possibility is to have a slightly asymmetric well, breaking the degeneracy between left and right states. The random walk model for two subbands will, in general, give finite values for all averages in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}. Consequently, the approximations presented for the single-subband cases will break. Moreover, the introduction of subband-dependent SOC, as well as intersubband SOC, leads to a large number of variables to analyze. Instead, for simplicity, the following discussion uses the representative parameters of Table \ref{tab:twosubbands}. \begin{table}[hb!] \caption{Parameters for the two-subband system.} \label{tab:twosubbands} \begin{center} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{cll} Parameter & Value & Description\\ \hline $m$ & $0.067m_0$ & Effective mass (GaAs)\\ $n_s$ & $8\times 10^{11}$~cm$^{-2}$ & 2DEG density\\ $\Delta_{12} = 2\varepsilon_-$ & 7~meV & Subband energy splitting\\ $(n_1, n_2)$ & $(5.0, 3.0)\times 10^{11}$~cm$^{-2}$ & Density per subband\\ $\beta_{1,1} \approx \beta_{1,2}$ & 3.7~meV\AA & Linear Dresselhaus SOC\\ $(\beta_{3,1}, \beta_{3,2})$ & $(0.86, 0.52)$~meV\AA & Cubic Dresselhaus SOC\\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{$-5 \leq (\alpha_2=-\alpha_1) \leq 5$~meV\AA} & Rashba SOC\\ $\eta$ & $\pm 1$~meV\AA & intersubband SOC\\ $\Gamma$ & $\pm 1$~meV\AA & intersubband SOC\\ $\tau$ & 1~ps & Average scattering time\\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \end{center} \end{table} \subsection{Subband and spin precession vectors} The effective Hamiltonian \cite{Fu2015Skyrmion} for a two-subband 2DEG with SOC is $H = H_0 + H_{SOC}$, with \begin{align} H_0 &= \left(\dfrac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2m} + \varepsilon_+\right) - \varepsilon_- \lambda_z,\\ H_{SOC} &= \dfrac{\hbar}{2}\bm{\sigma}\cdot \left[ \bm{\Omega}_+ - \lambda_z \bm{\Omega}_- + \lambda_x \bm{\Omega}_{12}\right], \label{eq:Hsoc} \end{align} where $\varepsilon_{\pm} = (\varepsilon_2\pm\varepsilon_1)/2$ is defined in terms of the first ($\nu = 1$) and second ($\nu=2$) subband energies $\varepsilon_\nu$, $\bm{\sigma} = (\sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z)$ are the spin operators, similarly $\bm{\lambda} = (\lambda_x, \lambda_y, \lambda_z)$ act on the subband subspace, $\bm{\Omega}_\pm = (\bm{\Omega}_2\pm\bm{\Omega}_1)/2$, and $m$ is the effective mass. The spin-orbit fields for each subband $\nu$ and the intersubband field are \begin{eqnarray} \bm{\Omega}_\nu &=& \dfrac{2}{\hbar} \begin{pmatrix} (+\alpha_\nu+\beta_{1,\nu})k_y + 2\beta_{3,\nu}\dfrac{k_x^2-k_y^2}{k^2}k_y\\ (-\alpha_\nu+\beta_{1,\nu})k_x - 2\beta_{3,\nu}\dfrac{k_x^2-k_y^2}{k^2}k_x\\ 0 \end{pmatrix} ,\\ \bm{\Omega}_{12} &=& \dfrac{2}{\hbar} \begin{pmatrix} +(\eta-\Gamma) k_y\\ -(\eta+\Gamma) k_x\\ 0 \end{pmatrix}. \end{eqnarray} Here we consider the Rashba $\alpha_\nu$, linear $\beta_{1,\nu}$ and cubic $\beta_{3,\nu}$ Dresselhaus contributions for each subband $\nu = \{1, 2\}$, and the intersubband SOCs, $\eta$ and $\Gamma$. In general we shall consider $\bm{\Omega}_\nu$ and $\bm{\Omega}_{12}$ as perturbations, such that the energy dispersion remains approximately parabolic near the Fermi level. The $\bm{\Omega}$ vector that defines the spin precession frequency for the RW model in Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag} is now $\bm{\Omega} = \bm{\Omega}_+ - \lambda_z\bm{\Omega}_- + \lambda_x \bm{\Omega}_{12}$, which is coupled to the subband operators $\bm{\lambda}$. If the subband energy difference $\Delta_{12} = \varepsilon_2-\varepsilon_1$ is large compared to the $H_{SOC}$ correction, we can use Löwdin perturbation theory to decouple the subbands. This is shown in Appendix \ref{app:lowdin}. Consequently, at each subband the electron spin feels an effective precession vector $\bm{\Omega}_{\nu}^\text{eff} = \bm{\Omega}_\nu + \bm{\Omega}_\nu^{(3)}$, where the small corrections $\bm{\Omega}_\nu^{(3)}$ are given by \begin{multline} \label{eq:mainO3x} \Omega^{(3)}_{\nu,x} = \dfrac{-\hbar^2}{4\Delta_{12}^2} \Bigg[\Omega_{{\bar{\nu}},x}[(\Omega_{12,x})^2-(\Omega_{12,y})^2] + \\ +2\;\Omega_{{\bar{\nu}},y}\;\Omega_{12,x}\;\Omega_{12,y}\Bigg], \end{multline} \begin{multline} \label{eq:mainO3y} \Omega^{(3)}_{\nu,y} = \dfrac{-\hbar^2}{4\Delta_{12}^2} \Bigg[\Omega_{{\bar{\nu}},y}[(\Omega_{12,y})^2-(\Omega_{12,x})^2] + \\ +2\;\Omega_{{\bar{\nu}},x}\;\Omega_{12,x}\;\Omega_{12,y}\Bigg], \end{multline} where $\bar{\nu}$ refers to the complementary subband. \subsection{Weak intersubband scattering} \label{sec:weak2} The ISS might be weak for large subband splitting $2\varepsilon_-$ and low temperatures, such that ISS events that require large momentum transfer are suppressed. In this regime, sets of electrons initialized at different subbands constitute independent ensembles with well defined $\mean{\bm{\lambda}} = (0, 0, \pm 1)$. Each ensemble follows the dynamics of a single-subband, as in Sec.~\ref{sec:Single}. The total magnetization is then an incoherent sum of the magnetization $\bm{m}_\nu(\bm{r},t)$ from each occupied subband, \begin{equation} \bm{m}(\bm{r},t) = \sum_\nu \bm{m}_\nu(\bm{r},t). \end{equation} \subsubsection{Crossed PSHs} The dynamics of each $\bm{m}_\nu(\bm{r},t)$ depends on the parameters of subband $\nu$. A particularly interesting case is when one subband is at the \PSHp regime and the other is on the \PSHm regime. This leads to the crossed-PSH (cPSH) regime, or persistent skyrmion lattice (PSL), first discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Fu2015Skyrmion}. Consider the parameters from Table \ref{tab:twosubbands}, where subband $\nu=1$ is near the \PSHp regime with $\alpha_1 \approx \beta_{1,1} - \beta_{3,1}$, while the other subband $\bar{\nu}=2$ is near the \PSHm regime with $\alpha_{2} \approx -\beta_{1,2} + \beta_{3,2}$. The z-components of the magnetizations for each subband are \begin{align} \label{eq:mag2plus} m_1(\bm{r},t) &= \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-\gamma_{y,1} t} \cos(\kappa_{y,1} y + \omega_1 t), \\ \label{eq:mag2minus} m_{2}(\bm{r},t) &= \rho(\bm{r},t) e^{-\gamma_{x,2} t} \cos(\kappa_{x,2} x). \end{align} \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./cPSHWeak.pdf} \caption{Magnetization patterns for two-subband crossed PSHs in the weak-ISS regime. The first (second) subband is in the \PSHp (\PSHm) regime. (a) At $x=0$ the magnetization profile is always positive, but shows the \PSHp stripes between zero and finite magnetization. (b) At $y=0$ the $x-t$ map shows a zigzag pattern. (c) Checkerboard pattern \cite{Fu2015Skyrmion} at $t = 1000$~ps centered at $y = v_d t$. In panel (b) the colors are highly saturated for better visualization of the pattern.} \label{fig:cPSHWeak} \end{figure} The resulting magnetization will have oscillations along $x$ and $y$, yielding the checkerboard pattern of the cPSH; see Fig.~\ref{fig:cPSHWeak}. For $x=0$ the pattern on the $yt$ map is approximately given by $[1+\cos(\kappa_{y,1} y + \omega_1 t)]$, which renders the \PSHp stripes shifted to positive magnetization. This is a consequence of the incoherent superposition of the \PSHp of subband $\nu=1$, Eq.~\eqref{eq:mag2plus}, and the \PSHm of subband $\bar{\nu}=2$, Eq.~\eqref{eq:mag2minus}, which gives a positive background to the \PSHp stripes. On the $xy$ map for fixed $t$, the superposition of oscillations along $x$ and $y$ leads to the checkerboard pattern in Fig.~\ref{fig:cPSHWeak}(c). The drift velocity $v_d$ sets a finite $\omega_1$, which drives a motion of the checkerboard pattern with velocity $v_y = -\omega_1/\kappa_{y,1} \propto v_d$. Additionally, the drift velocity affects the relaxation rates of the \PSHp and \PSHm subbands differently, hence $\gamma_{y,1} \neq \gamma_{x,2}$ and for large $t$ one mode will prevail. In Fig.~\ref{fig:cPSHWeak}(c) this is seen as slight preference to form stripes rather than the checkerboard pattern at the center of the package. \subsubsection{Intersubband SOC corrections} The intersubband SOCs are introduced via the effective precession vector $\bm{\Omega}_\nu^{\text{eff}}$ (see Appendix \ref{app:lowdin}). For overall weak SOC, the new terms in $\bm{\Omega}^\text{eff}_\nu$ do not break the approximations used to obtain the PSH$^\pm$ regimes. Consequently, the intersubband SOC simply introduces corrections to the wave vectors $\kappa_{x,\bar{\nu}} \rightarrow \kappa_{x,\bar{\nu}} + \delta \kappa_{x,\bar{\nu}}$, $\kappa_{y,\nu} \rightarrow \kappa_{y,\nu} + \delta \kappa_{y,\nu}$, and frequency $\omega_\nu \rightarrow \omega_\nu + \delta \omega_\nu$. Up to leading order in $v_d/v_F$ they read \begin{multline} \delta \kappa_{y,\nu} = -\dfrac{2m^3}{\Delta_{12}^2 \hbar^4} v_{f,\nu}^2 \Big[ \eta(-2\Gamma+\eta)\alpha_{\bar{\nu}} - \Gamma(\Gamma-2\eta)\beta_{1,\bar{\nu}} \\ + (\Gamma-\eta)^2\beta_{3,\bar{\nu}} \Big], \end{multline} \begin{multline} \delta \omega_\nu = -\dfrac{2m^3 v_F^2 v_d}{\Delta_{12}^2 \hbar^2} \Big[ \eta (\eta -2 \Gamma ) \alpha_{\bar{\nu}} + \Gamma (\Gamma -2 \eta ) \beta_{1,\bar{\nu}} \\ -2 (\Gamma -\eta )^2 \beta_{3,\bar{\nu}} \Big], \end{multline} \begin{multline} \delta \kappa_{x,\bar{\nu}} = \dfrac{2m^3}{\Delta_{12}^2 \hbar^4} v_{f,\bar{\nu}}^2 \Big[ \eta(2\Gamma+\eta)\alpha_{\nu} - \Gamma(\Gamma+2\eta)\beta_{1,\nu} \\ + (\Gamma+\eta)^2\beta_{3,\nu} \Big]. \end{multline} Additionally, the intersubband SOC will lead to corrections to the relaxation rates ($\gamma_n$, $\gamma_p$ and $\gamma_w$) and frequency $\xi$. However, these are large expressions that we choose not to show explicitly. \subsection{Strong intersubband scattering} \label{sec:strong2} For the strong-ISS regime we consider that both intra- and intersubband scattering times are comparable, and both are much shorter than the spin precession period. Therefore, the random walk process allows the electron to wander throughout the Fermi circles of all occupied subbands. Consequently, here we include an average over the subbands into the $\mean{\cdots}$ averages of the RW model. For a generic term $\mathcal{O}_\nu(\theta)$, the average now reads \begin{equation} \mean{\mathcal{O}} = \dfrac{1}{2\pi N_\nu}\sum_{\nu=1}^{N_\nu} \int_0^{2\pi} \mathcal{O}_\nu(\theta) = \dfrac{1}{N_\nu} \sum_{\nu=1}^{N_\nu} \mean{\mathcal{O}}_\nu, \label{eq:averages2} \end{equation} where $N_\nu$ is the number of occupied subbands. The short form on the right-hand side expresses the subband average contracting the $\theta$ average into $\mean{\mathcal{O}}_\nu$. The $\theta$ averages $\mean{\mathcal{O}}_\nu$ are equivalent to the ones of the single-subband cases, but calculated with $\bm{\Omega}_\nu^\text{eff}$, which introduces subband-dependent parameters ($\alpha_\nu$, $\beta_{1,\nu}$, $\beta_{3,\nu}$ and $k_{F,\nu}$), as well as the intersubband couplings ($\eta$ and $\Gamma$). For a drift velocity along $y$, these averages remain null $\mean{\Omega_y} = \mean{\Omega_x\Omega_y} = \mean{v_x\Omega_x} = \mean{v_y\Omega_y} = 0$. The others can be easily calculated algebraically, but now yield long expressions (not shown); namely, these are $\mean{\Omega_x}$, $\mean{v_x \Omega_y}$, $\mean{v_y \Omega_x}$, $\mean{\Omega_j^2}$, for $j=\{x,y\}$. Overall, the precession is dominated by $\mean{\bm{\Omega}} = \frac{1}{2}(\mean{\bm{\Omega}}_1 + \mean{\bm{\Omega}}_2)$, yielding subband-averaged SOCs $\alpha_+ = \frac{1}{2}(\alpha_1+\alpha_2)$, $\beta_{1,+} = \frac{1}{2}(\beta_{1,1}+\beta_{1,2})$, and $\beta_{3,+} = \frac{1}{2}(\beta_{3,1}+\beta_{3,2})$, plus perturbative corrections. Considering the parameters of Table \ref{tab:twosubbands}, we find that the RW averages are nearly isotropic for $v_d = 0$ and $\alpha_1 = -\alpha_2 = 0$, with $\mean{\bm{\Omega}} = 0$, $\mean{v_x \Omega_y} \lesssim \mean{v_y \Omega_x}$, and $\mean{\Omega_x^2} \lesssim \mean{\Omega_y^2}$. The strict isotropic dynamics would be equivalent to the pure Dresselhaus case discussed for a single-subband in Ref.~\onlinecite{Stanescu2007PhysRevB}, where the magnetization follows a Bessel pattern given by \begin{equation} m_z(r,t) \propto \dfrac{e^{-\gamma_0 t}}{\sqrt{t}}J_0(\kappa_0 r), \end{equation} where the wave number $\kappa_0$ and the relaxation rate $\gamma_0$ are \begin{align} \kappa_0 &= \dfrac{2\mean{v_y \Omega_x}}{\mean{v_y^2}},\\ \gamma_0 &= \dfrac{3\tau}{2}\mean{\Omega_x^2} - \dfrac{\tau\mean{v_y\Omega_x}^2}{\mean{v_y^2}}. \end{align} \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{./cPSHStrong.pdf} \caption{ Magnetization patterns for the two-subband crossed PSH in the strong-coupling limit. The drift velocity $v_d$ and the subband-dependent Rashba SOC $\alpha_1 = -\alpha_2$ are indicated in each panel in units of nm/ps and meV\AA, respectively. The maps are taken at $t=1000$~ps and other parameters are set in Table \ref{tab:twosubbands}. The isotropic case in panel (b) matches the Bessel solutions. For finite $\alpha_1$ the Bessel pattern is distorted. A finite $v_d$ induces the drift of the packet (envelope), but the inner pattern moves with a slow velocity. Due to the large relaxation rate $\gamma_0$ of the Bessel solutions, the colors here had to be strongly saturated for clear visualization of the patterns. } \label{fig:cPSHStrong} \end{figure} For $\alpha_1 =-\alpha_2= 0$ and $v_d =0$ the Bessel pattern is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(b) and matches well the approximate isotropic solution above. Beyond the isotropic limit (i.e., for finite but small $\alpha_1 = -\alpha_2$ and $v_d$), the precession pattern still resembles the isotropic Bessel solutions. A finite $v_d$ drives the Gaussian envelope drift along $y$, but the inner magnetization pattern drifts with a slower velocity, as seen in Figs.~\ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(d)-(f). An equivalent effect was discussed previously for the single-subband \PSHp case, where the precession pattern $\propto \cos(\kappa_y y + \omega t)$ yields a pattern velocity $-\omega/\kappa_y$. A finite $\alpha_1 = -\alpha_2$ distorts the pattern vertically [Figs.~\ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(a) and \ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(d)] or horizontally [Figs.~\ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(c) and \ref{fig:cPSHStrong}(f)], for $\alpha_1 > 0$ and $\alpha_1 < 0$, respectively. Since the dynamics is dominated by the subband-averaged SOCs, even though the subbands are set to the cPSH regime, the averaged SOCs deviate from this regime. Indeed $\alpha_+ = 0$ for $\alpha_1 =-\alpha_2$, while $\beta_{1,+} \neq 0$. Consequently, the strong-ISS regime for the cPSH setup shows a short lifetime $\gamma_0^{-1} \sim 0.1$~ns, much shorter than the single-subband PSH regimes ($\sim 1$~ns in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma}). \section{Final Remarks and Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion} \subsection{Limitations of the Random Walk model} The RW model provides an elegant description of the spin diffusion process. However, there are limitations. To go from the symbolic definition of the joint probability, Eq.~\eqref{eq:joint}, to the differential equation for the magnetization, Eq.~\eqref{eq:diffmag}, we have performed a Taylor expansion for small $\Delta\bm{r} = \bm{v}_n\tau$ and $\Delta\bm{s}_n$. Additionally, we use $\bm{s}_{n+1}$ from Eq.~\eqref{eq:ssol} in Eq.~\eqref{eq:mint}. We combine these keeping only terms that are linear in $\bm{s}$; otherwise it is not possible to recover the definition of the magnetization, Eq.~\eqref{eq:mint}, and write the differential equation for $\bm{m}(\bm{r},t)$. As shown here, this approximation is remarkably good for samples with small SOC coefficients, like GaAs quantum wells \cite{altmann2016current}. However, for strong SOC one cannot neglect the spin-orbit locking that couples the spin with the (Fermi) velocity. This condition would lead to a spin-dependent $\Delta\bm{r}$ (\textit{zitterbewegung} \cite{Schliemann2005Zitter, Schliemann2005ZitterB, bernardes2006spin, Schliemann2007SideJump}), thus breaking the conditions required to recover the magnetization in the expansion approach. With a different approach, in Ref.~\onlinecite{Sinova2011StrongSOC} the authors consider the strong-SOC regime, and show that the PSH arises from Rabi oscillations. Additionally, the RW model does not account for spin-charge coupling, which is discussed in Refs.~\onlinecite{Stanescu2007PhysRevB,Kleinert2007DriftB1} for single-subband systems. \subsection{Conclusions} We have analyzed the spin diffusion dynamics in two-subband systems, extending the random walk model to account for the subband dynamics. Our model includes the Rashba, linear and cubic Dresselhaus, and the intersubband spin-orbit couplings. Additionally, we have discussed the effects of initial packet broadening and external magnetic fields. For the dynamics of two-subband systems, two possible scenarios were identified regarding the ISS rates. For weak ISS, the subbands are effectively uncoupled and the magnetization dynamics is essentially an average of the magnetization of the individual subbands (incoherent sum). Consequently, if the subbands are set into the crossed-PSH regime, both magnetizations will show a long lifetime, resulting in the checkerboard pattern \cite{Fu2015Skyrmion}. We show that for a finite drift velocity, the single-subband relaxation rates for the \PSHp and \PSHm are different. Therefore, in the weak-ISS regime, a finite drift velocity could lead to different relaxation rates, such that for large $t$ only one of the magnetizations will prevail, returning to the single-subband striped pattern. For strong ISS, we have seen that the fast subband dynamics introduces subband-averaged spin-orbit couplings, rather than a subband-averaged magnetization (as in the weak-ISS case). Consequently, even if the individual subbands are set into the crossed-PSH regime, their averaged SOC will not be close to a PSH. Instead, we obtain a nearly isotropic Bessel pattern with short lifetime. Spintronic applications require long spin lifetimes. From the results presented, this can be achieved in two-subband systems by setting individual subbands into PSH regimes if the ISS is sufficiently weak. However, for strong ISS, the subband-averaged SOC is the main character. It may destroy the long-lived cPSH. However, one would still recover a long lifetime if the subband-averaged SOCs fall close to the PSH regime. Therefore, the extension to two-subband systems provides an additional handle to fine-tune the dynamics to obtain long lifetimes. \begin{acknowledgments} We acknowledge financial support from the Brazilian agencies CNPq, CAPES, and FAPEMIG. G.J.F. thanks Jiyong Fu for helpful discussions. F.G.G.H. acknowledges financial support from Grant No. 2014/25981-7 of the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP). P.A. and G.S. acknowledge financial support from the NCCR QSIT of the Swiss National Science Foundation. \end{acknowledgments}
\subsection{Experimental details} TNS single crystalline samples were prepared by reacting the elementals nickel, tantalum and selenium with a small amount of iodine in a evacuated quartz tube. The tube was slowly heated and kept with a temperature gradient from 950$^{\circ}$C to 850$^{\circ}$C for 7 days, followed by slow cooling. Single crystalline samples with a typical size of 0.04~x~1~x~10 mm$^3$ were obtained in the cooler end. For trARPES, the samples were cleaved \textit{in situ} at room temperature under ultrahigh vacuum conditions (1.6~x~10$^{-10}$ mbar) and then slowly cooled down to 110~K using liquid N$_2$. TNS was optically excited by the p-polarized, fundamental output (h$\nu_{\mathrm{pump}}$ = 1.55~eV) of a regeneratively amplified Ti:Sa laser system working at a repetition rate of 40 kHz. The photoinduced changes to the electronic structure along the Ni chain direction of TNS were probed by time-delayed p-polarized probe pulses (h$\nu_{\mathrm{probe}}$ = 6.2~eV), generated by frequency quadrupling of the fundamental. The two-photon photoemission signal of TNS at high kinetic energies represents a cross correlation of the Gaussian pump and probe laser pulses and was used to estimate an upper limit for the time resolution of 110~fs. The photoelectrons were detected by a hemispherical analyzer (SPECS Phoibos 100) held at a bias voltage of 0.5 V with respect to the sample holder. The energy resolution of 86~meV is obtained as root sum squared of the UV pulse bandwidth (25 meV) and the instrument resolution (82~meV) estimated \textit{in situ} from the low-energy secondary electron cut-off of a direct photoemission spectrum of the metallic sample holder. Due to the high statistics of our raw data, it was possible to resolve \textit{relative} energy shifts of only few meV. PE spectra are plotted as a function of energy with respect to the equilibrium Fermi level $E-E_{\mathrm{F}}=E_{\mathrm{kin}}-$h$\nu_{\mathrm{probe}}+\Phi$. $\Phi$ is the work function. $E_{\mathrm{F}}$ was determined independently on the metallic sample holder, which was in direct electrical contact with the sample. We can neglect sample charging as the origin of the observed transient spectral shifts as (i) no \textit{rigid} shift of the angle-resolved PE spectra was observed (parts of the spectrum shift up, others down) and (ii) the low-energy secondary electron cut-off remains unchanged. This is exemplified in Fig. \ref{fig:1SM}, where we compare EDCs at $\Gamma$ showing the whole ARPES spectra measured before $\Delta t = 0$ fs and at $\Delta t = 185$ fs (for a fluence of 0.12~mJ/cm$^2$) at 110 K. While the peaks of the lower and upper VB are transiently modified by the pump pulse, this shows that the low-energy cut-off (at a binding energy of about -0.8~eV) remains unchanged. This has been checked for different fluences and at different time delays. \renewcommand{\thefigure}{SM\arabic{figure}} \setcounter{figure}{0} \begin{center} \begin{figure}[h] \includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{lowenergycutoff} \caption{EDCs at $\Gamma$ before (empty grey) and at 185 fs (empty red) after photoexcitation for a fluence of 0.12 mJ/cm$^2$.} \label{fig:1SM} \end{figure} \end{center} \subsection{Experimental data analysis} EDCs were fitted with a sum of three Gaussian peaks multiplied by the Fermi-Dirac occupation distribution (FDD) and convoluted with another Gaussian to account for the energy resolution as exemplarily shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2SM}. The Gaussian peak at higher binding energy fits to the lower VB, while the sum of the other two Gaussians is used to reproduce the asymmetric shape of the upper VB. The EDC at $\Delta t = 365$ fs (solid red markers) in Fig. \ref{fig:2SM} clearly shows the downward shift of the upper flat top VB upon strong photoexcitation. This delayed downshift is sufficiently pronounced to be directly seen in the raw PE data, as evidenced by the normalized EDCs for different time delays before (empty grey) and after (solid red) photoexcitation. The time-dependent energetic position of the intensity maximum of the combined peak was used as a measure for the transient shift of the upper VB\footnote{The separate shifts of B and C exhibit the same qualitative behavior (not shown).}. Since the energy shift of both peaks is sufficiently strong to be seen by eye in the raw data, different fit functions (not shown, e.g. two Gaussians w/o FDD and three Gaussians w/ FDD) yield qualitatively the same result. Tests demonstrate that apparent band shifts due to FDD broadening can only account for a maximum downward shift of 5~meV, far below the observed maximum shift of 18~meV. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[h] \includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{figure3b_SM} \caption{Normalized EDCs at $\Gamma$ before $\Delta t = 0$ fs (empty grey) and at $\Delta t = 365$ fs after (solid red) photoexcitation with 0.47 mJ/cm$^2$ at 110~K. The exemplary fit curve (black line) is composed of three Gaussian peaks (blue) multiplied by a Fermi-Dirac occupation distribution (red dashed), and convolved with a Gaussian accounting for the energy resolution (green).} \label{fig:2SM} \end{figure} \end{center} The transient population of the VBs has been estimated from the area under the corresponding peak at each pump-probe delay. It should be noted that the electric field of the intense pump pulses might affect the spectral shape probed by ARPES. However, such effects occur only during the pump pulse duration \cite{MahmoodField} and could solely have an impact on our results at time delays $\pm$~50~fs. The band gap of TNS is approximately 0.3 eV \cite{OkamuraPrivate}. In Ref. \cite{LuNatureComm}, this corresponds to the isobestic point in the optical data. From our ARPES data at equilibrium (without pump photons) and at 110 K, we find that the upper VB lies at $E-E_{\mathrm{F}}$ = -0.11 eV, which is smaller than half the band gap value. This suggests a slight p-doping of our sample. This assertion about the p-doping of our sample is further supported by a Hall resistivity measurement performed on another sample from the same growth batch (see Fig. \ref{fig:2bSM}), which confirms that the Hall resistivity is hole-like (positive) on the whole temperature range displayed here. \begin{center} \begin{figure}[h] \includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{RHmgraph} \caption{Hall resistivity of our TNS samples.} \label{fig:2bSM} \end{figure} \end{center} \subsection{Theoretical modeling} We investigate the nonthermal state of the EI by considering a one-dimensional two-band system of spin-less fermions (spin-degrees of freedom are not included) with direct band gap, $H=H_{0}+H_{\text{int}},$ where the noninteracting part is $$H_{0}=\sum_{k,\alpha} (\epsilon_{k,\alpha}+\eta_{\alpha})c_{k,\alpha}^{\dagger}c_{k,\alpha},$$ with the band dispersion $\epsilon_{k,1(2)}=-(+)2t_0 \cos(k)$. The $c_{k,\alpha}$ denote the annihilation operators for an electron with momentum $k$ in orbital $\alpha=1,2.$ The bare band splittings $\eta_{1,2}$ are chosen such that band $1\:(2)$ is totally occupied (unoccupied). The hopping parameter $t_0$ is chosen such that the ground state dispersion in the unordered state matches the experimental one. For the interaction we consider a local density-density CIA of the form $$H_{\text{int}} = \frac{1}{2} \sum_i U n_{i,1} n_{i,2}. $$ We determined the interaction $U$ by the comparison of calculated and equilibrium ARPES spectra in the ordered and unordered state. Explicitly, for the ground state calculations, we used $t_0=0.26$ eV, $U/t_0=3.0$ and the relative bare band splitting $(\eta_{2}-\eta_{1})/t_0=2.1$. The excitonic instability arises because of the attractive CIA between the electrons in the upper band and the holes in the lower band, leading to a condensation of the excitons which are formed across the direct band gap. The order parameter of the condensate is $\rho_{12}=\langle c_{k,1}^\dagger c_{k,2} \rangle \neq 0.$ In order to solve the problem we employ standard Hartree-Fock calculations based on the mean-field decoupling of the interaction term. The experimentally observed abrupt band gap narrowing is modeled by a reduction of the bare band splitting $\eta_2-\eta_1$ between the VB and CB. The effect of the nonthermal distribution on the band gap size $\Delta$ is determined from the self-consistent Hartree-Fock calculation. In order to show that the conclusions do not depend on the particular choice of the distribution function, we compared several parametrizations of the nonthermal distribution function, see Fig.~\ref{fig:5SM}(b): (i) additional constant population of holes (electrons), (ii) Lorentzian peak (dip) in the Fermi-Dirac distribution function below (above) $E_{\mathrm{F}}$, namely $f_{\text{nth}}(\epsilon,A,\overline E)=f_{\text{FD}}(\epsilon,0)+A\gamma^2/((\epsilon-\overline E)^2+\gamma^2),$ where $f_{\text{FD}}(\epsilon,\mu)$ is the Fermi-Dirac distribution, $A$ is the amplitude, $\gamma$ the width and $\overline E$ the center position of the Lorentzian peak (dip), (iii) intraband thermalized distributions at elevated temperatures.\\ As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:5SM}(a), for all these nonthermal distributions with the same excitation density $n_{ex}$ the band gap at $\Gamma$ is enhanced except for the \textit{fully} thermalized one (solid orange in Fig. \ref{fig:5SM}(e)). This means that photoexcitation of an EI can result in a transient enhancement of the order parameter, if thermalization is sufficiently delayed by, for instance, the presence of the band gap, consistently with the experimental observations at later time delay. \begin{center} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{fig_supplMat} \caption{(a) Comparison of the ground state dispersion relation to the ones obtained from different nonthermal distribution functions, namely in blue a constant population of holes (electrons), in dark red a dip (hump) in the Fermi-Dirac distribution function below (above) $E_{\mathrm{F}}$, respectively, in green the corresponding \textit{intra}band thermalized distribution at elevated temperatures. The negative energy parts of the corresponding distribution functions are presented in panel (b).} \label{fig:5SM} \end{figure} \end{center} The theory that we present does not aim at realistically reproducing the experimental setup, including the photoexcitation and all possible relaxation processes. We rely on the separation of the time scales for the relaxation, and assume that the intraband electron-electron scattering leads to a fast relaxation and thermalization within each band, while the thermalization between the bands is mediated by electron-phonon interactions whose characteristic time is much longer. This leads to a nonthermal distribution function which exists in a relatively long time-window. The mean-field analysis is well suited to describe the state of the system, i.e., its band structure and order parameter, in the presence of such a non-thermal electron distribution. In order to simulate the relaxation and thermalization and therefore predict the precise time-dependent form of the nonthermal distribution function, however, one needs to include processes like electron-electron and electron-phonon scattering in the real-time description, which can be obtained by more advanced descriptions beyond mean-field, such as GW or DMFT. In these approaches, however, the timescales that one can reach are limited by the large cost in memory and computer time. Therefore, there is a need to develop new techniques to describe the long time behavior that includes the relaxation and thermalization dynamics, which is a challenging problem for future theoretical studies. \end{document}
\section{Introduction} In recent years, the introduction of Transformation Optics has shed a new light on the propagation of electromagnetic waves in complex media and has proven to be an intuitive yet powerful tool for engineering the flow of light at the sub-wavelength scale \cite{Pendry1780,LeonhardtPhilbin2006,Leonhardt1777}. The theory is based on the invariance of Maxwell's equations under a change of coordinates, resulting in equivalent permittivity and permeability profiles that are generally anisotropic, spatially varying and sometimes singular. Perhaps the most popular application has been an invisibility cloak, which has been realized experimentally in various frequency regimes for two dimensional and three dimensional setups \cite{Schurig977,valentine2009optical,ergin2010three} thanks to the development of metamaterials and advanced manufacturing techniques \cite{chen2010transformation}. However, the complexity of the required material properties makes practical realisation a hard task, while the use of resonant meta-atoms to reach extreme parameters results usually in a narrow frequency band of operation \cite{Oscar2012,Oscar2013}. There is thus a critical need for other approaches to achieve invisibility at least to reduce diffraction significantly such as mantle cloaking \cite{AluMantle2009}, optimized dielectric covers \cite{Sigmund2011,Vial2015} or by introducing gain \cite{Lin2011,Mostafazadeh2013}. Quite paradoxically, although it is a very common phenomenon in wave physics, relatively little is known regarding what does or does not cause scattering when the material properties are allowed to vary rapidly in space \cite{Berry1990,Horsley2016,Philbin2016,horsley2015spatial}. Finally, there is an ever increasing demand for controlling optical fields at the nanoscale for applications ranging from medical diagnostics and sensing to optical devices and optoelectronic circuitry \cite{zeng2014nanomaterials,Singh,Ozbay189,li2008harnessing}. In particular, local field enhancement is of paramount importance in phenomena such as surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) \cite{SERS2013,stiles2008surface}, improved non-linear effects \cite{EnhancNonlinear1,novotny2012,nphotonZayats}, optical antennae and the control of the local density of states \cite{hoppener2012self,belacel2013controlling}.\\ In this paper we present a general purpose method to control the amplitude and/or phase of a wave propagating in a two dimensional (2D) inhomogeneous isotropic medium. Although we focus our attention on media that does not scatter an incident plane wave while producing a specified amplitude and/or phase, the technique might be extended to arbitrary incident fields as well as to control the scattering pattern. In addition, the method is not based on the geometrical optics approximation and is valid at every frequency.\\ \section{Governing equations} We consider here linear, isotropic, lossless and possibly dispersive materials characterized by their $z$-invariant relative permittivity $\varepsilon(\bm r)$ and relative permeability $\mu(\bm r)$, where $\bm r=(x,y)^{\rm T}$ is the position vector. This medium is illuminated by a monochromatic electromagnetic wave of pulsation $\omega=k_0/c$, amplitude $A_0(\bm r,k_0)$ and phase $\phi_0(\bm r,k_0)$ whose electric field is linearly polarized along the $z$ axis, which is the so called Transverse Electric (TE) polarization, so that $\bm E=E_z \bm z$. Under these conditions, Maxwell's equations can be recast as the scalar wave equation: \begin{equation} \nabla\cdotp\left(\frac{1}{\mu}\,\nabla E_z\right) + k_0^2\,\varepsilon\, E_z = 0 , \label{waveEq} \end{equation} By writing the total electric field in polar form as $E_z=A\mathrm{e}^{\rm i \phi}$ ($A$ and $\phi$ real), Eq.~(\ref{waveEq}) is separated into the following two equations: \begin{empheq}[left=\empheqlbrace]{align} &\bm\nabla\cdotp\left(\frac{A^2}{\mu}\bm\nabla \phi\right)=0 \label{eqsimon1} \\ &( \bm{\nabla}\phi)^2-k_0^2\varepsilon\mu-\frac{\bm\nabla^2 A}{A}+ \frac{\bm\nabla \mu}{\mu}\cdotp\frac{\bm\nabla A}{A}=0 \label{eqsimon2} \end{empheq} The physical meaning of these two equation is well known: the first is the continuity equation for the Poynting vector, while the second is the \emph{exact} eikonal equation governing the motion of the rays \cite{holland1995quantum,PhilbinExactGO}. They are usually solved through setting $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$ as known quantities and then solving for $E_z$, \textit{i.e.} $A$ and $\phi$. However, the methodology presented here allows us to fix arbitrarily two parameters and then compute the two others using Eqs. (\ref{eqsimon1})-(\ref{eqsimon2}).\\ From now on we consider an incident homogeneous plane wave with constant amplitude $A_0$ and phase $\phi_0(\bm r,k_0)=k_0 \bm n \cdotp \bm r$, with $\bm n =(\cos\theta_0,\sin\theta_0)^{\rm T}$ the unit vector defining the incidence direction. The gradient of the phase can then be written as $$\bm{\nabla}\phi=\bm n k_0+\bm{\nabla}\psi,$$ where $\psi$ is an additional phase term. If $\bm{\nabla}\psi\rightarrow 0$ and $A\rightarrow A_0$ as $r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}\rightarrow +\infty$, the incident wave remains plane and the material will be invisible. \\ \section{Controlling amplitude and permeability} In this section we suppose that we fix $A$ and $\mu$. Substituting $\bm{\nabla}\phi$ into Eq.~(\ref{eqsimon1}), we obtain the following Poisson's equation for $\psi$ \begin{equation} \bm\nabla\cdotp\left(\frac{A^2}{\mu}\bm\nabla \psi\right)= -k_0\bm n\cdotp\bm\nabla\left(\frac{A^2}{\mu}\right) , \label{poisson} \end{equation} which can be solved to give $$ \bm \nabla \psi(\bm r) = -\frac{\mu(\bm r)k_0}{2\pi A^2(\bm r)} \int {\rm d}^2\bm r'\frac{\bm r-\bm r'}{\|\bm r-\bm r'\|^2} \bm n \cdotp \bm{\nabla}'\left(\frac{A^2(\bm r')}{\mu(\bm r')}\right).$$ This shows that if we specify the quantity $\zeta=A^2/\mu$ over space then the gradient of the phase changes in response to the change in $\zeta$ in the same way the electric field responds to a charge density. Substituting the above equation into (\ref{eqsimon2}) then determines a relationship between $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$. \\ In the following we further assume that $A$ and $\mu$ are dispersionless and introduce the frequency independent quantities $\alpha=\phi/k_0$ and $\beta=\psi/k_0$. Locally, the permittivity dispersion takes the form of a lossless Drude model \begin{equation} \varepsilon(\omega)=\varepsilon_{\infty}-\omega_{\rm p}^2/\omega^2, \label{drudemodel} \end{equation} with the permittivity at infinite frequency $\varepsilon_{\infty}$ and the plasma frequency $\omega_{\rm p}$ defined as: \begin{align} \varepsilon_{\infty}&= \frac{(\bm{\nabla} \alpha)^2}{\mu}=\frac{1}{\mu}\left[1+(\bm{\nabla} \beta)^2+2\,\bm n \cdotp \bm{\nabla} \beta \right],\label{drudeparam1}\\ \omega_{\rm p}^2&=\frac{c^2}{\mu} \left(\frac{\bm\nabla^2 A}{A}-\frac{\bm\nabla \mu}{\mu}\cdotp\frac{\bm\nabla A}{A}\right). \label{drudeparam2} \end{align} The obtained permittivity is linear, spatially varying, with a $1/\omega^2$ dispersion and non-local since $\varepsilon_{\infty}$ depends on the incidence direction $\bm n$. On the basis of time reversal, a plane wave coming from the opposite direction gives a total field with the same amplitude but an opposite phase as $\phi(-\bm n)=-\phi(\bm n)$, while invisibility is maintained for the same permittivity since $\varepsilon(-\bm n)=\varepsilon(\bm n)$, even if generally the amplitude and material profiles do not possess any particular symmetry.\\ \subsection{A special case} There is a particular situation for which we can get rid of the non-locality, and this happens when $\bm{\nabla}\beta=\bm 0$, \textit{i.e.} when $\mu$ is proportional to $A^2$. In this case and in the ray optics approximation we retrieve a medium with unit index of refraction because $\varepsilon\rightarrow 1/\mu$ as $\omega\rightarrow +\infty$, which is an inhomogeneous medium where all the waves travel in straight lines and without reflection. Essentially, our approach can be understood by considering this limiting case $\varepsilon=1/\mu$ and extending it to work for all frequencies and all incidences by adding dispersive and non-local terms into $\varepsilon$. On the other side of the spectrum, the medium becomes singular in the quasi-static limit since $\abs{\varepsilon}\rightarrow +\infty$ as $\omega\rightarrow 0$. This behaviour is due to the fact that any permeability inhomogeneity will cause large scattering at low frequencies, and one needs large changes in the permittivity to counteract this.\\ Without loss of generality, we now consider the case where $\mu=A^2$: this implies that the phase is exactly given by $\bm{\nabla}\phi=\bm n k_0$ everywhere, \textit{i.e.} the field is a plane wave with a non-uniform amplitude, and the Drude parameters simplify as \begin{equation} \varepsilon_{\infty}=\frac{1}{\mu}\quad \text{and} \quad \omega_{\rm p}^2 =\frac{c^2}{\mu} \left( \frac{\bm\nabla^2\sqrt{\mu}}{\sqrt{\mu}}-\frac{\bm\nabla \mu}{\mu}\cdotp\frac{\bm\nabla \sqrt{\mu}}{\sqrt{\mu}}\right). \label{equchi} \end{equation} We note that in this case, $\varepsilon$ is frequency dispersive but does not depend on the incidence angle, similarly to the P\"{o}schl-Teller profile (which is reflectionless for all angles and depends on $\omega$, see e.g. \cite{Lekner2007}) as the permittivity is analogous to the quantum potential for the Shr\"{o}dinger equation.\\ \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fig1} \caption{Invisible material in the case $\mu=A^2$ with $80\%$ damping of the field in the centre. (a) Permeability (top) and permittivity (bottom) profiles along the radial direction. (b) Real part of the electric field $E_z$ for $\lambda_0/R=1$. \label{fig1}} \end{figure} As an example, suppose we want to obtain a field with a prescribed Gaussian amplitude $A=1-f\exp(-r^2/R^2)$, and that $\mu=A^2$ (see blue line on the top panel of Fig.~\ref{fig1}~(a)), with $R=700\,$nm and $f=0.8$. Note that this results in a permeability profile with values below unity, which seems to contradicts our assumption of neglecting frequency dispersion for $\mu$. In practice indeed we would likely only be able to realise the $\mu$ profile containing regions of $\mu<1$ for one single frequency. The calculated permittivity profile is shown for several wavelengths on Fig.~\ref{fig1}~(a) (bottom panel). As discussed previously, the required $\varepsilon$ is roughly equal to $1/\mu$ for $\lambda_0/R=0.1$, while one needs more extreme permittivity values at longer wavelengths. We solved the wave equation (\ref{waveEq}) using a Finite Element Method (FEM) for $\lambda_0/R=1$, with a plane wave of unit amplitude incident from the negative $x$ axis and Perfectly Matched Layers (PML) to truncate the domain. The real part of the electric field $E_z$ is plotted on Fig.~\ref{fig1}~(b) and reveals a clear damping of the field as well as no scattering and a planar wavefront everywhere. The computed square norm of the field matches the required one perfectly (see black circles on the top panel of Fig.~\ref{fig1}~(a)).\\ Note that the Transverse Magnetic (TM) polarization case can be treated similarly by replacing $E_z$ by $H_z$ and swapping $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$. \subsection{The non-magnetic case} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fig2} \caption{Invisible material profile in the non-magnetic case ($\mu=1$) with arbitrary control of the amplitude. (a) Specified amplitude (from a picture of James Clerk Maxwell). (b) Computed amplitude. (c) Permittivity profile. (d) Real part of the electric field, showing the invisibility effect. \label{fig2}} \end{figure} For practical reasons, we investigate the possibility of having non-magnetic invisible profiles ($\mu=1$). We solve Eq.(\ref{eqsimon1}) to obtain the phase and the parameters for the permittivity reduce to: \begin{equation} \varepsilon_{\infty}= 1+(\bm{\nabla} \beta)^2+2\,\bm n \cdotp \bm{\nabla} \beta \quad \text{and} \quad \omega_{\rm p}^2= c^2 \frac{\bm\nabla^2 A}{A} \label{epsi_diel_Eq} \end{equation} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.85\columnwidth]{fig3} \caption{Angular response of the permittivity profile of Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(c). Top: scattering cross section $\sigma_{\rm s}$ normalized to the profile size $D$. Bottom: average error on the amplitude ${\rm E_ r}$ defined by Eq.~(\ref{error_Eq}). \label{fig2bis}} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{fig4} \caption{Invisible metamaterial with sub-wavelength control of the amplitude. (a) Continuous and (b) metamaterial permittivity profiles. (c) Central colour map: real part of the electric field at $\lambda_0=\SI{10.32}{\micro\meter}$, top and right panels: target (black dashed lines) and calculated (red solid lines) amplitudes for $y=0$ and $x=0$ respectively. (d) Left ordinate axis: permittivity dispersion of SiC (solid and dashed cyan lines for real and imaginary parts) and KBr (solid red line), the horizontal dashed line indicates a zero value; right ordinate axis: scattering cross section spectra of the metamaterial structure. The vertical dashed line indicates $\lambda_0=\lambda_{\rm L}=\SI{10.32}{\micro\meter}$ at which we designed the structure. \label{fig3}} \end{figure} To illustrate the arbitrariness of the choice of the amplitude, we used a profile extracted from a grayscale image of James Clerk Maxwell depicted on Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(a), where dark values correspond to a 50\% enhancement of the field, with a lateral ``size'' of approximately $D=6\lambda_0$. The permittivity profile is displayed on Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(c), and presents small features and rapidly varying values between $-0.5$ and $1.5$. The real part of $E_z$ is displayed on Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(d), and proves clearly that the field is not a plane wave, with a retarded phase on the left and an advanced phase on the right of the inhomogeneity, but that this profile does not induce any scattering. The required field enhancement is respected as can be seen on Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(b) with no more than 5\% relative error, albeit some small reflections due to numerical inaccuracies. This proves the ability of the method to devise invisible non-magnetic media capable of shaping intricate magnitude patterns. We then investigate the angular response of this permittivity profile in terms of invisibility an amplitude control. To quantify this, we computed the scattering cross section $\sigma_{\rm s}$ normalized to the profile size $D$, along with the average error on the amplitude ${\rm E_ r}$ defined as \begin{equation} {\rm E_ r}(\theta_0)=\frac{1}{S_\Omega}\int_\Omega {\rm d} \bm r\left\\|1-\frac{\|E_z(\theta_0)\|}{A}\right\\| \label{error_Eq} \end{equation} where $\Omega=[24\lambda_0\times 24\lambda_0]$ is the computational window used (cf. Fig.~\ref{fig2}~(d)) with surface $S_\Omega = (24\lambda_0)^2$. The results are plotted as a function of the incident angle $\theta_0$ on Fig.~\ref{fig2bis}, and clearly indicate a strong reduction of the scattering and an accurate reconstruction of the field magnitude for the reference configuration ($\theta_0 = \pi$) as well as for the anti-parallel direction of incidence ($\theta_0 = 0$), as discussed before. As expected, both effects are fairly narrow-band due to the non-locality of the permittivity. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{fig5} \caption{Inverse design of amplitude and phase profiles (see text for definitions) represented in (e), (g), giving a desired electric field (c). Required permittivity (a) and permeability (b) are the used to solve the wave equation (direct problem) for a sanity check of the field (d), amplitude (f) and phase (h). \label{fig4}} \end{figure} \subsection{Metamaterial implementation} As for a possible experimental verification of our method, we propose a metamaterial structure that approximates the permittivity profile given by Eq.~(\ref{epsi_diel_Eq}) at $\lambda_0=\SI{10.32}{\micro\meter}$ with $A=1-f\exp(-r^2/R^2)$, $f=-0.9$, and $R=\lambda_0/6.5=\SI{1587}{\nano\meter}$. The resulting continuous permittivity profile is given on Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(a) and is varies between $0.044$ and $2.239$. To be able to reach values of permittivity smaller than unity, we use silicon carbide (SiC), a polaritonic material that has a strong dispersion in the thermal infrared range given by the Drude-Lorentz model \cite{palik} $\varepsilon_{\rm SiC}(\omega)=\varepsilon_{\infty}[1+(\omega_L^2-\omega_T^2)/(\omega_T^2-\omega^2+\rm i\Gamma\omega)]$, with $\varepsilon_{\infty}=6.7$, $\omega_{\rm L}=\SI{1.82e14}{\radian\per\second}$, $\omega_{\rm T}=\SI{1.49e14}{\radian\per\second}$ and $\Gamma=\SI{8.96e11}{\radian\per\second}$ (see solid and dashed cyan lines on Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(d)). This material exhibits a dielectric to metallic transition around $\lambda_0=\lambda_{\rm L}=\SI{10.32}{\micro\meter}$ so that $\varepsilon_{\rm i}(\lambda_0)=0.0009 - 0.0815\rm i$. For values greater than unity, we use potassium bromide (KBr) with permittivity $\varepsilon_{\rm KBr}(\lambda_0)=2.3280$ \cite{li1976refractive}. The hybrid metamaterial structure is a $51\times 51$ array of square unit cells of period $d=\lambda_0/27=\SI{377}{\nano\meter}$. The continuous map of Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(a) is discretized at the centre $(x_i,y_j)$ of those unit cells resulting in a discrete set of values $\varepsilon_{ij}=\varepsilon(x_i,y_j)$. Since the period is much smaller than the wavelength, we can safely use an effective permittivity $\varepsilon _{\mathrm {eff} }$ given by the Maxwell-Garnett homogenization formula: $${\left({\frac {\varepsilon _{\mathrm {eff} }-\varepsilon _{\rm h}}{\varepsilon _{\mathrm {eff} }+2\,\varepsilon _{\rm h}}}\right) =f\left({\frac {\varepsilon _{\rm i}-\varepsilon _{\rm h}}{\varepsilon _{\rm i}+2\,\varepsilon _{\rm h}}}\right) } $$ where $\varepsilon _{\rm h}$ is the permittivity of the host medium (air in our case), $\varepsilon _{\rm i}$ is the permittivity of the inclusions (either SiC or KBr), $f=a^2/d^2$ is the filling fraction and $a$ is the length of the square section of the rods. The structure is then constructed as follows: if $\varepsilon_{ij}<0.99$ we use SiC rods, if $\varepsilon_{ij}>1.01$ we use KBr rods, otherwise we just use air (see Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(b)). The real part of the electric field is plotted on Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(c), and clearly illustrates the invisibility effect and the sub-wavelength control of the amplitude. The top and left panels compare the target (black dashed lines) and calculated (red solid lines) amplitudes for $y=0$ and $x=0$ respectively, revealing a quasi perfect match apart from a small scattering, mostly due to the truncation and discretization of the permittivity profile and a slightly weaker amplitude than expected, due to losses in SiC rods. The scattering cross section spectrum on Fig.~\ref{fig3}~(d) exhibits a pronounced dip around $\lambda_0=\SI{10.32}{\micro\meter}$, which illustrates the strong reduction of diffraction resulting in a quasi-invisible complex metamaterial.\\ \section{The inverse problem: controlling amplitude and phase} Finally, we study the inverse problem of finding invisible material properties that give a pre-defined electric field. To this aim, we fix the amplitude $A$ and the additional phase term $\psi$ and rewrite Eq.~(\ref{eqsimon1}) as: \begin{equation} A^2\bm\nabla \phi \cdotp\bm\nabla u = \bm\nabla\cdotp\left(A^2\bm\nabla \phi\right), \end{equation} with $u=\ln\mu$. This equation is then solved numerically and the obtained value of $\mu$ is plugged into Eq.~(\ref{eqsimon2}) to obtain $\varepsilon$.\\ For the following example, we set $\lambda_0=\SI{700}{\nano\meter}$, $R=\lambda_0$, $\theta_0=\pi/3$, \begin{align} A=1 & - 0.3\,\mathrm{e}^{-\left[(x-2\lambda_0)^2+0.5(y+2\lambda_0)^2\right]/R^2} \\ & + 0.4\,\mathrm{e}^{-\left[0.6(x+2\lambda_0)^2+(y-2\lambda_0)^2\right]/R^2} \end{align} and $$ \psi = k_0\left[x''_a\,\mathrm{e}^{-\left[{x''_a}^2+0.4{y''_a}^2\right]/R^2} - 0.7\,x''_b\,\mathrm{e}^{-\left[0.5{x''_b}^2+{y''_b}^2\right]/R^2}\right] $$ using the shifted and rotated coordinates: \begin{align} &x''_a = n_x x'_a + n_y y'_a, \qquad &x'_a= x-2\lambda_0, \\ &y''_a = -n_y x'_a + n_x y'_a,\qquad &y'_a = y-2\lambda_0,\\ &x''_b = n_x x'_b + n_y y'_b ,\qquad &x'_b= x+2\lambda_0,\\ &y''_b = -n_y x'_b + n_x y'_b ,\qquad &y'_b = y+2\lambda_0 . \end{align} This particular choice of amplitude and phase will give the following wave behaviour: amplitude damping at $(+2\lambda_0,-2\lambda_0)$, amplitude enhancement at $(-2\lambda_0,+2\lambda_0)$, phase expansion at $(-2\lambda_0,-2\lambda_0)$ and phase compression at $(+2\lambda_0,+2\lambda_0)$ (see Figures~\ref{fig4} (e), (g) and (c) for the specified amplitude, additional phase and electric field respectively). The obtained value of material properties are plotted on Figs.~\ref{fig4} (a) for the permittivity and (b) for the permeability. These non trivial profiles allow us to control the wave propagation quite arbitrarily in the near field while being transparent to a specific incident plane wave. Note that as stated before, the same profiles are still invisible for a wave coming from the opposite direction, and maintain the amplitude control but the phase has now opposite sign.\\ To double check the validity of our results, we solved the wave equation (\ref{waveEq}) employing the permittivity and permeability obtained by our approach. The results are plotted in Figs.~\ref{fig4} (f), (h) and (d) for the amplitude, additional phase and electric field respectively and match the required wave behaviour perfectly. The generality of this inverse problem makes it quite versatile and reveals a family of amplitude and phase controlling invisible electromagnetic media. \section{Conclusion} In conclusion, we have presented a flexible and systematic methodology to derive isotropic and lossless material properties needed to manipulate the amplitude and phase of the electromagnetic field in an arbitrary way, for planar propagation. In addition, our work provides a contribution in the understanding of what governs scattering in this type of media. Since it is based on the scalar wave equation, it could be easily extended to other fields such acoustics or fluid dynamics. In particular we have applied this method to derive a large class of invisible permittivity and permeability profiles. We illustrated these concepts through numerical examples for TE polarized plane waves using both $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$ and obtained omni-directional invisibility and control of the amplitude. Then we studied the case of non-magnetic materials and showed that one can obtain invisibility and fashion the spatial variation of the magnitude of the electric field for two anti-parallel directions of incidence. A metamaterial structure working in the infrared has been proposed, exhibiting sub-wavelength control of waves and invisibility at the same time. Finally, we tackled the inverse problem of finding non-scattering material properties that give a specified electric field. These results pave the way for a new route towards achieving invisibility with isotropic materials, and may offer an alternative paradigm for the design of nanophotonic devices with enhanced performances.\\ \begin{acknowledgments} This work was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), UK, under a Programme Grant (EP/I034548/1) ``The Quest for Ultimate Electromagnetics using Spatial Transformations (QUEST)''. \end{acknowledgments} \input{main.bbl} \end{document}
\section{Introduction} Given a graph $G$ and a positive integer $i$, an {\em $i$-packing} in $G$ is a subset $W$ of the vertex set of $G$ such that the distance between any two distinct vertices from $W$ is greater than $i$. This generalizes the notion of an independent set, which is equivalent to a $1$-packing. Now, the {\em packing chromatic number} of $G$ is the smallest integer $k$ such that the vertex set of $G$ can be partitioned into sets $\Pi_1,\ldots,\Pi_k$, where $\Pi_i$ is an $i$-packing for each $i\in [k]$. This invariant is well defined on any graph $G$ and is denoted $\chi_{\rho}(G)$. It was introduced in~\cite{goddard-2008} under the name broadcast chromatic number, and subsequently studied under the current name, see~\cite{argiroffo-2014, bkr-2007, bkr-2016, bkrw-2016+, ekstein-2014, fiala-2010, fiala-2009, finbow-2010, jacobs-2013, korze-2014, togni-2014, torres-2015}. One of the intriguing problems related to the packing chromatic number is whether it is bounded by a constant in the class of all cubic graphs. In particular, it was asked already in the seminal paper~\cite{goddard-2008} what is the maximum packing chromatic number in the class of cubic graphs of a given order. Gastineau and Togni found a cubic graph $G$ with $\chi_{\rho}(G)=13$ and asked whether $13$ is an upper bound for $\chi_{\rho}$ in the class of cubic graphs~\cite{gt-2016}, which we answered recently in the negative~\cite{bkrw-2016+}. More specifically, it was asked in~\cite{fiala-2009} whether the invariant is bounded in the class of planar cubic graphs. A question of similar nature from~\cite{gt-2016} asks whether the subdivision $S(G)$ of any subcubic graph $G$ (i.e., a graph with maximum degree 3) has packing chromatic number no more than 5. This question is the main motivation for the present paper. We suspect that the answer is positive, and pose it as the following conjecture. \begin{conjecture} \label{con:main} If $G$ is a subcubic graph, then $\chi_{\rho}(S(G))\le 5$. \end{conjecture} The packing chromatic number of subdivided graphs has been studied in several papers. Using subdivided graphs the class of graphs with packing chromatic number equal to $3$ was characterized in~\cite{goddard-2008}. The effect on the invariant of the subdivision of an edge of a graph was analyzed in~\cite{bkrw-2016+}. It was observed in~\cite{bkr-2007} that $\chi_{\rho}(S(G))\le \chi_{\rho}(G)+1$ for any graph $G$, and further proved that $\chi_{\rho}(S(K_n))=n+1$. Consequently the packing chromatic number of subdivided graphs is generally not bounded, hence the restriction to subcubic graphs in Conjecture~\ref{con:main} is natural. The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we introduce notation needed, list several facts related to Conjecture~\ref{con:main}, and prove a connection between the packing chromatic number (of subdivided graphs) and the so-called $(1,1,2,2)$-colorings. This connection is then used as our main tool while attacking the conjecture. Then, in Section~\ref{sec:generalized-prisms}, we prove that Conjecture~\ref{con:main} holds true for all generalized prisms of cycles. Along the way a characterization of the Petersen graph is obtained. (We refer to~\cite{goddard-2009} for a recent characterization of the Petersen graph and to~\cite{torri-1997} for older characterizations.) Moreover, it is shown that any optimal packing coloring of the subdivided Petersen graph looks differently than one would expect. In Section~\ref{sec:more-general} we then extend the main result of the previous section to the graphs obtained from generalized prisms in such a way that one of the two $n$-cycles in the edge set of a generalized prism is replaced by a union of cycles among which at most one is a 5-cycle. In the final section we consider the packing chromatic number of graphs obtained by subdividing each of its edges a fixed number of times. \section{Notation and preliminary results} \label{sec:preliminaries} All graphs considered in this paper are simple and connected, unless stated otherwise. Let $G$ be a graph and $S(G)$ its {\em subdivision}, that is, the graph obtained from $G$ by replacing each edge with a disjoint path of length 2. In other words, $S(G)$ is obtained from $G$ by subdividing each edge $e$ of $G$ with a new vertex to be denoted by $v_e$. The resulting vertex set $V(S(G))$ can thus be considered as $V(G)\cup \{v_e \mid e\in E(G)\}$. More generally, if $i\ge 1$, we define the graph $S_i(G)$ as the graph obtained from $G$ by subdividing each of its edges precisely $i$ times. In other words, $S_i(G)$ is obtained from $G$ by replacing each edge with a disjoint path of length $i+1$. Note that $S_1(G)=S(G)$. Observe that if $H$ is a subgraph of $G$, then $\chi_{\rho}(H)\le \chi_{\rho}(G)$. Indeed, this follows because $d_H(u,v)\ge d_G(u,v)$ holds for any vertices $u,v\in V(H)$. Consequently, a packing coloring of $G$ restricted to $H$ is a packing coloring of $H$. Since every subcubic graph is a subgraph of a cubic graph (easy exercise), it suffices to prove Conjecture~\ref{con:main} for cubic graphs. In addition, the following fact is a consequence of the characterization of the graphs of packing chromatic number 3 from~\cite{goddard-2008}. \begin{proposition} [\cite{goddard-2008}] \label{prp:bipartite} If $G$ is a (connected) bipartite graph of order at least $3$, then $\chi_{\rho}(S(G))=3$. \end{proposition} Hence we can restrict our attention to cubic non-bipartite graphs. Since $\chi_{\rho}(S(K_4))=5$ (see~\cite{bkr-2007}), Conjecture~\ref{con:main} reduces to 3-chromatic cubic graphs. Before we continue, we demonstrate that the conjecture does not hold for all 3-chromatic graphs. \begin{proposition} If $K_{n,n,n}$ is the complete tripartite graph with all parts of order $n$, then $\chi_{\rho}(S(K_{n,n,n}))\xrightarrow[n\to \infty]{}\infty$. \end{proposition} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Let $G_n$ denote $S(K_{n,n,n})$. Since ${\rm diam}(G_{n})=4$ for $n\ge 2$, we infer that in any packing coloring $c$ of $G_n$ every color bigger than $3$ appears at most once. Let $A,B$ and $C$ be the tripartition of $V(K_{n,n,n})$. Suppose there is a vertex $x$ from $A\cup B\cup C$ with $c(x)=1$. Since $N[x]$ induces $K_{1,2n}$ with $x$ as its center, in this case $c$ uses at least $2n$ colors. Otherwise, we may assume without loss of generality that in $A\cup B$ there are vertices $y$ and $z$ with $c(y)=2$, $c(z)=3$. Clearly, then no vertex from $C$ can receive colors $2$ or $3$, which in turn implies that $c$ uses $n$ different colors on $C$. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip Note that $\chi_{\rho}$ can be defined also in terms of a function on the vertex set of a graph $G$. Indeed, we say that a function $c:V(G) \to [k]$ is a {\em $k$-packing coloring} of $G$ if for each $i$ from the range of $c$, the set $c^{-1}(i)$ is an $i$-packing in $G$; we then also say that $G$ is {\em $k$-packing colorable}. In this way, $\chi_{\rho}(G)$ is the smallest integer $k$ such that there exists a $k$-packing coloring of $G$. One approach to attack Conjecture~\ref{con:main} is by using the concept of an $S$-coloring, which generalizes that of a packing coloring. This concept was first briefly mentioned in~\cite{goddard-2008} and later formally introduced in~\cite{goddard-2012} as follows. Given a graph $G$ and a non-decreasing sequence $S=(s_1,\ldots,s_k)$ of positive integers, an {\em $S$-coloring} of $G$ is a partition of the vertex set of $G$ into $k$ subsets $\Pi_1,\ldots,\Pi_k$, where $\Pi_i$ is an $s_i$-packing for each $i\in [k]$. We say that $G$ is {\em $S$-colorable} if it has an $S$-coloring. Clearly, $\chi_{\rho}(G)\le k$ if and only if $G$ is $S$-colorable for $S=(1,2,\ldots,k)$. For further results on the $S$-packing coloring see~\cite{gastineau-2015a, gastineau-2015b, goddard-2014}. The following result shows in what way $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable graphs are related to Conjecture~\ref{con:main}. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:necessary} If $G$ is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable, then $\chi_{\rho}(S(G))\le 5$. \end{proposition} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } By \cite[Proposition 1]{gt-2016}, every $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable graph $G$ yields a $(1,3,3,5,5)$-colorable $S(G)$, which in turn implies that $S(G)$ is $(1,2,3,4,5)$-colorable, that is, $S(G)$ is $5$-packing colorable. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip We next state a result that will be the main tool in our subsequent proofs. For its statement recall that the {\em square} $G^2$ of a graph $G$ is the graph having the same vertex set as $G$ and two vertices are adjacent in $G^2$ precisely when their distance in $G$ is at most $2$. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:CP1} A graph $G$ is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable if and only if there is a partition $\{V_1, V_2, V_3\}$ of $V(G)$ such that $V_2$ and $V_3$ are independent sets and $V_1$ induces a bipartite graph in $G^2$. \end{lemma} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Suppose that $\{V_1, V_2, V_3\}$ is a partition of $V(G)$ as stated above. Let $A$ and $B$ represent the partite sets of the graph $G^2[V_1]$. Note that $A$ is a $2$-packing in $G$ for otherwise $A$ would not be an independent set in $G^2$. Similarly, $B$ is a $2$-packing. Construct a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring of $G$ by assigning all the vertices of $V_2$ color $1$, all the vertices of $V_3$ color $2$, all the vertices of $A$ color $3$ and all the vertices of $B$ color $4$. Thus, $(V_2,V_3,A,B)$ is a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring of $G$. Conversely, suppose that we have a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring of $G$ with color classes $W_1, W_2, W_3, W_4$. Since $W_3$ and $W_4$ are $2$-packings in $G$, $W_3$ and $W_4$ are independent sets in $G^2$. It follows that $W_3 \cup W_4$ induces a bipartite graph in $G^2$. Let $V_1=W_3 \cup W_4$, $V_2=W_2$, and $V_3=W_1$. By definition, $\{V_1, V_2, V_3\}$ is a partition of $V(G)$ as claimed in the statement of the lemma. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip \section{Generalized prisms and the Petersen graph} \label{sec:generalized-prisms} In this section we confirm Conjecture~\ref{con:main} for all generalized prisms of cycles, where a {\em generalized prism} is a cubic graph obtained from the disjoint union of two cycles of equal length by adding a perfect matching between the vertices of the two cycles. Along the way we prove that a generalized prism of a cycle is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable unless it is the Petersen graph, thus characterizing the Petersen graph $P$ in a new way. By separately verifying that $\chi_{\rho}(S(P)) = 5$, Conjecture~\ref{con:main} for generalized prisms then follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:necessary}. We begin with the following technical lemma. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:help} If $C_n = v_1\cdots v_n$ is a cycle on $n$ vertices, then the following hold. \begin{enumerate} \item[(i)] There exists a set $A \subset V(C_n)$ such that at most one pair of adjacent vertices in $C_n$ is in the complement of $A$ and $G^2[A]$ is an even cycle or a path. \item[(ii)] If $n$ is odd and $i \in \{3, \dots, n-1\}$, there exists a set $A \subset V(G)$ such that $\{v_1, v_i, v_{j}\} \cap A = \emptyset$ for some $j \in \{i-1, i+1\}$, $v_iv_{j}$ is the only adjacent pair of vertices in $C_n$, which is in the complement of $A$, and $G^2[A]$ is a path. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } The result is trivial if $3 \le n \le 5$ so we may assume that $n \ge 6$. To prove statement (i), we first assume $n$ is even, and let \[A_1 = \begin{cases} \{v_i\mid i \textrm{ is odd}\} & \text{ if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{4}\\ \{v_1, v_2, v_4, v_5\} \cup \{v_j \mid j \text{ is odd and } j \ge 7\} & \text{ if }n\equiv 2\pmod{4} \end{cases}.\] Note that $G^2[A_1]$ is an even cycle. Suppose next that $n$ is odd, $n\ge 7$. If we let \[A_2 = \begin{cases} \{v_1, v_2, v_4, v_5, v_7, v_8\} \cup \{v_j\mid j \text{ is even and } j \ge 10\} & \text{ if }n\equiv 1 \pmod{4}, n \ge 9\\ \{v_1, v_4\} \cup \{v_j \mid j \text{ is even and }j \ge 4\} & \text{ if } n \equiv 3 \pmod{4} \end{cases},\] then $G^2[A_2]$ is a path if $n \equiv 3\pmod{4}$ and $G^2[A_2]$ is an even cycle if $n \equiv 1 \pmod{4}$. This concludes the proof of (i). We next prove (ii) in which case $n$ is odd. Let $i \in \{3, \dots, n-1\}$. Suppose first that $i$ is even. If $i \le n-3$, let \[A_3 = \{v_2, v_{i+2}\} \cup \{v_j\mid 3 \le j \le i-1, j \text{ odd}\} \cup \{v_j \mid i +3 \le j \le n, j \text{ odd}\} , \] and if $i = n-1$, let \[ A_4 = \begin{cases} \{v_2, v_{n-3}, v_n\} \cup \{v_j \mid 3 \le j \le n-4, j \text{ odd}\} & \text{ if } n\equiv 1 \pmod{4}\\ \{v_n\} \cup \{v_j\mid 2 \le j \le n-3, j\text{ even}\} & \text{ if } n \equiv 3 \pmod{4} \end{cases}.\] Finally, if $i$ is odd, we let $A_5 = \{v_j \mid 2 \le j \le i-1, j \text{ even}\} \cup \{v_j \mid i+2 \le j \le n, j \text{ odd}\}$. In each case, $G^2[A_j]$ is a path for $j \in \{3, 4, 5\}$. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip \begin{theorem}\label{thm:onecycle} If $G$ is a generalized prism of a cycle, then $G$ is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable if and only if $G$ is not the Petersen graph. \end{theorem} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Up to isomorphism there is only one generalized prism of the $3$-cycle, and it is clearly $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable. So we may assume that $C_n$ is a cycle on at least four vertices. By Lemma~\ref{lem:CP1}, it suffices to show that $V(G)$ can be partitioned into $V_1, V_2, V_3$, where $V_2$ and $V_3$ are independent sets and $G^2[V_1]$ is bipartite. In $G$, let $A = x_1 \cdots x_n$ and $B = y_1 \cdots y_n$ represent the two copies of $C_n$. By definition, there exists a perfect matching between $A$ and $B$ in $G$, and so we define $f:A \to B$ such that $f(x_i) = y_j$ if $x_iy_j \in E(G)$ for all $1 \le i \le n$. Without loss of generality we assume that $f(x_1) = y_1$. In addition, let $f(x_{n-1}) = y_r$ and $f(x_n) = y_s$ for some $\{r, s\} \subseteq \{2, \dots, n\}$. We then draw $A$ horizontally so that the indices increase from left to right and $x_n$ is located in the middle of the cycle. Moreover, we can draw $B$ horizontally and beneath $A$ so that the indices increase from left to right and $y_1$ is drawn to the right of both $y_r$ and $y_s$, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:drawing}(a). If $y_r$ is to the right of $y_s$, meaning $r >s$, then we can relabel the vertices of $B$ so that $f(x_1)$ still has index $1$, but the indices increase from right to left. Then we draw $B$ so that the indices increase from left to right, as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:drawing}(b), and $y_r$ is to the left of both $y_1$ and $y_s$. So we may assume throughout the remainder of the proof that $r < s$. \begin{figure}[ht!] \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[]{.5\textwidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75,style=thick] \node[vertex] (1) at (0,0) [label=below:$y_3$] {}; \node(dot1) at (1,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (2) at (2,0) [label=below:$y_s$] {}; \node(dot5) at (3,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (3) at (4,0) [label=below:$y_r$] {}; \node(dot6) at (5,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex](4) at (6,0)[label=below:$y_n$]{}; \node[vertex] (5) at (7,0) [label=below:$y_1$] {}; \node[vertex] (6) at (8,0) [label=below:$y_2$] {}; \node[vertex] (7) at (0,1) [] {}; \node(dot3) at (1,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node(dot7) at (2,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (8) at (3,1) [label=above:$x_{n-1}$] {}; \node[vertex] (9) at (4,1) [label=above:$x_n$] {}; \node[vertex] (10) at (5,1) [label=above:$x_1$] {}; \node(dot4) at (6,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node(dot8) at (7,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (11) at (8,1) [] {}; \path (8) edge (9) (9) edge (10) (2) edge (9) (3) edge (8) (5) edge (10) (4) edge (5) (5) edge (6) ; \end{tikzpicture} \caption{Original drawing of $G$} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[]{.5\textwidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75,style=thick] \node[vertex] (1) at (0,0) [label=below:$y_3$] {}; \node(dot1) at (1,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (2) at (2,0) [label=below:$y_{n-r+2}$] {}; \node(dot5) at (3,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (3) at (4,0) [label=below:$y_{n-s+2}$] {}; \node(dot6) at (5,0)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex](4) at (6,0)[label=below:$y_n$]{}; \node[vertex] (5) at (7,0) [label=below:$y_1$] {}; \node[vertex] (6) at (8,0) [label=below:$y_2$] {}; \node[vertex] (7) at (0,1) [] {}; \node(dot3) at (1,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node(dot7) at (2,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (8) at (3,1) [label=above:$x_{n-1}$] {}; \node[vertex] (9) at (4,1) [label=above:$x_n$] {}; \node[vertex] (10) at (5,1) [label=above:$x_1$] {}; \node(dot4) at (6,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node(dot8) at (7,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex] (11) at (8,1) [] {}; \path (8) edge (9) (9) edge (10) (2) edge (8) (3) edge (9) (5) edge (10) (4) edge (5) (5) edge (6) ; \end{tikzpicture} \caption{$G$ after reindexing the vertices of $B$} \end{subfigure} \caption{Drawing of the generalized prism of a cycle} \label{fig:drawing} \end{center} \end{figure} Suppose first that $C_n$ is an even cycle. Let \begin{itemize} \item $X_2 = \{x_i \mid 1 \le i \le n,\, i \text{ is odd}\}$ and \item $X_3 = \{x_i \mid 1 \le i \le n, \, i \text{ is even}\}$. \end{itemize} Let $Y_1$ be the set $A_1$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} and define \begin{itemize} \item $Y_2 = \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\}$. \end{itemize} One can easily verify that $G^2[Y_1]$ is an even cycle and $X_i \cup Y_i$ is independent for $i \in \{2, 3\}$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:CP1} it follows that the generalized prism is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable. So we may assume that $C_n$ is an odd cycle. Let $X_1 = \{x_n\}$, \begin{itemize} \item $X_2 = \{x_i \mid i\text{ is odd}, 1 \le i\le n-2\}$, and \item $X_3 = \{x_i \mid i\text{ is even}, 1 \le i \le n-1\}$. \end{itemize} In what follows, we partition the vertices of $B$ into $Y_1, Y_2, Y_3$ depending on the parity of $r$ and $s$. In each case, we let $V_i = X_i \cup Y_i$ for each $i \in [3]$ so that $V_2$ and $V_3$ are independent and $G^2[V_1]$ is bipartite. \noindent{\bf Case $1$.} Suppose $s$ is odd.\\ We shall assume first that $r$ is odd as well. If $s \ne n$, let $Y_1$ be the set $A_5$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} where $i = s$ so that $G^2[V_1]$ is a path that does not contain $\{y_1, y_s, y_{s+1}\}$. We then define \[Y_2 = \begin{cases} \{y_{s+1}\} \cup \{y_i \notin Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i)\in X_3\} & \text{ if }f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\} & \text{ if } f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_2 \end{cases}, \] and \[Y_3 = \begin{cases} \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if }f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_{s+1}\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if } f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_2 \end{cases}.\] If $s = n$ and $r$ is odd or $r = n-1$, we let $Y_1 = \{y_i \mid i \text{ is even}\}$, \begin{itemize} \item $Y_2 = \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\}$. \end{itemize} In either case, $G^2[V_1]$ is a path. So we may assume that $r$ is even and $r \ne n-1$ (note that the case $r=n-1$ is symmetric to the case when $s=n$, which was considered above). If $s < n$, we let \begin{itemize} \item $Y_1 = \{y_i \mid 3 \le i \le s-2, i \text{ is odd}\} \cup \{y_2, y_{s+1}\} \cup \{y_i \mid s+2 \le i \le n, i \text{ is odd}\}$. \end{itemize} As above, $G^2[V_1]$ is a path. If $f^{-1}(y_{s-1}) \in X_3$, then let \begin{itemize} \item $Y_2 = \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\}$. \end{itemize} Otherwise, let \begin{itemize} \item $Y_2 = \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\}$. \end{itemize} \noindent{\bf Case $2$.} Suppose that $s$ is even.\\ First, note that if $r$ is odd, then we can define $Y_1, Y_2, Y_3$ similarly to those subcases given in Case 1 (which can be observed by reversing the roles of $x_{n-1}$ and $x_1$). So we may assume that $r$ is even. Suppose first that $n >5$ and $r>2$. Then one of the sets $A_3$ or $A_4$ given in Lemma~\ref{lem:help} can be chosen for $Y_1$ so that $G^2[V_1]$ is a path and $Y_1$ does not contain vertices $\{y_1, y_s, y_j\}$ where $j \in \{s-1, s+1\}$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:boat} for two corresponding examples). Thus, $G^2[V_1]$ is path. We then define \[Y_2 = \begin{cases} \{y_i\not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\} & \text{ if }s \le n-3, f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1\mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\} & \text{ if } s \le n-3, f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_2\\ \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\} & \text{ if } s = n-1, f^{-1}(y_{s-1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_3\} & \text{ if } s = n-1, f^{-1}(y_{s-1}) \in X_2 \end{cases},\] and \[Y_3 = \begin{cases} \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if } s \le n-3, f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if } s \le n-3, f^{-1}(y_{s+1}) \in X_2\\ \{y_s\} \cup \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if } s = n-1, f^{-1}(y_{s-1}) \in X_3\\ \{y_i \not\in Y_1 \mid f^{-1}(y_i) \in X_2\} & \text{ if } s=n-1, f^{-1}(y_{s-1}) \in X_2 \end{cases}.\] \begin{figure}[ht!] \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[]{.5\textwidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75,style=thick] \node[vertex] (1) at (0,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (2) at (1,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex] (3) at (2,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex](4) at (3,0)[]{}; \node[vertex] (5) at (4,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (6) at (5,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex] (7) at (6,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (8) at (7,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex] (9) at (8,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node(dot1) at (2,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex](10) at (3,1)[label=above:$x_{n-1}$]{}; \node[vertex](11) at (4,1)[label=above:$x_n$]{}; \node[vertex](12) at (5,1)[label=above:$x_1$]{}; \node(dot2) at (6,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \path (1) edge (2) (2) edge (3) (3) edge (4) (4) edge (5) (5) edge (6) (6) edge (7) (7) edge (8) (8) edge (9) (1) edge[bend right=20] (9) (10) edge (11) (11) edge (12) (10) edge (3) (11) edge (5) (12) edge (7) ; \end{tikzpicture} \caption{$Y_1$ when $n=9$} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[]{.5\textwidth} \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75,style=thick] \node[vertex] (1) at (0,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (2) at (1,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex] (3) at (2,0) [] {}; \node[vertex](4) at (3,0)[label=below:1]{}; \node[vertex] (5) at (4,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (6) at (5,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (7) at (6,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex] (8) at (7,0) [] {}; \node[vertex] (9) at (8,0) [label=below:1] {}; \node[vertex](10) at (9,0)[]{}; \node[vertex](11) at (10,0)[label=below:1]{}; \node(dot1) at (3,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \node[vertex](12) at (4,1)[label=above:$x_{n-1}$]{}; \node[vertex](13) at (5,1)[label=above:$x_n$]{}; \node[vertex](14) at (6,1)[label=above:$x_1$]{}; \node(dot2) at (7,1)[]{$\cdots$}; \path (1) edge (2) (2) edge (3) (3) edge (4) (4) edge (5) (5) edge (6) (6) edge (7) (7) edge (8) (8) edge (9) (9) edge (10) (10) edge (11) (1) edge[bend right=20] (11) (12) edge (13) (13) edge (14) (12) edge (4) (13) edge (6) (14) edge (8) ; \end{tikzpicture} \caption{$Y_1$ when $n=11$} \end{subfigure} \caption{The set $Y_1$ in the (1,1,2,2)-coloring of $C_9$ and $C_{11}$} \label{fig:boat} \end{center} \end{figure} Next, we suppose that $r=2$ (while we may assume, by symmetry, that $s<n-1$), and let \[Y_1 = \{y_{s+2}\} \cup \{y_i \mid s+3 \le i \le n, i \text{ odd}\} \cup \{y_i \mid 3 \le i \le s-1, i \text{ odd}\}.\] Then choose $Y_2$ and $Y_3$ in the same way as above based on the index of $s$. Finally, consider when $C_n$ is a $5$-cycle. If $f(x_2) = y_5$ and $f(x_3) = y_3$, then Figure~\ref{fig:5cyclelabel} depicts a labeling of $G$ where $V_2$ and $V_3$ are independent and $G^2[V_1]$ is bipartite. If $f(x_2) = y_3$ and $f(x_3) = y_5$, then $G$ is the Petersen graph. The argument is complete by invoking the fact~\cite[Proposition 4]{gt-2016} that the Petersen graph is not $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[] \tikzstyle{vertex}=[circle, draw, inner sep=0pt, minimum size=6pt] \tikzset{vertexStyle/.append style={rectangle}} \node[vertex] (1) at (0,0) [label=below:$2$] {}; \node[vertex] (2) at (1,0) [label=below:$3$] {}; \node[vertex] (3) at (2,0) [label=below:$1$] {}; \node[vertex] (4) at (3,0) [label=below:$2$] {}; \node[vertex] (5) at (4,0) [label=below:$3$] {}; \node[vertex] (6) at (0,1) [label=above:$2$] {}; \node[vertex] (7) at (1,1) [label=above:$3$] {}; \node[vertex] (8) at (2,1) [label=above:$1$] {}; \node[vertex] (9) at (3,1) [label=above:$2$] {}; \node[vertex] (10) at (4,1) [label=above:$3$] {}; \path (1) edge (2) (2) edge (3) (3) edge (4) (4) edge (5) (1) edge[bend right=20] (5) (6) edge (7) (7) edge (8) (8) edge (9) (9) edge (10) (6) edge[bend left=20] (10) (1) edge (7) (2) edge (6) (3) edge (8) (4) edge (10) (5) edge (9) ; \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \caption{The labels depict a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring} \label{fig:5cyclelabel} \end{figure} By Theorem~\ref{thm:onecycle} and Proposition~\ref{prop:necessary} we know that any subdivided generalized prism of a cycle but the subdivided Petersen graph $P$ is $5$-packing colorable. In addition, a $5$-packing coloring of $S(P)$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Petersen}. Hence we have the following result. \begin{corollary} If $G$ is a generalized prism of a cycle, then $\chi_{\rho}(S(G))\le 5$. \end{corollary} \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.05] \tikzstyle{vertex}=[circle, draw, inner sep=0pt, minimum size=.45cm] \tikzset{vertexStyle/.append style={rectangle}} \node[vertex](1) at (-.15,0)[]{2}; \node[vertex](2) at (2,0)[]{1}; \node[vertex](3) at (4.15,0)[]{4}; \node[vertex](4) at (-1.5, 4)[]{3}; \node[vertex](5) at (5.5, 4)[]{1}; \node[vertex](6) at (2, 6.8)[]{1}; \node[vertex](7) at (2, 4.95)[]{1}; \node[vertex](8) at (.3, 3.4)[]{2}; \node[vertex](9) at (3.7, 3.4)[]{1}; \node[vertex](10) at (.9, 1.2)[]{1}; \node[vertex](11) at (3.1, 1.2)[]{1}; \node[vertex](12) at (0.15, 5.33)[]{2}; \node[vertex](13) at (3.85,5.33)[]{5}; \node[vertex](14) at (-.825,2)[]{1}; \node[vertex](15) at (4.83,2)[]{2}; \node[vertex](16) at (.375, .6)[]{5}; \node[vertex](17) at (3.625,.6)[]{3}; \node[vertex](18) at (2, 5.8)[]{4}; \node[vertex](19) at (-.52,3.68)[]{1}; \node[vertex](20) at (4.52, 3.68)[]{3}; \node[vertex](21) at (2.35,2.45)[]{2}; \node[vertex](22) at (1.65,2.45)[]{5}; \node[vertex](23) at (1.45,3)[]{3}; \node[vertex](24) at (2.55,3)[]{2}; \node[vertex](25) at (2,3.4)[]{4}; \path (1) edge (2) (2) edge (3) (1) edge (14) (14) edge (4) (3) edge (15) (15) edge (5) (4) edge (12) (12) edge (6) (5) edge (13) (13) edge (6) (6) edge (18) (18) edge (7) (4) edge (19) (19) edge (8) (5) edge (20) (20) edge (9) (1) edge (16) (16) edge (10) (3) edge (17) (17) edge (11) (7) edge (23) (23) edge (10) (10) edge (21) (21) edge (9) (11) edge (22) (22) edge (8) (8) edge (25) (9) edge (25) (7) edge (24) (11) edge (24) ; \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \caption{$5$-packing coloring of $S(P)$} \label{fig:Petersen} \end{figure} Intuitively, it seems reasonable to expect that an optimal packing coloring of any subdivided graph colors all the subdivided vertices by $1$. The example from Fig.~\ref{fig:Petersen} shows that an optimal coloring need not be like that. In fact, no optimal coloring of $S(P)$ colors all the subdivided vertices by $1$. This is an immediate consequence of the following result. \begin{proposition}\label{prp:uglycoloring} If $G$ is not $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable, and $S(G)$ is $(1,2,3,4,5)$-colorable, then in every $5$-packing coloring of $S(G)$ at least one of the subdivided vertices of $S(G)$ receives color bigger than $1$. \end{proposition} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Suppose to the contrary that $c$ is a $5$-packing coloring of $S(G)$ with $c(u_e)=1$ for every edge $e\in E(G)$. Then all vertices of $V(G)$ in $S(G)$ receive colors from $\{2,3,4,5\}$. Consider the coloring $c'$ of $V(G)$, obtained as the restriction of $c$ to $G$. Note that vertices colored by the color $2$, respectively $3$, form an independent set in $G$, while the set of vertices colored by the color $4$, respectively $5$, is a 2-packing of $G$. This implies that $c'$ is a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring of $G$. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip \section{A class larger than generalized prisms} \label{sec:more-general} In this section we confirm Conjecture~\ref{con:main} for a class of graphs larger than generalized prisms of cycles by proving that if $G$ is a connected, cubic graph of order $2n$ with a $2$-factor $\mathcal{F}$ and a perfect matching $M$, where $\mathcal{F}$ contains a cycle $C$ of length $n$, no edge of $M$ has both vertices in $C$, and $\mathcal{F}$ contains at most one $5$-cycle, then $G$ is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable. In other words, our result extends Theorem~\ref{thm:onecycle} to the graphs obtained from generalized prisms in such a way that one of the two $n$-cycles in the edge set of a generalized prism is replaced by a union of cycles among which at most one is a 5-cycle. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:2connectedcubic} Let $G$ be a connected, cubic graph of order $2n$ with a $2$-factor $\mathcal{F}$ and a perfect matching $M$. If $\mathcal{F}$ contains a cycle $C$ of length $n$ where no edge of $M$ has both vertices in $C$, and $\mathcal{F}$ contains at most one $5$-cycle, then $G$ is $(1,1,2,2)$-colorable. \end{theorem} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Note that by Theorem~\ref{thm:onecycle}, we may assume that $\mathcal{F}$ contains at least three cycles. Thus, $n \ge 6$. We let $C_n=x_1\cdots x_n$ represent the cycle in $\mathcal{F}$ of order $n$, and let $Z_1, \dots, Z_k$ be the remaining cycles of $\mathcal{F}$. Reindexing if necessary, we may assume that if $\mathcal{F}$ contains a $5$-cycle that $Z_1$ is said $5$-cycle. Otherwise, if $Z_i$ is odd for some $i \in [k]$, we let $Z_1$ represent the smallest odd cycle among all $Z_i$, $i \in [k]$. In any case, we let $Z_1 = y_1\cdots y_p$ for some $3 \le p <n$. Assume first that $Z_1$ is a $5$-cycle so that $p = 5$. Note that there exists $x_i \in C_n$ such that $f(x_i) \in Z_1$ and $f(x_j) \not\in Z_1$ for some $j \in \{i-1, i+1\}$. Reindexing $x_1, \dots, x_n$ if necessary, we may assume $f(x_n) \in Z_1$ and, redrawing $G$ if necessary, $f(x_{n-1}) \not\in Z_1$. As in Theorem~\ref{thm:onecycle}, we let $X_1 = \{x_n\}$, $X_2 = \{x_i \mid 1 \le i < n, i \text{ is odd}\}$ and $X_3 = \{x_i \mid 2 \le i <n, i \text{ is even}\}$. In what follows, we partition the vertices of $\cup_{i=1}^k Z_i$ into $Y_1, Y_2, Y_3$, and let $V_i = X_i \cup Y_i$ for each $i \in [3]$. In each case, $G^2[V_1]$ will be bipartite and $V_2, V_3$ will be independent sets. \noindent{\bf Case 1.} Suppose that $f(x_1) \in Z_1$. Without loss of generality, we may assume $f(x_1) = y_1$, and reindexing $Z_1$ if necessary, $f(x_n) = y_s$ where $s \in \{4,5\}$. For each $i \in \{2, \dots, k\}$ let $T_i$ be one of the sets $A_1$ or $A_2$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} depending on the congruence class of $n$ modulo $4$. Note that for each $i \in \{2, \dots, k\}$, $G^2[T_i]$ is bipartite. Next, we assume for the time being that $s = 4$ and let $T_1 = \{ y_2, y_5\}$. We let \begin{itemize} \item $Y_1 = \cup_{i=1}^k T_i$, \item $Y_2 = W_2 \cup \bigcup_{i=2}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = W_3 \cup \bigcup_{i=2}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_2\}$, \end{itemize} where \begin{itemize} \item $W_2 = \{y_3\}$ and $W_3 = \{y_1,y_4\}$, if $f^{-1}(y_3) \in X_3$; \item $W_2 = \{y_4\}$ and $W_3 = \{y_1, y_3\}$, if $f^{-1}(y_3) \in X_2$. \end{itemize} In $G^2[V_1]$, all edges incident to $x_n$ are bridges to either the $K_2$ induced by $T_1 - \{x_n\}$ or to a bipartite component induced by $T_i$ for some $i \in \{2, \dots, k\}$. Thus, $G^2[V_1]$ is bipartite. Furthermore, $V_i$ where $i \in \{2, 3\}$ is independent. Now, one can easily see that $Y_1, Y_2, Y_3$ can be defined in a similar fashion if instead $s = 5$. {\tiny ($\Box$)} \noindent{\bf Case 2.} Suppose that $f(x_1) \not\in Z_1$. Without loss of generality, we may assume $f(x_n) = y_1$. In this case, we define $T_i$ as in Case 1 for each $i \in \{2, \dots, k\}$ and we let $T_1 = \{y_2, y_4\}$. We let \begin{itemize} \item $Y_1 = \bigcup_{i=1}^k T_i$, \item $Y_2 = W_2 \cup \bigcup_{i=2}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = W_3 \cup \bigcup_{i=2}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_2\}$, \end{itemize} where $y_3\in W_2$ if and only if $f^{-1}(y_3) \in X_3$, and otherwise $y_3\in W_3$; and $y_1$ and $y_5$ are in different sets $W_2,W_3$, depending on $f^{-1}(y_5)$. As in Case 1, $G^2[V_1]$ is bipartite and $V_i$ is independent for $i \in \{2,3\}$. {\tiny ($\Box$)} \smallskip Now consider the case, when at least one of the cycles $Z_i$ is odd and none of them is a $5$-cycle. Recall that $Z_1$ is a shortest odd cycle from $\mathcal{F}$. We shall assume that $f(x_n) = y_s$ for some $s \in [p]$. Whether or not $f(x_1) \in Z_1$, we may choose $T_1$ to be the set $A_3, A_4$, or $A_5$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} so that $\{y_s, y_{s+1}\}\cap T_1 = \emptyset$ if $f(x_1) \not\in Z_1$, $\{f(x_1), y_s, y_{s+1}\} \cap T_1 = \emptyset$ if $f(x_1) \in Z_1$, and $G^2[T_1 \cup X_1]$ is bipartite. Then for each $i \in \{2, \dots, k\}$, we let $T_i$ be one of the sets $A_1$ or $A_2$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} depending on the congruence class of $n$ modulo $4$. Defining $Y_1$, $Y_2$, and $Y_3$ similarly as in Case 1, one can verify that $G^2[V_1]$ is indeed bipartite. Finally, consider the case that $Z_1$ is even, in which case all the cycles $Z_i$ are even, and so $n$ is also even. In this and only in this case, we let $X_1=\emptyset$, and $X_2 = \{x_i \mid 1 \le i \le n-1, i \text{ is odd}\}$ and $X_3 = \{x_i \mid 2 \le i \le n, i \text{ is even}\}$. Next, for each $i \in [k]$, we let $T_i$ be the set $A_1$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:help} and we define $Y_1 = \bigcup_{i=1}^k T_i$ (note that $V_1=Y_1$). Letting \begin{itemize} \item $Y_2 = \bigcup_{i=1}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_3\}$ and \item $Y_3 = \bigcup_{i=1}^k \{v_j \in Z_i - T_i \mid f^{-1}(v_j) \in X_2\}$ \end{itemize} we obtain a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring of $G$. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip Note that the graphs from Theorem~\ref{thm:2connectedcubic} are $2$-connected. We suspect that a similar approach might work to prove that an arbitrary 2-connected cubic graph (except the Petersen graph) has a $(1,1,2,2)$-packing coloring. (Recall that by Petersen's theorem~\cite{petersen} the edge set of any such graph can be partitioned into a 2-factor and a perfect matching.) One class of cubic graphs covered by the result in Theorem~\ref{thm:2connectedcubic} are some subclasses of generalized Petersen graphs. Let $k$ and $n$ be positive integers such that $k < n/2$. The \emph{generalized Petersen graph} $P(n,k)$ has vertex set $\{u_1,v_1, \ldots, u_n,v_n\}$. The edge set of $P(n,k)$ is the set \[ \{u_iu_{i+1} \mid i \in [n]\} \cup \{u_iv_i \mid i \in [n]\} \cup \{v_iv_{i+k} \mid i \in [n]\}\,,\] where addition on the subscripts is computed modulo $n$. The set $\{u_i \mid i\in [n]\}$ induces a cycle of order $n$, while the set $\{v_i \mid i \in [n]\}$ induces a disjoint union of cycles. The order and the number of this latter collection of cycles depends on the relationship between $n$ and $k$. It is easy to see that if $n$ and $k$ are relatively prime, then $\{v_i \mid i \in [n]\}$ induces a single cycle of order $n$. In this case $P(n,k)$ is a generalized prism of $C_n$ and satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{thm:onecycle} unless $n=5$, in which case $P(5,k)$ is either the ordinary prism of $C_5$ (that is, the Cartesian product of $C_5$ and $K_2$) or the famous Petersen graph. If $n$ and $k$ are not relatively prime, then the subgraph of $P(n,k)$ induced by $\{v_i \mid i \in [n]\}$ consists of the disjoint union of $n/r$ cycles each of order $r$, where $r$ is the smallest positive integer such that $rk$ is divisible by $n$. Hence, these will be $5$-cycles if and only if $n$ is a multiple of $5$. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:GPG} If $n$ and $k$ are positive integers such that $k<n/2$ and $n$ is not a multiple of $5$, then $P(n,k)$ has a $(1,1,2,2)$-coloring and hence $\chi_{\rho}(S(P(n,k)))\le 5$. \end{corollary} \section{Multiple subdivisions} \label{sec:multiple} We have already remarked that $\chi_{\rho}(S(K_n))=n+1$. We next consider $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))$ for $i\ge 2$. \begin{proposition} \label{prop:SubofKn} If $n\ge 3$ and $i\ge 3$, then $$\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 3; & \hbox{if $i\equiv 3 \pmod 4 $,} \\ 4; & \hbox{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.$$ Moreover, $\chi_{\rho}(S_2(K_n))\xrightarrow[n\to \infty]{}\infty$. \end{proposition} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Clearly, $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))\ge 3$ for $n\ge 3$ and $i\ge 3$. Note that $S_i(K_n)$ contains a cycle of length $3i + 3 = 3(i+1)$. Since $\chi_{\rho}(C_n) = 3$ if $n\equiv 0 \pmod 4$, and $\chi_{\rho}(C_n) = 4$ otherwise (see~\cite{goddard-2008}), we get that $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))\ge 3$ if $i\equiv 3\pmod 4$, and $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))\ge 4$ otherwise. To prove that these lower bounds are tight, we color $S_i(K_n)$ as follows. If $i\equiv 3\pmod 4$, then color the vertices $v\in V(K_n)$ with color $3$; otherwise color all these vertices with $4$. Colorings of the subdivided vertices are done based on the parity of $i\pmod 4$ as follows. If $i\equiv 3 \pmod 4$, then for each original edge of $K_n$ color the subdivided vertices consecutively by $1,2,1$, and add the block of colors $3,1,2,1$ as many times as required. If $i=4$, use colors $1,2,3,1$. For any even $i\ge 6$, alternatively attach to the four colors $1,2,3,1$ the pairs $2,1$ and $3,1$ as many times as required. Finally, let $i\equiv 1 \pmod 4$. If $i = 5$, then use the pattern $1,3,1,2,1$, and if $i\ge 9$, then add the block $3,1,2,1$ as many times as required. In all of the cases it is straightforward to verify that the constructed colorings are packing colorings. It remains to consider the case $i=2$. If $e=uv\in E(K_n)$, then let $u_e$ and $v_e$ be the vertices of $S_2(K_n)$ obtained by subdividing the edge $e$, where $u_e$ is adjacent to $u$ and $v_e$ to $v$. Let $c$ be an arbitrary packing coloring of $S_2(K_n)$. Then for any edge $e=uv\in E(K_n)$ we must have $c(u_e)\ne 1$ or $c(v_e)\ne 1$. Define now the orientation of $K_n$ as follows. If for the edge $e=uv$ we have $c(u_e)\ne 1$, then in $K_n$ orient the edge $uv$ from $u$ to $v$. Otherwise we must have $c(v_e)\ne 1$ in which case we orient the edge $uv$ from $v$ to $u$. (In the case that both $c(u_e)\ne 1$ and $c(v_e)\ne 1$ hold, we orient the edge $uv$ arbitrarily.) By the degree sum formula for digraphs and the pigeon-hole principle there exists a vertex $u$ with out-degree at least $\lceil (n-1)/2 \rceil$. This means that in $S_2(K_n)$ $u$ has at least that many neighbors colored with different colors bigger than $1$. Hence $\chi_{\rho}(S_2(K_n)) > \lceil (n-1)/2 \rceil$. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip By using our earlier observation that the packing chromatic number of a subgraph is bounded above by the packing chromatic number of the original graph, we get the following immediate corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:SubofKn}. \begin{corollary} \label{cor:subdivisiongraph} If $G$ is a connected graph of order at least $3$ and $i \ge 3$, then \[3 \le \chi_{\rho}(S_i(G)) \le 4\,.\] \end{corollary} In the case of trees we can further strengthen the result of Corollary~\ref{cor:subdivisiongraph} by including the parameter $i=2$ (and $i=1$), and by showing that for any odd $i$, the packing chromatic number is always $3$. More precisely, we have the following result. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:subdivided-trees} If $i\ge 1$, then $$\max\{\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))\ \|\ T\ {\rm tree}\} = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 3; & i\ {\rm odd}, \\ 4; & i\ {\rm even}. \end{array} \right.$$ \end{theorem} \noindent{\bf Proof.\ } Let $T$ be a tree on at least three vertices. Then, as already mentioned, $\chi_{\rho}(S_1(T))=3$, hence the assertion holds for $i=1$. Let $i=2$ and let $T$ be an arbitrary tree. To see that $\chi_{\rho}(S_2(T))\le 4$ let $v$ be an arbitrary vertex of $T$ and consider the BFS-tree of $S_2(T)$ rooted in $v$. Then set $$c(x) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1; & d_T(v,x) \equiv 1 \pmod 3, \\ 2; & d_T(v,x) \equiv 2 \pmod 3, \\ 3; & d_T(v,x) \equiv 0 \pmod 6, \\ 4; & d_T(v,x) \equiv 3 \pmod 6. \\ \end{array} \right.$$ It is straightforward to verify that $c$ is a packing coloring of $S_2(T)$. Let now $T$ be a tree with a vertex $u$ of degree at least $3$, let $v$ be a neighbor of $u$ and let $w$ be a neighbor of $v$ different from $u$. Recall that if $xy\in E(T)$, then we denote with $e_{xy}$ and $e_{yx}$ the vertices of $S_2(T)$ obtained by subdividing $xy$, where $e_{xy}$ is the vertex adjacent to $x$. Let $c$ be a packing coloring of $S_2(T)$. If $c(u) = 1$, then considering the neighbors of $u$ (in $S_2(T)$) we see that $\chi_{\rho}(S_2(T))\ge 4$. The same conclusion also follows if $\{c(u), c(v)\} = \{2,3\}$. Suppose next that $c(u) = c(v) = 2$. Then we may without loss of generality assume that $c(e_{vu}) = 3$ which in turn implies that $c(e_{vw}) = 1$. But then $c(e_{wv}) \ge 4$. Finally, let $c(u) = c(v) = 3$. Assuming without loss of generality that $c(e_{vu}) = 1$, we get $c(e_{vw}) = 2$, $c(e_{wv}) = 1$, but then $c(w) \ge 4$. This settles the case $i=2$. Suppose now that $i\ge 3$. Then by Corollary~\ref{cor:subdivisiongraph}, $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))\le 4$. We first deal with $i$ odd in which case we need to prove that $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))\le 3$ for any tree $T$. In the first subcase assume that $i\equiv 3\pmod 4$. By Corollary~\ref{cor:subdivisiongraph} we know that $3 \le \chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))$. Since $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))\le \chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))$, where $T$ has order $n$, and $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(K_n))=3$ by Proposition~\ref{prop:SubofKn}, we conclude that $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))=3$ when $i\equiv 3\pmod 4$. The second subcase to consider is when $i\equiv 1\pmod 4$, $i\ge 5$. Again root $S_i(T)$ in a vertex of $T$, say $u$, and consider the corresponding BFS tree. Consider the following sequence $S$ of $i+1$ colors: first repeat the block $2,1,3,1$ as many times as necessary and finish it with colors $2,1,3$. Note that $\|S\| \equiv 3 \pmod 4$. Let now $e=xy$ be an edge of $T$, where $d_T(x,u) < d_T(y,u)$. If $d_T(x,u)$ is even, then color the vertices in $S_i(T)$ between $x$ and $y$ (including $x$ and $y$) with the sequence of colors $S$, otherwise (if $d_T(x,u)$ is odd), color the vertices in $S_i(T)$ between $x$ and $y$ (including $x$ and $y$) with the sequence of colors obtained by reversing $S$. Note that this gives a well-defined coloring of $V(S_i(T))$, that is, each vertex of $T$ receives a unique color and that $c$ is a packing coloring. It remains to consider the case when $i\ge 4$ is even. To complete the argument we need to show that $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T))\ge 4$ for some tree $T$. Suppose on the contrary that $\chi_{\rho}(S_i(T)) = 3$ holds for any tree $T$ on at least three vertices. If $u$ is a vertex of degree at least $3$, then as above we infer that if $c$ is a $3$-packing coloring of $S_i(T)$, then $c(u) > 1$. In the rest we will also use the fact that if $c(x_1) = 3$ for some vertex of $S_i(T)$, and $x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4, \ldots$ is a path in $S_i(T)$, then $c(x_2) = 1$. Indeed, for otherwise $c(x_2) = 2$, but then $c(x_3) = 1$ and we would have $c(x_4) \ge 4$. Consider an arbitrary edge $uv$ of $T$ and consider the following subcases. Let $c(u) = c(v) = 3$. Then the subdivided vertices between $u$ and $v$ must receive the sequence of colors $1,2,1,3,1,2,1,\ldots$. But then the number of subdivided vertices between $u$ and $v$ is odd, a contradiction. Let $c(u) = c(v) = 2$ and let $w$ be the vertex adjacent to $u$ on the $u,v$-path. Assume first that $c(w) = 1$. Then the vertices between $u$ and $v$ receive colors $1,3,1,2,1,3,1,\ldots$ which again mean that there are an odd number of these subdivided vertices. Assume next that $c(w) = 3$. We may assume that $y\ne v$ is another neighbor of $u$ in $T$. Then the neighbor of $u$ on the $u,y$-path in $S_i(T)$ receives color $1$. But then we need color at least $4$ for the next vertex on the $u,y$-path. Suppose finally that $c(u) = 2$ and $c(v) = 3$. If $c(w) = 1$, then the sequence of colors on the $u,v$-path is $1,3,1,2,1,3,\ldots$ and we would have an odd number of subdivided vertices. While if $c(w) = 3$ we get the same contradiction as in the above paragraph. \hfill $\square$ \bigskip \section*{Acknowledgements} This work was supported in part by the Ministry of Science of Slovenia under the grant ARRS-BI-US/16-17-013. B.B. and S.K. are also supported in part by the Ministry of Science of Slovenia under the grant P1-0297. D.F.R. is supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation (Grant Number \#209654 to Douglas F. Rall). The authors wish to express their appreciation to Jernej Azarija for the computations of an optimal packing coloring of the subdivided Petersen graph.
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} In \cite{EtnyreHonda03} Honda and the first authors proved the first ``structure theorem" about Legendrian knots by showing how the classification of Legendrian representatives of a knot type behave under the topological operation of connected sum and used this structure theorem to show several new qualitative features of Legendrian knots. We call this a structure theorem since it shows the structure of Legendrian knots under a general topological construction, even if the actual classification of Legendrian knots is not known. This paper concerns another such structure theorem. Specifically we will consider the behavior of Legendrian knots under the satellite operation and several associated results. We begin by establishing some notation. Throughout this paper, when not stated otherwise, we will be considering Legendrian knots in the standard contact structure $\xi_{std}$ on $S^3$ (or equivalently the standard structure on ${\mathbb{R}}^3$ so that we may draw front diagrams to represent our knots). It will be important at times to distinguish a specific knot from its knot type, that is the isotopy equivalence class determined by a knot. We will use calligraphic letters, such as $\K$ and $\Lc$, to denote a knot type (smooth or Legendrian depending on context) and roman letters, such as $K$ and $L$, to denote specific knots. So the notation $K\in \K$ indicates that $K$ is a representative of the knot type $\K$. Given a smooth knot type $\K$ we will denote the set of Legendrian knots realizing this knot type by $\Leg(\K)$ and the set of transverse knots realizing this knot type by $\Trans(\K)$. Similarly if integers $t$ and $r$ are given then $\Leg(\K;t,r)$ denotes the subset of $\Leg(\K)$ containing Legendrian knots with Thurston-Bennequin invariant $t$ and rotation number $r$. (If only one integer is given, $\Leg(\K;t)$, it will specify the Thurston-Bennequin invariant.) Now consider a smooth knot type $\Pat$ in $V=D^2\times S^1$, which we will call a {\em pattern}, and a smooth knot type $\K$ in $S^3$, that we will call the {\em companion knot}. From this data we can fix an identification of $V$ with a neighborhood of a representative $K$ of $\K$ (this depends on a framing of $\K$, see Section~\ref{subsec:satknot} for a more precise definition but here we assume that the Seifert framing on $\K$ is used to make this identification) and consider the image of a representative $P$ of $\Pat$ under this identification. This gives a new knot $P(K)$ in $S^3$ called the {\em satellite of $K$ with pattern $P$}. We denote the resulting knot type $\Pat(\K)$ and as the notation suggests, one can think of a pattern as giving a function on the set of knot types. Turning back to contact geometry, recall that (the interior of) $V$ can be thought of as the 1-jet space of $S^1$ and as such has a standard contact structure $\xi_V=\ker(dz-y\, d\theta)$, where $(y,z)$ are coordinates on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ and $\theta$ is the angular coordinate on $S^1$. Projecting out the $y$ coordinate is called the front projection, and one may easily see that front projections in $V$ have many of the same properties of front projections in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$. See Figure~\ref{fig:patex}. \begin{figure}[h] \small \begin{overpic {pattern} \put(25,120){$\Pat$} \put(70,60){$\Delta\Pat$} \put(222,85){$\Q$} \end{overpic} \caption{In the upper left is a pattern $\Pat$. In all the diagrams identify the right and left hand sides to obtain a knot in $D^2\times S^1$. In the lower left is $\Delta\Pat$ and on the right is a Legendrian knot type $\Q$ realizing the smooth knot type $\Pat$.} \label{fig:patex} \end{figure} It is known that any Legendrian knot $L$ has a neighborhood $\nu(L)$ contactomorphic to $(V,\xi_V)$, see Section~\ref{sec:braidsatellite} for more details. Now given a Legendrian knot $Q$ in $V$ representing a pattern $\Pat$ and a Legendrian knot $L$ in $S^3$ then we denote by $Q(L)$ the image of $Q$ under the above contactomorphism. This operation is well-defined on Legendrian isotopy classes and is called the {\em Legendrian satellite operation}. It is important to notice that the contactomorphism used in this definition takes the product framing on $V$ to the contact framing on the neighborhood of $L$ and not the Seifert framing. Thus if the underlying smooth knots types of $L$ and $Q$ are $K$ and $P$, respectively, then $Q(L)$ is not in the smooth knot type of the smooth satellite $P(K)$ defined above, but in the knot type of $(\Delta^{tb(L)}P)(K)$, where $tb(L)$ is the Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $L$ (that is the contact framing of $L$ relative to the Seifert framing) and $\Delta$ is the result of applying a full right handed twist to $P$. See Figure~\ref{fig:patex}. A front diagram of a Legendrian satellite is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:satexample}. The front diagram is created by taking enough copies of the front diagram for the companion Legendrian knot, translated in the vertical direction, so that the front diagram for the pattern can be inserted in some portion of the diagram as shown in the figure. See Section~\ref{subsec:legsatellites} for more details on the construction. \begin{figure}[h] \small \begin{overpic {satexample} \end{overpic} \caption{A Legendrian right handed trefoil $\Lc$ is shown on the left. On the right is the Legendrian satellite $\Q(\Lc)$ for the Legendrian pattern $\Q$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig:patex}. Notice that since $tb(\Lc)=1$ the Legendrian knot $\Q(\Lc)$ represents the smooth knot type $(\Delta\Pat)(\K)$, where $\K$ is the smooth knot type of the right handed trefoil.} \label{fig:satexample} \end{figure} The Legendrian satellite construction was first explicitly defined and studied in \cite{NgThesis} where it was shown to be well-defined. However various types of satellites were used prior to this work. For example $n$-copies of Legendrian knots were discussed in \cite{Michatchev01} and the famous Chekanov-Eliashberg examples that gave the first Legendrian non-simple knot types can be thought of as Legendrian Whitehead doubles of Legendrian unknots (see Section~\ref{LWD} for more on Legendrian Whitehead doubles). The basic structure theorem for Legendrian satellite operations would involve understanding the map \[ \widetilde\mathit{Sat}\colon\thinspace \bigcup_{t\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-t}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; t)\right)\to \Leg(\Pat(\K))\colon\thinspace (\Q,\Lc)\mapsto \Q(\Lc) \] or the slightly more tractable map \[ \widetilde\mathit{Sat}'\colon\thinspace \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; \overline{t})\right)\to \Leg(\Pat(\K))\colon\thinspace (\Q,\Lc)\mapsto \Q(\Lc), \] where $\overline{t}$ is the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of the knot type $\K$. The obvious questions one would like to address are the following. \begin{enumerate} \item\label{q1} Is $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ or $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ onto? \item\label{q2} Is there an equivalence relation that may be placed on the domain to make $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ or $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ injective? \item\label{q3} Can one obtain classification results for new knot types using an understanding of $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ or $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$? \end{enumerate} Clearly to have a chance at answering the last question one needs to know the answer to the following question. \begin{enumerate} \setcounter{enumi}{3} \item\label{q4} For what patterns $\Pat$ do we understand $\Leg_V(\Pat)$? \end{enumerate} To answer some of these questions we first recall a knot type is called {\em uniformly thick} if every solid torus whose core realizes that knot type can be contained in another such torus that is a standard neighborhood of a maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant Legendrian representative of that knot type. In \cite{EtnyreHonda05} it was shown that negative torus knots are uniformly thick, connected sums of uniformly thick knot types are uniformly thick, and sufficiently negative cables of uniformly thick knot types are uniformly thick. On the other hand the unknot and positive torus knots are not uniformly thick. One of the main results of the paper is Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} which we paraphrase as follows (refer to Section~\ref{sec:braidsatellite} for a precise statement). \begin{theorem}\label{mainsat} Suppose that $\K$ is a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type, and $\Pat$ is a pattern in $V$. Assume that $\Pat(\K)$ satisfies certain symmetry hypotheses (see Sections~\ref{subsec:satosymmetry} and~\ref{sec:braidsatellite}). Then the kernel of $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ is given by an explicit equivalence relation, see Definition~\ref{def:ker}, such that $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ induces a bijection \[ {{\mathit{Sat}'}}\colon\thinspace \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim}\right) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K)). \] \end{theorem} This theorem gives an affirmative answer to Questions~(\ref{q1}) and~(\ref{q2}) in certain cases. However, since cabling is a satellite operation, one can see that the results in \cite{EtnyreHonda05} and \cite{EtnyreLafountainTosun12} imply that neither $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ nor $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ is onto when considering many positive cables of a positive torus knot. However, results in \cite{TosunPre12} imply that Theorem~\ref{mainsat} can sometimes be true even for knots that are not uniformly thick. Finding the exact generality in which the theorem can be proved would be very interesting. The first attempts to address Question~\ref{q4} ocured in \cite{Traynor01} and \cite{NgTraynor04}, where generating family and, respectively, contact homology invariants where used to show several subtle phenomena about Legendrian knots in $(V,\xi_V)$. We give several results for Legendrian knots in $(V,\xi_V)$. We call a pattern {\em braided} if it is the closure in $V$ of an element $w$ of the $n$-strand braid group $B_n$ for some $n$. In Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraids1} we prove the following result. \begin{theorem}\label{braidstatement} A Legendrian braid $B$ in $(V,\xi_V)$ is Legendrian isotopic to the closure of a concatenation of the building blocks in Figure~\ref{fig:openbraidsimpl}. \end{theorem} \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {xsz1} \put(-2,23){$X=X(1,1)$} \put(100,-2){$S=S_0(1,n-1)$} \put(250,-2){$Z=Z_0(1,n-1)$} \end{overpic} \caption{Building blocks of Legendrian braids. There may be other strands both above and bellow of the pictured braids, but they are all assumed to be horizontal strands that are disjoint from the strands in the picture.} \label{fig:openbraidsimpl} \end{figure} From this result in Theorem~\ref{thm:closedposlegendrianbraid} and Lemma~\ref{2starndbraid} we show: \begin{enumerate} \item Let $\Pat$ be the closure of a positive braid $w$ in the $n$-strand braid group $\B_n$, then the relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $ \overline{\reltb}_V(\Pat)= \textit{length}(w) $ and \[ \vert\Leg_{V}(\Pat;\overline{\reltb}_{V}(\Pat))\vert=1. \] \item Let $\Pat_{m}$ be a 2--braid pattern with $m$ (odd) half twists. Then $\Pat_m$ is Legendrian simple in particular: \begin{enumerate} \item If $m> 0$, then $\Pat_m$ has a unique Legendrian representative with maximal relative Thurston--Bennequin number $m$ and rotation number $0$. \item If $m<0$, then $\Pat_m$ has $\|m\|+1$ representatives with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number $\reltb_{V}=-2\|m\|$ and with different rotation numbers \[ \relrot_{V}\in \{-m,-(m-2),\dots,m-2,m\}. \] \end{enumerate} \end{enumerate} In \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} the proof of Theorem~\ref{braidstatement}, or more precisely Corollary~\ref{thm:legbraidsimpl}, was used to classify Legendrian twist knots. In Theorem~\ref{whiteheadpatternclass} we generalize part of that work to classify Legendrian Whitehead patterns. In addition, in Theorem~\ref{cablepats} we classify Legendrian cable patterns. With these results we can prove several classification results for Legendrian knots in $(S^3,\xi_{std})$. \begin{enumerate} \item In Theorem~\ref{csum} we can reprove the structure theorem for connected sums from \cite{EtnyreHonda03} under the extra hypothesis that one of the summands is uniformly thick and Legendrian simple (and their are no symmetries). \item In Theorem~\ref{pqcableclass} we can reprove the result from \cite{EtnyreHonda05} that cables of Legendrian simple, uniformly thick knot types are Legendrian simple. \item In Theorem~\ref{thm:twistsat} we classify Legendrian knots in the knot types of Whitehead doubles of Legendrian simple, uniformly thick knots types. This leads to many new non-Legendrian simple and non-transversely simple knot types. See Example~\ref{whdtorus}. \end{enumerate} We also make several similar observations about transverse knots in satellite knot types. In Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries} we discuss the topological satellite construction and make several observations about the topology of the complement of satellite knots. We also discuss several features about contact structures on solid tori that will be needed in the paper. Section~\ref{sec:braidsind2xi} concerns ``open" Legendrian braids in $D^2\times I$ with and $I$-invariant contact structure. Gluing the ends of this thickened disk together gives $V$ and so these results are used in Section~\ref{sec:legendrianbraidsind2xs1} to prove our results about braided patterns. In that section we also consider Whitehead patterns. Finally in Section~\ref{sec:braidsatellite} we discuss the Legendrian satellite construction and prove our new structure theorems. \noindent {\em{Acknowledgments}} The authors are very grateful for helpful conversations with Vincent Colin, Paolo Ghiggini, Lenny Ng, Dave Futer, and Andr\'as Stipsicz. Part of this work was carried out while both the authors were at the Mittag-Leffler Institut, while the first author was at the Institute for Advanced Study, and while the second author was at Universit\'e de Nantes and UC Santa Barbara. We gratefully acknowledge their support of this work. The first author was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation (\#342144), The Bell Companies Fellowship Fund, and NSF grants DMS-1309073 and DMS-1608684. The second author was supported by ERC Geodycon, OTKA grant numbers 49449, 67867 and NK81203 and NSF grant number 1104690. \section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:preliminaries} We assume the reader is familiar with basic knot theory and in particular braid theory as can be found in \cite{Birman74, Rolfsen76}. We also refer to \cite{EtnyreHonda01b} for the basic notions from contact geometry, Legendrian and transverse knot theory, and the use of convex surfaces to study Legendrian knots. In Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot} we recall the satellite operation from knot theory and in the following subsection we discuss some relevant results about Legendrian knots and contact structures on the solid torus. \subsection{Satellite knots, patterns and companions} \label{subsec:satknot} Let $V=D^2\times S^1$ where $D^2$ is the unit disk in ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. A \dfn{smooth pattern type} $\Pat$ is an isotopy class of embeddings of a closed 1--manifold into $V$ that cannot be included in a ball inside $V$. Let $\mer=\partial D^2$ be the meridian of $V$ and fix $\lon=\{p\}\times S^1$, where $p\in \partial D^2$. For any representative $P\in \Pat$ of the isotopy class the algebraic intersection number $P\cdot(D^2\times \{\theta\})$ has the same value for any $\theta\in S^1$. This value is independent of the chosen representative $P\in\Pat$, and it is called the \dfn{winding number}, $n=n(\Pat)$, of $\Pat$. Further the \emph{wrapping number}, $w=\mathit{wrap}(\Pat)$, is the minimal geometric intersection of $\Pat$ with a meridian of $V$. Usually patterns are pictured by their projection as tangles in ${{\Rold}}$ with matching endpoints in $D \times \{0\}$ and $D\times \{1\}$. These will be called open patterns (and we will distinguish them from closed patterns by a subscript $\Pat_{\textrm{open}}$ whenever it is not clear from the context.) A full twist of a pattern $\Pat$ can be defined as the image $\Delta \Pat$ of $\Pat$ under the map $\Delta\colon V\to V$ that sends $\lon$ to $\lon+\mer$. This operation on the tangle representation is reflected as concatenation of the tangle with a full twist $\Delta$. See Figure~\ref{fig:patex}. A negative full twist $\Delta^{-1}\Pat$ can be defined similarly. Let $\K$ be a smooth knot type and $\Pat$ a smooth pattern type in $V=D^2\times S^1$. Take representatives $K\in\K$ and $P\in\Pat$, and take a tubular neighborhood $N(K)$ of $K$, and fix a longitude $\lambda$ on $\partial N(K)$. The \emph{satellite $P_\lambda(K)$ with companion $K$ and pattern $P$} is the image of $P$ under a diffeomorphism $\psi\colon V\to N(K)$ which sends $\lon$ into $\lambda$. This notion is well defined up to isotopy. \begin{lemma} \label{satwelldefined} Let $N(K_0)$ and $N(K_1)$ be neighborhoods of $K_0, K_1\in\K$. Suppose that $\lambda_0$ and $\lambda_1$ represent the same framing. Then for any $P_0, P_1\in\Pat$ and differomorphisms $\psi_0\colon V\to N(K_0)$ and $\psi_1\colon V\to N(K_1)$ that sends $\lon$ to $\lambda_0$, and $\lambda_1$, respectively, $\psi_0(P_0)$ and $\psi_1(P_1)$ are isotopic. \qed \end{lemma} The above lemma shows that the satellite construction gives a well-defined knot type, which we denote by $\Pat_{\lambda}(\K)$. The same knot type with respect to a different longitude, has a different pattern: \[ \Pat_\lambda(\K)\cong(\Delta^{-k}\Pat)_{\lambda+k\mu}(\K). \] where $\mu$ is the meridian of $\K$. If $\K$ has a Seiffert surface then $\Pat(\K)$ denotes $\Pat_\lambda(\K)$, where $\lambda$ is the Seifert framing for $\K$. \subsubsection{Symmetries of satellite knots} \label{subsec:satsymmetry} When considering satellite knots we will assume that $\K$ is not the unknot and $\Pat$ is not the core of $V$. In this case notice that $T_S=\psi(\partial V)$ will be a non-boundary parallel incompressible torus in the complement of $\Pat_\lambda(\K)$ and it will be called the {\em satellite incompressible torus}. In general, recall that if $C$ denotes the complement of $\Pat_\lambda(\K)$ then there is a JSJ decomposition of $C$, \cite{JacoShalen78, Johannson79}. That is there is a union of tori $T$ in $C$ such that $C\setminus T$ is a union of Seifert fibered spaces and atoroidal manifolds. If the collection $T$ is taken to be a minimal such collection, then it is unique up to isotopy. While JSJ decompositions are defined for general prime 3--manifolds, the case of knot complements has been extensively studied and there is a careful an thorough exposition of this case in \cite{Budney06}. It is easy to see that $T_S$ is part of this JSJ decomposition of $C$. When there are more tori in the JSJ decomposition of $C$ we will be concerned with certain symmetries that permute the tori. Specifically, consider the situation in Lemma~\ref{satwelldefined}. After isotoping $\psi_0(P_0)$ to $\psi_1(P_1)$ we have two incompressible tori $T_0=\psi_0(\partial V)$ and $T_1=\psi_1(\partial V)$ in the complement $C$ of $\psi_0(P_0)=\psi_1(P_1)$. In many situations $T_0$ and $T_1$ will have to be isotopic. For example if $\K$ is a hyperbolic knot or a torus knot and $\Pat$ has $\mathit{wrap}(\Pat)\ge 2$. If $T_0$ and $T_1$ are not isotopic then there is a diffeomorphism of $C$ that takes $T_0$ to $T_1$. We will call this an {\em (un-oriented) topological symmetry} and these can be seen through Budney's companionship graphs \cite{Budney06}. As we will only be considering cases where un-oriented topological symmetries do not occur we will not discuss the material in \cite{Budney06} in detail, but we will discuss one situation that we need to explicitly exclude below and another to help the reader understand that such symmetries can be subtle. As a first example consider two prime knots $\K_1$ and $\K_2$. The complement of $\K_1\#\K_2$ has two disjoint ``swallow-follow" incompressible tori. To see them consider a neighborhood $N$ of $\K_1\#\K_2$ and the sphere $S^2$ that intersects $N$ in two disks. Note that $S^2$ separates $\partial N$ into two annuli, say $A_1$ and $A_2$. Now let $T_1$ be $S^2\setminus (S^2\cap N)$ union $A_1$ and similarly for $T_2$. See Figure~\ref{fig:sftorus}. These can easily be seen to be incompressible tori in the complement of $\K_1\#\K_2$. Moreover, if $\K_1=\K_2$ then it is easy to see that there is an isotopy of $S^3$ that takes $\K_1\#\K_2$ to itself and exchanges $T_1$ and $T_2$. But if we consider the complement of $\K_1\#\K_2$, then the two tori are not isotopic. This is the simplest example of an un-oriented topological symmetry. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {sftorus} \put(33,95){$\K_1$} \put(124,95){$\K_2$} \put(218,140){$\K_1$} \put(308,140){$\K_2$} \put(313,33){$\K_2$} \end{overpic} \caption{On the left the two swallow-follow tori in the complement of the connected sum of $\K_1\#\K_2$. On the upper right, the green torus is isotoped to more clearly ``follow" $\K_1$ and ``swallow" $\K_2$. On the lower right is the solid torus the green $T^2$ bounds that shows $\K_2$ as a pattern in $V$.} \label{fig:sftorus} \end{figure} To see this situation arrises from a satellite operation notice that each $T_i$ bounds a solid torus $S_i$ and $S_1$ contains a copy of $\K_2$ and hence defines a pattern $\Pat_{\K_2}$. Similarly $S_2$ contains a copy of $\K_1$ and defines a pattern $\Pat_{\K_1}$. Clearly $\Pat_{\K_2}(\K_1)=\K_1\#\K_2=\Pat_{\K_1}(\K_2)$, see Figure~\ref{fig:sftorus}, and we see the well-known fact that connected sums are a special case of the satellite operation. We now consider another situation where topological symmetries arise. We first define splicing of two knots. Given $K_1$ and $K_2$ in two separate copies of $S^3$ let $X_1$ and $X_2$ be the complements of open neighborhoods of $K_1$ and $K_2$, respectively. The {\em splice} of $K_1$ and $K_2$ is the result of gluing $X_1$ and $X_2$ together along their boundaries by a diffeomorphism that interchanges their longitudes and meridians. If one of the $K_i$ is an unknot then it is clear that the resulting manifold is $S^3$. Now given a link $L$ with components $L_0\cup\ldots \cup L_k$ such that $L-L_0$ is an unlink and knots $K_1,\ldots, K_k$ then consider the result of splicing each $K_i$ to $L_i$. The result will again be $S^3$ with a knot $L_0$ in it. Notice that if the $K_i$ are non-trivial knots then the complement of $L_0$ has lots of incompressible tori, namely the boundaries of the neighborhoods of the $L_i$. It is an easy exercise to see that if $L=L_0\cup L_1\cup L_2$ where $L_0$ is the unknot and the $L_i$ are meridians to $L_0$, then splicing $K_1$ and $K_2$ to $L_1$ and $L_2$ will result in $L_0$ being the connected sum of $K_1$ and $K_2$ and the two incompressible tori coming form the $L_i$ are the ones described above and the topological symmetry when $K_1=K_2$ comes from the symmetry of $L$ that fixes $L_0$ and interchanges the other $L_i$. Now consider the Borromean rings $L=L_0\cup L_1\cup L_2$. Notice we again have a symmetry fixing $L_0$ and interchanging the other $L_i$. Splicing in $K_1$ and $K_2$ will turn $L_0$ into a knot $K$. We claim that $K$ is a satellite knot. To see this let $L'=L'_0\cup L_2'$ be the image of $L_0\cup L_2$ after $L_1$ is spliced to $K_1$. It is easy to see that $L_2'$ is still an unknot. So $L_0'$ in $S^3-L_2'$ is a pattern $\Pat$. And splicing $L_2'$ with $K_2$ is the same thing as forming $\Pat(K_2)$. But as discussed above if $K_1=K_2$ then there will be a topological symmetry of the complement of $\Pat(K_2)$ that interchanges the two incompressible tori that can both be seen as satellite tori. This is an example of a topological symmetry that does not come from the connected sum of two knots. \subsubsection{Orientation symmetries of satellite knots} \label{subsec:satosymmetry} We will also need to consider {oriented topological symmetries}. To that end notice that in the definition of the satellite construction we are implicitly considering oriented knots to identify $V$ with the neighborhood $N(K)$ of the knot $K$ we need not only a framing on $K$ but also an orientation on $K$. We will also be assuming that our patterns are oriented. Later we will want to consider solid tori that are standard neighborhoods of oriented Legendrian knots (representing $K$) and in particular we will be focusing on the boundary of these standard neighborhoods. The boundaries of these neighborhoods uniquely determine the oriented Legendrian knot {\em if} an orientation on a longitude is chosen. However, given a pattern $\Pat$ with non-zero winding number, we will always orient $\Pat$ so that the winding number is positive. Now given a torus $\psi(\partial V)$ the orientation on the longitude is determined by the image of $\Pat$. In particular if there are no un-oriented topological symmetries, as discussed above, then when $\psi_0(P_0)$ is isotoped to be the same as $\psi_1(P_1)$ the tori $T_0$ and $T_1$ (we are using the notation from the paragraph above on topological symmetries) will be isotopic through an isotopy taking the preferred orientation on a longitude of $T_0$ to the preferred orientation on a longitude of $T_1$. If the winding number of $\Pat$ is zero then this is not the case. Consider the diffeomorphism $f\colon\thinspace V\to V$ defined by $f((x,y),\theta)=((-x,y), -\theta)$ where $V=D^2\times S^1$ with angular coordinate $\theta$ on $S^1$ and Cartesian coordinates on $D^2$. Then there are patterns $\Pat$ such that $\Pat$ and $f(\Pat)$ are the same, for example the Whitehead patterns discussed in Section~\ref{lwp} have this property. Notice that it is a necessary condition for this to happen that the winding number of $\Pat$ is zero. Now suppose $\psi\colon\thinspace V\to S^3$ parameterizes a neighborhood of an oriented knot $\K$ then $\psi\circ f$ parameterizes a neighborhood of $-\K$ (that is $\K$ with the opposite orientation). Moreover, $\Pat(-\K)=(f(\Pat))(\K)=\psi\circ f(\Pat)=\psi(\Pat)=\Pat(\K)$, thus there is no way to assign an orientation to a longitude of $\psi(\partial V)$ (or equivalently fix the orientation on $\K$) from the satellite knot $\Pat(\K)$. We will call this ambiguity in the orientation of $\K$ an {\em oriented topological symmetry}. \subsection{Legendrian and transverse knots} We assume the reader is familiar with Legendrian and transverse knots. The majority of the material used in this paper can be found in \cite{Etnyre05, EtnyreHonda01b} but we recall a few lesser-known results we will need below. We will denote the set of contact structures on a 3--manifold $M$ by $\Xi(M)$. \begin{theorem}\label{isoIScontacto} Let $M$ be a closed 3--manifold on which the space of contact structures isotopic to a fixed contact structure $\xi$ is simply connected. Then classifying Legendrian knots up to contactomorphism (smoothly isotopic to the identity) is equivalent to classifying them up to Legendrian isotopy. This is also true for a manifold with boundary if the contact structures and diffeomorphisms are all fixed near the boundary. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Fix a contact structure $\xi$ on $M$. Clearly if two Legendrian knots are isotopic then there is a contactomorphism taking one to the other (since on a compact manifold Legendrian isotopies can be extended to global contact isotopies). Now suppose there is a contactomorphism $\phi\colon\thinspace M\to M$ that take the Legendrian knot $L$ to $L'$ and is smoothly isotopic to the identity. Let $\phi_t, t\in[0,1],$ be that isotopy where $\phi_0(x)=x$ and $\phi_1(x)=\phi(x)$. Notice that $\xi_t=(\phi_t)_(\xi)$ is a loop of contact structures on $M$ based at $\xi$. By hypothesis this loop is contractible. Thus there is a map $H\colon\thinspace [0,1]\times [0,1]\to \Xi(M)$ such that $H(t, 0)=\xi_t, H(t,1)=\xi, H(0,s)=\xi$ and $H(1,s)=\xi$. Applying Moser's method to $H(t, s)$ for $s\in[0,1]$ and $t$ fixed and then noticing that as $t$ varies the diffeomorphism constructed by the method vary smoothly we see that there is a map $F\colon\thinspace [0,1]\times[0,1]\to \text{Diff}(M)$ such that $F(t,0)(x)=x$ and $F(t,s)_(H(t,s))=H(t,1)=\xi$. In particular $F(0,s), F(t,1)$ and $F(1,s)$ are all contactomorphism of $\xi$. Moreover concatenating these paths gives a path of contactomorphisms that is isotopic, rel.\ endpoints, to $\phi_t$ as a path of diffeomorphisms. Thus this gives the desired ambient contact isotopy taking $L$ to $L'$. \end{proof} We now recall a fundamental result of Eliashberg. \begin{theorem}[Eliashberg 1992, \cite{Eliashberg92a} {\em cf.\ }\cite{Grioux93}]\label{contactOnB3} Given the 3--ball $B^3$ with a singular foliation $\mathcal{F}$ on its boundary that could be the characteristic foliation of a tight contact structure on $B^3$. There is a unique (up to contact isotopy) tight contact structure on $B^3$ inducing $\mathcal{F}$ and the space of tight contact structures on $B^3$ inducing $\mathcal{F}$ is simply connected. \end{theorem} Let $V=D^2\times S^1$ and $\Gamma$ denote a two component slope zero longitudinal dividing curve on $\partial V$. Let $\Xi(V,\Gamma)$ denote the space of tight contact structures on $V$ with a fixed characteristic foliation on $\partial V$ divided by $\Gamma$. Whenever we talk about contact structures on manifolds with boundary we need to fix a characteristic foliation $\mathcal F$ on the boundary divided by the dividing curve of the boundary. Then uniqueness means, that up to isotopy fixing a neighborhood of the boundary there is a unique contact structure with the prescribed characteristic foliation. The following lemma is a well-known folk theorem. A proof recently appeared in \cite[Theorem~2.36]{VogelPre13} but we sketch an argument here for completeness. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:contactstr} With the notations above $\pi_1(\Xi(V,\Gamma))=1$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\xi_t$ be an $S^1$-family of contact structures with the given boundary conditions. Choose a meridional disc $D$ of $V$, and isotope $\xi_t$ so that it is convex for all $t\in S^1$ (to guarantee this one needs to observe that since our contact structures are tight any bypass attachment to such a disk must be trivial and so unnecessary). The dividing curve on $D$ is one connected arc, and by another isotopy of $\xi_t$ we can arrange that the characteristic foliation on $D$ is isotopic for all $t$. A further isotopy makes the $\xi_t$ agree in a neighborhood $N$ of $\partial V\cup D$. There is an $S^2$ in this neighborhood that bounds a 3-ball $B$ in $V$ so that $V=N\cup B$. Thus we have an $S^1$-family of contact structures on $B$ with fixed boundary conditions. By Theorem~\ref{contactOnB3} the fundamental group of the space of tight contact structures on $B^3$ with a given characteristic foliation is trivial. Thus this loop of contact structures is contractible. This completes a contraction of the loop $\xi_t$ as well. \end{proof} By Theorem~\ref{isoIScontacto} and this lemma we can conclude the following. \begin{corollary}\label{cor:iso} Let $\xi_V$ be any tight contact structure on $V$ with convex boundary and dividing curves $\Gamma$. Then the classification of Legendrian knots in $(V,\xi_V)$ up to contactomorphism (smoothly isotopic to the identity) and up to isotopy are the same.\hfill\qed \end{corollary} We note that since a classification of Legendrian knots in a knot type determines the classification of transverse knots in that knot type, \cite{EtnyreHonda01b}, this corollary also holds for transverse knots. \section{Open Legendrian and transverse braids} \label{sec:braidsind2xi} In this section we will classify Legendrian and transverse representatives of open braids in $\Rold$. \subsection{Legendrian braids in $\Rold$}\label{basicdefs} Throughout this section we will be considering the contact structure $\xi_\Rold$ on $\Rold$, where $I=[0,1]$, that is $I$-invariant, tangent to the boundary of each $D\times \{t\}$, and induces a single dividing curve on $D$. We note that the interior of $\Rold$ can naturally be identified with the 1-jet space of $I$ and hence we can depict Legendrian knots in $\Rold$ via their front projection. We say a Legendrian arc $\gamma$ in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$ is \dfn{straight} if it is of the form $\{p\}\times I$ for some point $p$ in the dividing set $\Gamma_D$ of $D$. An arc $\gamma$ that intersects $D\times \{0\}$ or $D\times\{1\}$ is \dfn{straight near the boundary} if near its end point it agrees with a straight Legendrian arc. A \dfn{(open) Legendrian braid} $Q$ of index $n$ in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$ is a collection of $n$ Legendrian arcs forming a topological braid that are straight near the boundary. We note that it is easy to see that any collection of Legendrian arcs that topologically form a braid can be isotoped through Legendrian arcs to a Legendrian braid. Figure~\ref{fig:openbraid} depicts the front projection of some Legendrian braids. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {xszmain} \put(1,65){$k$} \put(2,38){$l$} \put(142,56){$l$} \put(143,31){$k$} \put(280,70){$k$} \put(281,45){$l$} \put(50, 15){$X(k,l)$} \put(190,0){$S(k,l)$} \put(330,0){$Z(k,l)$} \end{overpic} \caption{Front projections of \emph{basic Legendrian braids}. There may be other strands both above and bellow of the pictured braids, but they are all assumed to be horizontal strands that are disjoint from the strands in the picture.} \label{fig:openbraid} \end{figure} When considering Legendrian braids we allow the end points to move along the dividing set $\Gamma_D$, but they will always remain straight near the boundary. We notice that if two copies of $(\Rold, \xi_\Rold)$ are glued together so that $D\times \{1\}$ in the first copy is glued to $D\times \{0\}$ in the second copy, then the result is a contact manifold that is naturally contactomorphic to a subset of $(\Rold, \xi_\Rold)$. Thus two Legendrian $n$-braids can be concatenated to obtain a new Legendrian braid. We define basic building blocs for Legendrian braids. Fixing the braid index $n$ for each triple of natural numbers $i, k, l$ such that $i+k+l\leq n$ we define $X_i(k,l)$ to be the Legendrian braid depicted on the left of Figure~\ref{fig:openbraid} with $i$ straight Legendrian arcs below the pictured braid and $n-(i+k+l)$ straight Legendrian arcs above the pictured braid. We similarly have $S_i(k,l)$ and $Z_i(k,l)$ indicated in the middle and right of the figure, respectively. We will usually drop the subscript $i$ from the notation when the meaning is clear from context. The braids $X_i(k,l), S_i(k,l)$ and $Z_i(x,l)$ are called \dfn{basic Legendrian braids}. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:legbraid} A Legendrian $n$-braid $Q$ in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$ is Legendrian isotopic to a concatenation of the basic Legendrian braids. \end{theorem} The above theorem will be proved in Section~\ref{proofofbraid} by classifying tight contact structures on the complement of $Q$ but before giving the proof we discuss some corollaries of this theorem. First notice that the building blocks in Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraid} can be simplified. \begin{corollary}\label{thm:legbraidsimpl} A Legendrian braid $Q$ in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$ is Legendrian isotopic to the concatenation of the basic Legendrian braids $X_i =X_i(1,1)$, $S=S_0(1,n-1)$ and $Z=Z_0(1,n-1)$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig:openbraidsimpl}. \end{corollary} Notice that the corollary implies that a Legendrian 2-braid is a concatenation of the building blocks $X_0, S$, and $Z$. This is a key result necessary for the classification of Legendrian twist knots given in \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13}. \begin{proof} The Legendrian braid $X(k,l)$ is a concatenation of $(kl)$ copies of $X_i$ for the appropriate choices of $i$. The braid $S(1,l)$ is obtained from $S$ and $(n-1-l)$ copies of $X_i$ placed before or after as necessary. Then $S(k,l)$ is the concatenation of $k$ copies of $S(1,l)$. Similarly $Z(k,l)$ can be built up from $k$ copies of ${Z}$ and $k(n-1-l)$ copies of $X_i$. \end{proof} \subsection{Invariants of open Legendrian braids} Let $\Pat$ be denote the smooth isotopy class of an (open) braid (with isotopies relative to the boundary). The set of Legendrian isotopy classes representing $\Pat$ is denoted by $\Leg_{\Rold}(\Pat)$. We also note that we always orient all strands of a braid from left to right. We define the \emph{relative Thurston--Bennequin number} and the \emph{relative rotation number} of a Legendrian braid type, $\Q$, in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$ using the front projections of its chosen representative $Q$ as follows \begin{eqnarray} \reltb_{\Rold}(Q)&=&\textrm{writhe}(Q)-\frac12c(Q);\\ \relrot_{\Rold}(Q)&=&\frac12(d(Q)-u(Q)). \end{eqnarray} where $c(Q)$ denotes the number of cusps, and $d(Q)$ and $u(Q)$ denotes the number of downward and upward oriented cusps, respectively. This number is independent on the chosen representation, thus giving rise to the invariants $\reltb_{\Rold}(\Q)$ and $\relrot_{\Rold}(\Q)$ of the Legendrian isotopy type $\Q$. Denote the the set of Legendrian isotopy classes with relative Thurston--Bennequin number $t$ by $\Leg_{\xi_\Rold}(\Pat;t)$. Let $\mathcal{X}_i,\mathcal{S},\mathcal{Z}$ denote the Legendrian isotopy classes of the braids $X_i, S$ and $\mathcal{Z}$. The relative classical invariants for the basic Legendrian braids are \[ \begin{array}{lll} \reltb_{\Rold}(\mathcal{X}_i)=1, & \reltb_{\Rold}(\mathcal{S})=-n, & \reltb_{\Rold}(\mathcal{Z})=-n,\\ \relrot_{\Rold}(\mathcal{X}_i)=0, & \relrot_{\Rold}(\mathcal{S})=-1, & \relrot_{\Rold}(\mathcal{Z})=1.\\ \end{array} \] \subsection{Positive Legendrian braids in $(\Rold,\xi_\Rold)$} For positive braids the maximal Thurston--Bennequin number is known to be the length of $\Pat$. \begin{theorem}\label{openmaxtb} Let $\Pat$ be a (open) braid represented by a positive word $w$ in the braid group $B_n$, then the maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant for Legendrian knots realizing $\Pat$ is \[\overline{\reltb}_{\Rold}(\Pat)=\textit{length}(w).\] \end{theorem} \begin{proof} If the topological braid generators $\sigma_i$ in the positive word $w$ are replaced by the basic Legendrian braids $X_i$, then we easily see that $\overline{\reltb}_{\Rold}(\Pat)\geq \textit{length}(w)$. To see the other inequality notice that if there is a Legendrian braid $Q$ in $\Leg_{\Rold}(\Pat)$ with larger relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant then we can embed it in the standard contact structure on ${\mathbb{R}}^3$ and complete it as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cb} resulting in a Legendrian link. \begin{figure}[h] \begin{overpic {closedbraid} \end{overpic} \caption{The closure of an open $n$-braid in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$.} \label{fig:cb} \end{figure} If this is a knot then its Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $\reltb_{\Rold}(Q)-n$. Moreover, the maximal Euler characteristic of a Seifert surface for the knot is $n-\textit{length}(\Pat)$, thus we have a Legendrian knot violating the Bennequin bound. If the link in Figure~\ref{fig:cb} is not a knot then one may easily concatenate $\Q$ with some of the basic Legendrian braids $X_i$ so that its ``closure" is a knot and again violates the Bennequin bound. \end{proof} Moreover we can classify (open) positive Legendrian braids with maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:poslegendrianbraid} Let $\Pat$ be a (open) braid represented by a positive word $w$ in the braid group $B_n$, then $\Pat$ has a unique Legendrian representative with maximal Thurston--Bennequin number. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Given a Legendrian representative of $w$ Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraidsimpl} allows us to express it in terms of the basic Legendrian braids $X_i$, $S$ and $Z$. This will give a presentation $w'$ of $w$ in terms of the standard generators $\sigma_i$ of the braid group. For each $Z$ or $S$ this word has a term of the form $(\sigma_0\cdots \sigma_{n-1})^{-1}$ (or the reverse of this). Since the algebraic length of $w$ and $w'$ are the same there will have to be $n-1$ compensatory $X_i$s. So the over all contribution to the Thurston-Bennequin invariant of the terms is $-1$. Thus we see that the Thurston-Bennequin invariant of this Legendrian braid is equal to the algebraic length of $w$ minus the number of $S$s and $Z$s, and so there can be no $S$s and $Z$s. Now we need to prove that any two representatives with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number are Legendrian isotopic. The braid moves that contain only positive powers ($\sigma_i\sigma_{i+1}\sigma_i=\sigma_{i+1}\sigma_i\sigma_{i+1}$ and $\sigma_i\sigma_j=\sigma_i\sigma_j$ (for $\|i-j\|\ge 2$) ) can be represented by Legendrian isotiopies. These are the relations in the monoid $B_n$ of positive (open) braids, thus Theorem \ref{thm:posbraid} finishes the proof. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}[{\em cf} \protect{\cite[Section~6.5.4]{KasselTuraev08}}]\label{thm:posbraid If two positive braid words are equivalent in the group $B_n$ then they are equivalent in the positive braid monoid too. \qed \end{theorem} \subsection{Bypasses and Legendrian braids}\label{proofofbraid} In this section we will prove Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraid}. To that end we begin by observing that by Corollary~\ref{cor:iso} classifying Legendrian braids in $(\Rold, \xi_\Rold)$ up to isotopy and contactomorphism are equivalent. Moreover, the contactomorphism type of a Legendrian braid is determined by the contact structure on the complement of a standard neighborhood of the braid up to contactomorphism fixing the back face of the braid complement. To clarify this last statement we begin by discussing the standard neighborhood of a Legendrian braid. \subsubsection{Standard neighborhoods of Legendrian braids} We consider (open) Legendrian $n$-braids and isotop them so that they become straight near the boundary. To this end we fix $n$ points $p_1,\ldots, p_n$ on $\Gamma_D$ ordered from bottom to top as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:punctured disc}. \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{overpic {punctureddisc} \end{overpic} \caption{The dividing curve on $S=D-\nu(Q)$. The small circles are the $D^j_i$.} \label{fig:punctured disc} \end{figure} By Giroux realisation we can arrange that on $D\times \{j\}, j=0,1,$ there are disjoint disks $D_i^j, i=1,\ldots n,$ containing $p_i$ such that $D_i^j$ has Legendrian boundary with Thurston-Bennequin invariant $-1$ and standard characteristic foliation shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sdtfoliation}. \begin{figure}[h] \begin{overpic {sdtfoliation} \end{overpic} \caption{The characteristic foliation on a disk neighborhood $D^j_i$ of the $p_i$.} \label{fig:sdtfoliation} \end{figure} Now given a Legendrian $n$-braid $Q$ a standard neighborhood of a strand of $Q$ will be a neighborhood $D\times I$ of the strand such that $D\times \partial I$ consists of two disks that are sub-disks of the $D_i^j$ with Legendrian boundary and $(\partial D)\times I$ is a convex annulus with two dividing curves running between the boundary components of the annulus. We can also assume, by Giroux realization, that the characteristic foliation on the annulus consists of two lines of singularities parallel to the dividing curves and the rest of the foliation given by the boundary of meridional disks. Now a standard neighborhood of $Q$ is a neighborhood $\nu(Q)$ of $Q$ that is a standard neighborhood of each of its strands. We will call the contact manifold $\Rold\setminus \nu(Q)$ the \dfn{exterior} of $Q$. We will call $D\times \{0\}$ intersected with the exterior the \dfn{back face}, the intersection with $D\times \{1\}$ the \dfn{front face} and the remainder of the boundary the \dfn{vertical boundary} Since there is a unique tight contact structure on a ball, any contactomorphism of the complement of the standard neighborhoods of Legendrian braids that fixes the back face can be extended over the neighborhoods to a contactomorphism of $D\times I$ preserving the Legendrian braids. (Notice that extending over the neighborhood of the braid is done by gluing 2-handles to the complement that correspond to neighborhoods of the meridional disks. It is important that we fix the back face of the complement of the braid so that the contactomorphism preserves the attaching regions of the 2-handles and can thus be extended over them.) Thus the classification of Legendrian braids up to contactomorphism is equivalent to the classification of the exteriors of Legendrian braids up to contactomorphism fixing the back face. \subsubsection{Straightening standard neighborhoods of Legendrian braids} Notice that we can put the exterior of a Legendrian braid in a standard form. The basic idea is to make the boundary of the exterior of all braids look the same for all braids except for the front face $D\times \{1\}$. See Figure~\ref{fig:straightD2xI}. \begin{figure}[h] \begin{overpic {straightD2xI} \end{overpic} \caption{Straightening the strands of $\nu(Q)$} \label{fig:straightD2xI} \end{figure} More specifically, Let $D_n$ be the convex disk shown in Figure~\ref{fig:punctured disc} and let $\xi_n$ be the $I$ invariant contact structure on $D_n\times I$. Notice that $(\partial D_n)\times I$ can be made convex so that the dividing curves are all parallel to the $I$-factor. We can also assume that $\partial D_n\times \{t\}$ is Legendrian for each $t\in I$. Given a Legendrian $n$-braid $Q$ and a standard neighborhood $\nu(Q)$ of $Q$, there is a smooth diffeomorphism of $\Rold\setminus \nu(Q)$ to $D_n\times I$ that is the identity on the back face, and takes the front face to the front face and the vertical boundary to the vertical boundary. Pushing forward the contact structure on $\Rold\setminus \nu(Q)$ by this diffeomorphism gives the \dfn{straightened neighborhood of $Q$}. Notice that everything on the boundary is standard except on the front face where the dividing curves can be quite complicated. In Figure~\ref{fig:straight} and ~\ref{fig:straight2} we show the front face of the straightened basic braids $X(k,l)$ and $Z(k,l)$, respectively. The front face for the straightened braid $S(k,l)$ is obtained from Figure~\ref{fig:straight2} by rotating the picture by $\pi$. \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{overpic {BasicStraight1} \put(45,98){$l$} \put(43,29){$k$} \end{overpic} \caption{The front face of the exterior of the basic Legendrian braid $X(k,l)$ before straightening on the left and after straightening on the right. The horizontal arcs on the right will be the boundary of product disks used below.} \label{fig:straight} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[htb] \begin{overpic {BasicStraight} \put(40,245){$l$} \put(38,185){$k$} \end{overpic} \caption{The front face of the exterior of the basic Legendrian braid $Z(k,l)$ before straightening on the upper left and after straightening on the lower right. In the second figure on the top the twists in the vertical boundary have been pushed to the front face. The next figure untwists the half twist between the $k$ and $l$ strands. The next three figures untwists the full twist between the $k$ strands. The horizontal arcs on the right will be the boundary of product disks used below.} \label{fig:straight2} \end{figure} Notice that in the straightened neighborhood each $D_n\times \{t\}$ has Legendrian boundary. According to \cite[Proof of Lemma 3.10]{Honda02} we can arrange that there are finite number of $0=t_0<t_1<\ldots <t_k=1$ such that each $D_n\times [t_{i-1},t_i]$ is a bypass layer (that is obtained from an $I$ invariant contact structure on a neighborhood of $D_n\times \{t_i\}$ by attaching a bypass). \subsubsection{Bypasses and basic Legendrian braids} We proceed by understanding a single bypass attachment. The $6$ ways of attaching a bypass to $D\times\{0\}$ are depicted in Figure \ref{fig:bypassxsz}. Since $\xi_\Rold$ is tight, only the first 3 type of attachment is allowed (otherwise after the bypass attachment we would create a dividing set with a contractible component, when considered on the disk $D$, and thus an overtwisted disk). \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {PossibleBypass} \put(49,209){$k$} \put(67,180){$l$} \put(178,203){$k$} \put(191,175){$l$} \put(303,203){$k$} \put(319,174){$l$} \put(79,200){$x(k,l)$} \put(200,160){$s(k,l)$} \put(335,180){$z(k,l)$} \end{overpic} \caption{Possible bypass attachments to $S$. Only some of the punctures $D^i$ that occur along the dividing curve are depicted here.} \label{fig:bypassxsz} \end{figure} In the following we will show that these three types of attachments correspond to the front projections of Figure~\ref{fig:openbraid}. First note, that after the bypass attachments along the curves $x(k,l),s(k,l),z(k,l)$ depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:bypassxsz} we obtain the dividing curves $\Gamma_{\Xkl}, \Gamma_{\Skl}$ and $\Gamma_{\Zkl}$ on $S\times\{1\}$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig:afterbypassxsz}. \begin{figure}[ht] \begin{overpic {AfterBypassxsz} \put(49,79){$k$} \put(64,42){$l$} \put(178,70){$k$} \put(191,41){$l$} \put(308,71){$k$} \put(324,41){$l$} \put(95,0){$\Gamma_{X(k,l)}$} \put(225,0){$\Gamma_{S(k,l)}$} \put(355,0){$\Gamma_{Z(k,l)}$} \end{overpic} \caption{Result of a bypass attachment. The punctures $D^i$ are denoted by dots on the dividing curve.} \label{fig:afterbypassxsz} \end{figure} \begin{lemma} Using the notation established above, suppose that $(D_n\times I, \xi)$ is obtained by a bypass attachment along the curve $x(k,l), s(k,l)$ or $z(k,l)$. Then $(D_n\times I, \xi)$ is contactomorphic to the complement of the standard neighborhood of the basic Legendrian braid $X(k.l)$, $S(k,l)$ or $Z(k,l)$, respectively, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:openbraid}, by a contactomorphism preserving the back face, front face and vertical boundaries. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\xi_X$ be the contact structure on $D_n\times I$ coming from straightening the exterior of $X(k,l)$ and let $\xi_x'$ be the contact structure on $D_n\times I$ obtained from an $I$ invariant neighborhood of $D_n$ by attaching a bypass layer along the curve $x(k,l)$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig:bypassxsz}. By construction the characteristic foliation and dividing sets on the back face and vertical boundaries of these braid complements agree. Notice that there is an isotopy (fixed outside a neighborhood of the front face) of the identity map on $D_n\times I$ so that the dividing curves on the front face are also preserved. By Giroux Realization \cite{Giroux91} we can assume the map also preserves the characteristic foliations (technically we are removing a small neighborhood of one of the front faces that lies in an $I$-invariant neighborhood, but it should be clear that this does not affect our argument). So the identity map can be isotoped to a map $\phi$ that is a contactomorphism from $\xi_X$ to $\xi_x'$ in a neighborhood $U$ of $\partial (D_n\times I)$. Let $S$ be a convex surface embedded in the interior of the region $U$ that is obtained by rounding the corners of $\partial (D_n\times I)$. There are $n$ disks properly embedded in $D_n\times I$ that come as the product of the horizontal lines in Figure~\ref{fig:straight}. We can think of the boundaries of these disks as lying on $S$ and one easily checks they intersect the dividing set exactly twice. Thus we may Legendrian realize the boundaries of these disks and make them convex. Each will contain exactly one dividing curve, thus $\phi$ may be further isotoped to fix the characteristic foliation on the disk. Hence we can isotope $\phi$ to be a contactomorphism on $U'$ which is $U$ union a neighborhood of these disks. Since the complement of $U'$ can be assumed to be a ball and there is a unique tight contact structure on the ball, we may finally isotope $\phi$ to a contactomorphism from $\xi_X$ to $\xi_x'$ on all of $D_n\times I$. Considering Figure~\ref{fig:straight2} and the rightmost diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:afterbypassxsz} we see that the argument for $Z(k,l)$ is almost identical. The only difference is that the uppermost $k$ horizontal arcs in Figure~\ref{fig:straight2} will result in convex disks with 2 dividing curves each. There are two possibilities for such dividing curves, but one of them will give a bypass that straddles the ``vertical" dividing curve in the bottom right diagram of Figure~\ref{fig:straight2}. Pushing over this bypass will result in a disconnected dividing curve on $\partial (D\times I)$ and hence an overtwisted disk. Thus there is a unique possible configuration for the dividing curves on the disks corresponding the the horizontal lines in Figure~\ref{fig:straight2}. With this observation the argument is identical to the one given above for $X(k,l)$. The proof of $S(k,l)$ is identical to the one given above for $Z(k,l)$ after one draws the straightened exterior of $S(k,l)$ and compares it to the middle diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:afterbypassxsz}. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:legbraid}] The manifold $D_n\times [0,1]$ is built up from bypass layers, and above we understood what front projections each of them correspond to. Thus any Legendrian knot can be built up from concatenations of the Legendrian braids on Figure~\ref{fig:openbraid}. \end{proof} \section{Patterns in $D^2\times S^1$} \label{sec:legendrianbraidsind2xs1} This section discusses the definitions, constructions, and basic computations concerning Legendrian and transverse pattens. The definitions and notations used below for smooth patterns in $V=D^2\times S^1$ are given in Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot}. \subsection{Legendrian patterns} Let $\xi_V$ be the unique (up to isotopy) $S^1$--invariant tight contact structure on $V=D^2\times S^1$ with convex boundary $\partial V$ and dividing curve $\Gamma_{\partial V}=\lon\cup-\lon$. To be specific we can take $V$ to be a subset of the 1-jet space $T^S^1\times {\mathbb{R}}$ with its standard contact structure $\ker(dz-y\, d\theta)$, where $z$ is the coordinate on ${\mathbb{R}}$, $\theta$ the coordinate on $S^1$ and $y$ the coordinate on the fiber of $T^S^1=S^1\times {\mathbb{R}}$. The core $C=\{(0,0)\}\times S^1$ of $V$ can be assumed to be a Legendrian curve. \subsubsection{Invariants of Legendrian patterns}\label{invariantsinV} To define invariants of Legendrian patterns in $V$ we think of $V$ as the 1--jet space of $S^1$ and use the front projection. More specifically, as first observed by Ng \cite{NgThesis} (or \cite{NgTraynor04} for more sophisticated invariants) the relative Thurston-Bennequin number and rotation number of a Legendrian braid $Q$ in $V$ can be computed in terms of the front projection: \begin{eqnarray} \reltb_{V}(Q)&=&\textrm{writhe}(Q_{\rm{open}})-\frac12c(Q_{\rm{open}});\\ \relrot_{V}(Q)&=&\frac12(d(Q_{\rm{open}})-u(Q_{\rm{open}})), \end{eqnarray} where $Q_{\rm{open}}$ is any open Legendrian tangle whose closure is $Q$, $c(Q_{\rm{open}})$ denotes the number of cusps and $d(Q_{\rm{open}})$ and $u(Q_{\rm{open}})$ denotes the number of downward and upward cusps, respectively. Note that the above value is independent of the open pattern $Q_{\rm{open}}$ whose closure is $Q$. Let $\Leg_{V}(\Pat)$ denote the set of Legendrian isotopy classes of Legendrian representations of the smooth pattern $\Pat$. We will denote Legendrian isotopy classes of patterns in the smooth pattern type $\Pat$ with relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant $t$ and relative rotation number $r$ by $\Leg_{V}(\Pat;t,r)$. The set of representatives with relative Thurston--Bennequin number $t$ are denoted by $\Leg_{V}(\Pat;t)$. \subsubsection{Reimbeddings of Legendrian patterns}\label{reembed} When studying Legendrian satellite knots it will be useful to ``reimbed" certain patterns into the solid torus. We discuss this here. The solid torus $(V,\xi_V)$ can be embedded into itself as follows. The core $C$ is a Legendrian curve, and $(V,\xi_V)$ can be interpreted as a standard neighborhood of $C$. The standard neighborhood $\nu(\St_+^z\St_-^s(C))$ of a stabilization of the core is on the one hand naturally a subset of $(V,\xi_V)=\nu(C)$ and on the other hand it is contactomorphic to $(V,\xi_V)$, thus defining an embedding \[\zeta^z\sigma^s\colon (V,\xi_V)\hookrightarrow (V,\xi_V)\] whose image is $\nu(\St_+^z\St_-^s(C))$. Notice that the image of $n$ horizontal strands parallel to $C$ under $\zeta^z\sigma^s$ is $\mathcal{Z}^z\mathcal{S}^s$. Since the concatenation of open patterns is well-defined, the above discussion leads to the following simple observation whose proof is left to the reader. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:stabpattern} For a Legendrian pattern type $\Q\in\Leg_{V}(\Pat)$, the followings are equivalent: \begin{enumerate} \item\label{lem:stabpatternt item:1} There exists a Legendrian pattern $\widetilde{\Q}\in \Leg_{V}(\Delta^{(z+s)}\Pat)$ such that $\Q=\zeta^z\sigma^s(\widetilde{Q})$; \item\label{lem:stabpatternt item:2} We have the inclusions $\Q\subset \nu\subset V$ for some standard neighborhood $\nu$ of $\St_+^z\St_-^s(C)$ with $\partial \nu$ isotopic to $\partial V$ in the complement of $\Q$; and \item\label{lem:stabpatternt item:3} There exists an open Legendrian pattern $\widetilde{\Q}_\textrm{open}\in\Leg_{\xi_{{\Rold}}}(\Delta^{(z+s)}\Pat_\textrm{open})$ such that $\Q$ is the closure of the open braid $\mathcal{Z}^{z}\mathcal{S}^{s}\widetilde{\Q}_\textrm{open}$. \end{enumerate} In particular the condition in Item (\ref{lem:stabpatternt item:3}) is independent on the chosen tangle-representation of $\Q$.\qed \end{lemma} \begin{remark} It is interesting to note, that it is not clear how one would define a full positive twist of a Legendrian pattern. One reason for this is that $(V,\xi_V)$ has no solid sub-torus with two dividing curves of slope $1$. So one cannot use the construction above for negative twists. One might try cutting open a pattern to get a tangle and then concatenating with $\Delta$ to add a positive twist, but Figure~\ref{fig:noposttwist} shows that this is not well-defined and can result in a patterns related by stabilization. \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{overpic {nopostwist} \put(174,220){$=$} \put(310,205){add twist} \put(325,125){isotope} \put(295,60){destabilize} \put(170,-8){isotope} \put(15,60){destabilize} \put(10,130){isotope} \put(5,205){add twist} \end{overpic} \caption{The top row shows two ways to cut open a pattern in $V$. The next row shows the effect of adding a full positive twist. The other diagrams show that these patterns are related by stabilizations.} \label{fig:noposttwist} \end{figure} \end{remark} \subsubsection{Legendrian braid patterns} Suppose that $\Pat$ represents the closure of a braid word $w\in B_n$ in $V$, and let $Q$ be a Legendrian representative of a Legendrian isotopy class $\Q\in\Leg_{V}(\Pat)$. We may cut $V$ along a meridional disk to get an open Legendrian pattern $Q_{open}$ in $({{\Rold}},\xi_{{\Rold}})$. Moreover this open pattern smoothly represents a conjugate $uwu^{-1}$ of $w$, where $u\in B_n$. By Theorem \ref{thm:legbraid} the open Legendrian braid $Q_{\rm{open}}$ is Legendrian isotopic to a concatenation of the building blocks of Figure \ref{fig:openbraid}. This sequence of building blocks defines a braid word equivalent to $uwu^{-1}$ in the group $B_n$. Thus after gluing the ends of $\Rold$ to obtain $V$ we have established the following result. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:legbraids1} A Legendrian braid $B$ in $(V,\xi_V)$ is Legendrian isotopic to the closure of (cyclic) concatenation of the building blocks in Figure~\ref{fig:openbraidsimpl}.\hfill \qed \end{theorem} We can also prove a closed version of Theorems~\ref{openmaxtb} and~\ref{thm:poslegendrianbraid}. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:closedposlegendrianbraid} Let $\Pat$ be the closure of a positive braid $w\in B_n$, then $ \overline{\reltb}_V(\Pat)= \textit{length}(w) $ and $\vert\Leg_{V}(\Pat;\overline{\reltb}_{V}(\Pat))\vert=1$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The computation of the maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant follows from Theorem~\ref{openmaxtb} and the observations in Section~\ref{invariantsinV} about the relation between the invariants in $V=D^2\times S^1$ and $\Rold$. For uniqueness take a Legendrian representation $Q$ with maximal relative Thurston--Bennequin number. As noted above we can cut $V$ open to obtain an open Legendrian braid $Q_{\rm{open}}$ in $\Rold$ representing the braid word $uwu^{-1}$ for some $n$-braid $u$. We know the algebraic length of $uwu^{-1}$ will equal the length of $w$ and thus $\overline{\reltb}_V(Q_{\rm{open}})=\textit{length}(w)- c$, where $c$ is the number of left cusps in the front projection of $Q_{\rm{open}}$. Since we are assuming that $\overline{\reltb}(Q_{\rm{open}})=\textit{length}(w)$ we see that there are no cusps and hence when $Q_{\rm{open}}$ is represented in terms of the basic Legendrian braids from Corollary~\ref{thm:legbraidsimpl} there will be no $\mathcal{Z}$s or $\mathcal{S}$s. From this we see that $uwu^{-1}$ must just be some cyclic permutation of $w$. By choosing the cutting disc differently we can make sure that the open braid we get from $Q$ represents $w$, and thus as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:poslegendrianbraid} we conclude that $Q$ is the unique Legendrian representation with maximal Thurston--Bennequin number. \end{proof} We can give a complete Legendrian classification for 2-braid patterns. This is due to the fact that it is clear when 2--braid patterns destabilize. \begin{theorem}\label{2starndbraid} Let $\Pat_{m}$ be a 2--braid pattern with $m$ (odd) half twists. Then $\Pat_m$ is Legendrian simple. In particular: \begin{enumerate} \item If $m> 0$, then $\Pat_m$ has a unique Legendrian representative which has maximal relative Thurston--Bennequin number $m$ and rotation number $0$. \item If $m<0$, then $\Pat_m$ has $\|m\|+1$ representatives with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number $2m$ and with different rotation numbers $\relrot_{V}\in \{-\|m\|,-(\|m\|-2),\dots,\|m\|-2,\|m\|\}$.\end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} The key observation is that if a 2-braid is represented as a product of basic braids and there is a basic $\mathcal{X}$-braid next to a basic $\mathcal{S}$ or $\mathcal{Z}$-braid then the braid will destabilize. We have already observed that there is a unique maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant representative for $m>0$ and we now see that all other destabilize. For the $m<0$ case we see that all Legendrian representatives destabilize to one represented by a concatenation of basic $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$-braids. Moreover there are an odd number of basic braids in this representation and thus there must be two adjacent $\mathcal{S}$ or $\mathcal{Z}$-braids. Noting the isotopy in Figure~\ref{fig:ssz} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{overpic {ssz} \end{overpic} \caption{Legendrian isotopy of a tangle.} \label{fig:ssz} \end{figure} and recalling that we can cyclically permute the basic $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$-braids one may easily see that two Legendrian representatives that are written with the same number of $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$-braids are isotopic. Moreover if the number of $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$-braids used to represent two Legendrian knots is different then their rotation numbers will be different. The result now easily follows. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Legendrian cable patterns} Cabling a knot is a satellite operation. To see this let $T\subset V$ be a torus parallel to the boundary of $V$ then let $\mu$ be the primitive element in $H_1(T^2)$ that becomes trivial when included into $V$ and let $\lambda$ be the homology class of $x\times S^1$ for some $x\in D^2$. Then for any relatively prime integers $p$ and $q$ the homology class $p\lambda + q\mu$ can be realized by an embedded curve $C_{p,q}$ on $T$. The knot $C_{p,q}$ represents the knot type $\CC_{p,q}$ that we call the {\em $(p,q)$-cable pattern}. It is clear that for a given knot $\K$ the satellite $\CC_{p,q}(\K)$ is simply the $(p,q)$-cable of $\K$. \begin{theorem}\label{cablepats} Let $p$ and $q$ be relatively prime integers. Then $\CC_{p,q}$ is Legendrian simple. In particular \begin{enumerate} \item If $p/q>0$, then there is a unique maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant representative which has $\reltb_V=pq-p$ and rotation number $0$. \item If $p/q<0$, then the maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $pq$ and $\Leg_V(\CC_{p,q};pq)$ has $2n+2$ elements with rotation numbers \[ \{\pm(p+q(n+k))\| k=-n, -n+2, \ldots, n-2, n\}, \] where $n$ is the unique integer such that $-n-1<p/q<-n$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{remark} Note that this theorem subsumes Lemma~\ref{2starndbraid}, but the proofs are significantly different and the proof of the former demonstrates the utility of the the constructions of Legendrian braids in Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraid} (as the classification of Legendrian Whitehead patters below will too). \end{remark} \begin{proof} The proof of this theorem follows the proof of Theorem~3.2 and~3.6 in \cite{EtnyreHonda05} almost exactly, so we only sketch the details here. We first observe that by the classification of contact structures on solid tori, \cite{Giroux00, Honda00a}, there is a convex $T^2$ in $(V,\xi_V)$ that is parallel to the boundary with dividing slope $r/s$ for any $r/s\leq 0$ and none with dividing slope greater than zero. Now given a Legendrian representative $L$ of $\CC_{p,q}$ with $p/q>0$ we claim that the twisting of $\xi_V$ along $L$ relative to any torus $T^2$ parallel to the boundary of $V$ must be less than zero. If it were not then there would be a Legendrian $L'$ in that knot type with twisting zero. We could then place it on a convex torus that would necessarily have to have dividing slope $p/q$ which is impossible. Knowing that the twisting of $\xi_V$ along $L$ relative to $T$ is negative we can put $L$ on a convex torus. Suppose this torus has dividing slope $r/s\leq0$. Then the twisting of $L$ relative to $T$ is $\|rq-ps\|$. One may easily see that this is maximized by $-p$ exactly when $r/s=0/1$. Thus any maximal Thurston-Bennequin representative will be a ruling curve on the unique (up to isotopy) convex torus with dividing slope $0$ and thus is itself unique up to isotopy. The relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant differs from the twisting of $\xi_V$ relative to $T$ by $pq$. So the maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $pq-p$. One may now easily draw a front diagram for $L$ (using only basic $\mathcal{X}$ braids) and see that the rotation number is $0$. Given any $L$ with relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant less than $pq-p$ we can put it on a convex torus with dividing slope less than $0$ and use a convex annulus with one boundary component $L$ and the other a ruling curve on the dividing slope $0$ convex torus to find a bypass for $L$ and destabilize it. Thus all Legendrian knots realizing $\CC_{p,q}$ will destabilize to the one with maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant. Turning now to $p/q<0$ one can construct a Legendrian representative of $\CC_{p,q}$ as a Legendrian divide on a a convex torus $T$ parallel to the boundary of $V$. This Legendrian will have relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant $pq$. The proof of Theorem 1.2 in \cite{EtnyreHonda05} shows that the relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant cannot be larger than $pq$. From this it is easy to see that any maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant representative of $\CC_{p,q}$ is a Legendrian divide on a convex torus. Moreover one can argue that all non-maximal representatives will destabilize to one of these as was done for positive $p/q$. To compute the rotation numbers notice that $V$ is a standard neighborhood of a Legendrian core curve $C$ and that any convex torus with dividing slope $p/q$ will be contained between the boundary of a standard neighborhood of $\St^{n_1}_+\St^{n_2}_-(C)$ and $\St_\pm(\St^{n_1}_+\St^{n_2}_-(C))$ where $n=n_1+n_2$ and $n_1,n_2\geq 0$. The computation of the rotation numbers can now be done as in the proof of Lemma~3.8 from \cite{EtnyreHonda05}. Here we indicate the presentation of such curves in terms of $\mathcal{Z}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ braids. Notice that $\\|p\\|=n\\|q\\|+e$ where $e>0$. Now any maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant representative of $\CC_{p,q}$ will be of the form $(Z^q)^{n_1}(S^q)^{n_2}Z^e$ or $(Z^q)^{n_1}(S^q)^{n_2}S^e$. Assuming $p>0$ (and hence $q<0$) we see that $p+nq=e$ and the computation of the rotation numbers is clear. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Legendrian Whitehead patterns} \label{lwp} Whitehead doubling of a knot is based on the sequence of patterns $\W_m$ ($m\in{\mathbb{Z}}$) in $V$ shown in Figure \ref{fig:whiteheadtop}. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {whiteheadtop} \put(90,25){$m$} \end{overpic} \caption{The Whitehead pattern $\W_m$ (where the box contains $m\in{\mathbb{Z}}$ half twists).} \label{fig:whiteheadtop} \end{figure} Note that for these patterns winding number is $0$. In the following we give a complete description of $\Leg_{V}(\W_m)$. \begin{theorem}\label{whiteheadpatternclass} Let $\W_m$ be a smooth pattern with $m$ half twists. Then \begin{enumerate} \item For $m\ge 0$ even, there are two Legendrian representatives of $\W_m$ with \[ (\reltb_{V},\relrot_{V})=(1-m,0). \] These two Legendrian patterns become isotopic after a single stabilization (of the same sign). All other Legendrian patterns of type $\W_m$ destabilize to one of these two. \item For $m>0$ odd, there are exactly two Legendrian representatives of $\W_m$ with maximal relative Thurston-Bennequin number, $\reltb_{V} = -m-3$. These representatives are distinguished by their relative rotation numbers $\relrot_{V}=\pm1$ and a negative stabilization of the $\relrot_{V}=1$ pattern is isotopic to a positive stabilization of the $\relrot_{V}=-1$ pattern. All other Legendrian knots destabilize to at least one of these two. In particular, the pattern type is Legendrian simple. \item For $m<0$ odd, $\W_m$ has $\|m\|+1$ Legendrian representatives with \[ (\reltb_{V},\relrot_{V})=(-3,0). \] All other Legendrian knots destabilize to one of these. After any stabilizations, these $\|m\|+1$ representatives all become isotopic. \item\label{item4} For $m< 0$ even, $\W_m$ has $\left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right)^2$ different Legendrian representations with \[ (\reltb_{V},\relrot_{V})=(1,0). \] All other Legendrian knots destabilize to one of these. These Legendrian knots fall into $\frac{\|m\|}2+1$ different Legendrian isotopy classes after any given positive number of positive stabilizations, and $\frac{\|m\|}2+1$ different Legendrian isotopy classes after any given positive number of negative stabilizations. After at least one positive and one negative stabilization (with a fixed number of each), the knots all become Legendrian isotopic. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} See Figure~\ref{fig:mainthm1} and~\ref{fig:mainthm3} for a schematic picture for the Legendrian mountain range for $\W_m$. \begin{figure} \centering {\small $ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \vcenter{\xymatrix @dr { 2 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d]& \\ 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & &\\ 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & & & \\ &&&}} \vcenter{\xymatrix @dr { & 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d]& \\ 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-}& 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & &\\ 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} &1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & & & \\ 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d]&&&&\\ &&&&}} $ } \vspace{-3cm} \caption{Schematic Legendrian mountain range for $\W_m$ for $m\geq 0$ even, left, and $m>0$ odd, right. Rotation number is plotted in the horizontal direction, Thurston--Bennequin number in the vertical direction. The numbers represent the number of Legendrian representatives for a particular $(\rot, \tb)$, and the signed arrows represent positive and negative stabilization.} \label{fig:mainthm1} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering {\small $ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \vcenter{\xymatrix @dr { \|m\|+1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d]& \\ 1 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & &\\ 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & & & \\ &&&& }} \vcenter{\xymatrix @dr { \left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right)^2 \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & \left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right) \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & \left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right) \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d]& \\ \left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right) \ar[r]^{+} \ar[d]_{-} & 1 \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & &\\ \left(\frac{\|m\|}2+1\right) \ar@{.}[r] \ar@{.}[d] & & & \\ &&&&}} $} \vspace{-3cm} \caption{Legendrian mountain range for $\W_m$, $m$ odd and negative, left, and even and negative, right.} \label{fig:mainthm3} \end{figure} The proof follows the authors paper with Ng \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13}. The method of \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} for putting a Legendrian representation of twists knots in $(S^3,\xi_\textrm{st})$ in a standard form only uses that the contact structure is tight and the existence of certain discs in some decompositions of the knot complement. The contact structure we consider is still tight, and all the discs still exist. More specifically, after showing that any Legendrian twist knot in $S^3$ has a Legendrian unknot with $tb=-1$ linking it in a particular way, the rest of the classification in \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} is done by analyzing Legendrian patterns in the smooth type of $\W_m$. For a Legendrian pattern that does not destabilize, this is done by finding two meridional disks in $V$ that cut $V$ into two copies of $\Rold$, one containing a 2-braid representing the $m$ twists in $\W_m$ and one containing the clasp shown in Figure~\ref{fig:whiteheadtop}. The Legendrian knots representing the 2-braid are classified in Theorem~\ref{thm:legbraid} above and the Legendrian representative for the clasp is understood in Section~4.2 of \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13}. The proofs there cary over to our case (more or less verbatim) yielding the following result. \begin{theorem}\label{citethm} Any Legendrian representation of $\W_m$ either destabilizes or isotopic to the Legendrian patterns depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:Legtwistpattern}.\qed \end{theorem} \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {Legtwistpattern} \put(89,29){$m$} \end{overpic} \caption{Legendrian representatives of the Whitehead pattern $\W_m$ with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number. The box contains $m$ copies of the basic ${X}$-braid if $m\ge0$, and $\vert m\vert$ copies of the basic ${S}$ and ${Z}$-braids if $m<0$.} \label{fig:Legtwistpattern} \end{figure} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{whiteheadpatternclass}] We start with the case when $m<0$, so the box in Figure~\ref{fig:Legtwistpattern} contains $\vert m\vert$ basic ${\mathcal{S}}$ and ${\mathcal{Z}}$-braids in arbitrary order. Depending on the orientation of the strands there are two types of ${\mathcal{S}}$s and ${\mathcal{Z}}$s as depicted on Figure~\ref{fig:zsplusminus}. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \includegraphic {zs-example} \caption{The Legendrian braids ${\mathcal{Z}}^+$, ${\mathcal{Z}}^-$, ${\mathcal{S}}^+$ and ${\mathcal{S}}^-$, respectivelly} \label{fig:zsplusminus} \end{figure} Thus the content of the box can be described by a word $w$ of length $\vert m\vert$ in ${\mathcal{Z}}^+$, ${\mathcal{Z}}^-$, ${\mathcal{S}}^+$ and ${\mathcal{S}}^-$, with alternating signs. Let $\Q_w$ denote the Legendrian isotopy class corresponding to the word $w$. In Figure~\ref{fig:ssz} it was shown that if $w'$ is obtained from $w$ by exchanging an appearance of ${\mathcal{Z}}^\pm{\mathcal{S}}^\mp{\mathcal{S}}^\pm$ for ${\mathcal{S}}^\pm{\mathcal{S}}^\mp{\mathcal{Z}}^\pm$ or similarly exchanging ${\mathcal{Z}}^\pm{\mathcal{Z}}^\mp{\mathcal{S}}^\pm$ for ${\mathcal{S}}^\pm{\mathcal{Z}}^\mp{\mathcal{Z}}^\pm$ then $\Q_w=\Q_{w'}$. Now consider the case when $m$ is even. The isotopies in Figure~\ref{fig:ssz} show that any two consecutive $+$ letters can be exchanged and similarly that any two consecutive $-$ letters can be exchanged. Thus the Legendrian pattern determined by a word $w$ is determined by the number of ${Z}^+$s, ${Z}^-$s, ${S}^+$s and ${S}^-$ in the word --- which we denote by $z^+(w),z^-(w),s^+(w)$, and $s^-(w)$, respectively --- and whether or not the word begins with a $+$ or $-$ letter. Figure~\ref{fig:movez} shows that $\Q_{w'{S}^\pm}=\Q_{{S}^\pm w'}$ and similarly reflecting the diagram about a horizontal axis shows that $\Q_{w'\mathcal{Z}^\pm}=\Q_{\mathcal{Z}^\pm w'}$. Thus we can always assume that the word begins with, say, a $+$ letter. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {Sbacktofront} \end{overpic} \caption{The sequence of front diagrams showing how to move an $\mathcal{S}$ from one side of the cusp to the other. In other words that $\Q_{w'{S}^\pm}=\Q_{{S}^\pm w'}$.} \label{fig:movez} \end{figure} We conclude that the Legendrian isotopy class of $\Q_w$ can be described by the quadruple of numbers $(z^+,z^-,s^+,s^-)=(z^+(w),z^-(w),s^+(w),s^-(w))$, and we have the relations \[ z^++s^+=\frac{\vert m\vert}2 \quad \text{and}\quad z^-+s^-=\frac{\vert m\vert}2. \] Thus the quadruple can be replaced by the pair $(z^+,z^-)$ and all Legendrian representations of the pattern $\W_m$ fall into the isotopy classes $\Q_{(z^+,z^-)}$ determined by two numbers $z^+$ and $z^-$ that lie between 0 and $\frac{\vert m\vert}2$. Now notice that the standard Legendrian unknot $\mathcal{U}$ has Thurston-Bennequin number $-1$, thus for a Legendrian representative $\Q$ of $\W_m$ the satellite $\Q(\mathcal{U})$, as described in Section~\ref{sec:braidsatellite}, is a Legendrian representative of a twist knot with $(m-2)$ half twists. By Theorem 1.1 of \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} $\Q_{(z^+,z^-)}(\mathcal{U})$ is different from $\Q_{(\tilde z^+,\tilde z^-)}(\mathcal{U})$ unless $(\tilde z^+,\tilde z^-)=(z^+,z^-)$ or $(m-1-z^+,m-1-z^-)$. Similarly the knots $\Q_{(z^+,z^-)}(\St_+\mathcal{U})$ and $\Q_{(\tilde z^+,\tilde z^-)}(\St_+\mathcal{U})$ are distinct unless $(\tilde z^+,\tilde z^-)=(z^+,z^-)$ or $(m-z^+,m-z^-)$. Thus we see that all the $\Q_{(z^+,z^-)}$ must be distinct as patterns. This establishes Item~(\ref{item4}) of the theorem for the maximal Thurston-Bennequin examples. For the non-maximal examples we notice that Theorem~\ref{citethm} and the proof of Lemma~\ref{2starndbraid} imply that a non-maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant pattern will destabilize. We now note that in Figure~\ref{fig:szstab} it is shown that the stabilized knot $\St^\pm\Q_w$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\St^\pm\Q_{w'}$, where $w'$ is obtained from $w$ by exchanging any $\mathcal{\mathcal{Z}}^\pm$ for $\mathcal{\mathcal{S}}^\pm$ or vice versa. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \includegraphic {szstab} \caption{Legendrian isotopy of a tangle.} \label{fig:szstab} \end{figure} Thus to complete Item~(\ref{item4}) of the theorem we merely need to notice that by embedding the solid torus $V$ as a neighborhood of the maximal Thurston-Bennequin unknot in $S^3$ the classification of twist knots in \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} implies that $\St^\pm\Q_w$ is determined by $z^\pm$. For the $m<0$ odd case the proof is similar, but simpler. The relation of Figure~\ref{fig:szstab} translates to $\Q_{w\mathcal{Z}^\pm}=\Q_{\mathcal{Z}^\mp w}$ and $\Q_{w\mathcal{S}^\pm}=\Q_{\mathcal{S}^\mp w}$. Since $m$ is odd, this shows that $\Q_{w}=\Q_{w'}$ whenever they have the same number of $\mathcal{Z}$s and $\mathcal{S}$s. Let $\Q_z$ denote the Legendrian isotopy classes with $z$, $\mathcal{Z}$s (and $m-z$, $\mathcal{S}$s). Write $m=-2n+1$. Then Theorem 1.1 of \cite{EtnyreNgVertesi13} says that $\Q_z(\U)$ and $\Q_{z'}(\U)$ are different for $z\neq z' \text{ or } n-z'$. To distinguish $\Q_z$ from $\Q_{n-z}$ we need to consider the satellies $\Q_z(\St_+ \U)=\Q_{z+2}(\U)$. Here we see that $\Q_z(\St_+ \U)\neq \Q_{z'}(\St_+ \U)$ whenever $z\neq z'\text{ or } n+1-z'$. The $m<0$ odd case is now complete by noting that maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant patterns have been classified and the non-maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant patters are dealt with in the discussion of stabilization above. For $m\ge 0$ the box of Figure~\ref{fig:Legtwistpattern} can be uniquely filled with $m$ copies of the basic ${\mathcal{X}}$-braid, thus depending on the orientation of the strands there can be two Legendrian representatives of $\W_m$ with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number. For $m$ odd these representatives are distinguished by their relative rotation number. For $m$ even the representatives have the same relative rotation number, but can be distinguished using contact homology, see for example Proposition 5.11 of \cite{NgTraynor04}. After any stabilization the knot is isotopic to one that has a $\mathcal{Z}$ or $\mathcal{S}$ in it, thus the orientation of the cusp can be changed, and the knots become Legendrian isotopic. \end{proof} \subsection{Transverse patterns} \label{sec:transversebraidsind2xi} In this section we discuss transverse representations of patterns in $(V,\xi_V)$. Let $\Pat$ be a smooth pattern in $V$, and let $R$ be a transverse representative of $\Pat$ with transverse isotopy class $\mathcal{R}$. The set of transverse isotopy classes of $\Pat$ is denoted by $\Trans(\Pat)$. In \cite{EtnyreHonda01b} it was shown that the relation between Legendrian representations and transverse representations is local. \begin{theorem}[Etnyre and Honda 2001, \cite{EtnyreHonda01b}]\label{relation} The transverse patterns $R$ and $R'$ are transverse isotopic if and only if they have Legendrian approximations $Q$ and $Q'$ that have Legendrian isotopic negative stabilizations.\qed \end{theorem} One can also adapt the proof in \cite{EpsteinFuchsMeyer01} to give an alternate proof of this result. The above theorem implies that the relative self-linking number can be defined using the relative invariants for Legendrian knots in $(V,\xi_V)$: \[\textrm{relsl}_{V}(\mathcal{R})=\textrm{reltb}_{V}(\Q)-\textrm{relrot}_{\xi_V}(\Q),\] where $\Q$ is any Legendrian approximation of $\mathcal{R}$. A pattern $\Pat$ is called \emph{transverse simple} if its transverse representatives are distinguished by their relative self-linking numbers. Recall from Subsection~\ref{reembed} that $(V,\xi_V)$ can be embedded into itself as a standard neighborhood of a stabilization of its Legendrian core, thus a negative full twist of a pattern can be defined for transverse patterns, just as they were for Legendrian patterns in that subsection, to which we refer for the notation used below. The image of the trivial transverse pattern with $n$ horizontal strands under $\sigma$ and $\zeta$ are the transverse push-offs of $\mathcal{S}^n$ and $\mathcal{Z}^n$, respectively. \subsubsection{Transverse braid patterns} Using the results for Legendrian braids patterns in $(V,\xi_V)$ we can classify transverse braids in a solid torus. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:transversebraid} Let $\Pat$ be a braid pattern in $V$, and let $\mathcal{R}\in \Trans({\Pat})$ be a transverse isotopy class in $(V,\xi_V)$. Then $\mathcal{R}$ can be represented as the closure of some concatenation of the basic transverse braids shown in Figure~\ref{fig:opentransversebraidsimpl}. \end{theorem} \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {basictrans} \put(22,0){$\mathcal{X}_{\textrm{tr}} $} \put(112,0){$\mathcal{S}_{\textrm{tr}} $} \put(202,0){$\St_{\textrm{tr}}$} \end{overpic} \caption{Basic transverse braids (the strands not depicted are assumed to be horizontal).} \label{fig:opentransversebraidsimpl} \end{figure} \begin{proof} Take a Legendrian approximation $Q$ of the representative $R$ of $\mathcal{R}$. From Corollary~\ref{thm:legbraidsimpl}, $Q$ is built up from basic Legendrian braids depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:openbraidsimpl}. Thus $\mathcal{R}$ is the transverse push off of this concatenation, which means it is transverse isotopic to the transverse push offs of the sequence of the basic Legendrian braids. Figures~\ref{fig:destabtransvers} and~\ref{fig:s1ktr} show that the transverse push offs can be further simplified to the basic transverse braids of Figure~\ref{fig:opentransversebraidsimpl}. \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{overpic {destabtransvers} \end{overpic} \caption{The transverse push off of $Z(1,n-1)$ destabilizes.} \label{fig:destabtransvers} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \begin{overpic {s1ktr} \end{overpic} \caption{The transverse push off of $S(1,n-1)$.} \label{fig:s1ktr} \end{figure} \end{proof} Unlike Legendrian braids, transverse braids are easy to understand. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:transversed2s1} Any braid pattern $\Pat$ in $V$ is transversally simple in $(V,\xi_V)$ and the maximal self-linking number is \[\overline{\textrm{relsl}}_{V}(\Pat)=\textit{writhe}(\Pat).\] \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $\mathcal{R}$ be a transverse patters representing some braid $\Pat$. According to Theorem~\ref{thm:transversebraid} a pattern $\mathcal{R}$ can be written as a word in the basic transverse braids in Figure~\ref{fig:opentransversebraidsimpl}. If we denote by $\textit{writhe}(\mathcal{R})$ the number of $\mathcal{X}_{\textrm{tr}}$ minus the number of $\mathcal{S}_{\textrm{tr}}$ then one easily computes that the relative self-linking number of $\mathcal{R}$ is $\textit{writhe}(\mathcal{R})-\# \St_{\textrm{tr}}$. Moreover, any word in the $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{tr}}$ and $\mathcal{X}_{\mathrm{tr}}$ corresponds directly to a braid word in the braid group and vice versa. So if we ignore the $\St_{\textrm{tr}}$ in the expression of $\mathcal{R}$ as a word in the basic transverse braids then we get a braid word $w$ in the topological braid group representing $\Pat$. Examining the braid relations one sees that for any other braid word $w'$ representing $\Pat$ we have that $\textit{writhe}(w)=\textit{writhe}(w')$ and thus we can talk about $\textit{writhe}(\Pat)$. We have shown that any transverse pattern $\mathcal{R}$ representing $B$ satisfies \[ \textrm{relsl}_{\xi_V}(\mathcal{R})\leq \textit{writhe}(\Pat). \] Representing $\mathcal{R}$ as a word in the basic transverse braids in Figure~\ref{fig:opentransversebraidsimpl}, we see that it has maximal self-linking number unless there are some $\St_{\textrm{tr}}$ terms. If there are such terms we can clearly destabilize $\mathcal{R}$. So any transverse braid with non maximal self-linking number destabilizes. To see that two transverse braids with maximal self-linking number are transversely isotopic recall that a word in the basic transverse braids $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{tr}}$ and $\mathcal{X}_{\mathrm{tr}}$ corresponds to a word in the standard generators of the braid group and vice versa. In addition, all braid relations in the braid group correspond to transverse isotopies of the associated transverse braids. Similarly conjugations of the braid word representing the braid are also transverse isotopies in $V$. Thus the topological types of a maximal self-linking number transverse braid determines the braid up to isotopy. \end{proof} Note that a full twist $\Delta$ is naturally a transverse braid. For $R$ a transverse knot in $\mathcal{R}\in\Trans_{V}(\Pat)$ take an arbitrary opening $R_{\textrm{open}}$ with a convex disc that intersects $R$ in $n$ points. And let $\Delta R_{\textrm{open}}$ be the concatenation of $\Delta$ and $R_{\textrm{open}}$. Choosing a different cutting disc will not change the transverse isotopy class of the resulting closed braid $\Delta\mathcal{R}$. Here we are using the fact that any two opening of $R$ are related to conjugation with elements in the braid group and these conjugations do not change the result. The operation $\Delta$ on transverse braids is the inverse of applying the map $\sigma^1$ defined in Subsection~\ref{reembed} to a braid. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:deltastab} For any transverse braid $\mathcal{R}\in\Trans(\Pat)$ we have \[\Delta(\sigma^1(\mathcal{R}))=\sigma^1(\Delta\mathcal{R})=\mathcal{R}.\]\qed \end{lemma} \subsubsection{Transverse Whithead patterns} As a consequence of the Legendrian classification of Whitehead patterns and the relation between Legendrian and transverse knots recalled in Theorem~\ref{relation} we can classify transverse Whitehead patterns. \begin{theorem} Let $\W_m$ be a smooth pattern with $m$ half twists. Then \begin{enumerate} \item For $m\ge 0$ or $m<0$ odd, $\W_m$ is transversely simple. Moreover the maximal relative self-linking number equals \[ \relsl_{V}= \begin{cases} 1-m & m\ge 0 \text{ is even,}\\ -m-2 & m>0 \text{ is odd,}\\ -3 & m<0 \text{ is odd.} \end{cases} \] \item For $m<0$ even, $\W_m$ has $\frac{\|m\|}2+1$ transverse representatives with maximal self-linking number $\relsl_{V}=1$, and any nontrivial stabilization of these maximal representatives is isotopic (for a fixed number of stabilizations).\qed \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \section{Satellites} \label{sec:braidsatellite} Topological satellite knots were discussed in Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot} and we refer the reader to that section to review notation and terminology. In this section we will begin by giving a general discussion of Legendrian satellite knots and what one can say about them in terms of the underlying pattern and companion knots. We then discuss the specific examples of Legendrian braids, cables and Whitehead doubles. We end this section with a discussion of transverse satellite knots. \subsection{Legendrian satellites}\label{subsec:legsatellites} Let $\Lc\in \Leg(\K)$ be a Legendrian isotopy class of the smooth knot type $\K$. Choose a specific Legendrian knot $L$ representing $\Lc$ and a standard contact neighborhood $\nu(L)$ of $L$. Denote by $\tau$ the Thurston--Bennequin framing for $L$. Note that $\tau=\lambda+\tb(L)\mu$, where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ give the standard longitude-meridian basis for $\partial \nu(L)$ as discussed in Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot}. Let $Q$ be a Legendrian pattern representing an isotopy class $\Q\in\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$. Denote by $\psi$ the unique (up to contact isotopy) contactomorphism from $(V,\xi_V)$ to $(\nu(L),\xi\vert_{\nu(L)})$. The contactomorphism $\psi$ necessarily maps $\Gamma_{\partial V}$ to $\Gamma_{\nu(L)}$, thus the product framing $\lon$ on $V$ is mapped to $\tau$. Denote the image of $Q$ under the contactomorphism $\psi$ by $Q(L)$. Then $Q(L)$ is a Legendrian knot in the smooth class \[ (\Delta^{-\tb(L)}\Pat)_{\tau}(\K)=(\Delta^{-\tb(L)}\Pat)_{\lambda+\tb(L)\mu}(\K)=\Pat_\lambda(\K)=\Pat(\K). \] A simple application of Lemma~\ref{isoIScontacto}, and the fact that standard neighborhoods of Legendrian knots are well-defined up to contact isotopy, shows that $Q(L)$ is well defined up to Legendrian isotopy independent of the choice of $L\in\Lc$ and $Q\in \Q$. \begin{lemma} Let $L_0$ and $L_1$ be two Legendrian knots in the Legendrian isotopy class $\Lc$, and choose contactomorphisms $\psi_0\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (\nu(L_0),\xi\vert_{\nu(L_0)})$ and $\psi_1\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (\nu(L_1),\xi\vert_{\nu(L_1)})$ for some standard contact neighborhoods $\nu(L_0)$ and $\nu(L_1)$. Let $Q_0$ and $Q_1$ be two Legendrian patters in the Legendrian isotopy class $\Q\in\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$. Then $Q_0(L_0)$ and $Q_1(L_1)$ are Legendrian isotopic. \qed \end{lemma} This means that the Legendrian class $\Q(\Lc)$ is well-defined. The classical invariants of Legendrian satellites can be computed as follows. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:legbraidsat} Let $n$ denote the winding number of the Legendrian pattern $\Q$. Then \[ \tb(\Q(\Lc))=n^2\cdot \tb(\Lc)+\reltb_{V}(\Q) \] and \[ \rot(\Q(\Lc))= n\cdot \rot(\Lc)+\relrot_{V}(\Q). \] \end{lemma} \begin{proof} These formulas were first observed in \cite{NgThesis} (see also \cite{NgTraynor04}) where it was noted that they follow easily from front diagrams. For the sake of completeness we give the computation here. A front projection for a Legendrian representative of the Legendrian satellite $\Q(\Lc)$ can be constructed as follows. Take a Legendrian representative $L\in \Leg(\K)$, that has a straight horizontal segment $c$ pointing from left to right in its front projection $\pi(L)$ with a neighborhood $N(c)\cong[-\varepsilon,\varepsilon]\times c$ that intersects $\pi(L)$ only in $c$. Pick an open pattern $Q_{\textit{open}}$ with closure $Q \in \Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$, and which intersects the boundary in $w$ points. Insert a front projection of $Q_\textit{open}$ into $N(c)$ and add oriented parallel copies of $\pi(L)-c$ that match $Q_\textit{open}$ at $[-\varepsilon,\varepsilon]\times\partial c$. See Figure \ref{fig:satex}. \begin{figure}[h] \small \begin{overpic {satex} \put(1,143){$N(c)$} \put(147,44){$\Pat$} \end{overpic} \caption{A Legendrian knot $L$ depicted on the left together with the neighborhood $N(c)$ shaded. The (open) satellite pattern $\Pat_\textit{open}$ is shown in the middle. On the right is a satellite where the open pattern is inserted in the shaded region. Notice that since $\tb(L)=1$ the open Legendrian pattern represents $\Delta^{-1}\Pat$.} \label{fig:satex} \end{figure} Let $w_+$ and $w_-$ denote the number of positively and negatively orieneted copies of $L$. Then the total wrapping number is $w=w_++w_-$ and the winding number is $n=w_+-w_-$. In this projection of $Q(L)$, the number of cusps can be explicitly computed. \begin{align} u(Q(L))&=w_+\cdot u(L)+w_-\cdot d(L)+u(Q),\\ d(Q(L))&=w_+\cdot d(L)+w_-\cdot u(L)+d(Q),\\ c(L)&=w\cdot c(L)+c(Q). \end{align} Thus the rotation number $\rot(Q(L))=\frac{1}2\left(d(Q(L))-u(Q(L))\right)$ is indeed \[\frac12 \left(w_+\cdot\left(d(L)-u(L)\right)-w_-\cdot\left(d(L)-u(L)\right)+d(Q)-u(Q)\right)=n\cdot\rot(L)+\relrot_V(Q)\] Additionally to the usual notation let $x_+$, respectively $x_-$, denote the number of positive, respectively negative, crossings of a projection. Then \begin{align} x_+(Q(L))=& (w_+w_-)c(L)+(w_+^2 +w_-^2)x_+(L)+(2w_+w_-)x_-(L)+x_+(Q), \\ x_-(Q(L))=& \left(\binom{w_+}{2} +\binom{w_-}{2}\right)c(L)\\ &\qquad +(2w_+w_-)x_+(L)+(w_+^2+w_-^2)x_-(L)+x_-(Q). \end{align} The writhe of $Q(L)$ is \begin{align} \mathit{writhe}(Q(L))&=x_+(Q(L))-x_-(Q(L))\\&=\frac{w-n^2}2 c(L)+n^2(x_+(L)-x_-(L))+x_+(Q)-x_-(Q). \end{align} And then \[ \tb(Q(L))=\mathit{writhe}(Q(L))-\frac12c(Q(L))=n^2\cdot \tb(L)+\reltb_{V}(Q). \] \vskip -.3in \end{proof} To further understand Legendrian satellites we recall from \cite{EtnyreHonda05} that a knot type $\K$ is \emph{uniformly thick} if all solid tori representing $\K$ can be contained in another solid torus that is a non-thickenable, standard neighborhood of a Legendrian representative $L$ of $\K$ with maximal Thurston--Bennequin number. In the following we use the notation \[ \overline{t}=\overline{\tb}(\K) \] for the maximal Thuston-Bennequin number of Legendrian knots in $\Leg(\K)$. For a while we only need to work with a weaker assumption. A knot is called \emph{thickenable} if all solid tori representing $\K$ can be contained in another solid torus that is the standard neighborhood of a Legendrian representative of $\K$. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:utpsatelite} Suppose $\K$ is thickenable and let $\Pat$ be a pattern in $V$. Then any element of $\Leg(\Pat(\K))$ can be written as $\Q(\Lc)$, where $\Lc$ is a Legendrian representation of $\K$ and $\Q\in (\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$. Moreover if $\Lc$ is uniformly thick then we can assume that $\Lc\in\Leg(\K;{\overline{t}})$ and $\Q\in\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Take a Legendrian representative $S$ of $\Q(\Lc)$. Smoothly $S$ is the satellite $\Pat(\K)$ of $\K$ and thus it is contained in a solid torus $T$ that represents $\K$. Since $\K$ is thickenable this solid torus can be thickened to a standard neighborhood $\nu(L)$, where $L$ is a Legendrian representation of $\K$. The solid torus $(\nu(K),\xi_{\rm{st}}\vert_{\nu(K)})$ is contactomorphic to $(V,\xi_V)$ via a contactomorphism $\psi$ that brings $\mathbf{l}$ to the contact framing $\lambda+\tb(\Lc)\mu$. Then $Q=\psi^{-1}(S)$ is a Legendrian pattern in $(V,\xi_V)$ that smoothly represents $\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat$. The proof for the uniformly thick case is identical. \end{proof} For any satellite $\Pat(\K)$ we have $\overline{\tb}(\Pat(\K))\ge n^2\overline{t}+\overline{\reltb_{V}}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)$. A consequence of the previous lemma is that for uniformly thick knot types the above inequality is an equality. \begin{corollary}\label{cor:utpsatmaxtb} Suppose $\K$ is uniformly thick, and $\Pat(\K)$ is the satellite with pattern $\Pat$. Then \[\overline{\tb}(\Pat(\K))=n^2\overline{t}+\overline{\reltb_{V}}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat). \] \vskip -.3in \qed \end{corollary} For simplicity in the following we will assume that $\K$ is Legendrian simple and thickenable. By Lemma \ref{lem:utpsatelite} for a thickenable knot type $\K$ the map \[ \widetilde\mathit{Sat}\colon\thinspace \bigcup_{t\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-t}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; t)\right)\to \Leg(\Pat(\K))\colon\thinspace (\Q,\Lc)\mapsto \Q(\Lc) \] is surjective. If $\K$ is uniformly thick then we can work with a more trackable surjective map \[ \widetilde\mathit{Sat}'\colon\thinspace \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})\right) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K))\colon\thinspace (\Q, \Lc)\mapsto \Q(\Lc). \] One can define stabilization of pairs by $\St_\pm(\Q,\Lc)=(\St_\pm\Q,\Lc)$ which makes $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ and $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$ $\St_\pm$ equivariant maps. Stabilization on the $\K$ component is reflected by $\sigma$ or $\zeta$ on the $\Pat$-component: \begin{align} \widetilde\mathit{Sat}(\Q,\St_+\Lc)&=\widetilde\mathit{Sat}(\zeta\Q,\Lc);\\ \widetilde\mathit{Sat}(\Q,\St^-\Lc)& =\widetilde\mathit{Sat}(\sigma\Q,\Lc). \end{align} Thus to make $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ injective we need to factor out with an equivalence relation containing $(\Q,\St_+\Lc)\sim (\zeta\Q,\Lc)$ and $(\Q,\St_-\Lc)\sim (\sigma\Q,\Lc)$. If there are no oriented topological symmetries then the equivalence relation of Theorem \ref{mainsat} is what follows from the above observation, if we have oriented topological symmetries then we need to include them in the relation too. \begin{definition}\label{def:kergen} Let $\K$ be a thickenable knot type, and $\Pat$ be a pattern in $V$. If the winding number of $\Pat$ is not zero then for $\Lc,\Lc'\in \Leg(\K)$ and patterns $\Q\in \Leg_V(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$, $\Q'\in \Leg_V(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc')}\Pat)$, the pairs $(\Lc,\Q)\sim (\Lc',\Q')$ if and only if there is a sequence \[ (\Q,\Lc)=(\Q_0,\Lc_0),(\Q_1,\Lc_1),\dots,(\Q_k,\Lc_k)=(\Q',\Lc'), \] where either \begin{itemize} \item $\Lc_i$ is a stabilisation of $\Lc_{i-1}$ and depending on the sign of the stabilisation $\Q_i$ is either $\zeta \Q_{i-1}$ (if $\Lc_i=\St_+\Lc_{i-1}$) or $\sigma Q_{i-1}$ (if $\Lc_i=\St_-\Lc_{i-1}$); or \item $\Lc_i$ is a destabilisation of $\Lc_{i-1}$ and depending on the sign of the destabilisation $\Q_{i-1}$ is either $\zeta Q_{i}$ (if $\Lc_{i-1}=\St_+\Lc_i$) or $\sigma Q_{i}$ (if $\Lc_{i-1}=\St_+\Lc_i$). \end{itemize} If $\Pat$ has winding number zero, $-\K=\K$, and $\Pat(\K)$ has oriented topological symmetries as defined at the end of Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot} then we define the same equivalence relation except that at the first step in the sequence we also allow, but do not require, $\Lc_{1}=-\Lc_0$ and $\Q_{1}=f(\Q_0)$. (The map $f$ is defined at the end of Section~\ref{subsec:satknot} and is a contactomorphism of $V$.) \end{definition} Then by the above observation the map $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$ descends to an $\St_\pm$ equivariant map on the quotient \[ {\mathit{Sat}}\colon\thinspace \left(\frac{\bigcup_{t\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-t}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; t)\right)}{\sim}\right)\to \Leg(\Pat(\K))\colon\thinspace (\Q,\Lc)\mapsto \Q(\Lc) \] with respect to the inherited map \[ \St_\pm \colon \left( \frac{\bigcup_{t\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-t}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; t)\right)}{\sim}\right) \to \left( \frac{\bigcup_{t\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \left(\Leg_V(\Delta^{-t}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K; t)\right)}{\sim}\right). \] Moreover, as stated in Theorem~\ref{thm:main} the relation $\sim$ accounts for the non-injectivity of $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}$, thus ${\mathit{Sat}}$ is a bijection. Before turning to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} we prove a technical lemma. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:tori1} Suppose that $N$ is a solid torus with convex boundary realizing the knot type $\K$. \begin{enumerate} \item\label{2thick} If the dividing slope of $\partial N$ is $n$, for some integer $n$, then for any solid torus $N'$ containing $N$ with standard convex boundary of slope $n+1$ there is another solid torus $N''$ satisfying $N\subset N''\subset N'$ and $N''$ has standard convex boundary of slope $n$ (if $\partial N$ has two dividing curves then one can take $N''=N$). The torus $N''$ is a standard neighborhood of a Legendrian knot $L$ and $N'$ is a standard neighborhood of a Legendrian knot that stabilizes to $L$. If $\K$ is Legendrian simple then there are at most two possibilities for $N'$. It can be a standard neighborhood of the Legendrian knots $L_+$ or $L_-$ where $\St_+(L_+)=\St_-(L_-)=L$. \item\label{uthick} If the dividing slope of $\partial N$ is in the interval $(n,n+1)$, for some integer $n$, then any solid torus $N'$ containing $N$ with standard convex boundary of slope $n+1$ is a standard neighborhood of a Legendrian representative of $\K$. If $\K$ is Legendrian simple then there is a unique possibility for this Legendrian representative. \end{enumerate} Moreover, in Item \eqref{uthick} any such $N'$ can be obtained by a sequence of bypass attachments from the outside of $N$, and if $N'$ is a solid torus with standard convex boundary of slope $n+1$ obtained from $N$ by a single bypass attachment from the outside then the dividing slope of the boundary of $N$ is in $(n,n+1]$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The only non-standard part of the statement is Item~(\ref{uthick}). Suppose that the dividing slope of $\partial N$ is contained in the interval $(n,n+1)$ for some integer $n$. Then one can use the classification of contact structures on solid tori to find a solid torus $N'' \subset N$ with dividing slope $n$. Now suppose we are given $N'$ with dividing slope $n+1$ and satisfying $N\subset N'$. The tori $N''$ and $N'$ are each neighborhoods of Legendrian curves $L''$ and $L'$, respectively. Moreover $L''$ is a stabilization of $L'$. The sign of the basic slices of the thickened tori $N\setminus N''$ is determined by the sign of the basic slice $N'\setminus N''$. Since $N\setminus N''$ is independent of the thickening $N'$ we see that $L'$ is a fixed destabilization of $L''$. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{thm:main} Suppose that $\K$ is a thickenable and Legendrian simple knot type, and $\Pat$ is a pattern in $V$. Assume that $\Pat(\K)$ has no topological symmetries, and if $\Pat$ has winding $0$, assume that $-\K=\K$ and $\Pat(\K)$ has oriented topological symmetries. Let $\Lc, \Lc'$ be Legendrian representatives of $\K$ and let $\Q$ and $\Q'$ be Legendrian patterns representing $\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat$ and $\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc')}\Pat$, respectively. Then $\Q(\Lc)$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\Q'(\Lc')$ if and only if $(\Q,\Lc) \sim (\Q',\Lc')$ as in Definition \ref{def:kergen}. In particular, the map ${\mathit{Sat}}$ induced by $\widetilde{\mathit{Sat}}$ on the equivalence classes of $\sim$ is an $\St_\pm$ equivariant bijection. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} From the discussion above it is clear that if $(\Q,\Lc) \sim (\Q',\Lc')$ then $\Q(\Lc)$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\Q'(\Lc')$. To prove the other implication after Legendrian isotopy we can assume that ${S}=Q(L)=Q'(L')$ for some $L\in \Lc$, $L'\in \Lc'$, $Q\in \Q$, and $Q'\in\Q'$. Let $\phi\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (S^3,\xi_{\textrm{st}})$ and $\phi'\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (S^3,\xi_{\textrm{st}})$ be the defining maps for $Q(L)$ and $Q'(L')$. In particular if $C$ is the core of $V$ then $\phi(C)=L$, $\phi'(C)=L'$, $\phi(V)=\nu(L)$, $\phi'(V)=\nu(L')$, $\phi(Q)=S$, and $\phi'(Q')=S$. By our assumption on no topological symmetries the neighborhoods $\nu(L)$ and $\nu(L')$ are smoothly isotopic by an isotopy fixing $S$. Moreover, if $\Pat$ has non-zero winding number then we may assume this isotopy preserves an orientation on a longitude on the boundaries of these neighborhoods. If $\Pat$ does have winding number zero then after possibly reversing the orientation on $L$ (and replacing $\Q$ with $f(\Q)$ where $f$ was defined at the end of Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot}) we may similarly assume that there is a well-defined oriented longitude preserved by the isotopy. Thus by Colin's isotopy discretisation argument \cite[Lemma~3.10]{Honda02} there is a sequence of convex tori $\partial \nu(L)=T_0,T_1,\dots,T_l=\partial \nu(L')$ bounding corresponding solid tori $N_i$ all containing ${S}$, such that $T_{i+1}$ is obtained from $T_{i}$ by a bypass attachment for $0\leq i<l-1$. Let $s_i$ be the dividing slope of $T_i$. Choose smallest integer thickenings for the $N_i$, i.e.\ choose solid tori $N'_i$ containing $N_i$ with standard convex boundary of dividing slope $n_i=\lceil s_i \rceil$. Making sure that if $s_i$ is an integer, and the dividing curve on $T_i$ has two components then $N_i=N_i'$. Each $N_i'$ is contactomorphic to $(V,\xi_V)$ via the embedding $\phi_i\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (S^3,\xi_{std})$. Now let $L_i=\phi_i(C)$ and $Q_i=\phi_i^{-1}(S)$. Here $\phi_0=\phi$ and $\phi_l=\phi'$. We claim that for each $i$ the pairs $(L_{i-1},Q_{i-1})$ and $(L_i,Q_i)$ are Legendrian isotopic pairs; $L_i$ is a stabilization of $L_{i-1}$ and depending on the sign of the stabilization $Q_i$ is either $\zeta Q_{i-1}$ or $\sigma Q_{i-1}$; or vice versa. By symmetry we may assume that $N_i$ is obtained from $N_{i-1}$ via a nontrivial bypass attachment on the outside, so $N_{i-1}\subset N_{i}$. Suppose that the boundary slope of $N_{i-1}$ is in $(n,n+1)$ for some integer $n$, and thus the boundary slope of $N_i$ is in $(n,n+1]$. Then $N_{i-1}$ is included in two solid torus $N_{i-1}\subset N_{i-1}'$ and $N_{i-1}\subset N_i\subset N_i'$, with boundary slope $n+1$. Thus by Lemma~\ref{lem:tori1}, $L_i$ and $L_{i-1}$ are Legendrian isotopic. Now, from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:tori1} there is a contactomorphism $\phi\colon\thinspace N_{i-1}'\to N_i'$ fixing $N_{i-1}$ and hence also fixing $S$. Thus we have a contactomorphism $\psi_{i-1}^{-1}\circ \psi \circ \phi_i\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (V,\xi_V)$ bringing $Q_i$ to $Q_{i-1}$. Then by Corollary \ref{cor:iso}, $Q_i$ and $Q_{i-1}$ are Legendrian isotopic. If the boundary slope of $N_{i-1}$ is an integer $n$, then our construction gives nested solid tori $N_{i-1}=N_{i-1}'\subset N_i\subset N_{i}'$, and again by Lemma \ref{lem:tori1} $L_{i-1}$ is a stabilization of $L_i$. Now the same argument as above proves that depending on the sign of the stabilization $\zeta Q_{i-1}$ or $\sigma Q_{i-1}$ is Legendrian isotopic to $Q_{i}$. \end{proof} The above Theorem has a more trackable version when $\K$ is uniformly thick and Legendrian simple. In this case every representation of the Legendrian satellite is of the form $\Lc(\Q)$ for some peak $\Lc$ of the Legendrian mountain range, and for some Legendrian representation $\Q$ of the pattern $\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat$. Thus in this case the map \[ \widetilde{\mathit{Sat}}'\colon\thinspace \Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t}) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K)) \] is surjective. To phrase how the relation $\sim$ desecends to $\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})$ we introduce some notation. A \emph{peak} of the mountain range for $\K$ is a Legendrian representative $\Lc$ that has Thurston--Bennequin number $\overline{t}$. Two peaks $\Lc$ and $\Lc'$ are said to be neighbouring if there is no other peak with rotation number between $\rot(\Lc)$ and $\rot(\Lc')$. The \emph{valley} $\widetilde{\Lc}$ between neighbouring peaks is the common stabiliztaion of $\Lc$ and $\Lc'$ with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number. The \emph{depth} of the \emph{valley} $\widetilde{\Lc}$ is $d=\frac 12 \|\rot(\Lc)-\rot(\Lc')\|=\overline{t}-\tb(\widetilde{\Lc})$. Then for $\rot(\Lc)<\rot(\Lc')$ we have $\widetilde{\Lc}=\mathit{St}_+^d\Lc'=\mathit{St}_-^d\Lc$. If $\Lc$ is a peak in the mountain range of $\Leg(\K)$ we say $\Lc'\in \Leg(\K)$ is in the \emph{shadow} of $\Lc$ if $\Lc'$ is some (possibly iterated positive and negative) stabilization of $\Lc$. Note that if $\Lc$ and $\Lc'$ are neighbouring peaks with $\rot(\Lc)<\rot(\Lc')$ and valley $\widetilde{\Lc}$ of depth $d=\frac{\rot(\Lc')-\rot(\Lc)}2$ then for $\widetilde{Q}\in \Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}+d}\Pat)$ we have: \[\Q(\Lc)=(\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q})(\Lc)=\widetilde{\Q}(\St_+^d\Lc)=\widetilde{\Q}(\widetilde{\Lc})=\widetilde{\Q}(\St_-^d\Lc')=(\sigma^d\widetilde{Q})(\Lc')=\Q'(\Lc'),\] where $\Q=\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q}$ and $\Q'=\sigma^d\widetilde{\Q}$ are in $\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)$. Again, if there are no oriented topological symmetries then the equivalence relation $\sim'$ is what follows from the above observation, if we have oriented topological symmetries then we need to include them in the relation too. \begin{definition}\label{def:ker} Let $\K$ be a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type, and $\Pat$ be a pattern in $V$. If the winding number of $\Pat$ is not zero then for the peaks $\Lc, \Lc'\in\Leg(\K;\overline{t})$ and the Legendrian patterns $\Q,\Q'\in\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat )$ define $(\Q, \Lc)\sim' (\Q',\Lc')$ if and only if there is a sequence \[ (\Q,\Lc)=(\Q_0,\Lc_0),(\Q_1,\Lc_1),\dots,(\Q_k,\Lc_k)=(\Q',\Lc'), \] where \begin{itemize} \item $\tb(\Lc_i)=\overline{t}$ and $\Lc_{i-1}$ and $\Lc_{i}$ are neighboring peaks with valley $\widetilde{\Lc}_i$ of depth $d_i$ between them; and \item if $\rot(\Lc_i)>\rot(\Lc_{i-1})$ (resp. $\rot(\Lc_i)<\rot(\Lc_{i-1})$) then there is a Legendrian pattern $\widetilde{\Q}_i\in \Leg_{V}(\Delta^{d_i-\overline{t}}\Pat)$ with $\Q_{i-1}=\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q}_i$ and $\Q_{i}=\sigma^d\widetilde{\Q}_i$ (resp. $\Q_{i-1}=\sigma^d\widetilde{\Q}_i$ and $\Q_{i}=\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q}_i$). \end{itemize} If $\Pat$ has winding number zero, $-\K=\K$, and $\Pat(\K)$ has oriented topological symmetries as defined at the end of Subsection~\ref{subsec:satknot} then we define the same equivalence relation except that at the first step in the sequence we also allow, but do not require, $\Lc_{1}=-\Lc_0$ and $\Q_{1}=f(\Q_0)$. (The map $f$ is defined at the end of Section~\ref{subsec:satknot} and is a contactomorphism of $V$.) \end{definition} Then by the above observation the map $\mathit{Sat}'$ descends to an $\St_\pm$ equivariant map on the quotient \[ {{\mathit{Sat}}'}\colon \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim'}\right) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K)) \] with respect to the inherited map \[ \St_\pm \colon \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim'}\right) \to \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim'}\right). \] Again, as stated in Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} the relation $\sim'$ accounts for the non-injectivity of $\widetilde\mathit{Sat}'$, thus ${\mathit{Sat}'}$ is a bijection. \begin{theorem}\label{lem:incommonstab} Suppose that $\K$ is a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type, and $\Pat$ is a pattern in $V$. Assume there are no topological symmetries of $\Pat(\K)$ that send the satellite incompressible torus to another incompressible torus in the complement of $\Pat(\K)$. In addition, if $\Pat$ has winding number zero, assume that $-\K=\K$ and $\Pat(\K)$ has oriented topological symmetries. Let $\Lc, \Lc'\in\Leg(\K;\overline{t})$ be peaks of the mountain range of $\K$ and let $\Q,\Q'\in\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{tb}(\K)}\Pat )$ be Legendrian patterns. Then $\Q(\Lc)$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\Q'(\Lc')$ if and only if $(\Q,\Lc) \sim' (\Q',\Lc')$ as in Definition \ref{def:ker}. In particular, \[ {{\mathit{Sat}}'}\colon\thinspace \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim'}\right) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K)) \] is an $\St_\pm$ equivariant bijection. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Theorem \ref{thm:main} gives a sequence $(\Q,\Lc)=(\Q_0',\Lc'_0),(\Q'_1,\Lc'_1),\dots,(\Q'_k,\Lc'_k)=(\Q',\Lc')$, such that for each $i$ the Legendrian knot $\Lc_i$ is a (de)stabilization of $\Lc_{i-1}$ and $Q_i$ and $Q_{i-1}$ are related appropriately by $\zeta$ and $\sigma$. Each $\Lc_i'$ is in the shadow of some set of consecutive peaks $\mathit{Peak}_i$. We will inductively choose $(\Lc_i,\Q_i)$ as in Definition \ref{def:ker}. Let $\Lc_0=\Lc$ and $\Q_0=\Q$ and suppose that $(i_1+1)$ is the first index such that $\mathit{Peak}_{i_1+1}$ does not contain $\Lc_0$. Then $\mathit{Peak}_{i_1+1}$ must contain exactly one of the neighbours of $\Lc_0$, say $\Lc_1$, and $\Lc_{i_1}$ must be a shadow of both $\Lc_0$ and $\Lc_1$. Then by Legendrian simplicity $\Lc_{i_1}$ is in the shadow of the valley $\widetilde{\Lc}_1$ between $\Lc_0$ and $\Lc_1$. In fact, $\Lc_{i_1}$ is obtained from $\widetilde{\Lc}_1$ by some stabilisations of the same sign, say $\Lc_{i_1}=\St_+^a\widetilde{\Lc}_1$ for some $a$. Also $\widetilde{\Lc}_1=\St_+^{d_1}\Lc_0$ and $\widetilde{\Lc}_1=\St_-^{d_1}\Lc_1$. With this notation $\Lc_{i_1}=\St_+^{a+d_1}\Lc_0$. Note that since $\Lc_0',\dots,\Lc_{i_1}'$ are all in the shadow of $\Lc_0$ then we can follow through the changes of the $\Q_i'$ and conclude that $\Q_0=\zeta^{a+d_1}\Q_{i_1}'$. Let $\widetilde{\Q}_1=\zeta^a\Q_{i_1}$ then we have $\Q_0=\zeta^{d_1}\widetilde{\Q}_1$ and define $\Q_1$ as $\sigma^{d_1}\widetilde{\Q}_1$. Now $\Q_{i_1+1}'=\sigma^{d_1-1}\widetilde{\Q}_{1}$, and we can continue our induction to define the pairs $(\Lc_2,\Q_2),\dots (\Lc_l,\Q_l)$. Since $\Lc'$ is only in the shadow of itself $\Lc_k=\Lc'$, and once we are in the shadow of $\Lc_k$ we can follow through the changes of the $\Q_i'$ backwards, and see that $\Q_l=\Q'$, concluding the proof. \end{proof} For certain patterns Theorem \ref{lem:incommonstab} gives us a complete understanding of the number of Legendrian representatives of satellites. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:mainleg} Suppose that $\K$ is a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type. Denote the maximal Thurston--Bennequin number of $\K$ by $\overline{t}$. Suppose \[ \Leg(\K;\overline{t})=\{\Lc_0,\Lc_1 \dots,\Lc_k\} \] where \[ \rot(\Lc_0)=r_0<\rot(\Lc_1)=r_1<\cdots<\rot(\Lc_k)=r_k. \] And let $d_1=\frac{r_2-r_1}2,\dots,d_{k-1}=\frac{r_k-r_{k-1}}2$ denote the depths of the valleys $\widetilde{\Lc}_1,\dots,\widetilde{\Lc}_k$. Let $\Pat$ be a pattern with winding number $n$. Assume that for two patterns $\Q,\Q'\in \Leg_V(\Delta^{-m+d}\Pat)$ (here $m$ is any integer and $d$ is any natural number) we have $\sigma^d\Q=\sigma^d\Q'$ if and only if $\zeta^d\Q=\zeta^d\Q'$. Assume there are no topological symmetries of $\Pat(\K)$ that send the satellite incompressible torus to another incompressible torus in the complement of $\Pat(\K)$. \begin{enumerate} \item\label{mainleg:1A} If $\Pat$ has nonzero winding number, then the number of Legendrian representatives of $\K(\Pat)$ with invariants $(\tb,\rot)=(t,r)$ is \begin{align} \sum_{i=0}^{k}&\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat;(t-n^2\overline{t}),r-nr_i)\right\vert\\ &\qquad\qquad-\sum_{i=1}^{k}\left\vert\sigma^{d_i}\left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)}\Pat;(t-n^2\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)),r-n\rot(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)\right)\right\vert. \end{align} \item\label{mainleg:2A} If $\Pat$ has winding number zero, assume that $-\K=\K$ and $\Pat(\K)$ has oriented topological symmetries. Then the number of Legendrian representatives of $\K(\Pat)$ with invariants $(\tb,\rot)=(t,r)$ is: \begin{align} \sum_{i=0}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k+1}{2}\right\rfloor}\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat;t,r)\right\vert & +\mathcal{X}_{2\mid k}\left\vert \frac{\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat;t,r)}{\Q\sim f(\Q)} \right\vert \\ & - \sum_{i=1}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}\left\vert\sigma^{d_i}\left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)}\Pat;t,r)\right)\right\vert , \end{align} where $\mathcal{X}_{2\mid k}$ is the indicator function with value 1 if $k$ is even, and 0 if $k$ is odd. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{remark} The conditions of the Theorem hold when the maps $\sigma^d,\zeta^d\colon \Leg_V(\Delta^{-m+d}\Pat;t,r)\to \Leg_V(\Delta^{-m}\Pat)$ are all injective, or when $\Leg_V(\Delta^{-m+d}\Pat;t,r)$ is empty or has only one element. In all of these cases $\left\vert\sigma^{d}\left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-t+d}\Pat;(t,r)\right)\right\vert$ is $\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-t+d}\Pat;(t,r)\right\vert$, $1$, or $0$ and the formulas simplify accordingly. \end{remark} For an illustration on how to use the above statements, see the proofs of Theorems~\ref{2braidsclass} and~\ref{thm:twistsat}. \begin{proof} For the proof of the first statement fix the pair $(t,r)$. We first check that the maps \[\mathit{Sat}(\cdot,\Lc)\colon \Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat;(t-n^2\tb(\Lc)),r-n\rot(\Lc)) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K);t,r)\] are injective for any $\Lc \in \Leg(\K)$. It is enough to prove the statement for a peak $\Lc$, so assume that $\Q(\Lc)=\Q'(\Lc)$. Then Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} gives a path $(\Q,\Lc)=(\Q_0,\Lc_0),$ $(\Q_1,\Lc_1),\dots,$ $(\Q_k,\Lc_k)=(\Q',\Lc)$ as in Definitition~\ref{def:ker}. Since $\Lc_0=\Lc_k$ there must be an $i$ such that $\Lc_{i-1}=\Lc_{i+1}$. This means that the valleys $\widetilde{\Lc}_{i}$ and $\widetilde{\Lc}_{i+1}$ must agree too, and without loss of generality we can assume that $\St_+^d\Lc_{i-1}=\St_+^d\Lc_{i+1}=\widetilde{\Lc}_{i}=\widetilde{\Lc}_{i+1}=\St_-^d\Lc_{i}$. Then according to Definition~\ref{def:ker} there are patterns $\widetilde{\Q}_{i}$ and $\widetilde{\Q}_{i+1}$ such that $\sigma^d\widetilde{\Q}_{i}=\Q_{i}=\sigma^d\widetilde{\Q}_{i+1}$, thus by the hypothesis of the theorem $\Q_{i-1}=\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q}_{i}=\zeta^d\widetilde{\Q}_{i+1}=\Q_{i+1}$. So the sequence can be shortened. Repeating the same procedure, we will end up with a sequence of length one, which proves that $\Q=\Q'$. Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} and Lemma~\ref{lem:legbraidsat} say that ${{\mathit{Sat}}'}$ maps the set \[ S= \bigcup_{i=0}^k \left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat;(t-n^2\overline{t}),r-nr_i)\times \{\Lc_i\}\right) \] onto $\Leg(\Pat(\K); t,r)$ and thus the first term in the equation in Item~\ref{mainleg:1A} is an upper bound on $\|\Leg(\Pat(\K); t,r)\|$. Arguing as above, two elements in $S$ corresponding to adjacent peaks $\Lc_{i-1}$ and $\Lc_{i}$ will map to the same element under $\mathit{Sat}'$ if and only if they are also in the image of $\mathit{Sat}$ restricted to \begin{align} \sigma^{d_i}&\left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)}\Pat;(t-n^2\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)),r-n\rot(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)\right) \times \{\Lc_{i-1}\}\\ &= \zeta^{d_i}\left(\Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)}\Pat;(t-n^2\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)),r-n\rot(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)\right) \times \{\Lc_{i}\}. \end{align} Thus, by the injectivity of $\mathit{Sat}(\cdot, \Lc)$, the second term in the equation in Item~\ref{mainleg:1A} accounts for the over count in the first term. In the second part $n=0$ and the maps \[\mathit{Sat}(\cdot,\Lc)\colon \Leg_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat;t,r) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K);t,r)\] are only injective if $\Lc\neq -\Lc$, and by Legendrian simplicity and our hypothesis this is equivalent to $\rot(\Lc)\neq 0$. When $\rot(\Lc)=0$, then we only get an injective map after factoring out with the relation $\Q\sim f(\Q)$. Now the argument is identical to the one above after observing, that by the symmetry $\Lc_i(\Q)=\Lc_{k-i+1}(f(\Q))$ every Legendrian representative of the satellite can be written in the form $\Q(\Lc_i)$ for $i\leq \lceil \frac{k+1}2\rceil$. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Connected sums} Recall from Section~\ref{subsec:satknot} that the connected sum of two knots can be thought of as a satellite of one by the other. More specifically given $\K_1$ and $\K_2$ in $S^3$ let $\mu$ be a meridian to $K_1$. Then the complement of a neighborhood of $\mu$, $V=S^3-\nu(\mu)$, is a solid torus containing $\K_1$ and it has a canonical product structure (coming from $\mu$ and a meridian of $\mu$). So we can think of $\K_1$ as determining a pattern $\Pat_{\K_1}$ in $V=S^1\times D^2$. (It is useful to notice that the pattern $\Pat_{\K_1}$ is independent of the product structure chosen on the complement of $\nu(\mu)$. In particular, we could have chosen a Legendrian unknot with maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant to represent $\mu$ and then taken the framing coming from the dividing curves on the boundary of the neighborhood. This will be convenient below.) One may easily see that $\K_1\#\K_2$ is the same topological knot as $\Pat_{\K_1}(\K_2)$. We will now see how to recover part of the structure theorem concerning connected sums from \cite{EtnyreHonda03} using Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab}. We begin by recalling Legendrian connected sums for Legendrian knots $\Lc_1$ and $\Lc_2$ in the standard contact structure on $S^3$ (there is a more general notion defined in any contact manifold, but we will not need that here). Choose Legendrian representatives $L_1$ and $L_2$ of $\Lc_1$ and $\Lc_2$ so that the front diagram for $L_1$ is to the left of the one for $L_2$ and a right cusp of $L_1$ is right beside a left cusp for $L_2$. Remove a small neighborhood of a right cusp from $L_1$ and a left cusp form $L_2$, and then connect the remained with two horizontal arcs. This will result in a Legendrian knot $L_1\#L_2$ and one can show that its Legendrian isotopy type is independent of the choices of $L_1$, $L_2$, and all other choices, \cite{EtnyreHonda03}. Thus we denote the resulting Legendrian isotopy type by $\Lc_1\#\Lc_2$. We can now show the following. \begin{theorem}\label{csum} Given two knots $\K_1$ and $\K_2$ in $S^3$. Let $\K=\K_1\#\K_2$ with either $\K_1$ or $\K_2$ Legendrian simple and uniformly thick. Also assume that $\K_1$ is not isotopic to $\K_2$ (and if the knots are not prime then neither contains a summand of the other). Then there is a bijection \[ C:\left(\frac{\Leg(\K_1)\times \Leg(\K_2)}{\sim}\right) \to \Leg(\K_1\#\K_2) \] given by Legendrian connected sum: $C(\Lc_1,\Lc_2)=\Lc_1\#\Lc_2$, where the equivalence relation $\sim$ is generated by $(\St_\pm(\Lc_1),\Lc_2)\sim(\Lc_1, \St_\pm(\Lc_2))$. \end{theorem} \begin{remark} In \cite{EtnyreHonda03} a more general result was shown. Specifically the ambient manifolds did not have to be $(S^3,\xi_{std})$ and symmetries between $\K_1$ and $\K_2$ were allowed. More importantly, the requirement that one of $\K_1$ or $\K_2$ be Legendrian simple and uniformly thick was not needed. On the one hand this shows a deficiency in our understanding of satellites, but on the other hand it points to the fact that for some patterns we might be able to dispense with the Legendrian simple and uniformly thick hypotheses in Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab}. \end{remark} Before giving the proof we make a simple observation. \begin{lemma}\label{csumpattern} Given a knot type $\K$ in $S^3$ and the associated pattern $\Pat_\K$ in $V$ defined above, there is a bijection \[ \Leg_V(\Pat_\K)\to \Leg(\K) \] given by sending $\Q$ to $\Q(U)$ where $U$ is the maximal Thurston-Bennequin representative of the unknot. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Given any $\Lc\in \Leg(\K)$ and specific Legendrian representative $L$ of $\Lc$ let $M$ be a Legendrian representative of the meridian to $L$ with $tb(M)=-1$. The complement of a standard neighborhood of $M$ is a solid torus $N$ that is a standard neighborhood of an unknot $U$ with $tb(U)=-1$. Now let $\phi\colon\thinspace V\to N$ be the map from the 1-jet space of $S^1$ to $N$ and let $Q_L$ be $\phi^{-1}(L)$ in $V$. Notice that $Q_L$ is well-defined up to isotopy since any isotopy, $L_t$, $t\in[0,1]$, of $L$ (or similarly isotopy of the chosen Legendrian meridian $M$) will induce a one parameter family of smooth maps $\phi_t\colon\thinspace V\to S^3$ and we can assume that $\phi_0$ and $\phi_1$ are the maps used to define the standard neighborhood of a Legendrian unknot. Pulling back $\xi_{std}$ by the $\phi_t$ will give a loop of contact structures on $V$. Lemma~\ref{lem:contactstr} says that the space of contact structures $\Xi(V)$ has trivial fundamental group, so arguing as in Theorem~\ref{isoIScontacto} we can conclude that the $\phi_t$ may be isotoped, relative to $t=0,1$, so that all the $\phi_t$ give parameterizations of standard neighborhoods of unknots. Thus $\phi_t(L_t)$ give a Legendrian isotopy from $Q_{L_0}$ to $Q_{L_1}$ and we see that $\Lc$ defines a Legendrian pattern $\Q_\Lc$. From the construction it is clear that $\Q_\Lc(U)=\Lc$ and thus the map in the lemma is surjective. The argument in the previous paragraph also shows that if $\Q_\Lc(U)$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\Q_{\Lc'}(U)$ in $S^3$ then $\Q_\Lc$ is Legendrian isotopic to $\Q_{\Lc'}$ in $V$. Thus we see that the map in the lemma is also injective. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{csum}] Suppose, without loss of generality, that $\K_2$ is Legendrian simple and uniformly thick. Let $\overline{t}$ be the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\K_2$. Notice that by the symmetries in the statement of Theorem~\ref{csum} the set \[ \frac{\Leg(\K_1)\times \Leg(\K_2)}{\sim} \] is the same as the set \[ \frac{\Leg(\K_1)\times \Leg(\K_2;\overline{t})}{\sim}. \] In addition notice that when written in this form $\sim$ in the statement of the theorem reduces to $\sim$ from the statement of Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab}. Notice that since there is a meridional disk in $V$ that intersects $\Pat_{\K_1}$ in a single point we know that $\Delta^k\Pat_{\K_1}=\Pat_{\K_1}$ for any integer $k$. Moreover, Lemma~\ref{csumpattern} implies that $\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat_{\K_1})=\Leg_V(\Pat_{\K_1})$ can be identified with $\Leg(\K_1)$. We also know from above that $\Leg(\Pat_{\K_1}(\K_2))=\Leg(\K_1\#\K_2)$. Observing that the Legendrian satellite of $\Lc_2$ in $\Leg(\K_2)$ by a Legendrian pattern $\Q_{\Lc_1}$ in $\Leg_V(\Pat_{\K_1})$ is the same as the Legendrian connected sum of $\Lc_1\#\Lc_2$ we see that the map in the statement of the theorem before modding out by equivalence is simply \[ C={\mathit{Sat}}\colon\thinspace \left(\frac{\Leg_V(\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat)\times \Leg(\K;\overline{t})}{\sim}\right) \to \Leg(\Pat(\K)). \] Thus the bijectivity of $\mathit{Sat}$ in Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} implies the bijectivity of $C$. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Legendrian braid satellites} As a direct consequence of Theorems \ref{thm:mainleg} and \ref{2starndbraid} we can reprove a theorem originally proven in \cite{EtnyreHonda05} using quite different techniques. \begin{theorem}\label{2braidsclass} Let $\K$ be a Legendrian simple and uniformly thick knot type. Then any 2--braided satellite of $\K$ is also Legendrian simple. More explicitly denote the 2--braided pattern with $m$ (odd) twists by $\Pat_m$ and the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\K$ by $\overline{t}$. Moreover, suppose \[ \Leg(\K;\overline{t})=\{\Lc_0,\Lc_1 \dots,\Lc_k\} \] where \[ \rot(\Lc_0)=r_0<\rot(\Lc_1)=r_1<\cdots<\rot(\Lc_k)=r_k. \] If $m>2\overline{t}$, then the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\Pat_{m}(\K)$ is $2\overline{t}+m$, there are exactly $k+1$ elements in $\Leg(\Pat_m(\K),2\overline{t}+m)$ that realize the rotation numbers $2r_i$ for $i=0,\ldots k$, and all other Legendrian knots realizing $\Pat_m(\K)$ destabilize to one of these. If $m<2\overline{t}$, then the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\Pat_{m}(\K)$ is $2m$, the rotation numbers realized by elements in $\Leg(\Pat_m(\K),2m)$ are in the set \[ \mathcal{R}=\{2r_i + (m-2\overline{t}) + 2l\| i=0,\ldots, k, l=0,\ldots, 2\overline{t}-m\} \] (as this is a set multiplicities are ignored), the cardinality of the set $\Leg(\Pat_m(\K),2m)$ is the same as the set $\mathcal{R}$, and all other Legendrian knots realizing $\Pat_m(\K)$ destabilize to one of these. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} First note that since Legendrian representatives of the pattern $\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat_m=\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}}$ always destabilize to a representative with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number, thus by Lemma~\ref{lem:utpsatelite} the same statement is true for Legendrian representatives of $\Pat_m(\K)$. Since $\Pat_{m-2t}$ is Legendrian simple for any $t$ we see that $\Leg_V(\Pat_{m-2t}; a,b)$ contains one element or is empty. Moreover the maps $\sigma$ and $\zeta$ are always surjective. So the condition of Theorem~\ref{thm:mainleg} holds, thus we can use a simplified version of the first formula of Theorem~\ref{thm:mainleg}: \[ \sum_{i=0}^{k}\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}};(t-4\overline{t}),(r-2r_i))\right\vert-\sum_{i=1}^{k}\left\vert\left(\Leg_{V}(\Pat_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};(t-4\widetilde{t}_i),(r-2\widetilde{r}_i)\right)\right\vert. \] where $\widetilde{t}_i$ and $\widetilde{r}_i$ are the Thurston-Bennequin and rotation numbers of the valleys $\widetilde{\Lc}_i$ between $\Lc_{i-1}$ and $\Lc_{i}$, i.e. $\widetilde{t}_i=\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)=\overline{t}-\frac{r_{i}-r_{i-1}}{2}$ and $\widetilde{r_i}=\rot(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)=\frac{r_{i}+r_{i-1}}2$. Considering the case where $m-2\overline{t}>0$ notice that $\Leg_V(\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}}; t,r)$ is non-empty if and only if $\|r\|\leq m-2\overline{t}-t$, and $t+r$ is odd. Thus $\Leg_{V}(\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}};(t-4\overline{t}),(r-2r_i))$ is non-empty if and only if $\|r-2r_i\|\leq m+2\overline{t}-t$ and $t+r$ is odd. In addition notice that if $\|r-2r_{i-1}\|\leq m+2\overline{t}-t$, $\|r-2r_i\|\leq m+2\overline{t}-t$, and $t+r$ is odd, then since $\widetilde{r_i}$ is between $r_{i-1}$ and $r_{i}$ we see that \begin{align} \|r-2\widetilde{r_i}\| &= \|r - 2(r_{i-1}+\frac{r_i-r_{i-1}}{2})\|\leq \|r-2r_{i-1}\| + ({r_i-r_{i-1}})\\ &\leq m+2\overline{t}-t +({r_i-r_{i-1}})= m+2\widetilde t_i-t \end{align} and so $\left(\Leg_{V}(\Pat_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};(t-4\widetilde{t}_i),(r-2\widetilde{r}_i)\right)$ is non-empty. Similarly if $\|r-2\widetilde{r_i}\|\leq m+2\widetilde t_i-t$ then one may easily check that $\|r-2r_i\|\leq m+2\overline{t}-t$ and $\|r-2r_{i+1}\|\leq m+2\overline{t}-t$. So in the equation above, the terms in the first sum are 1 exactly one more time than the terms in the second sum. This establishes Legendrian simplicity of $\Pat_m\K$. To complete the classification of Legendrian knots notice that $\Leg_{V}(\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}};(t-4\overline{t}),(r-2r_i))$ will be empty if $(t-4\overline{t})> m+2\overline{t}$ and if $(t-4\overline{t})= m+2\overline{t}$ then we must have $r=2r_i$ for some $i$. We can argue similarly for the case when $m-2\overline{t}<0$ by noticing that $\Leg_V(\Pat_{m-2\overline{t}}; t,r)$ is non-empty if and only if $\|r\|\leq m-2\overline{t}-t$, $t\leq -2m-4\overline{t}$, and $t+r$ is odd. The extra constraint does not significantly affect the argument that the sum determining $\|\Leg(\Pat_m\K;t,r)\|$ is either 0 or 1 and thus $\Pat_m\K$ is Legendrian simple. Identifying the representatives with maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is also similar. \end{proof} Theorem~\ref{thm:mainleg} together with Theorem~\ref{cablepats} gives an alternate proof of a theorem from \cite{EtnyreHonda05} by an an argument identical to the one give above. \begin{theorem}\label{pqcableclass} Let $\K$ be a Legendrian simple and uniformly thick knot type. Then any $(p,q)$-cable of $\K$ is also Legendrian simple. More explicitly denote the $(p,q)$-cable pattern $\CC_{p,q}$ and suppose the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\K$ is denoted $\overline{t}$ and \[ \Leg(\K;\overline{t})=\{\Lc_0,\Lc_1 \dots,\Lc_k\} \] where \[ \rot(\Lc_0)=r_0<\rot(\Lc_1)=r_1<\cdots<\rot(\Lc_k)=r_k. \] If $p/q>\overline{t}$, then the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\CC_{p,q}(\K)$ is $pq-p+\overline{t} q$, there are exactly $k+1$ elements in $\Leg(\CC_{p,q}(\K),pq-p+\overline{t} q)$ that realize the rotation numbers $qr_i$ for $i=0,\ldots k$, and all other Legendrian knots realizing $\CC_{p,q}(\K)$ destabilize to one of these. If $p/q<\overline{t}$ then taking $n$ so that $-n-1< p/q<-n$ we see that the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\CC_{p,q}(\K)$ is $pq$, the rotation numbers realized by elements of $\Leg(\CC_{p,q}(\K),pq)$ are in the set \[ \mathcal{R}=\{\pm(q\cdot\rot(L) + (p+nq)\| L\in \Leg(\K, \overline{t}-n)\} \] (as this is a set multiplicities are ignored), the cardinality of the set $\Leg(\CC_{p,q}(\K),pq)$ is the same as the set $\mathcal{R}$, and all other Legendrian knots realizing $\CC_{p,q}(\K)$ destabilize to one of these. \qed \end{theorem} While we cannot classify satellites for general braided patterns we can come close for positive braided patterns. \begin{theorem} Let $\K$ be a Legendrian simple and uniformly thick knot type with with maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant $\overline{t}$. Let $\Pat$ be any pattern such that $\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat$ is a positive braided pattern. Then maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant representatives of $\Pat(\K)$ are distinguished by their rotation numbers and when any two such Legendrian knots are stabilized to have the same Thurston-Bennequin invariant and rotation number then they become Legendrian isotopic. \end{theorem} \begin{remark} Notice that if one could show that any Legendrian knot in the knot type $\Pat(\K)$ destabilized to a maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant representative then we would know that $\Pat(\K)$ is Legendrian simple. Unfortunately the tools we have developed so far do not establish this. \end{remark} \begin{proof} The proof of this theorem is almost identical to the proof of the first part of the Theorem \ref{2braidsclass} except we use Theorem~\ref{thm:closedposlegendrianbraid} in palace of Theorem~\ref{2starndbraid}. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Legendrian Whitehead doubles}\label{LWD} The previous theorems about cabled satellites do not actually need the full strength of Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} but only the observation made before Definition~\ref{def:ker} about when two Legendrian satellites are isotopic. We will now consider a situation where we do need the full strength of Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab} and also see another situation where the satellite of a Legendrian simple knot by a Legendrian simple pattern need not be Legendrian simple. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:twistsat} Let $\W_m$ be the Whitehead pattern with $m$ half-twists. And let $\K$ be a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type for which $\K=-\K$, and such that $\W_m(\K)$ has no topological symmetries (as in Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab}). Suppose the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\K$ is denoted $\overline{t}$ and \[ \Leg(\K;\overline{t})=\{\Lc_0,\Lc_1 \dots,\Lc_k\} \] where \[ \rot(\Lc_0)=r_0<\cdots<\rot(\Lc_k)=r_k. \] Let $j$ be the maximal depth of a valley in the Legendrian mountain range of $\K$ and let $n_d$ be the number of valleys of depth $d$ corresponding to Legendrian knots with negative rotation numbers, so the total number of valleys is $k=2(n_1+\ldots + n_j)+\mathcal{X}_{2\nmid k}$. Here, again $\mathcal{X}_{2\nmid k}$ is the indicator function, with value 1 if $k$ is odd and value 0 if $k$ is even. All Legendrian knots in $\Leg(\W_m(\K))$ destabilize to one of the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant representatives. \begin{enumerate} \item\label{it:twistsat1} If $m\geq 2\overline{t}$ even, then the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\W_m(\K)$ is $2\overline{t}-m+1$. There are $k+1$ elements in $ \Leg(\W_m(\K); 2\overline{t}-m+1)$ and they all have rotation number $0$. Moreover for any $a=a_1+a_2>0$ with $a_i \ge 0$ and $h=\min\{a_1,a_2\}$ we have \[ \left\|\Leg(\W_m(\K); 2\overline{t}-m+1-a,a_1-a_2)\right\|= \left\lceil \frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil -\sum_{d=1}^hn_d. \] \item\label{it:twistsat2} If $m>2\overline{t}$ odd, then the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\W_m(\K)$ is $2\overline{t}-m-3$. There are exactly $\left\lceil \frac{k+1}2\right\rceil$ elements in $\Leg(\W_m(\K); 2\overline{t}-m-3,\pm 1)$ and for other $r$ $\Leg(\W_m(\K); -(m-\overline{t})-3,r)$ is empty. Moreover, for any $a_1,a_2$ non-negative with $a=a_1+a_2$ and $h=\min\{a_1,a_2\}$ we have \[ \left\|\Leg(\W_m(\K); 2\overline{t}-m-3-a,\pm(1+a_1-a_2))\right\|=\left\lceil\frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil-\sum_{d=1}^hn_d. \] \item\label{it:twistsat3} If $m<2\overline{t} $ odd, then the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\W_m(\K)$ is $-3$. Let $l=\left\lfloor \frac{2\overline{t}-m}2\right\rfloor$. There are \[ (k+1)\left( \frac{2\overline{t}-m+1}2\right) -\sum_{d=1}^{l} n_d\left({2\overline{t}-2d-m+1}\right) \] elements in $\Leg(\W_m(\K); -3)$ and they all have rotation number $0$. Moreover, for any $a=a_1+a_2>0$ with $a_i$ non-negative and $h=\min\{a_1,a_2\}$ we have \[ \left\lceil\frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil -\sum_{d=1}^ln_d- \sum_{d=l+1}^hn_d \] elements in \[ \Leg(\W_m(\K); -3-(a+1),\pm (1+a_1-a_2)), \] where the last sum is 0 unless $h>l$ \item\label{it:twistsat4} If $m<2\overline{t}$ even, then the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant of $\W_m(\K)$ is $1$. Let $l=\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2$, then there are \begin{equation* \left\lceil\left(\frac{k+1}2\right) \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}{2}+1\right)^2\right\rceil - \sum_{d=1}^{l-1} n_d \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m-2d}2 +1\right)^2 -2n_l \end{equation} elements in $ \Leg(\W_m(\K); 1)$ and they all have rotation number $0$. Moreover, for any $a>0$ we have \[ \left\lceil\frac{k+1}2\right\rceil \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}{2}+1\right) - \sum_{d=1}^{l} n_d \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m-2d}2 +1\right) \] elements in $\Leg(\W_m(\K); 1-a,\pm a)$ and for $a=a_1+a_2$ with $a_1\geq 0$ and $a_2>0$, and $h=\min\{a_1,a_2\}$ we have \[ \left\lceil\frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil -\sum_{d=1}^ln_d- \sum_{d=l+1}^hn_d \] elements in \[ \Leg(\W_m(\K); 1-(a+1),\pm (1+a_1-a_2)), \] where the last sum is 0 unless $h>l$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We will only spell out the proof of Item~(\ref{it:twistsat4}), the proof for the rest of the statements is simpler. So let $m<2\overline{t}$ even. First notice, that the patterns $\Delta^{-t}\W_m=\W_{m-2t}$ destabilize, whenever they don't have maximal Thurston-Bennequin number, so the same will hold for $\W_m(\K)$. Setting $l=\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2$, the maps $\sigma^{d},\zeta^d\colon \Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}+2d})\to \Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}})$ are injective for all $d$ and have a single image when $d>l$. Thus Item~(\ref{mainleg:2A}) of Theorem~\ref{thm:mainleg} can be applied, and the number of Legendrian represenatives of $\W_m(\K)$ with Thurton-Bennequin number $t$ and rotation number $r$ is: \begin{align} \sum_{i=0}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k+1}{2}\right\rfloor}\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)\right\vert & +\mathcal{X}_{2\mid k}\left\vert \frac{\Leg_{V}(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)}{\Q\sim f(\Q)} \right\vert \\ & - \sum_{i=1, d_i\le l}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}\left\vert\Leg_{V}(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};t,r)\right\vert - \sum_{i=1, d_i >l}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}\mathcal{X}_{(\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};t,r)\neq\emptyset)}, \end{align*} Here $\widetilde{\Lc}_i$ is the valley between $\Lc_{i-1}$ and $\Lc_{i}$ of depth $d_i=\frac{r_{i}-r_{i-1}}{2}$, and $\widetilde{t}_i=\tb(\widetilde{\Lc}_i)=\overline{t}-d_i$, the indicator function $\mathcal{X}_{(\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};t,r)\neq\emptyset)}$ is 1 when $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};t,r)\neq\emptyset$ and 0 otherwise. Notice that we have separated the last sum in Theorem~\ref{thm:mainleg} according to the depths of the corresponding valleys (this is because when the valley has depth bigger than $l$ the corresponding set of Legendrian pattens will either be empty or contain one element). Next we will understand the action of $f$ on $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)$. First notice, that $f$ maps $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)$ to $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,-r)$, thus if $r\neq 0$, then \[\left\|\frac{\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)}{Q\sim f(Q)}\right\|=\|\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,r)\|.\] Also, for $t<1$ we have $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,0)=1$, thus $f$ brings the unique representative to itself, and we have \[\left\|\frac{\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};t,0)}{Q\sim f(Q)}\right\|=1\] Using the notation of the proof of Theorem \ref{whiteheadpatternclass} the symmetry of the Legendrian representations of $\W_{m-2\overline{t}}$ with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number is given by \[ f\colon \Q_{(z^-,z^+)}\mapsto \Q_{\left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2-z^+,\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2-z^-\right)}. \] Thus $\Q\sim f(\Q)$ have equivalence classes of size two when neither $z_+$ or $z_-$ equals $\frac 12 \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1\right)$, and has a class of size one otherwise (notice this can happen only if $\frac 12 \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1\right)$ is an integer and then it can only happen once). This means that \[\left\|\frac{\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\overline{t}};1,0)}{Q\sim f(Q)}\right\|=\left\lceil\frac{(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1)^2}2\right\rceil.\] The maximal Thurston-Bennequin number for $\W_m(\Q)$ is 1, and all such representatives have rotation number 0. Using the above formula for $(r,t)=(0,1)$ we get \[ \left\lfloor\frac{k+1}{2}\right\rfloor \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1 \right)^2 +\mathcal{X}_{2\mid k} \left\lceil\frac{(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1)^2}2\right\rceil - \sum_{i=1, d_i< l}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}\left(\frac{2\widetilde{t}_i-m}2+1 \right)^2 - \sum_{i=1, d_i=l}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}2 \] since for $d_i>l$ the maximal Thurston-Bennequin number of $\W_{m-2\overline{t}+2d_i}$ is $1-m+2\overline{t}-2d_i<1$, thus $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};1,0)=\emptyset$. In addition, notice that when $d_i=l$ the space $\Leg(\W_{n-2\widetilde{t}_i}; 1,0)=\Leg(\W_0;1,0)$ has two elements. The above gives the first formula of Item~(\ref{it:twistsat4}), by simply noting that for integers $b$ and $c$ we have $\left\lfloor\frac{b}2\right\rfloor c+\mathcal{X}_{2\mid b-1}\left\lceil \frac c 2 \right\rceil=\left\lceil \frac{bc}2\right\rceil$. In the case when the pair $(r,t)$ is on an edge of the mountain range, i.e. $(r,t)=(\pm a,1-a)$, then the formula can be computed similarly: \[ \left\lfloor\frac{k+1}{2}\right\rfloor \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1 \right) +\mathcal{X}_{2\mid k} \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2+1\right) - \sum_{i=1, d_i\le l}^{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}\left(\frac{2\widetilde{t}_i-m}2+1 \right)\] This again, by $\left\lfloor\frac{b}2\right\rfloor +\mathcal{X}_{2\mid b-1}=\left\lceil \frac{b}2\right\rceil$, agrees with the second formula of Item~(\ref{it:twistsat4}). When $(r,t)$ is in the interior of the triangle, i.e.\ $(r,t)=(a_1-a_2,1-a)$ with $a=a_1+a_2$, then all relevant maps $\sigma^{d_i},\zeta^{d_i}$ have a single image, so we just need to understand for which $\widetilde{\Lc}_i$ we get $\Leg_V(\W_{m-2\widetilde{t}_i};t,r)\neq\emptyset$. This happens, when $m-2\widetilde{t}_i\le0$ or if $1-m+2\widetilde{t}_i\le \min\{1-a_1,1-a_2\}$, or equivalently if $d_i\le l$ or $l<d_i\le h$. Again, the resulting sum agrees with the third formula of Item~(\ref{it:twistsat4}). \end{proof} \begin{example}\label{whdtorus} To give an example of Theorem~\ref{thm:twistsat} we will consider the Whitehead doubles of the $(-13, 3)$ torus knot $\K$. According to \cite{EtnyreHonda01b} this is a Legendrian simple knot type, the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $-39$, and there are 8 representatives with maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant which realize the rotation numbers \[ -10, -8,-4,-2, 2, 4,8,10. \] In \cite{EtnyreHonda05} it was shown that negative torus knots are uniformly thick. So we can apply Theorem~\ref{thm:twistsat}. Clearly we have $n_1=2$ and $n_2=1$. From this one immediately computes the Legendrian representatives of the Whitehead doubles of $\K$. See Figures~\ref{fig:evenpos} and~\ref{fig:oddpos} for $m\geq -78$. For $m< -78$ the general closed from for the numbers in the mountain range are more complicated, but see Figures~\ref{fig:oddneg} and~\ref{fig:oddnegplus}. \end{example} \begin{figure} \centering {\tiny\[ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \xymatrix &&&&&&&8\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&&&&&\\ &&&&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&&\\ &&&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&\\ &&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&\\ &&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&& 1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&\\ &&4\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]& &1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&4\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&\\ &&&&&&&&&&&&& } \]} \caption{Legendrian mountain range for the Whitehead double $\W_m(\K)$ of the $(-13,3)$ torus knot $\K$ where $m\geq -78$ is even. The maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $-77-m$. } \label{fig:evenpos} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering {\tiny\[ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \xymatrix &&&&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&&&\\ &&&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&& 4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&&\\ &&&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&\\ &&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&& 2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&\\ &&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&4\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&\\ &4\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&& 1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld] &&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&4\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&\\ &&&&&&& &&&&&&& } \]} \caption{Legendrian mountain range for the Whitehead double $\W_m(\K)$ of the $(-13,3)$ torus knot $\K$ where $m\geq -78$ is odd. The maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $-81-m$.} \label{fig:oddpos} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering {\tiny\[ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \xymatrix &&&&&&&a\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&&&&&\\ &&&&&&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&&\\ &&&&&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&\\ &&&&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&b\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&\\ &&&b\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&& 1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld] &&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&b\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&\\ &&&&&&&&&&&&& } \]} \caption{Legendrian mountain range for the Whitehead double $\W_m(\K)$ of the $(-13,3)$ torus knot $\K$ where $m<-78$ is odd. The maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $-3$. The numbers $a$ and $b$ are determined by the formulas in Theorem~\ref{thm:twistsat}, for example when $m=-81$, $a=12$ and $b=2$.} \label{fig:oddnegplus} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering {\tiny\[ \xymatrixrowsep{2em} \xymatrixcolsep{2em} \xymatrix &&&&&&&12\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&&&&&\\ &&&&&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&&\\ &&&&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&&\\ &&&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}& &2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&&\\ &&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&& 1\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-} &&2\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&6\ar[rd]^{+} \ar[ld]_{-}&&\\ &&6\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]& &1\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&2\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&&6\ar@{.}[rd] \ar@{.}[ld]&\\ &&&&&&&&&&&&& } \]} \caption{Legendrian mountain range for the Whitehead double $\W_m(\K)$ of the $(-13,3)$ torus knot $\K$ where $m=-80$. The maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant is $1$.} \label{fig:oddneg} \end{figure} \subsection{Transverse satellites} \label{sec:transversebraidsatellite} We define transverse satellites with respect to Legendrian knots. Let $L\in\Lc\in\Leg(\K)$ be a Legendrian knot let $R\in\mathcal{R}\in\Trans_{V}(\Delta^{-\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$ be a transverse pattern and let $\psi\colon(V,\xi_V)\to(\nu(L),\xi_{\textrm{st}}\vert_{\nu(L)})$ be a contactomorphism. Then the transverse knot $R(L)=\psi(R)$ is the \emph{transverse satellite with companion $L$ and pattern $R$}. The transverse satellite smoothly represents $\Pat(\K)$, and it is independent of the isotopy classes. \begin{lemma} Let $L_0, L_1\in\Lc$, and choose standard contact neighborhoods $\nu(L_0)$ and $\nu(L_1)$. Let $R_0, R_1\in \mathcal{R}$ and suppose that $\psi_0\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (\nu(L_0),\xi\vert_{\nu(L_0)})$ and $\psi_1\colon (V,\xi_V)\to (\nu(L_1),\xi\vert_{\nu(L_1)})$ are contactomorphisms (that of course must bring the product framing $\mathbf{l}$ to the Thurston--Bennequin framings). Then $R_0(L_0)$ and $R_1(L_1)$ are transverse isotopic. \qed \end{lemma} This means that the transverse isotopy class $\mathcal{R}(\Lc)$ is well defined. Using Legendrian approximations and the formulas in Lemma~\ref{lem:legbraidsat} the self linking number of transverse satellites can be computed as follows. \begin{lemma} Let $\Lc\in\Leg(\K)$ and $\Q\in\Trans_{V}(\Delta^{\tb(\Lc)}\Pat)$. Then \[\self(\mathcal{R}(\Lc))=(n^2\tb(\Lc)-n\cdot\rot(\Lc))-\relsl_{V}(\mathcal{R})\] \end{lemma} Similarly to the Legendrian case we have the following. \begin{lemma}\label{lem:utptrsatelite} Suppose $\K$ is uniformly thick, and let $\Pat$ be a pattern in $V$. Then any element of $\Trans(\Pat(\K))$ can be written as $\mathcal{R}(\Lc)$, where $\Lc\in\Leg(\K)$ and $\mathcal{R}\in\Trans_{V}(\Delta^{-\overline{\tb}(\K)}\Pat)$. \qed \end{lemma} \subsubsection{Transverse braid satellites} Braid patterns behave nicely under the satellite operation. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:univthicktransversebraid} Let $\K$ be a uniformly thick transversally simple knot type and suppose that $\Pat$ is a braid pattern, then $\Pat(\K)$ is transversally simple. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $\Lc_0$ be the Legendrian representation of $\K$ with the smallest rotation number amongst the ones with maximal Thurston-Bennequin number. By Lemma \ref{lem:utptrsatelite} any transverse representation $T$ of $\Pat(\K)$ can be written in the form $R(L)$, where $L$ is a representative of a peak $\Lc$ for the mountain range for $\K$ and $R$ is a transverse represntative of $\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat$. Notice that by Lemma \ref{lem:deltastab} for $a>0$ we have $\mathcal{R}(\Lc)=(\Delta^a\mathcal{R})(\St_-^a\Lc)$. Since $\K$ is transversally simple for $a$ big enough $\St_-^a(\Lc)$ will be the unique Legendrian representative of $\K$ with $(\tb,\rot)=(\tb(\Lc)-a,\rot(\Lc)-a)$. By choosing sufficiently large $a$ we can also assume, that $\St_-^a\Lc$ is a stabilization of $\Lc_0$. This means that for some representative $L_0$ of $\Lc_0$ we have $T\subset \nu(\St_-^aL)\subset \nu(L_0)$, and thus $T=R_0(L_0)$ for some transverse pattern $R_0$ smoothly representing $\Delta^{-\overline{t}}\Pat$. We have just proved that any transverse representative of $\Pat(\K)$ can be written in the form $\mathcal{R}_0(\mathcal{L}_0)$. Since $\Pat$ is transversely simple by Theorem~\ref{thm:transversed2s1} all these representatives are distinguished by their self-linking number \[\self(\mathcal{R}_0(\mathcal{L}_0))=(n^2\tb(\Lc_0)-n\cdot\rot(\Lc_0))-\relsl_{V}(\mathcal{R}_0).\] Thus $\Pat(\K)$ is indeed transversally simple. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Transverse Whitehead doubbles} Recall that there is a map $\Leg(\K)$ to $\Trans(\K)$ obtained by transverse push-off and if $\Leg(\K)$ is modded out by negative stabilization then the map becomes a bijection, \cite{EtnyreHonda01b, FuchsTabachnikov97}. Thus a direct consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:twistsat} is the classification of transverse Whitehead doubles of uniformly thick, Legendrian simple knot types. \begin{theorem} \label{thm:twistsattr} Let $\W_m$ be the Whitehead pattern with $m$ half-twists. And let $\K$ be a uniformly thick and Legendrian simple knot type for which $-\K=\K$ and such that $\W_m(\K)$ has no topological symmetries (as in Theorem~\ref{lem:incommonstab}). Suppose the maximum Thurston-Bennequin number of $\K$ is denoted $\overline{t}$ and \[ \Leg(\K;\overline{t})=\{\Lc_0,\Lc_1 \dots,\Lc_k\} \] where \[ \rot(\Lc_0)=r_0<\cdots<\rot(\Lc_k)=r_k. \] Let $j$ be the maximal depth of a valley in the Legendrian mountain range of $\K$ and let $n_d$ be the number of valleys of depth $d$ corresponding to Legendrian knots with negative rotation numbers, so the total number of valleys is $k=2(n_1+\ldots + n_j)+\mathcal{X}_{2\nmid k}$. Here, again $\mathcal{X}_{\text{event}}$ is the indicator function, with value 1 if ``event'' is true and value 0 if ``event'' is false. All transverse knots in$\Trans(\W_m(\K))$ destabilize to one of the maximal self-linking number representatives. \begin{enumerate} \item If $m\geq 2\overline{t}$ even, then the maximal self-linking number of $\W_m(\K)$ is $2\overline{t}-m+1$. Moreover for any $a\geq 0$ we have \[ \left\|\Trans(\W_m(\K); 1-(m-\overline{t})-2a)\right\|= \left\lceil \frac{k+1}2 \right \rceil -\sum_{d=1}^an_d. \] \item If $m>2\overline{t}$ odd, then the maximal self-linking number of $\W_m(\K)$ is $2\overline{t}-m-2$. Moreover for any $a\geq 0$ we have \[ \left\|\Trans(\W_m(\K); -(m-\overline{t})-2-2a)\right\|=\left\lceil \frac{k+1}2 \right \rceil -\sum_{d=1}^an_d. \] \item If $m<2\overline{t} $ odd, then the maximal self-linking number of $\W_m(\K)$ is $-3$. Let $l=\left\lfloor\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2\right\rfloor$. Then for any $a\geq 0$ we have \[ \left\|\Trans(\W_m(\K); -3-2a)\right\| = \left\lceil \frac{k+1}2 \right \rceil -\sum_{d=1}^ln_d- \sum_{d=l+1}^an_d, \] where the last sum is 0 unless $a>l$. \item If $m<2\overline{t} $ even, then the maximal self-linking number of $\W_m(\K)$ is $1$. Let $l=\frac{2\overline{t}-m}2$. There are \[ \left\lceil\frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m}{2}+1\right) - \sum_{d=1}^{l} n_d \left(\frac{2\overline{t}-m-2d}2 +1\right) \] elements in $\Trans(\W_m(\K); 1)$ and for any $a\geq 1$ we have \[ \left\|\Trans(\W_m(\K); 1-2a)\right\|=\left\lceil\frac{k+1}2 \right\rceil -\sum_{d=1}^ln_d- \sum_{d=l+1}^an_d \] where the last sum is 0 unless $a>l$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \def$'$} \def\cprime{$'${$'$} \def$'$} \def\cprime{$'${$'$} \providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace} \providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR } \providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{% \href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2} } \providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
\section{INTRODUCTION} Topological insulators (TIs) with time-reversal symmetry (TRS), have been of increasing interest in condensed matter physics and material science during the last decade. The emergence of robust edge states in two-dimensional (2D) TIs that are protected by TRS, make them promising candidates for potential applications in spintronics and quantum computing~\cite{kane,hasan,moor,qi,fu,bernevig}. TIs can exist intrinsically or be driven by external factors such as electrical field or by functionalization~\cite{ren}. Strain engineering is a well known strategy for switching from normal insulator (NI) phase to a TI phase~\cite{ren,ma}. Among the wide list of systems that possesses such property, 2D materials with fascinating electronic, mechanical and thermal properties have been in the focus of attention~\cite{kane,ezawa1}.\par In the past few years, phosphorene, a monolayer of black phosphorus, has emerged as an encouraging 2D semiconducting material for widespread applications. Phosphorene-based field effect transistors (FETs), show a higher ON/OFF ratio in comparison with graphene~\cite{koenig,li} and has a higher carrier mobility with respect to 2D transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) which have recently attracted a lot of attention for FET applications~\cite{koenig,li,xia}. There exist several works pertinent to the observation of different phases in bulk and multilayer black phosphorous by tuning the lowest energy bands~\cite{fei1,kim,xiang,zunger,zhang}. Using density functional theory (DFT) it was shown that few-layers of phosphorene experiences a NI to TI and then a TI to topological metal (TM) phase transition by applying a perpendicular electric field~\cite{zunger}. In a different DFT study~\cite{zhang} such phase transitions for various stacked bilayer phosphorene under in-plane strain has been explored. Owing to the puckered structure of phosphorene, it has a high degree of flexibility. Therefore, it can sustain strain very well specially in the zigzag direction up to about 30\%~\cite{wei,peng}. This makes phosphorene promising for possible applications using strain engineering.\par In our work, we investigate the effect of strain on the electronic band structure of phosphorene the TB approach. The band gaps of this model~\cite{rud} are close to the most reliable DFT and experimental results~\cite{liang,tran} that predict band gaps of $1\sim2$ eV for phosphorene. In this paper, we propose a model Hamiltonian for the SOC for monolayer phosphorene that can be generalized to few-layers phosphorene. We show that, a model which includes the next-nearest(n-n) neighbors in the upper or lower chains, is sufficient for capturing the main physics. Then, strain engineering of this system is investigated through modifying the hopping parameters of the system. We demonstrate that, by applying particular types of strain, the system can make a phase transition to a TI. Finally, we show numerically that though the topological bulk band gaps induced by SOC is about $5$ meV, but the highly anisotropic nature of this material causes the corresponding bulk gaps in large widths zPNRs be at least three order of magnitude larger than room temperature thermal energy ($\sim26$ meV) and makes phosphorene nanoribbons excellent candidates for future applications. This paper is organized as follows: the effective low-energy TB model Hamiltonian including the SOC terms is obtained in Sec.~II. The effect of axial strains on the band structure produced by this model is calculated and our results are compared with DFT results in Sec.~III. Demonstration of a topological phase transition in the electronic properties of phosphorene when particular types of strain are applied and the characteristics of corresponding edge states in zPNRs is presented in Sec.~IV. The paper is summarized in Sec.~V. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \begin{small}\section{TIGHT-BINDING MODEL HAMILTONIAN INCLUDING SPIN-ORBIT INTERACTION} \begin{figure} \centering {\includegraphics[angle=0,width=0.8\textwidth]{fig1}} \caption{ The lattice geometry of phosphorene. The two different colors of the P atoms refer to upper and lower chains (a) The hopping parameters $t_1,t_2,...,t_5$ used in our TB model are indicated in the figure. Red dotted arrows represent two types of n-n neighbors and the green dashed rectangle shows the unit cell of phosphorene. (b) A honeycomb-like ring of phosphorene. The vectors $\vec{d}_i$, $\vec{d}_j$, $\vec{d}_i+\vec{d}_j$ and $\vec{F}\propto(\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i)$ are used to derive the SOC. (c) Lattice constants and the components of geometrical parameters describing the structure of phosphorene.} \label{lattice} \end{figure} ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \subsection{Structure}\end{small} The puckered atomic structure of phosphorene and its geometrical parameters are shown in Fig.~\ref{lattice} where the $x$ and $y$ axes are the armchair and zigzag directions, respectively and the $z$ axis is in the normal direction to the plane of phosphorene. With this definition of coordinates, one can indicate the various atom connections $r_i$ which correspond to various hopping parameters $t_i$ that are included in the TB model. The structure parameters have been taken from~\cite{qiao} which is very close to experimentally measured parameters~\cite{takao} for its bulk structure. The components of the geometrical parameters as shown in Figs.~\ref{lattice}(b) and (c), for bond lengths $r_1=2.240$ \r{A} and $r_2=2.280$ \r{A} are $(r_{1x},r_{1y},r_{1z})=(1.503,1.660,0)$ and $(r_{2x},r_{2y},r_{2z})=(0.786,0,2.140)$, and $r_3,r_4,r_5$ are simply defined by parameters of $r_1$ and $r_2$. The two in-plane lattice constants are $a=4.580$ \r{A}, $b=3.320$ \r{A} and the thickness of a single layer due to the puckered nature is $r_{2z}=2.140$ \r{A}. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \subsection{Tight-binding model} The phosphorene TB Hamiltonian that has been proposed earlier~\cite{rud}, without the spin degree of freedom, is given by \begin{equation} \hat{H}=\sum_{ i,j }t_{ij}c_{i}^{\dagger }c_{j}, \end{equation where the summation is up to fifths neighbors, and $t_{ij}$ are hopping integrals that show the energy transfer between the $i$th and $j$th sites. The hopping terms are shown in Fig.~\ref{lattice}(a). $c_i^{\dagger}$ and $c_{j}$ represent the creation and annihilation operators of electrons in sites $i$ and $j$, respectively. The numerical values of these hopping parameters are: $t_1=-1.220$~eV, $t_2=3.665$~eV, $t_3=-0.205$~eV, $t_4=-0.105$~eV, and $t_5=-0.055$~eV~\cite{rud}. Including the spin degree of freedom and SOC the Hamiltonian is modified into \begin{equation} \hat{H}=\sum_{ i,j,\alpha }t_{ij}c_{i\alpha}^{\dagger }c_{j\alpha}+\hat{H}_{SO}, \label{H} \end{equation where in $\hat{H}_{SO}=\hat{H}_{SO1}+\hat{H}_{SO2}$, the first term is called the usual effective SOC and the second one is the intrinsic Rashba SOC which will be introduced in next subsection. Due to the puckered structure of phosphorene, the Rashba term is rather large as compared to the first term and should be included in our calculations. \subsection{Spin-orbit coupling in Phosphorene} The primary goal of this subsection is to introduce a spin-orbit model Hamiltonian for phosphorene which can capture the most important spin-related phenomenon. There exist several studies which showed the anisotropic behaviour in the electronic and optical properties of phosphorene~\cite{fei,yang,tran,sisakht} which are due to the anisotropic nature of the band dispersion of phosphorene. This property is reflected in the effective mass of electrons and holes of phosphorene. As a matter of fact, the corresponding band dispersion of the zigzag direction in real space, is relatively flat near the Fermi energy while it has an approximately linear dispersion in the armchair direction~\cite{fei,sisakht}. One can define two types of n-n neighbors in the phosphorene structure. As shown in Fig.~\ref{lattice}(a), each P atom has two intra-chain and four inter-chain n-n neighbors, respectively. The effective mass of electrons in the direction of intra-chain, are at least an order of magnitude larger than the inter-chain direction~\cite{fei}. Therefore, electrons usually select the inter-chain path for circular motion, allowing us to ignore the intra-chain neighbors and only consider the four n-n inter-chain P atoms in the SOC model. In general, the SOC term for a 2D system is given by \begin{equation} H_{SO} =-\frac{\hbar}{4m_0^2c^2}(\vec{F}\times\vec{P})\cdot\vec{\sigma}, \end{equation}\\ where $\hbar$, $m_0$ and $c$ are Plank's constant, mass of free electron, and the velocity of light, respectively. $\vec{F}$ is the effective electrostatic force, $\vec{P}$ is the effective momentum and $\vec{\sigma}$ denotes the Pauli matrices. As in the cases of graphene and silicene~\cite{liu}, the nearest-neighbor SOC is zero in phosphorene, but the SOC terms of the n-n neighbors are nonzero. As shown in Fig.~\ref{lattice}(b), in a honeycomb-like ring of phosphorene, we can define $\vec{d}_i$ and $\vec{d}_j$ as vectors that connect the nearest P atoms to each other and $\vec{d}_i+\vec{d}_j$ the connecting vector of n-n neighbors. Using these vectors, the electrostatic force and momentum can be written as $\vec{F}=\|\vec{F}\|(\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i)/\|\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i\|$ and $\vec{P}=-i\hbar\vec{\triangledown}\equiv-i\alpha(\vec{d}_i+\vec{d}_j)$, with $\alpha$ being a prefactor. Rewriting the SOC in terms of the above definitions we obtain \begin{equation} H_{SO} =-\frac{\hbar}{4m_0^2c^2}[ \frac{\|\vec{F}\|(-i\alpha)}{\|\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i\|}(\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i)\times(\vec{d}_i+\vec{d}_j) ]\cdot\vec{\sigma}. \end{equation}\\ Based on experimental and DFT data, $\|\vec{d}_i\|$ and $\|\vec{d}_j\|$ are approximately equal~\cite{qiao,takao,gomes,wei}, therefore $(\vec{d}_i+\vec{d}_j)$ and $(\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i)$ become perpendicular to each other. This leads to \begin{equation} \small H_{SO} =-i\frac{2\hbar\alpha\|\vec{F}\|}{4m_0^2c^2\|\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i\|}(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)\cdot\vec{\sigma}\equiv-i\gamma(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)\cdot\vec{\sigma}, \label{HSO} \end{equation}% where the term $2\hbar\alpha\|\vec{F}\|/4m_0^2c^2\|\vec{d}_j-\vec{d}_i\|=\gamma$ will be adjusted to obtain the correct value of SOC as obtained by DFT. Notice that, the above approximations reduce the two parameters of the usual SOC and intrinsic Rashba SOC into a single parameter. Using $\vec{\sigma}=\sigma_\shortparallel\hat{a}_\shortparallel+\sigma_z\hat{a}_z$, where $\sigma_\shortparallel$ ($\sigma_z$) are the in-plane (out of plane) Pauli matrixes (matrix), we rewrite Eq.~(\ref{HSO}) as \begin{equation} \small H_{SO} =-i\gamma\|\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j\|_z\nu_{ij}\sigma_z -i\gamma\|(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel\|(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel^0\cdot\vec{\sigma_\shortparallel}, \label{HSO1} \end{equation}% where $\nu_{ij}\equiv(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_z/\|\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j\|_z=\pm1$ and $(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel^0\equiv(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel/\|(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel\|$ is a dimensionless unit vector. The spin-orbit terms in second quantization are given by \begin{eqnarray} \small \hat{H}_{SO1}+\hat{H}_{SO2}=-i\lambda_{so}\sum_{\ll ij\gg\alpha\beta}\nu_{ij}c_{i\alpha}^\dag\sigma_z^{\alpha \beta} c_{j\beta} \notag \\ -i\lambda_{r}\sum_{\ll ij\gg\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^\dag(\vec{d}_i\times \vec{d}_j)^0\cdot\vec{\sigma}_\shortparallel^{\alpha \beta} c_{j\beta}, \label{HSO2} \end{eqnarray}\\ where $\lambda_{so}\equiv\gamma\|\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j\|_z$ and $\lambda_r\equiv\gamma\|(\vec{d}_i\times\vec{d}_j)_\shortparallel\|$ are effective intrinsic SOC and intrinsic Rashba constants, and the summation runs over the inter-chain n-n neighbors. As mentioned before, these two parameters are related to one parameter $\gamma$, which can be estimated by adjusting the TB band structure of phosphorene to the one obtained from DFT. It was shown that in the absence of SOC the energy gap of few-layers phosphorene closes under an external electric field or strain~\cite{zunger,zhang}. However, including the SOC an energy gap of $5$~meV~\cite{zunger} remains in few-layers phosphorene. This results in the value of $\gamma\approx0.006$ meV/$\mathring{A^2}$ in our TB model. \section{PHOSPHORENE UNDER STRAIN: ELECTRONIC BAND STRUCTURE} The role of uniaxial and biaxial strain in manipulating the electronic structure of few-layers phosphorene has been investigated via DFT~\cite{rodin,peng,wang,zhang,huang} and TB approaches~\cite{jiang,mohammadi,duan}. Applying tensile or compressive strain in different directions results in different modifications of the electronic bands. One can observe a direct to indirect gap transition, or a prior direct band gap closing, depending on the type of applied strain~\cite{peng,wang,zhang}. In this work we consider biaxial compressive strain in the plane of few-layers phosphorene~\cite{wang,zhang}, and tensile strain in the normal direction~\cite{huang}. This modifies the low energy bands so that the valance and conduction bands approach each other. By further increasing strain, the lower band, coming from $p_x$ orbitals, shifts upward resulting in a semi-metal phase~\cite{wang} given that at the band crossing point a mini gap opens due to the SOC. Investigating the local density of states of $p$ orbitals~\cite{zhang} shows that our one orbital $p_z$-like TB model is still valid in the low energy limit before the semi-metal phase appears. In the following, we will first study the bulk band of phosphorene in the presence of axial strains using our TB approach and demonstrate that a band inversion occurs in the energy spectrum of phosphorene in the range where the structure is still stable under strain. It has been shown that the bond lengths and bond angles of phosphorene both change under axial strains~\cite{wang,sa}. Therefore, the hopping parameters will change. According to the Harisson rule~\cite{harrison,tang}, the hopping parameters for $p$ orbitals are related to the bond length as $t_i\propto 1/r_i^2$ and the angular dependence can be described by the hopping integrals along the $\pi$ and $\sigma$ bonds. However, our calculations showed that, though the changes in angles are almost noticeable~\cite{wang,sa}, the modification of the hopping parameters due to them is much smaller than the effect of changes of bond lengths. Hence, we consider only changes of the bond lengths in the hopping modulation. When an axial strain is applied to phosphorene, the rectangle shape of the unit cell with lattice constants of $a_0$ and $b_0$ remains unchanged. Therefore the initial geometrical parameter $r^0_i$ is deformed as $(r_{ix}, r_{iy}, r_{iz})=((1+\varepsilon_x)r^0_{ix}, (1+\varepsilon_y)r^0_{iy}, (1+\varepsilon_z)r^0_{iz})$ where $\varepsilon_j$ is the strain in the $j$-direction and $r_i$ is a deformed geometrical parameter. In the linear deformation regime, expanding the norm of $r_i$ to first order of $\varepsilon_j$ gives \begin{equation} r_{i}=(1+\alpha_x^i\varepsilon_x+\alpha_y^i\varepsilon_y+\alpha_z^i\varepsilon_z)r^0_i, \end{equation} where $\alpha_j^i=(r^0_{ij}/r^0_i)^2$ are coefficients related to the structure of phosphorene which are simply calculated via the special geometrical parameters given in previous section. Using the Harrison relation, we obtain the strain effect on the hopping parameters as \begin{equation} t_i\approx(1-2\alpha_x^i\varepsilon_x-2\alpha_y^i\varepsilon_y-2\alpha_z^i\varepsilon_z)t^0_i, \label{MODIFIED_T} \end{equation} where $t_i$ is the modified hopping parameter of deformed phosphorene with new lattice constants $a$ and $b$. Let us now study the energy spectrum of strained phosphorene with the modified hopping parameters as given by Eq.~(\ref{MODIFIED_T}). The unit cell of monolayer phosphorene is a rectangle containing four atoms as shown in Fig.~\ref{lattice}(a). Fourier transform of the strained Hamiltonian of Eq.~(\ref{H}) gives the general Hamiltonian in momentum space as \begin{equation} H=\sum_{\bf k} \psi^{\dagger}_{\bf k}H_{\bf k}\psi_{\bf k}, \label{Hk1} \end{equation} where we have used the basis $\psi^{\dagger}_{\bf k}=\{a^{\dagger}_{\bf k},b^{\dagger}_{\bf k},c^{\dagger}_{\bf k},d^{\dagger}_{\bf k}\}\otimes{\{\uparrow,\downarrow\}}$ with $H_{\bf k}$ being \begin{equation} H_{\bf k} = \begin{pmatrix} H_{\bf k}(\uparrow\uparrow)& H_{\bf k}(\uparrow\downarrow) \\ H_{\bf k}(\downarrow\uparrow) & H_{\bf k}(\downarrow\downarrow) \label{Hk2}\end{pmatrix}, \end{equation}\\ where \begin{eqnarray} H_{\bf k}(\uparrow\uparrow)&=&H^{(4)}_{\bf k}+H^{so}_{\bf k},~~H_{\bf k}(\downarrow\downarrow)=H^{(4)}_{\bf k}-H^{(so)}_{\bf k}, \notag \\ H_{\bf k}(\uparrow\downarrow)&=&H^{(R)}_{\bf k},~~~~~~~~~~~~~H_{\bf k}(\downarrow\uparrow)={H^{\dagger}_{\bf k}}^{(R)}, \end{eqnarray}\\ are $4\times4$ matrices \begin{eqnarray} H^{(4)}_{\bf k} &=&\begin{pmatrix} 0 & A_{\bf k}& B_{\bf k} & C_{\bf k} \\ A^{}_{\bf k} & 0 & D_{\bf k} & B_{\bf k} \\ B^{}_{\bf k} & D^{}_{\bf k} & 0 & A_{\bf k} \\ C^_{\bf k} &B^{}_{\bf k} & A^{}_{\bf k} & 0 \end{pmatrix} , \notag \\ H^{(so)}_{\bf k} &=& \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & E_{\bf k}& 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & -E_{\bf k} \\ {E^{}_{\bf k}} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & -{E^{}_{\bf k}} & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} ,\notag \\ H^{(R)}_{\bf k} &=& \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & F_{\bf k}& 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & F_{\bf k} \\ {e^{i(k_a-k_b)}F_{\bf k}} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & {e^{i(k_a-k_b)}F_{\bf k}} & 0 & 0 \label{Hk3} \end{pmatrix}, \end{eqnarray} whose elements are given by \begin{eqnarray} \small A_{\bf k} &=& t_2+t_5e^{-ik_a},\notag \\ \small B_{\bf k} &=& 4t_4e^{-i(k_a-k_b)/2}\cos(k_a/2)\cos(k_b/2),\notag \\ \small C_{\bf k} &=& 2e^{ik_b/2}\cos(k_b/2)(t_1e^{-ik_a}+t_3), \notag \\ \small D_{\bf k} &=& 2e^{ik_b/2}\cos(k_b/2)(t_1+t_3e^{-ik_a}), \notag \\ \small E_{\bf K} &=& -2\lambda_{so}e^{-i(k_a-k_b)/2}\sin(k_a/2)\sin(k_b/2), \notag \\ \small F_{\bf K} &=& 4\lambda_re^{(k_b-k_a)/2}(\cos(k_b/2)\cos(k_a/2)\cos(\theta), \notag \\ &&+i\sin(k_b)\sin(k_a)\sin(\theta)),\notag \\ \end{eqnarray} with $k_a=\textbf{k.a}$, $k_b=\textbf{k.b}$ and $\theta=\arctan(r_{1y}/r_{1x})$.\\ The energy spectrum of pristine phosphorene in the absence of strain has been obtained by numerical diagonalization of the TB Hamiltonian Eq.~(\ref{Hk1}) in different symmetry directions as shown in Fig.~\ref{band-inversion}(a). As we can see in Fig.~\ref{band-inversion}(b), the degeneracies of bands have been removed (black lines) slightly due to the SOC in comparison with the case of zero SOC coupling (red lines) except for the time reversal invariant momentas (TRIMs) which are at least doubly degenerate according to the Kramers theorem. As seen in Fig.~\ref{band-inversion} the gap of phosphorene is located at the $\Gamma$ point which is also a TRIM. At this point, the spin up and spin down valence and conduction bands are degenerate and the change in the gap due to the SOC is very small as compared to the bulk gap. Since axial strain doesn't break TRS, the bands at this point remain degenerate. Therefore, when the bulk gap is modified by an external factor such as strain, we can safely use the spinless Hamiltonian demonstrating the general trend in changes of the gap. All P atoms in a unit cell have the same on-site energy, so we can project the position of upper and lower chains of phosphorene on a horizontal plane to reduce the spinless $4\times4$~ Hamiltonian $H^{(4)}_{\bf k}$ into a two-band TB model~\cite{sisakht,ezawa2}. Therefore the new $k$-space Hamiltonian of the strained phosphorene in the absence of spin is given by \begin{small} \begin{flalign} \small H^{(2)}_{\bf k}& = \begin{pmatrix} B_{\bf k}e^{i(k_a-k_b)/2} &\small A_{\bf k}+C_{\bf k}e^{i(k_a-k_b)/2}\\ \small A^{}_{\bf k}+C^{}_{\bf k}e^{-i(k_a-k_b)/2}& \small B_{\bf k}e^{i(k_a-k_b)/2} \label{Hk2} \end{pmatrix}. \end{flalign} \end{small} Diagonalizing this Hamiltonian at the $\Gamma$ point gives the band gap as \begin{small} \begin{eqnarray} E_g&=&(4t^0_1+2t^0_2+4t^0_3+2t^0_5)\notag\\ &-&\sum_j(8\alpha^1_j\varepsilon_j t^0_1+4\alpha^2_j\varepsilon_j t^0_2+8\alpha^3_j\varepsilon_j t^0_3+4\alpha^5_j\varepsilon_j t^0_5), \label{eg0} \end{eqnarray} \end{small}where $j$ denotes the summation over $x$, $y$, $z$ components. The first bracket is the unstrained band gap i.e. $E^0_g=1.52$~eV and the second one indicates the structural dependent values of changes in the band gap due to the axial strains. Inserting the numerical values of the structural parameters in Eq.~(\ref{eg0}) we obtain a compact form for the gap equation \begin{eqnarray} E_g=E^0_g-\sum_j\eta_j\varepsilon_j, \label{eg} \end{eqnarray} where $\eta_x=-4.09$~eV, $\eta_y=-5.72$~eV and $\eta_z=12.86$~eV. Eq.~(\ref{eg}) shows that by applying in-plane compressive biaxial strain and perpendicular tensile strain, the band gap decreases which is consistent with DFT calculations~\cite{rodin,peng,wang,zhang,huang}. It is shown that DFT calculations using the PBE exchange correlation functional anticipate properly the general trends of the band structure when applying axial strains on phosphorene~\cite{peng,wang}. A comparison between the band gaps as function of axial strains using available DFT data~\cite{peng,wang,huang} and TB model demonstrate that the modification of the hopping parameters in the linear regime are valid for rather large strains and show that the modified TB model predicts correctly the variation of the low energy spectrum. Figure~\ref{gap_ez} shows the band gap values evaluated at the $\Gamma$ point in the presence of (a) uniaxial perpendicular tensile strain (b) uniaxial compressive strain in armchair direction, and (c) biaxial compressive in-plane strain, respectively. In both DFT and TB approaches the band gaps exhibit linear dependence with applied strain. The discrepancy between the values of the band gaps originate from the specific calculation method. \begin{figure} \centering {\includegraphics[angle=0,width=0.48\textwidth]{fig2}} \caption{(a) The TB bands of phosphorene including the effect of SOC. The blue dashed rectangle is magnified in (b), (c) and (d) for various conditions: (b) The magnified valence and conduction bands of Phosphorene. Red curves show the bands without SOC. Black solid curves show the bands with SOC. (c), (d) The energy spectrum right before and after band inversion at 11.5\% and 12.5\% perpendicular tensile strain, respectively. The inset shows the gap opening due to the SOC, i.e. $\sim5$ meV. } \label{band-inversion} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering {\includegraphics[angle=0,width=1\textwidth]{fig3}} \caption{ Band gap evolution of phosphorene in the presence of (a) perpendicular tensile strain, (b) uniaxial compressive strain in armchair direction, and (c) biaxial compressive in-plane strain. } \label{gap_ez} \end{figure} As a particular case we consider the modification of energy the spectrum under a perpendicular tensile strain. By increasing the tensile strain, a band inversion occurs at the critical value of $\varepsilon^c_z=E^0_g/\eta_z=0.118$. This is a signal of a topological phase transition. Figs.~\ref{band-inversion}(c), (d) show the low energy bands just before and after band closing at 11.5\% and 12.5\% tensile strain, respectively. As shown in the inset of Fig.~\ref{band-inversion}(d), the SOC opens a small gap of about 5~meV after band closing preventing the formation of a Dirac like-cone. Notice from Figs.~\ref{band-inversion}, that the low energy bands in the armchair direction become more linear under strain. This makes the intra-chain n-n neighbours less important justifying the use of the SOC terms of Eq.~(\ref{HSO2}). \section{TOPOLOGICAL PHASE TRANSITION OF PHOSPHORENE UNDER STRAIN} The $\mathbb{Z}_2$ classification provides a very strong distinction between two different time reversal topological and trivial phases. Pristine phosphorene as a trivial insulator when the intrinsic SOC effect is included preserves the TRS and can exhibit a quantum spin Hall (QSH) phase when its electronic properties is influenced by external factors e.g. electric field or strain. In the following, we first briefly describe our approach for calculating the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant. This approach, when working in the frame of the TB model~\cite{sol} is quite efficient for 2D materials such as phosphorene. Then, we will demonstrate numerically a topological phase transition in strained phosphorene and calculate the phase diagrams accordingly. Finally we will show the existence of protected edge states in zPNRs and discuss their fascinating properties. \subsection{Calculation of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant} Fu and Kane~\cite{fu1} showed that an equivalent way to calculate the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant is as an integral over half the Brillouin zone given by \begin{equation} \small\mathbb{Z}_2=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\left [\oint_{\small{\partial\textrm{HBZ}}}d\bm{k}\bm{\cdot\mathcal{A}}(\bm{k})- \int_{\small{\textrm{HBZ}}}d^2k \mathcal{F}(\bm{k})]\right]\textrm {(mod 2)}, \label{z2-1} \end{equation}\\ where $\small{\textrm{HBZ}}$ denotes half the Brillouin zone. $\bm{\mathcal{A}}(\bm{k})=\sum_n\langle u_n(\bm{k})\|\nabla_n u_n(\bm{k})\rangle$ is the Berry gauge potential and the Berry field strength is written as $\mathcal{F}=\nabla_{\bf k} \times {\mathcal{A}(\bm{k})\mid_z}$ where $u_n(\bm{k})$ is the periodic part of the Bloch state with band index $n$ and the summation runs over all occupied states. According to Stoke's theorem, it is obvious that if $\bm{\mathcal{A}}$ and $ \mathcal{F}$ have the same gauge which is smooth over $\small{\textrm{HBZ}}$, the result will vanish. Therefore, one needs to fix the gauge with some additional constraints~\cite{sol1}. By choosing a gauge, in which the corresponding states fulfills the TRS constraints in addition to the periodicity of the $k$ points, that are related by a reciprocal lattice $\bm G$, the gauge fixing procedure is complete and the returned results of $\mathbb{Z}_2=0$ or $\mathbb{Z}_2=1$ represents the trivial and topological phases, respectively. In the case of phosphorene, where bands cross or degeneracies are present in the energy spectrum, the Berry potential and Berry field strength must be extended to non-Abelian gauge field analogies~\cite{fukui} associated with a ground state multiplet $\|\psi(k)\rangle=(\|u_1(k)\rangle,...,\|u_{2M}(k)\rangle)$ in the equation $\mathcal{H}(k)\|u_n(k)\rangle= E_n(k)\|u_n(k)\rangle $. Based on the above extension, the discretized Brillouin zone version~\cite{fukui1} of Eq.~(\ref{z2-1}) for numerical computing the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant, is written as \begin{equation} \small\mathbb{Z}_2=\frac{1}{2 \pi i}\left[ \sum_{{\textit k_l}\in \small{\partial\textrm{HBZ}}}A_x({\textit k_l}) - \sum_{{\textit k_l}\in \small\textrm{HBZ}} F_{xy} ({\textit k_l})\right]\textrm {(mod 2)}, \label{z2-2} \end{equation} where each site in the square lattice of the Brillouin zone of phosphorene is labeled by $\textit k_l$ and $\textit l$ specifies a plaquette with so-called unimodular link variable \begin{equation} U_\mu({\textit k_l})=\frac{\textrm {det} \psi^\dagger(\textit k_l)\psi(\textit k_l+ \hat{\mu})}{\|\textrm {det} \psi^\dagger(\textit k_l)\psi(\textit k_l+ \hat{\mu})\|}, \end{equation} where $\hat{\mu}$ denotes a unit vector in $x$-$y$ plane. Such a link variable allows us to define the Berry potential and Berry field as \begin{eqnarray} A_{x}({\textit k_l})&=&\ln U_x({\textit k_l}), \\ \small F_{xy}(\textit k_l)&=&\ln\frac{U_x(\textit k_l)U_y(\textit k_l+\hat{x})}{ U_y(\textit k_l)U_x(\textit k_l+\hat{y})}. \label{FFF} \end{eqnarray} Berry potential and Berry field strength are both defined within the branch of $A_{x}({\textit k_l})/i\in(-\pi,\pi)$ and $F_{xy}(\textit k_l)/i\in(-\pi,\pi)$. Figure~\ref{fig4} shows the results of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ corresponding to the energy bands in Fig.~\ref{band-inversion}. As can be seen, at the critical strain of $11.8\%$, which is consistent with the condition of $\varepsilon_z>E^0_g/\eta_z$ for band inversion, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant jumps from $0$ to $1$. This, demonstrates a topological phase transition in the electronic properties of phosphorene. \begin{figure} \centering {\includegraphics[angle=0,width=0.48\textwidth]{fig4.eps}} \caption{ Calculation of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant of phosphorene in the presence of perpendicular tensile strain. The critical value for the topological phase transition is $11.8\%$.} \label{fig4} \end{figure} According to Eq.~(\ref{eg}), another way to observe a topological phase transition in phosphorene, is by applying in-plane compressive biaxial strain at a fixed value of tensile strain in the $z$ direction. Figs.~\ref{z-2} show the numerically computed $\mathbb{Z}_2$ phase diagrams as a function of $\varepsilon_x$ and $\varepsilon_y$ at a fixed value of $\varepsilon_z$. As can be seen, there is a linear border between two distinct topological phases that corresponds to the regimes before and after the gap closing condition of $\eta_x\varepsilon_x+\eta_y\varepsilon_y=E^0_g-\eta_z\varepsilon^c_z$, where $\varepsilon^c_z$ is a fixed value of strain in the direction of $z$. It is worth mentioning that, the relatively large bulk band gap of monolayer phosphorene necessitates a rather large value of strain in order to observe band inversion. As mentioned before, according to DFT calculations, this is accompanied by an upward shift of a new VBM. After a critical percentage of strain, a direct band touching occurs, which is characterized by a TI phase. However, further increase of strain leads to a metal phase and because the topological nature does not change, the system may fall into the TM phase. Our model can not predict the VBM upward shift, hence, in spite of demonstrating the change of the topological phase, it can not distinguish between the TI and TM phases. Note that our approach can be simply extended to the case of few-layers phosphorene in which we expect to observe the topological phase transition at lower strain values, due to the fact that the inter-layers hoppings result in a smaller gap~\cite{cai}. \subsection{Electronic properties of phosphorene nanoribbons under strain} In this subsection, we investigate the evolution of the band structure of phosphorene nanoribbons in the presence of in-plane and perpendicular strain. In the following, we refer to the width of zPNRs as $N_z$-zPNR with $N_z$ being the number of zigzag chains across the ribbon width. As we showed in the previous section, a topological phase transition occurs in the band spectrum of phosphorene. This should lead to the formation of topologically protected edge states in the band structure of the corresponding nanoribbons. We obtain the eigenvalues and eigenvectors using the following matrix \begin{equation} M_{i\alpha,j\beta}({\bf k}) = \sum_{mn}\tau_{mi\alpha,nj\beta} e^{i{\bf k}\cdot{\bf R}_{mn}}, \label{band1} \end{equation} where $e^{i{\bf k}\cdot{\bf R}_{mn}} $ are the 1D Bloch wave functions. $m$,~$n$ denote super-cells; $i$,~$j$ are the basis sites in a super-cell and $\alpha$,~$\beta$ denote the spin degree of freedom. ${\bf k}$ is the wave vector, and ${\bf R}_{mn}$ represents a Bravais lattice vector. $\tau_{mi\alpha,nj\beta}$ are the hopping integrals with usual SOC or intrinsic Rashba coupling that are conveniently defined between the basis site $i$ with spin $\alpha$ of super cell $m$ and the basis site $j$ with spin $\beta$ of unit cell $n$. \begin{figure} \centering {\includegraphics[angle=0,width=0.47\textwidth]{fig5}} \caption{Phase diagrams of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant as function of $\varepsilon_x$ and $\varepsilon_y$ for different values of $\varepsilon^c_z$. The linear boundaries distinct the two topologically different phases according to the gap closing condition of $\eta_x\varepsilon_x+\eta_y\varepsilon_y=E^0_g-\eta_z\varepsilon^c_z$. } \label{z-2} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[angle=0,width=.9\textwidth]{fig6} \caption{1D energy bands for a typical phosphorene nanoribbon with $N_z=100$~($\sim23$~nm) in case: (a) without strain, (b) $\varepsilon_z=10 \%$, and (c) $\varepsilon_z=14 \%$. (d) The amplitude probability of the topological edge modes living on opposite edges for a definite $k$ point. } \label{edge-modes} \end{figure} Note that, Eq.~(\ref{band1}) is related to the energy spectrum of nanoribbons that are not edge passivated. The experimental realization of such nanoribbons with pristine edges in low dimensional materials as graphene is well known~\cite{zhang1} and may be extended to the case of phosphorene nanoribbons. However, the stability of such ribbons is important from the experimental point of view. Formation energy studies~\cite{carvalho} showed that pristine phosphorene nanoribbons are stable specially for ribbon widths which we have considered in this paper. The emergence of quasi-flat bands which are detached completely from the bulk bands due to the special structure of phosphorene are well known~\cite{ezawa2,sisakht,gruj}. As shown in Fig.~\ref{edge-modes}(a), there are topologically non-protected edge modes in the 1D bands of a typical zPNR (the results are for $N_z=100$). These quasi-flat bands have been used to propose a field-effect transistor driven by an in-plane electric field~\cite{ezawa2,sisakht}. However, since pristine bulk phosphorene is a trivial insulator, the existence of topologically non-protected edge modes in the corresponding nanoribbons which can be affected by environmental conditions such as disorder or impurities, may not be a good candidate for practical use. As an example, we consider the zigzag nanoribbon in the presence of perpendicular strain. The behaviour in the presence of other types of strain is similar to this case. As can be seen in Figs.~\ref{edge-modes}(b) and (c), by increasing strain the bulk gap of the nanoribbon gradually decreases and after a critical strain, where a band inversion occurs in the bulk spectrum, the corresponding edge states in the ribbon cross the gap which demonstrates a topological insulator phase. Owing to the dependence of the nanoribbon gap on the ribbon width, the critical strain for driving it to a topological insulator phase depends on the width as well. If we consider ribbons with very large widths, the critical value approaches the critical strain value of bulk 11.8\% that we have calculated in previous section. The anisotropic structure of phosphorene results in a large bulk gap for zigzag nanoribbons with experimentally accessible widths. This makes strained zPNRs ideal systems for observing topological states even at room temperature. As shown in Fig.~\ref{edge-modes}(c) for a zigzag nanoribbon of width $\sim23$~nm this gap is about 200~meV which is much larger than room temperature thermal energy. We have calculated numerically these bulk gaps for relatively large ribbons up to a width of $100$~nm and found that the mentioned gaps are at least three orders of magnitude larger than the thermal energy at room temperature.It is worth mentioning that, such a typical ribbon width is wide enough to prevent from overlapping of edge states living on opposite sides of the ribbon. The corresponding amplitude probability of the topological edge modes of Fig.~\ref{edge-modes}(c) which have amplitude on opposite edges are shown in Fig.~\ref{edge-modes}(d) for a definite $k$ point. The amplitude of the wave functions drop very quickly along the width of the ribbon demonstrating that the nanoribbon width is wide enough to prevent quantum tunneling. Such excellent properties can pave the way for utilizing it in device applications. \section{Conclusions} In summary, we derived a spin-orbit model Hamiltonian based on the structural and electronic properties of phosphorene that captures the main physical properties of spin-orbit related subjects. Then we showed in the frame of this TB model that gap engineering of phosphorene by axial strains can lead to a topological phase transition in the electronic properties of phosphorene. In spite of the relatively small gap induced by SOC in bulk monolayer phosphorene, we predict that due to the special puckered structure of phosphorene, zigzag nanoribbons in the regime of TI have topologically protected edge states with rather large bulk band gaps of about $200$~meV for a typical ribbon of width $\sim23 $~nm. Such gaps are larger that the thermal energy at room temperature and are therefore sufficiently large for practical device engineering at room temperature. \section*{Acknowledgement} This work was supported by Iran's ministry of science. M.Z. is a postdoc fellow of the Felamish Research Foundation (FWO-Vl).
\section{Introduction} Ramsey theorem for posets with one linear extension was proved in \cite{NR}, \cite{PTW}. Recently, Solecki and Zhao in \cite{SZ} proved Ramsey theorem for posets with multiple linear extensions. Their proof was based on Ramsey theorem for rigid surjection [Solecki2], which was earlier proved by Solecki. In this note, we present a different proof of Solecki-Zhao result. Our proof of this Ramsey type theorem for posets with multiple linear extensions is based on Ramsey type theorem for posets with single linear extension. Our main result is Theorem \ref{thm:main}. \fi \section{Preliminary definitions} A poset is a pair $(X,P^{X})$, where $X$ is a set and $P^{X}$ is a partial order on $X$. We consider partial orders that are strict, i.e. not reflexive. We say that a partial order $L^{X}$ on $X$ \textit{extends} a partial order $P^{X}$ on $X$ if for all $x, y \in X$ $$x P^{X} y \Rightarrow x L^{X} y.$$ If $(X,P^{X})$ is a poset and $U \subset X$ we denote by $P^{X}\|_{U}$ the \textit{restriction} of $P^{X}$ onto $U$. Below, we consider collections $\mathcal{L}^{X}_k=(L_1^{X}, L_2^{X}, \dots, L_k^{X})$ ,where each of $L_{i}^{X}$ is a linear order on $X$. \begin{definition} We denote by $PL^{(k)}$ the set consisting of all triplets $(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}^{X}_k)$, where $(X,P^{X})$ is a poset and each $L_{i}^{X}$ for $ i \in [k]$ is a linear order that extends $P^{X}$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} Let $\mathcal{X} , \mathcal{Y} \in PL^{(k)}$, where $\mathcal{X}=(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}^{X}_k)$ and $\mathcal{Y}=(Y, P^{Y}, \mathcal{L}^{Y}_k)$. We write $\mathcal{X} \subseteq \mathcal{Y}$ if \begin{itemize} \item $X\subseteq Y$ and $P^{Y}\|_X$ extends $P^{X}$. \item $L^{Y}_{i}\|_X=L^{X}_{i}$ for all $i\in [k]$. \end{itemize} \end{definition} \begin{definition} Let $\mathcal{X} , \mathcal{Y} \in PL^{(k)}$, where $\mathcal{X}=(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}^{X}_k)$ and $\mathcal{Y}=(Y, P^{Y}, \mathcal{L}^{Y}_k)$. We say that a mapping $\pi : X \to Y$ is order preserving for $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$ if for any $i \in [k]$ and any $x,y \in X$ we have $$ x L_{i}^X y \Leftrightarrow \pi(x)L_{i}^{Y}\pi(y) \; \; \;\text{and} \; \; \; x P^{X}y \Leftrightarrow \pi(x)P^{Y}\pi(y) .$$ \end{definition} \begin{definition} \label{def:isomor} We say that $\pi$ is an isomorphism between $\mathcal{X} \in PL^{(k)}$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \in PL^{(k)}$ if it is order preserving bijection. We say that $\mathcal{X} \in PL^{(k)}$ is isomorphic to $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \in PL^{(k)}$ if there is an isomorphism between $\mathcal{X}$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$. \end{definition} \begin{definition}\label{def:copy} Let $k > 0$ and $\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y} \in PL^{(k)}$. We say that $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \in PL^{(k)}$ is a copy of $\mathcal{X}$ in $\mathcal{Y}$ if $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \subseteq \mathcal{Y}$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{X}$. For $\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y} \in PL^{(k)}$ denote by $\binom{\mathcal{Y}}{\mathcal{X}}$ the set of all copies of $\mathcal{X}$ in $\mathcal{Y}$. \end{definition} For any $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \in \binom{\mathcal{Y}}{\mathcal{X}}$ there is unique order preserving mapping $\pi: X \to \tilde{X}$. On other hand, any order preserving mapping $\pi : X \to Y$ induces a copy $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}=\pi(\mathcal{X}) \in \binom{\mathcal{Y}}{\mathcal{X}}$. We identify each $\tilde{\mathcal{X}} \in \binom{\mathcal{Y}}{\mathcal{X}}$ with corresponding order preserving mapping $\pi$ and will say that $\pi$ is a copy of $\mathcal{X}$ in $\mathcal{Y}$ instead of saying that $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$ is a copy of $\mathcal{X}$ in $\mathcal{Y}$ with corresponding order preserving mapping $\pi$. We refer to the following theorem as to Ramsey theorem for posets with one linear extension. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:one_ext} For any integer $r$ and any $\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y} \in PL^{(1)} $ there is $\mathcal{Z} \in PL^{(1)}$, such that for any $r$-colouring of set $\binom{\mathcal{Z}}{\mathcal{X}}$ there is $\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}$, a copy of $\mathcal{Y}$ in $\mathcal{Z}$, such that $\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}}{\mathcal{X}}$ is monochromatic. \end{theorem} Ramsey properties of the class of partially ordered sets were considered in \cite{NR} and \cite{PTW}, where all partially ordered sets with P-Ramsey properties were characterised (see also \cite{NR2}). Subsequently some extensions and related results were obtained in \cite{Promel} and \cite{Fouche}, using different method. Next theorem is a product version of the Theorem \ref{thm:one_ext}, that we are going to use in Section \ref{sec:proof}. Proof of this theorem is based on a standard folkloristic argument. For similar results of this type see e.g. \cite{Promel}. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:product} For any $\mathcal{X}_i, \mathcal{Y}_{i}\in PL^{(1)}$ with $i\in [k]$ there are $\mathcal{Z}_i \in PL^{(1)}$ with $i \in [k]$, such that for any 2-colouring of set $\binom{\mathcal{Z}_1}{\mathcal{X}_1} \times \dots \times \binom{\mathcal{Z}_k}{\mathcal{X}_k}$ there are $\tilde{\mathcal{Y}_i}$, a copies of $\mathcal{Y}_i$ in $\mathcal{Z}_i$ for $i \in [k]$, such that $\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}_1}}{\mathcal{X}_1} \times \dots \times \binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}_k}}{\mathcal{X}_k}$ is monochromatic. \end{theorem} To distinguish between the objects of $PL^{(1)}$, which will play a special role in our proof, and $PL^{(k)}$ for $k\geq 2$, from now on, we use letters $\mathcal{X}$, $\mathcal{Y}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$ for elements of $PL^{(1)}$ and $\aa$, $\mathcal{B}$, $\mathcal{C}$ for elements of $PL^{(k)}$. Based on Theorem \ref{thm:product}, in Section \ref{sec:proof} we are going to prove the following result, first obtained in \cite{SZ} . \begin{theorem} \label{thm:main} For any integer $k$ any $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B} \in PL^{(k)} $ there is $\mathcal{C} \in PL^{(k)}$, such that for any colouring $2$-colouring of set $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}$ there is $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$, a copy of $\mathcal{B}$ in $\mathcal{C}$, such that $\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{B}}}{\mathcal{A}}$ is monochromatic. \end{theorem} \section{Properties of join and canonical copies} First, we define the join of $k$ elements of $PL^{(1)}$. \begin{definition}\label{def:join} Let $\mathcal{Z}_{i}=(Z_i, P^{Z_i}, L^{Z_i})\in PL^{(1)}$ for $i \in [k]$ ans set $C=\Pi_{i=1}^{k}Z_i$. Define partial order $<_C$ on set $C$ by $\overline{x}<_{C}\overline{y}$ if $x_{i}P^{Z_{i}}y_{i}$ for all $i \in [k]$. For all $i \in [k]$ define shifted lexicographic orders $<_{lx_i}$ on set $\Pi_{i=1}^{k}Z_i$, by $$\overline{x}<_{lx_i}\overline{y} \Leftrightarrow x_{i+\delta}L^{Z_{i+\delta}}y_{i+\delta},$$ where $\delta$ is the smallest non-negative number $j$, for which $x_{i+j}\neq y_{i+j}$ (with addition mod $k$). Let $\mathcal{L}_{k}^{C}=(<_{lx_1}, <_{lx_2}, \dots, <_{lx_k})$. Then the join of $\mathcal{Z}_1, \dots, \mathcal{Z}_k$ is $$\mathcal{C}=(C, P^C, \mathcal{L}_{k}^C).$$ For notation, we will use $\mathcal{C}=\sqcup_{i=1}^k \mathcal{Z}_i$. \end{definition} Note, that for $\mathcal{Z}_1, \dots, \mathcal{Z}_k \in PL^{(1)}$ we have that $\sqcup_{i=1}^{k} \mathcal{Z}_{2} \in PL^{(k)}$. Indeed, since $L^{Z_{i}}$ extends $P^{Z_i}$ we infer that $<_{lx_i}$ also extends $<_{C}$ for $i \in [k]$. \begin{claim}\label{claim:1} Let $\mathcal{Z}_{i}=(Z_i, P^{Z_i}, L^{Z_i})\in PL^{(1)}$ for $i \in [k] $ and let $\aa=(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}^{X}_{k}) \in PL^{(k)}$. Set $\mathcal{C}=\sqcup_{i=1}^{k} \mathcal{Z}_i$ and let $\pi_{i} : X \to Z_{i}$ be a copy of $\mathcal{X}_{i}=(X, P^{X}, L_{i}^{X})$ in $\mathcal{Z}_{i}$ for $i \in [k]$. Then the image of the mapping $\pi : X \to C$ , defined by $$\pi(x)=(\pi_1(x), \pi_2(x), \dots, \pi_k(x))$$ for each $x \in X$, is a copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}$. \end{claim} \begin{remark}\label{remark:1}$ $ \begin{itemize} \item We say that the image of the mapping $\pi$ from Claim \ref{claim:1}, is a \textit{canonical} copy of $\mathcal{\mathcal{B}}$ in $\mathcal{C}=\sqcup_{i=1}^k\mathcal{Z}_k$. \item By $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{B}}_{can} \subseteq \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{B}}$ we denote a set of all canonical copies of $\mathcal{B}$ in $\mathcal{C}$. \end{itemize} \end{remark} \begin{proof} We need to verify that $\pi: X \to C$ is order preserving for $\aa$ and $\mathcal{C}$. Indeed, we observe that if $x,y \in X$, then fact that $\pi_i: X \to Z_{i}$ preserves $P^{X}$ for $i \in [k]$ combined with definition of $\mathcal{C}$ yields $$xP^Xy \Leftrightarrow \forall i\in [k] : \pi_i(x) P^{Z_i}\pi_i(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi(x)<_C\pi(y).$$ Since $\pi_i$ preserves $L^{X}_i$ for $i \in [k] \;$ , we have $$ xL_i^Xy \Leftrightarrow \pi_i(x)L_i^{Z_i}\pi_i(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi(x)<_{lx_{i}}\pi(y)$$ for $i \in [k]$. Hence, $\pi$ preserves $P^{X}$ and $L^{X}_i$ for $i \in [k]$. \end{proof} For the rest of this section we assume that $\mathcal{C}=\sqcup_{i=1}^{k}\mathcal{Z}_i=(C, <_C, \mathcal{L}^{C}_{k})$, $\aa=(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}_k^{X})$ and $\mathcal{B}=(Y, P^{Y}, \mathcal{L}_k^{Y})$. \begin{note}\label{note:lambda} By construction, $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can}$ is in 1-1 correspondence with the set $\Pi_{i=1}^k\binom{\mathcal{Z}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ and the function $\lambda : (\pi_1(X), \dots , \pi_{k}(X)) \mapsto \pi(X)$ is the bijection between sets $\Pi_{i=1}^k\binom{\mathcal{Z}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ and $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can}$. \end{note} The following Claim states that if $\pi$ is a canonical copy of $\mathcal{B}$ in $\mathcal{C}$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is a copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\mathcal{B}$, then $\pi(\tilde{\mathcal{A}})$ is a canonical copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\mathcal{C}$. \begin{claim}\label{claim:2} If $\pi \in \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{B}}_{can}$ and $\tau \in \binom{\mathcal{B}}{\aa}$, then $\sigma=\pi \circ \tau \in \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\aa}_{can}$. \end{claim} \begin{proof} Since $\pi: Y \to C$ is a canonical copy, we have that $\pi=(\pi_1, \dots, \pi_k),$ where $\pi_i : Y \to Z_i$ are copies of $Y$ in $Z_{i}$ for $i \in [k]$. Define $\sigma_{i}=\pi_{i}\circ \tau$ for $i=\in [k]$. It is sufficient to prove that for any $i \in [k]$ $\sigma_{i}$ is order preserving for $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Z}_{i}$. Indeed, since $\tau$ is order preserving for $\aa$ and $\mathcal{B}$ and $\pi_{i}$ is order preserving for preserves $(Y, P^{Y}, L^{Y}_i)$ and $\mathcal{Z}_i$ for any $i \in [k]$, we have for any $x,y \in X$ and for $i \in [k]$ $$xP^Xy \Leftrightarrow \tau(x)P^{Y}\tau(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi_{i}(\tau(x))P^{Z_{i}}\pi_{i}(\tau(y))\Leftrightarrow \sigma_{i}(x)P^{Z_{i}}\sigma_{i}(y),$$ $$xL^X_{i}y \Leftrightarrow \tau(x)L^{Y}_{i}\tau(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi_{i}(\tau(x))L^{Z_{i}}\pi_{i}(\tau(y))\Leftrightarrow \sigma_{i}(x)L^{Z_{i}}\sigma_{i}(y).$$ Consequently, for $i \in [k]$, $\sigma_{i}$ is order preserving for $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Z}_{i}$, and $\sigma=(\sigma_1, \sigma_2)$ is a canonical copy of $\aa$ in $\mathcal{C}$. \end{proof} Our final Claim states that if $\tilde \mathcal{B}$ is a canonical copy of $\mathcal{B}$ in $\mathcal{C}$, and $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is a copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\tilde \mathcal{B}$, then $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is a canonical copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\mathcal{C}$. \begin{claim}\label{claim:3} If $\pi \in \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{B}}_{can}$ and $\sigma \in \binom{\pi(\mathcal{B})}{\aa}$, then $\sigma \in \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\aa}_{can}$. \end{claim} \begin{proof} Since $\pi$ is an isomorphism between $\mathcal{B}$ and $\pi(\mathcal{B})$, then $\pi^{-1}$ exists and is order preserving for $\pi(\mathcal{B})$ and $\mathcal{B}$. Therefore, $\tau=\pi^{-1} \circ \sigma$ is order preserving mapping for $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$. Finally, Claim \ref{claim:2} applied for $\pi$ and $\tau$ gives that $\pi \circ \tau =\sigma$ is canonical copy of $\mathcal{A}$. \iffalse=====COMMENT: At this point proof looks easy to me in this form. We can use more precise version, by changing last two sentences to: ===== Let $\tau=\pi^{-1} \circ \sigma$, then $\tau$ is bijection and we prove that $\tau$ preserve order on $\mathcal{C}$. Since $\sigma, \pi$ are bijections that preserve orders, we have that for any $x,y \in X$ and any $i \in [k]$ $$xP^Xy \Leftrightarrow \sigma(x)<_C\sigma(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi^{-1}(\sigma(x))P^{Y}\pi^{-1}(\sigma(y))\Leftrightarrow \tau(x)P^Y\tau(y),$$ $$xL_{i}^Xy \Leftrightarrow \sigma(x)<_{lx_i}\sigma(y) \Leftrightarrow \pi^{-1}(\sigma(x))L_{i}^{Y}\pi^{-1}(\sigma(y))\Leftrightarrow \tau(x)L_{i}^Y\tau(y).$$ Hence, $\tau$ is a copy of $\mathcal{C}$ in $\mathcal{B}$. Finally, Claim \ref{claim:2} applied for $\pi$ and $\tau$ gives that $\pi \circ \tau =\sigma$ is canonical copy of $\mathcal{A}$. \fi \end{proof} \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main}}\label{sec:proof} Let $\mathcal{A}=(X, P^{X}, \mathcal{L}_{k}^{X})$ and $\mathcal{B}=(Y,P^{Y}, \mathcal{L}_{k}^Y)$ be given. Applying Theorem \ref{thm:product} with $\mathcal{X}_{i}=(X,P^{X}, L_{i}^X)$ for $i \in [k]$ and $\mathcal{Y}_i=(Y,P^{Y}, L_{i}^Y)$ for $i \in [k]$ we obtain $\mathcal{Z}_{i}=(Z_{i},P^{Z_{i}}, L_{i}^{Z_{i}})$ for $i \in [k]$ . Set $\mathcal{C}=\sqcup_{i=1}^{k} \mathcal{Z}_i$. Let $\chi: \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}} \mapsto \{red,blue\}$ be a colouring. Since $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can} \subseteq \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}$, colouring $\chi$ induces $\{red,blue\}$ colouring of $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can}$. By Note \ref{note:lambda}, sets in $\binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can}$ and elements of $\Pi_{i=1}^{k}\binom{\mathcal{Z}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ are in 1-1 correspondence and thus $\lambda^{-1} \circ \chi$ induces a colouring of $\Pi_{i=1}^{k}\binom{\mathcal{Z}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$. By a choice of $\mathcal{Z}_i$ (recall that $\mathcal{Z}_i \in PL^{(1)}, \; i \in [k]$) there are $\tilde{Y}_i \in \binom{\mathcal{Z}_{i}}{\mathcal{Y}_{i}}$ for $i \in [k]$, such that $\Pi_{i=1}^k\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ is monochromatic and w.l.o.g we assume that all elements of $\Pi_{i=1}^k\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ are red. Let $\pi_{i} : \mathcal{Y}_i \to \tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i$ be the corresponding isomorphism between $\mathcal{Y}_i$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i$ for $i \in [k]$ and let $\pi : B \to C$ be a mapping defined by $\pi(y)=(\pi_1(y), \dots, \pi_k(y))$ for each $y \in Y$. Then, by Claim \ref{claim:1}, $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}=\pi(\mathcal{B})$ is a copy of $\mathcal{B}$ in $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ be a copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$, then, by Claim \ref{claim:3}, $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is a canonical copy of $\mathcal{A}$ in $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\sigma$ be isomorphism from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$, then $\sigma=(\sigma_1, \dots, \sigma_k)$, where $\sigma_i$ is order preserving for $\mathcal{X}_i$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i$ for any $i \in [k]$. Since $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}\in \binom{\mathcal{C}}{\mathcal{A}}_{can}$ and all elements of $\Pi_{i=1}^k\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{Y}}_i}{\mathcal{X}_i}$ are red, we get that $(\lambda^{-1} \circ \chi )(\tilde{\mathcal{A}})$ is red and consequently $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is red. Therefore, set $\binom{\tilde{\mathcal{B}}}{\mathcal{A}}$ is monochromatic. \begin{bibdiv} \begin{biblist} \bib{Fouche}{article}{ author={Fouch{\'e}, W. L.}, title={Symmetry and the Ramsey degree of posets}, note={15th British Combinatorial Conference (Stirling, 1995)}, journal={Discrete Math.}, volume={167/168}, date={1997}, pages={309--315}, issn={0012-365X}, review={\MR{1446753}}, doi={10.1016/S0012-365X(96)00236-1}, } \bib{NR}{article}{ author={Ne{\v{s}}et{\v{r}}il, Jaroslav}, author={R{\"o}dl, Vojt{\v{e}}ch}, title={Combinatorial partitions of finite posets and lattices---Ramsey lattices}, journal={Algebra Universalis}, volume={19}, date={1984}, number={1}, pages={106--119}, issn={0002-5240}, review={\MR{748915}}, doi={10.1007/BF01191498}, } \bib{NR2}{article}{ author={N\vspace{0mm}e{\v{s}}et{\v{r}}il, Jaroslav}, author={R{\"o}dl, Vojt{\v{e}}ch}, title={Ramsey partial orders from acyclic graphs}, note={arxiv.org:1608.04662}, } \bib{PTW}{article}{ author={Paoli, M.}, author={Trotter, W. T., Jr.}, author={Walker, J. W.}, title={Graphs and orders in Ramsey theory and in dimension theory}, conference={ title={Graphs and order}, address={Banff, Alta.}, date={1984}, }, book={ series={NATO Adv. Sci. Inst. Ser. C Math. Phys. Sci.}, volume={147}, publisher={Reidel, Dordrecht}, }, date={1985}, pages={351--394}, review={\MR{818500}}, } \bib{Promel}{book}{ author={Pr{\"o}mel, Hans J{\"u}rgen}, title={Ramsey theory for discrete structures}, note={With a foreword by Angelika Steger}, publisher={Springer, Cham}, date={2013}, pages={xvi+232}, isbn={978-3-319-01314-5}, isbn={978-3-319-01315-2}, review={\MR{3157030}}, doi={10.1007/978-3-319-01315-2}, } \bib{SZ}{article}{ author={Solecki, S.}, author={Zhao, M.}, title={A Ramsey theorem for partial orders with linear extensions}, note={arXiv:1409.5846}, } \end{biblist} \end{bibdiv} \end{document}
\section{Introduction} Acousto-optical modulators (AOMs) and electro-optic modulators (EOMs) are standard devices used in optics laboratories for frequency-shifting, amplitude-modulating, and phase modulating optical fields~\cite{PhotonicDevices}. EOMs can provide phase modulation (PM) using the electro-optic response of a crystal, and can provide amplitude modulation (AM) when combined with polarizers. Achieving pure PM or AM using EOMs requires extreme care. Due to effects such as frequency-dependent interference and polarization rotation in the birefringent crystals, PM is often accompanied by residual AM and vice versa~\cite{Whittaker:85, Cusack:04}. Techniques have been developed for combining multiple EOMs to impart an arbitrary mixture of AM and PM on light or to suppress the unwanted modulation~\cite{Cusack:04}. Driving an AOM with modulated radio frequency can also be used to add AM to the output light in either the zeroth or first diffracted order. This method can also introduce some amount of PM to the light due to changes to the index of refraction in the AOM crystal, such that the optical phase follows the acoustic phase~\cite{HENDERSON1970223, Li_OptLett2005}. This situation, however, is rarely discussed. Many experiments and applications using AOMs are either phase-insensitive or otherwise unaffected by residual PM. Nevertheless, certain phase-sensitive processes are affected. Phase modulation from an AOM has been shown to be an experimental difficulty in some optical phase-sensitive amplifier (PSA) experiments~\cite{Corzo:11, CorzoPRL:12}. In particular, while the PSA can perform completely noiseless amplification of a particular field quadrature, it can also convert PM to AM, making signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurements hard to interpret. It can even lead to apparent increases in the SNR after amplification if inadvertent PM is closely tied to an applied AM signal, as is the case in using many modulation devices. While AM can be measured with direct detection methods, PM can only be detected using more complicated phase-sensitive or interferometric measurement techniques, and can therefore be difficult to detect and eliminate. Common techniques for measuring the AM and PM of optical beams include homodyne and heterodyne detection~\cite{Cusack:04,bachor_guide_2004}. More indirect methods also exist for converting PM to AM such as using differential absorption in a sample~\cite{Whittaker:85}, reflected light from a cavity~\cite{Yam:15}, phase conjugation methods~\cite{PICHE1988146}, or Brillouin scattering~\cite{Yao98}. Phase modulation is often used in optical communication, such as in phase-shift keying. Signals from phase-shift keying are often demodulated using homodyne or heterodyne techniques and phase sensitive amplifiers have been investigated for regeneration of phase keyed signals ~\cite{Crou2006}. A theoretical and experimental examination of a single-ended coherent receiver based on a phase sensitive fiber parametric amplifier, including a comparison to a single-ended homodyne detector, has been presented in ~\cite{Kumpera2015}. Our emphasis in this work is on detecting and quantifying unintended phase modulations introduced by commonly used free space optical modulators.” In this paper, we explore the effects of PM on the output of an optical quantum-noise limited PSA, where the phase of the input light is central to amplifier behavior. We study the effects of phase modulation on a PSA both theoretically and experimentally. We introduce a novel method for quantifying the PM depth on an input light field using the PSA as part of a phase-sensitive detector. This method relies on the differing gains of the AC and DC components of the PSA output intensities with a PM input. We compare the results of this method with the results of homodyne detection (HD), a standard method for measuring the quadratures of a light field. We then insert a mechanical chopper in our experiment to amplitude-modulate a laser beam and use our PSA detection method to find PM in this field. We find that this detection method is suitable for detecting phase modulation and that the results for the PSA output match well with our theoretical predictions. We also note that for experiments already employing a PSA, this method allows one to recognize and correct for the presence of PM on the input signal. \section{Theoretical predictions} \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Setup} \caption{ \label{fig:Experimental_Setup} (a) Experimental setup. AOM: acousto-optic modulator, TA: semiconductor tapered amplifier, BS: non-polarizing beam splitter, PBS: polarizing beam splitter. (b) level structure of the D1 transition of $^{85}$Rb and the optical frequencies arranged in the double-$\Lambda$ configuration. Here $\nu_1$ and $\nu_2$ are the pumps and $\nu_p$ is the probe. The width of the excited state in the level diagram represents the Doppler broadened line, $\Delta$ is the one-photon detuning, $\delta$ is the two-photon detuning, and $\nu_{HF}$ is the hyperfine splitting.} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Phase-sensitive amplification} We describe the operation of a phase-sensitive amplifier and predict the effect of phase and amplitude modulation on the outputs. Our optical PSA amplifies or deamplifies an optical waveform with a gain dependent on the phase of the input light. The phase of the input field is relative to two strong pump fields (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Experimental_Setup}) that mediate the non-linear process that results in phase-sensitive amplification. Given an input field $E_{in}=\|E_{in}\|e^{i\phi}$, the relationship between the classical input and output field is given by \begin{equation} E_{out}= E_{in} \cosh r + E_{in}^* \sinh r , \\ \label{eq: PSA.eq.} \end{equation} where $r$ is the interaction strength of the parametric process derived from the product of the pump power, nonlinear susceptibility, and interaction length \cite{Grynberg:1309862}. In our case, the phase of the process is defined by $\phi_{PSA}=2 \phi-\phi_1-\phi_2$, where $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$ are the pump phases. Therefore, the output intensity $I_{out}=E_{out}\cdot E_{out}^$ is a function of input phase $\phi$, making the output phase-sensitive. We define the phase-dependent gain of the PSA as $g(\phi)=I_{out}(\phi)/I_{in}$. This leads to a maximum of the phase-dependent gain of $G = g(0) = e^{2 r}$ and a minimum of $1/G = g(\pi) = e^{-2 r}$. Because the gain of the PSA changes with input phase, the output intensity will be affected by the presence of phase modulation on the input beam, and this effect must be included. We now consider the case of a modulated input field. We adopt the definitions used in \cite{bachor_guide_2004} for an electric field in the rotating carrier frame with both amplitude and phase modulation: \begin{equation} E_{in}=[1 - \frac{A}{2}(1-\cos\Omega t) + i\frac{P}{2}\cos\Omega t]e^{i\phi}. \\ \label{eq: Ein_mix.eq.} \end{equation} $\Omega$ is the modulation frequency and $A$ and $P$ are the AM and PM modulation depths respectively with $A\ll1$ and $P\ll1$. This input field has a sine-wave modulation on top of a constant offset, and so we can refer to the AC and DC components of the field. After the PSA, both the AC and DC components will be amplified or deamplified depending on the input phase $\phi$. However, due to the presence of PM, the AC and DC components can experience different gains. We define $g^{AC}(\phi)=I_{out}^{AC}(\phi)/I_{in}^{AC}$ and $g^{DC}(\phi)=I_{out}^{DC}(\phi)/I_{in}^{DC}$, where $I_{in/out}^{AC}$ and $I_{in/out}^{DC}$ are the AC and DC parts of the input and output intensities, respectively. For pure AM ($P=0$), $g^{AC}(\phi)=g^{DC}(\phi)$, implying that the AC and DC components of the input intensity will be equally amplified/deamplified at any given input phase. However, this will not be the case when $P\neq0$, and so we can compare $I_{out}^{DC}(\phi)$ with $I_{out}^{AC}(\phi)$ to detect and quantify phase modulation. As an example, see the solid lines in Fig. \ref{fig:acdc} which show the PSA AC and DC gains for four different input signals, all with the same level of amplitude modulation but varying levels of phase modulation. The goal here is to reproduce experimental data (discussed below) from measurements on input signals resulting from four slightly different alignments of an acousto-optic modulator, all producing the same level of AM modulation. In the experiment, the degree of AM modulation is easily determined by direct intensity measurements without the PSA. All four theory curves shown here have $A = 0.16$ and a maximum gain of approximately $G=2.25$. By letting $\phi$ range from 0 to $2\pi$, we get a parametric plot of the AC versus DC gains for all phases. Note that if $P$ is very close to zero (Fig. \ref{fig:acdc}(a)), we see a straight line with a slope of unity when plotting $I_{out}^{DC}$ vs $I_{out}^{AC}$. On the other hand if $P$ is a substantial fraction of $A$ (Figs. \ref{fig:acdc}(b) -- \ref{fig:acdc}(d)) this implies the presence of phase modulation, and we see an oval as the phase is scanned due to the unequal amplifications of the DC and AC components. For large values of $P$ the oval has negative AC gain values but we simply plot the absolute value. Therefore, by detecting the modulated input and output states of a PSA, we can quantify the amount of phase modulation present by using the size and shape of this oval. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ACDC_refit} \caption{ \label{fig:acdc} PSA results: AC gain versus DC gain for an optical signal modulated with an acousto-optic modulator and amplified in an optical phase-sensitive amplifier. The different plots are for different mixtures of AM and PM due to the AOM alignment. Each plot is parametric with respect to the phase of the PSA. The solid curves are theoretical fits with (a) $P/A=0.00$, (b) $P/A=0.11$, (c) $P/A=0.50$, (d) $P/A=1.65$.} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Balanced homodyne measurement} We now consider homodyne measurements of a signal with amplitude and phase modulation. Homodyne detection is the standard phase sensitive technique for measuring the amplitude and phase quadratures of a light field. We will use it below to look at the same input signals as were measured by the PSA technique (Fig. \ref{fig:acdc}) in order to verify the conclusions drawn from those measurements.” To perform homodyne measurements, the signal beam is interfered with a reference local oscillator (LO) field $E_{LO}=A_{LO}e^{i\phi_{LO}}$ on a 50/50 beam splitter, after which a balanced detection of the output intensities is performed. Depending on the phase of the reference beam $\phi_{LO}$ compared to the signal phase, the homodyne output will be sensitive to either the amplitude or phase of the signal light. For the same modulated input state in Eq.~(\ref{eq: Ein_mix.eq.}), it can be shown that the subtracted photocurrent is proportional to \begin{equation} i^-_{out}= 2A_{LO}(A-2)\sin(\phi_{LO}-\phi) + 2A_{LO}[P\cos(\phi_{LO}-\phi)-A\sin(\phi_{LO}-\phi)]\cos\Omega t. \\ \label{eq: HD.eq.} \end{equation} The first term varies with $\phi_{LO}$ and is independent of the modulation frequency $\Omega$, and will be referred to as the DC level. The second term is dependent on the modulation frequency and will have some AC amplitude. When the LO phase satisfies $\phi_{LO}=\phi+n\pi$, where $n$ is an integer, the first term in Eq. (\ref{eq: HD.eq.}) is 0, and the balanced HD output becomes $i^-_{out}= \pm2A_{LO}P\cos\Omega t$. The output is a sine wave at the modulation frequency whose amplitude is determined by only the PM depth $P$ and the LO strength $A_{LO}$. This is the point where the homodyne detector measures the phase quadrature. At $\phi_{LO}=\phi+n\pi/2$, it is sensitive to only the amplitude modulation. As an example, in Fig. \ref{fig:hd}, (solid lines) we plot the AC amplitude (second term in Eq. (\ref{eq: HD.eq.})) as a function of the DC level (first term) while $\phi_{LO}$ is scanned over the full range. The data in these plots are for same input signals as in Fig. \ref{fig:acdc}, and thus all have the same level of amplitude modulation ($A=0.16$), and a variable level of phase modulation resulting from slight changes in the alignment of the acousto-optic modulator. The plots are double valued in general because there are two values of $\phi_{LO}$ that correspond to the same DC level. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{hd_all} \caption{ \label{fig:hd} Homodyne results: AC amplitude versus DC level for an optical signal modulated with an acousto-optic modulator and measured with a balanced homodyne detector. The different plots are for different mixtures of AM and PM due to the AOM alignment. Each plot is parametric with respect to the phase of the LO. The solid curves are theoretical fits with (a) $P/A=0.03$, (b) $P/A=0.14$, (c) $P/A=0.50$, (d) $P/A=1.85$.} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Experiment} \subsection{Setup} A diagram of our experiment is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Experimental_Setup}. We use an experimental scheme similar to the one detailed in \cite{Corzo:11,CorzoPRL:12}. The phase-sensitive amplifier is created through the nonlinear four-wave mixing process in $^{85}$Rb vapor. The signal probe beam is detuned from the D$_1$ line (795 nm) of Rb while two strong pump beams with frequencies $\pm 3$ GHz from the probe intersect it at a small angle within the atomic vapor. We insert either an 80 MHz AOM or an optical chopper into the probe beam path before the PSA cell to modulate the input light. Before being aligned into the PSA vapor cell, the modulated input beam passes through a single-mode polarization-maintaining fiber. The input probe beam after the fiber is 200 $\mu W$ with a $1/e^2$ beam waist of 250 $\mu m$. The pump beams have a $1/e^2$ beam waist of 550 $\mu m$ and each has a power of 100 $mW$. The 12.5 mm vapor cell is filled with isotopically pure $^{85}$Rb and heated to 87 $^\circ$C. All the data shown in this paper is taken with the probe beam blue detuned 1.4 GHz from the center of the $5S_{1/2}$ $F=3$ manifold to the center of the $5P_{1/2}$ Doppler-broadened transition. The pump beams are created by seeding two 0.5 $W$ tapered amplifiers with light that has been shifted $\pm$3 GHz using double-passed AOMs. The probe frequency is always centered between the two pumps. The chosen detunings result in a $-4$ MHz two-photon detuning for the probe and each pump compared to the exact hyperfine splitting of the ground state, in order to compensate for light shifts (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Experimental_Setup}(b)). \subsection{Results: AOM} We have found that when using the AOM to amplitude-modulate a light beam, the amount of (unintended) PM is highly dependent on the AOM alignment relative to the input beam while the degree of amplitude modulation is not. For present purposes the degree of amplitude modulation can be determined by direct intensity detection without the PSA or homodyne detector and thus we take it as a fixed parameter in our fits to the PSA and homodyne data. For a given alignment through the AOM, we can switch between detecting the light using HD or sending it into the PSA. The input beam is modulated at $1$ MHz with $A=0.16$. Figures \ref{fig:acdc} and \ref{fig:hd} show measurements of PM at four different AOM alignments using the PSA method and HD method respectively. The alignment is changed by moving the horizontal tilt on the AOM. The stars are the experimental data while the solid lines are the theoretical fits using Eqs.~(\ref{eq: PSA.eq.}), (\ref{eq: Ein_mix.eq.}) and (\ref{eq: HD.eq.}). For the data in Fig. \ref{fig:acdc}, the input and pump phases are allowed to drift such that each data point represents a shot of the experiment at a different PSA phase, and therefore a different $g(\phi)$. The PSA measurements give a well-defined shape which is a function of $A$, $P$, $\phi$, and $r$. To fit the data, we took a subset of the data that could be plotted using a single-valued function of AC gain as a function of DC gain, rather than a parametric function of $\phi$. To get a single valued function, we selected the data points corresponding to a span of $\pi$ in PSA phase, which can be found by taking all the data points that lie above the line $y=x$ in Fig. \ref{fig:acdc}. This data is then fit using the AC gain as a function of DC gain. The uncertainties for these measurements can be found in Fig. \ref{fig:ACDC_HD_Comparison}. The uncertainties are $95\%$ confidence intervals from the fits. Due to systematic errors and our initial uncertainty in $A$, we have put lower bounds on the uncertainties corresponding to $1.5\%$ uncertainty in $P/A$. We find that by moving the tilt of the AOM less than one degree, we can change $P/A$ from nearly zero to greater than 0.2. The amplitude modulation alone is not appreciably changed for any of the data shown. Extremely fine tuning of the angle is required to find the minimum $P/A$. Unfortunately, aligning for highest diffraction efficiency does not guarantee minimum phase modulation. In the case of the homodyne measurements, the shapes are a function of $P$ and $A$ from the second term of Eq.~(\ref{eq: HD.eq.}), as well as a scaling factor and a vertical offset. To perform fits, we took a subset of the data that could be plotted using a single-valued function. To select data points consistent with a single valued function, we selected the data points corresponding to a span of $\pi$ in LO phase. Moving along the parametric curve in a single direction, from the minimum DC level to the maximum DC level, constitutes a $\pi$ phase shift in the LO. Instead of a parametric function of $\phi$, we can now plot AC amplitude as a function of DC level and perform a standard fit. The uncertainties for these measurements can be found in Fig. \ref{fig:ACDC_HD_Comparison}. The uncertainties are $95\%$ confidence intervals from the fits. Due to systematic errors and our initial uncertainty of $A$, we have put lower bounds on the uncertainties corresponding to $3\%$ uncertainty in $P/A$. By switching between the PSA measurement and the homodyne measurement without disturbing the AOM alignment, we can compare the two methods. In Fig. \ref{fig:ACDC_HD_Comparison}, we plot $P/A$ for the homodyne measurement versus the PSA measurement. The AOM alignment was adjusted for each point to increase or decrease the amount of phase modulation, and thus the ratio $P/A$. We find that the PSA and homodyne method track each other linearly and are in substantial agreement. This shows that measurements with a phase-sensitive amplifier can act as a diagnostic tool for reducing phase modulation on a light field. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=4in]{comp_20160804} \caption{ \label{fig:ACDC_HD_Comparison} Comparison of the ratio of phase to amplitude modulation measured by homodyne detection and measurements of PSA AC and DC amplification. The solid line is $y=x$ and the dashed line is a best linear fit, $y = 0.91x - 0.02$, to the data.} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Results: optical chopper} Having confirmed that our analysis of the PSA data is consistent with that based on standard homodyne measurements, we can now use the PSA results alone. We consider here a common laboratory technique for amplitude modulating a beam, namely a mechanical chopper wheel which alternately blocks and un-blocks a beam. The spatial mode of the beam after the chopper is cleaned with a single mode fiber before the beam is sent into the PSA. We find the chopper introduces phase modulation as its blades cut through the beam. It may seem counter-intuitive that a chopper can add PM; however, as the blade passes through the beam, the spatial mode and phase front of the beam are disturbed due to diffraction effects around the blade. As the chopper moves through the beam, the light intensity will change with a transient, well-modeled by the error function. The intensity as a function of time after a blade moving through a Gaussian beam is given by \begin{equation} I_{in} = \frac{1}{2}[1+erf(\frac{t-\mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})], \\ \label{eq: erf.} \end{equation} where $t$ is time, $\mu$ is the offset and $\sigma$ is the width of the error function. We introduce a simple empirical model for the phase modulation which we can test with the PSA measurements. We assume that any phase modulation introduced to the light follows a Gaussian function in time as the blade traverses across the beam profile, with a width that matches the error function of the intensity: \begin{equation} E_{in}= e^{i\phi}\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}[1+iPe^{-(\frac{t-\mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})^2}][1+erf(\frac{t-\mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})]}. \\ \label{eq: chopper.eq.} \end{equation} In this case, $P$ corresponds to the maximum amplitude of the Gaussian shaped PM. We find the values of $\mu$ and $\sigma$ by fitting Eq.~(\ref{eq: erf.}) to the measured transient intensity of the input beam (see the dashed curves in Figs. \ref{fig:chopper}(a) and \ref{fig:chopper}(c)). We define the AC part of the PSA output signal as the intensity integrated over the time window during which the transient turns from off to on; from 6 to 10 $\mu s$. The AC gain is defined as the ratio of the AC signal with the PSA on to the AC signal with the PSA off. The DC component is the steady state of the intensity after the light is fully unblocked.The DC gain is defined as the ratio of the DC signal with the PSA on to the DC signal with the PSA off. Just as when using an AOM, the discrepancy between AC and DC gain is indicative of the level of phase modulation. This allows us to plot the AC intensity component versus the DC level and extract a PM depth. We believe the deviation between theory and experiment is mostly due to our assumption of the Gaussian form of the phase modulation above and the slight mechanical instability of the chopper from shot-to-shot. \begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Chopper_1} \caption{ \label{fig:chopper} PM measurements for two different chopper alignments using the PSA scheme. (a) and (c) show raw data from a tilted chopper alignment and optimal chopper alignment, respectively. The dashed lines are direct intensity detection without a PSA and the other curves are various phases of the PSA. Inset theory curves are shown as examples to demonstrate curve shapes for the fit parameters and do not necessarily match the PSA phases of the individual data curves shown. (b) and (d) show AC gain vs. DC gain, as defined in the text, for the tilted chopper alignment, and optimal chopper alignment, respectively. The solid curves in (b) and (d) are theoretical fits where $P$ = 0.7 and $P$ = 0.15, respectively.} \end{center} \end{figure} We found that the phase modulation of a chopper depended strongly on the tilt of the chopper blades when they intersected the laser beam. Fig.~\ref{fig:chopper} shows the results of the PSA measurements for two positions of an optical chopper, the first (\ref{fig:chopper}(a) and \ref{fig:chopper}(b)) when the blades are tilted off-axis by approximately $10$ degrees from the beam path, and the second (\ref{fig:chopper}(c) and \ref{fig:chopper}(d)) where the blades intersect the beam path at normal incidence. In both cases, the blades are placed within the Rayleigh range of a beam focus. It is clear from this measurement that the phase modulation was reduced by setting the chopper to normal incidence, however PM may not be eliminated completely. We were unable to reduce the amount of PM below the level shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:chopper}(d). \section{Conclusion} These demonstrations highlight the importance of being able to measure and correct for the presence of unintended phase modulation when employing common amplitude modulation techniques in experiments using phase sensitive amplifiers. We show that PSA signals can be used as a diagnostic tool for quantifying the PM depth of an input signal and are consistent with established homodyne techniques. We find that both AOMs and optical choppers can inadvertently add PM to a light field in addition to the desired AM. This can drastically alter the results in applications using phase-sensitive amplifiers. In each case, the amount of PM can be reduced by adjusting the angle of incidence between the beam path and the modulator. Similar analysis could be carried out using optical PSAs and light modulated by electro-optic devices. \section{Funding} National Science Foundation (NSF) and Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR). \end{document}
\subsection{Just-in-time Trigger}\label{sec:design_async} The just-in-time trigger aims to remove synchronization at points \txtcircle{1} and \txtcircle{3}. JITT\xspace triggers both event delivery (\txtcircle{1}) and buffer ownership transfer (\txtcircle{3}), asynchronously. To determine the event delivery time, it predicts how much time an application will spend to process events and draw on a buffer. Using the prediction, \textsf{Presto}\xspace carefully triggers the event delivery so that it is late enough for an application to receive more recent events, but early enough not to miss the next screen update. We discuss the prediction in detail in \S~\ref{sec:design_prediction}. To decide the buffer ownership transfer time, JITT\xspace has to know how much time the buffer ownership transfer requires. Focusing on a single main app highly simplifies the output subsystem's execution. In our experiments with more than 6,000 execution time samples, 99.9\% of the samples are below 2.8 ms and all of them are below 3.5 ms. \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figs/design_async.pdf} \caption{Latency from just-in-time trigger: The input subsystem delivers more recent events by predicting the application's execution time. A wrong prediction, however, adds an extra $T_{sync}$ latency for the frame $F_{2:3}$.} \label{fig:design_async} \end{minipage} \hfill \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figs/design_async_bypass.pdf} \caption{Latency from just-in-time frame delivery: The recovery procedure drops the frame $F_{2:3}$ with a wrong prediction and avoids propagating delays.} \label{fig:design_async_bypass} \end{minipage} \vspace{-3mm} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:design_async} illustrates how the just-in-time trigger works. When $E_0$ happens, the input subsystem has the two predicted execution times for the application and the output subsystem. The next event $E_1$ can be processed before the next sync pulse\xspace, thus the input subsystem waits for the event. On the contrary, the input subsystem does not wait for $E_2$ because the event cannot be processed before the next sync pulse\xspace. As a result, the waiting reduces the latency for $E_1$ because the application processes it before $V_1$ and the output subsystem successfully transfers $F_{0:1}$'s ownership to the display subsystem by $V_1$. It is worth noting that the waiting does not increase the latency for $E_0$ because both \textsf{Presto}\xspace and a legacy system finish processing the event before the $V_1$. $ and $T_{output}$. Yet your text below suggests JIT reduces $T_{app}$ and $T_{out}$. Confusing} The latency model with just-in-time trigger is: \begin{equation}\label{eq:jitt} \bar{T} = \bar{T}_{input} + \boldsymbol{T'}_{\boldsymbol{app}} + \boldsymbol{T'}_{\boldsymbol{out}} + \bar{T}_{disp} \end{equation} Compared to the base model, Equation \eqref{eq:base}, $T_{app}$ and $T_{out}$ is changed to $T'_{app}$ and $T'_{out}$, respectively. $T'_{app}$ is introduced by the first trigger at \txtcircle{1} and it represents an application's predicted execution time to process the event and render a frame. $T'_{out}$ is introduced by the second trigger at \txtcircle{3}, and it is 3.5 ms. Hence, the just-in-time trigger reduces \begin{equation}\label{eq:jitt_reduce} 22.4_{(ms)} - T'_{app} (= T_{app} + T_{out} - T'_{app} - T'_{out}) \end{equation} from the equation~\eqref{eq:base}. Underprediction of the application execution time, however, may happen and introduce delay to equation \eqref{eq:jitt}. JITT\xspace provides a recovery mechanism described in \S~\ref{sec:design_bypass}. \input{prediction} \input{bypass} \section{Concluding Remarks}\label{sec:discussion} In this work, we present {\scshape Polypath}\xspace, an operating system design that supports multiple tradeoffs for interaction latency, and \textsf{Presto}\xspace, an I2D path\xspace design that halves the latency by judiciously allowing frame drops. {\scshape Polypath}\xspace exports an asynchronous API that allows an unmodified legacy application to changes its path design with the guaranteed path integrity, independently from other applications. \textsf{Presto}\xspace is able to reduce the average latency of the drawing benchmarks tested from about \SI{70}{ms} to \SI{40}{ms}. \emph{Where does the rest of latency come from?} Our investigation has pointed to the input hardware, which contributes about \SI{30}{ms} in state-of-art Android systems. This includes the hardware time for scanning capacitance changes on the touch sensor, converting analog signals to digital, and communicating to the CPU~\cite{touchproduct}. This latency can be reduced in two ways. One, exemplified by Apple Pencil, is to increase the input sampling rate, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:latency_ipadPro}. The more effective way, however, is touch prediction\xspace, as exemplified by iOS 9, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:latency_ipadPro} and Figure~\ref{fig:latency_result}. \section{ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS} \noindent This work was supported in part by NSF Award CNS \#1422312. \subsection{Latency Tradeoff by \textsf{Presto}\xspace} We next answer the three questions about the latency reduction, its orthogonality and the tradeoffs by \textsf{Presto}\xspace. The measurement shows that \textsf{Presto}\xspace with JITT\xspace only and with JITT\xspace and PAR\xspace reduces the average latency of our benchmarks from \SI{72.7}{ms} to \SI{54.4}{ms} and \SI{41.0}{ms}, respectively. This reduction eliminates all latency from synchronization and will significantly improve user experience and performance according to both the literature~\cite{deber2015much} and our own experience and user study. Moreover, as we anticipated, the reduction from \textsf{Presto}\xspace is orthogonal from that of another important technique, touch prediction\xspace, employed by iPad Pro. When combined with touch prediction\xspace of \SI{30}{ms}, \textsf{Presto}\xspace is able to reduce the latency of our in-house application below \SI{10}{ms}. \subsubsection{\textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces latency by \SI{32}{ms}} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figs/latency_result_indirect} \caption{\textsf{Presto}\xspace consistently reduces the latency of the legacy benchmarks, by \SI{32}{ms} on average.} \label{fig:latency_reduction} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:latency_reduction} shows how much each of the two techniques reduces the latencies of legacy applications. On average, \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces the latency by \SI{32}{ms}. To appreciate the significance of this reduction, we note that Deber et al~\cite{deber2015much} showed that even a small latency reduction, i.e. \SI{8.3}{ms}, brings a perceptible effect in touchscreen interactions. This reduction is larger than average latency caused by the coarse-grained I2D path\xspace design, i.e., \SI{26.6}{ms} (\S\ref{sec:monopath_latency}). This is because when an application occasionally fails to finish drawing by the next display refresh, JITT\xspace drops this delayed frame while stock Android keeps it and propagates the delay to all subsequent frames. The frame drop by \textsf{Presto}\xspace is not perceptible to users as we will see in\S\ref{sec:user_eval}. Notably, different benchmarks see different amount of latency reduction from \textsf{Presto}\xspace. \textsf{Presto}\xspace is most effective for those that have large latency to begin with, i.e., \program{Autodesk (AD)}, \program{Calligraphy (CY)}, \program{Calligrapher (CR)}, and \program{Brush (BP)}. \textsf{Presto}\xspace is the least effective for \program{MetaMoji (MM)}, reducing the latency by \SI{17.6}{ms} only. Our analysis reveals that this is because its average {\small $T_{app}$} is the longest among all benchmarks. As a result, it has the least amount of latency due to synchronization and gives \textsf{Presto}\xspace the least opportunity. \subsubsection{\textsf{Presto}\xspace beats iPad Pro} \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth,trim={1.4cm 0 2.4cm 0cm},clip]{figs/compareWithiPadPro} \caption{\textsf{Presto}\xspace improves the latency of our in-house application on Nexus 6 below that of iPad Pro even with Apple Pencil and touch prediction\xspace. } \label{fig:latency_ipadPro} \end{minipage} \hfill \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figs/latency_result} \caption{Latency of \textsf{Presto}\xspace plus touch prediction\xspace for our in-house application: the effectiveness of \textsf{Presto}\xspace is complementary to that of touch prediction\xspace. X axis is the time into the future predicted. } \label{fig:latency_result} \end{minipage} \end{figure} Using our in-house application, we are able to compare \textsf{Presto}\xspace on Nexus 6 with iOS on iPad Pro, the state-of-the-art touch device widely in use. iPad Pro employs two techniques to reduce the latency: it doubles the input sampling rate for Apple Pencil~\cite{applePencil}, from 120 Hz to 240 Hz, and the iOS SDK provides predicted events for the next frame (\SI{16}{ms}), a technique called \emph{touch prediction\xspace}~\cite{iosPrediction}. Because neither technique is available on Android, we measure the in-house application on iPad Pro with four configurations as reported in the right half of Figure~\ref{fig:latency_ipadPro}: normal stylus pen without touch prediction\xspace, Apple Pencil without touch prediction\xspace, normal stylus pen with touch prediction\xspace, and Apple Pencil with touch prediction\xspace. The results clearly show that both the faster input sampling rate and touch prediction\xspace help reduce the latency for iPad Pro, with the best latency being \SI{42.9}{ms}. Impressively, \textsf{Presto}\xspace is able to reduce Android's latency to even lower, \SI{33.0}{ms}, even without fast input sampling or touch prediction\xspace. \subsubsection{\textsf{Presto}\xspace brings orthogonal benefits}\label{sec:orthogonal} In principle, the effectiveness of \textsf{Presto}\xspace is orthogonal to that of faster input and touch prediction\xspace because \textsf{Presto}\xspace eliminates latency resulting from synchronization and the latter primarily reduce latency resulting from the input hardware. With our in-house application, we implement touch prediction\xspace that predicts into the future from \SI{0} to \SI{32}{ms}. \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces the latency by eliminating the synchronization points. Figure~\ref{fig:latency_result} shows how \textsf{Presto}\xspace and touch prediction\xspace complementarily reduces the latency. The leftmost group in the figure does not have predicted events, i.e., touch prediction\xspace of \SI{0}{ms}. Clearly, for touch prediction\xspace of various time, \textsf{Presto}\xspace demonstrates almost the same effectiveness in latency reduction. Interestingly, \textsf{Presto}\xspace with touch prediction\xspace of about \SI{30}{ms} is able to reduce the average latency below \SI{10}{ms}, a rather remarkable achievement by a software-only solution. \subsubsection{Tradeoffs by \textbf{\textsf{Presto}\xspace}}\label{sec:overhead} \textsf{Presto}\xspace trades off other computing goals for short latency: it judiciously allows frame drops and tearing, and may incur power overhead through PAR\xspace. When we try out the benchmarks with \textsf{Presto}\xspace, we could not see any effects usually associated with frame drops or tearing. Our double-blind user study, reported in \S\ref{sec:user_eval}, confirms this independently. Below we report objective data regarding frame drops, tearing risk, and power overhead. By design, \textsf{Presto}\xspace guarantees no consecutive frame drops. In the worst case, it would drop \SI{50}{\%} of the frames (every other frame). Our measurement, reported in Figure~\ref{fig:frameDropTearing}, shows a much lower rate for our benchmarks, with the worst case being \SI{8}{\%} (\program{Bamboo (BP)}). There is no direct way we could observe the occurrences of tearing: as shown in \S\ref{sec:newrequirements}, even if tearing happens and is captured by camera, it would be extremely hard to tell it from the effect of latency. Instead, we measure how frequent underprediction of {\small $T_{app}$} happens. As shown in \S\ref{sec:design_position}, an underprediction of {\small $T_{app}$} is a necessary but not sufficient condition for tearing to happen. Therefore, the frequency of underprediction can be considered as an upper bound for that of tearing. Figure~\ref{fig:frameDropTearing} shows the frequencies of underprediction for the legacy benchmarks. \program{HandWrite (HP)} has the highest frequency of underprediction (\SI{17}{\%}). \program{Bamboo (BP)} has the highest frequency (\SI{13}{\%}) amongst the five benchmarks used in the user study. These frequencies are at most suggestive of how often tearing may happen. None of the authors could see any effects due to tearing; nor did the participants in our user study. We use a Monsoon Power Monitor~\cite{monsoon} to measure the power consumption of \textsf{Presto}\xspace in Nexus 6. We disable all wireless communications and dim the LCD backlight to the minimum level. We measure the power consumption of the in-house application during 60 seconds of touchscreen drawing for each of the following configurations: without \textsf{Presto}\xspace, with \textsf{Presto}\xspace (JITT\xspace), \textsf{Presto}\xspace (JITT+PAR\xspace without frame comparison), and \textsf{Presto}\xspace (JITT+PAR\xspace). Their power consumption and standard deviations are $2017 \pm 120$, $2075\pm115$, $2024 \pm 110$, and $2564 \pm 201$ \SI{}{mW}, respectively. We would like to highlight two points regarding the power overhead. First, JITT\xspace increases the power consumption only slightly, well below the standard deviation. PAR\xspace (without frame comparison) decreases the power consumption to be barely indistinguishable from that of the stock Nexus 6, i.e. $2024 \pm 110$ vs. $2017 \pm 120$. This is because PAR\xspace reduces activities of the buffer manager. Second, the frame comparison needed for PAR\xspace contributes most of the power overhead, an 27\% increase. Because in our measurement we disabled all wireless interfaces and dimmed the LCD backlight to minimum, the percentage increase for real-world usage will be much lower. More importantly, using frame comparison to determine the dirty region is not practically necessary because the GPU and application already have the information. Some SDKs, e.g.,\cite{glsurfaceview}, already make this information available via an API, e.g., \code{invalidate(Rect dirty)}. With such APIs, this overhead would be eliminated. \subsection{Latency Measurement} Measuring the end-to-end latency of touch interaction is nontrivial because neither the starting point, the moment of a physical touch, and the end point, the moment of display externalization, can be observed by software running in the mobile device. Below we present two measurement methods used in our evaluation of \textsf{Presto}\xspace. The first one is \emph{indirect}, by combining calibration, analysis, and OS-based time logging. It is applicable to all applications. The second is \emph{direct} based on camera capture and video analysis. It is, however, only applicable to applications whose visual effects are amenable to our video analysis. In our evaluation, we use the indirect method to report latencies for legacy benchmarks; we use the direct method to provide in-depth insight along with the in-house benchmark. \subsubsection{Indirect Measurement}\label{sec:measure_indirect} The indirect measurement method breaks down the end-to-end latency into three parts and deal with each differently: (1) from physical touch to the touch device driver, (2) from the touch device driver to the display subsystem, and (3) from the display subsystem to display externalization. We measure the latency of (1) by using a setup with a microcontroller and two light sensors (API PDB-C142, response time: \SI{50}{us}): the microcontroller continuously polls the sensor output at \SI{1}{KHz}. We place the first light sensor besides the screen and shoot a laser beam from the other side. When the stylus pen crosses the laser beam, the light sensor detects it and changes its output; the microcontroller detects the change and logs a timestamp. When the touch device driver receives an event crossing the beam, it turns on the built-in LED, which takes \SI{1.5}{ms}. The second light sensor, placed directly above the LED, detects this so that the microcontroller logs the second timestamp. We estimate the latency of (1) as the difference between these timestamps: \SI{28.0}{}$\pm$\SI{1}{ms}. We measure the latency of (2) by logging two timestamps in software: when the touch device driver receives an interrupt and when the ownership of the resulting buffer is transferred to the display subsystem. Notably the latency of (2) is where \textsf{Presto}\xspace makes a difference. We estimate the latency of (3) based the y-coordinate of the touch event logged in software as described above. Since the display panel illuminates pixels sequentially top-down after a sync pulse\xspace, we estimate when the pixels of the touched area illuminate as {\small $T_{sync}\cdot y/H$} where {\small $H$} is the screen height measured in pixel number. \subsubsection{Direct Measurement}\label{sec:measure_direct} For the in-house benchmark, we are able to measure the user-perceived latency by analyzing video record. What a camera can precisely capture are the locations: that of the square ({\small $L_s$}) in response to a touch and that of the pen\xspace ({\small $L_p$}) in each frame. Therefore, we estimate the velocity of the pen\xspace movement ({\small $v$}) from its locations in consecutive frames. By calculating how long it would take the pen\xspace to travel from the touched location ({\small $L_s$}) to the current pen\xspace location ({\small $L_p$}), we obtain the latency as {\small $(L_s-L_p)/v$}. This estimation, however, relies on the assumption that the velocity of the pen does not change abruptly from frame to frame. Due to the high frame rate, i.e., \SI{60}{Hz}, this assumption is largely true and also confirmed by our own measurement. We note that the camera also introduces errors due to its limited frame rate. We use a Nikon D5300 camera with 60 Hz frame rate and 1/500 sec shutter speed. The frame rate would introduce a random latency uniformly distributed between \SI{0} to \SI{16.7}{ms} ({\small $T_{sync}$}). Therefore, we deduce this random variable when reporting the latency measurement. We compare the latency derived from the indirect measurement of the in-house application against with its direct measurement for the in-house benchmark with stock Android, \textsf{Presto}\xspace (JITT\xspace) and \textsf{Presto}\xspace (JITT+PAR\xspace). The direct and indirect measurements are within \SI{2.5}{ms} from each other. The difference is smaller than their standard deviation and more importantly, one order of magnitude smaller than the latency reduction achieved by \textsf{Presto}\xspace. \subsection{Evaluation Setup}\label{sec:eval_setup} We evaluate our implementation on Google Nexus 6 smartphones with Android 5.0 (Lollipop) and Linux kernel 3.10.40. The smartphone has a 5.96$^{\prime\prime}$ 2560 $\times$ 1440 AMOLED display, 2.7 GHz quad-core CPU, and 600 MHz GPU. During the evaluation, we use a DotPen stylus pen with a tip of \SI{1.9}{mm}~\cite{dotpen}, instead of finger, to find out the touched position with high accuracy. \textbf{Benchmarks}:~~ We evaluate \textsf{Presto}\xspace with both legacy applications and an in-house application. Since the effect of the latency is clearer in drawing applications, we select ten drawing applications, the top five each from the \program{Drawing \& Handwriting} and \program{Calligraphy} categories of the Google Play Store on Jan 26, 2016. Some of the top applications only provide instructions for calligraphy without drawing facilities; we replaced them by the applications ranked next. The five from \program{Drawing \& Handwriting} are \program{Notepad+ Free (N+)}, \program{Autodesk Sketch (AD)}, \program{Handrite Note (HN)}, \program{Bamboo Paper (BP)}, and \program{MetaMoJi Note Lite (MM)}. The five from \program{Callligraphy} are \program{Calligraphy HD (CY)}, \program{Calligrapher (CR)}, \program{INKredible (IK)}, \program{Brush Pen (BP)}, and \program{HandWrite Pro Note (HP)}. For these applications, we measure the latency using the indirect method presented in \S\ref{sec:measure_indirect}. We also employ an in-house application because its latency can be directly measured with a more accurate method described in~\S\ref{sec:measure_direct}. The application uses OpenGL ES 2.0 to draw a 115$\times$115 square and a horizontal line on a touched position. As the pen\xspace moves, it drags the square and line with it. We have implemented the application for both Android and iOS and will make both implementations open-source. The in-house application is valuable for three reasons. (\textit{i}) First, it allows us to understand the accuracy of the indirect measurement of legacy applications. (\textit{ii}) Second, it allows us to compare our Android-based \textsf{Presto}\xspace prototype with iPad Pro with Apple Pencil, a cutting-edge touch device commercially available, using the same OpenGL ES code base. and \emph{(iii)} Because the application has bare minimum functionality for touch interaction, it allows us to better understand the power overhead of \textsf{Presto}\xspace. \textbf{Interaction and Trace Collection}:~~Short of a programmable robotic arm, we try our best to produce repeatable traces of interaction with the benchmarks. For each benchmark, we interact by manually moving the pen\xspace repeatedly from one end of the screen to the other vertically in portrait orientation, with a steady speed for 150 seconds. Post collection analysis shows an average speed of \SI{68}{mm} per second, with a standard deviation of 12. All traces will be made available online. \subsection{Overhead of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace}\label{sec:overhead_poly} We measure the overhead of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace in terms of application launching delay and path switching delay on the ten drawing benchmarks applications (\S\ref{sec:eval_setup}). When an application is launched, {\scshape Polypath}\xspace imposes the extra overhead to acquire the application's path preference from \code{PackageManager} and to bind the path to the application. Our measurement shows that the extra delay is between \SI{13.1}{} to \SI{34.5}{ms}, which is negligible for the launch delays of many \SI{100}{ms} for legacy applications. The path changing API \code{ApplyPath()} is asynchronous in order to ensure the path integrity (\S\ref{sec:poly}). There is a delay between when \code{ApplyPath()} is invoked and when the new path is in place. Note this delay is not part of the latency of the I2D path\xspace. We estimate the delay to be between \SI{0}{ms} and {\small $3\cdot T_{sync}$}. The worst delay happens when the path changes from the legacy design to \textsf{Presto}\xspace and \code{ApplyPath()} is called when the event manager has only one event in its buffer. In this case, the event manager will wait almost {\small$T_{sync}$} to buffer more events and deliver them to the application, and the buffer manager will wait another {\small$2\cdot T_{sync}$} to externalize two frames, one that the application is currently drawing and the other resulting from the buffered events. We measured the time from when the API is called to when the buffer manager finishes the path change, which is the completion of the path change procedure (\S\ref{sec:poly}). Our measurements confirmed the above estimation with 1000 path changes each when the I2D path\xspace is active and inactive, respectively. When the I2D path\xspace is active, the average and standard deviation are \SI{20.5}{ms} and \SI{10.1}{ms}, respectively; when inactive, they are \SI{0.27}{ms} and \SI{0.08}{ms}, respectively. \subsection{User Evaluation}\label{sec:user_eval} \begin{figure}[t] \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \vspace{0pt} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figs/frameDropTearing} \caption{\textsf{Presto}\xspace occasionally experiences frame drops and underprediction. } \label{fig:frameDropTearing} \end{minipage} \hfill \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth} \vspace{0pt} \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figs/userstudy} \caption{Number of participants answering Question (\textit{i}) in each of the three ways: which device is faster: A, B or same? } \label{fig:userstudy} \end{minipage} \end{figure} When we try the benchmarks with \textsf{Presto}\xspace, it is visually obvious that \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces latency significantly. None of us are able to notice any tearing effects or frame drops. Nevertheless, In defense against any possible experimenter's bias, we perform a double-blind user study to evaluate \textsf{Presto}\xspace subjectively. \textbf{Participants}:~We recruited 11 participants via campus-wide flyers. They were students and staff members from various science and engineering departments, between 19 and 40 years old, with three women. All had at least two-month experience with an Android device with a display bigger than 5.5 inches. \textbf{Procedure}:~Each participant came to the lab by appointment and was given two Nexus 6 smartphones that are identical except one has stock Android, the other \textsf{Presto}\xspace. The smartphones are marked A and B, respectively. Neither the participant nor the study administrator knew which one is stock. The participant was then asked to use their finger or a stylus pen to try out the five top Android applications from \program{Drawing \& Handwriting}. They were allowed to try as long as they wished; and all finished in 10 to 45 minutes. After each application, the participant answered three questions: (i) which device is faster: A, B or same? (ii) if you chose A or B, to what extent do you agree with the statement that the latency difference is obvious? (1 to 5 with 1 being \emph{strongly disagree} and 5 being \emph{strongly agree}) (iii) other than the latency, describe any difference you observe. For post-mortem analysis, we recorded the hand-smartphone interaction of all except two participants with a GoPro Hero 4 camera at \SI{240}{Hz}. We plan to release the video clips in compliance with our institutional review board (IRB) approval. \textbf{Quantitative findings}:~Figure~\ref{fig:userstudy} presents participants' answers to the first question. Not surprisingly, more than half of the participants consider \textsf{Presto}\xspace to be faster in each of the benchmarks.\footnote{We emphasize that the participants do not know which device has \textsf{Presto}\xspace. The identity is only used in our data analysis and presentation.} For \program{Autodesk (AD)}, 10 out of 11 participants considers \textsf{Presto}\xspace is faster. This corroborates the measurement presented in Figure~\ref{fig:latency_reduction}, which shows \program{Audtodesk (AD)} sees the largest latency reduction amongst the five. To our surprise and puzzlement, a same participant reported the stock Android is faster in \program{Notepad+ (N+)} and \program{Bamboo (BP)}. We checked the video record, and it was obvious to us that \textsf{Presto}\xspace was clearly faster in both the applications. One theory to explain this is that the participant mistook A with B when answering the question. Nevertheless, we are wary that the same theory can be used to argue the participant's responses for the other three applications were also mistaken. Overall, the data suggests that participants overwhelmingly felt that \textsf{Presto}\xspace is faster. For those who considered \textsf{Presto}\xspace to be faster, the average of their responses to the second question is 3.5, indicating the latency difference is obvious to them. \textbf{Qualitative findings}:~Our participants were asked if they observe any difference beyond latency. None reported any effects that may result from inconsistent frame rate, frame drop, or tearing, such as application's fluctuating response time, screen flickering, and screen overlap. Indeed most of their comments are about secondary effects due to latency difference. Two participants did notice some details about how \textsf{Presto}\xspace actually works. One remarked about \program{MetaMoji (MM)} that \textsf{Presto}\xspace ``seems to catch up quicker than'' the stock Android. The other observed similar effects with \program{Autodesk (AD)} but worded it differently: the stock Android has ``smooth curves;'' \textsf{Presto}\xspace is ``not as soft as'' the stock Android. By that, the participant was referring to the same effect that when drawing a line, the line with \textsf{Presto}\xspace sometimes jumps to the touch point, or ``catch up quicker'' in the words of the first participant. \section{Evaluation}\label{sec:eval} Using the prototype, we seek to answer the following questions regarding {\scshape Polypath}\xspace and \textsf{Presto}\xspace. \begin{enumerate} \vspace{-1ex} \item What is the overhead of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace? \vspace{-1.5ex} \item How effective is \textsf{Presto}\xspace in reducing latency? how much does each of its two key techniques contribute? \vspace{-1.5ex}\item Is its effectiveness orthogonal to that of other popular latency reduction technique, namely event prediction~\cite{asano2005predictive, lank2007endpoint, laviola2003double, pasqual2014mouse, iosPrediction}? \vspace{-1.5ex}\item What tradeoffs does \textsf{Presto}\xspace make, in terms of power consumption and the visual goals dear to the legacy path design? \vspace{-1.5ex} \item How do users evaluate \textsf{Presto}\xspace? \end{enumerate} \input{eval_method} \input{eval_latencymeasurement} \input{eval_overhead} \input{eval_latency} \input{eval_user} \section{Implementation}\label{sec:impl} We first describe Android's I2D path implementation, which is summarized by Figure~\ref{fig:impl}, and then describe our prototype implementation of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace with two path designs, i.e., \textsf{Presto}\xspace and Android legacy, using Android 5 (Lollipop). \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth,trim={2.5cm 3cm 6.5cm 2cm},clip]{figs/impl_android} \caption{ Android's I2D path\xspace implementation } \label{fig:impl} \end{figure} In Android 5, the event manager includes a library \code{libinput}, and a sync pulse\xspace receiver \code{DisplayEventReceiver} in Android runtime library \code{libandroid\_runtime}. Both are in an application's address space. In the \code{libinput} library, the \code{InputConsumer} object receives events from the input subsystem through a Unix socket and buffers them. \code{InputConsumer} delivers the buffered events to the application when \code{DisplayEventReceiver} receives a sync pulse\xspace from the display subsystem. The buffer manager is \code{BufferQueue}, which is part of Android GUI library \code{libgui} and allocates buffers and manages their ownership. Note that we use \code{BufferQueue} to refer to three classes: \code{BufferQueueCore}, \code{BufferQueueProducer}, and \code{BufferQueueConsumer}. \code{BufferQueue} is indirectly synchronized with the sync pulse\xspace by responding to requests from the display subsystem. \code{BufferQueue} is not in an application's address space; however, each application window has its dedicated \code{BufferQueue}. As a result, \code{BufferQueue}s from different applications are independent from each other. The display subsystem includes \code{SurfaceFlinger}, which receives \state{filled} buffers from multiple applications' \code{BufferQueue}s and sets up the hardware composer. \code{SurfaceFlinger} also relays the sync pulse\xspace from the hardware composer to the event manager. \subsection{Implementing {\scshape Polypath}\xspace}\label{sec:impl_poly} Implementing {\scshape Polypath}\xspace involves three major parts: the path manager\xspace, \code{ApplyPath()}, and path binding. The implementation includes about 740 lines of C++ and 100 lines of Java codes. We implement the path manager\xspace as an Android system service, which is a thread in the same address space as \code{SurfaceFlinger}. The event manager, however, is in the application's address space; thus, the path manager\xspace communicates with it through a Unix socket named with the application's pid. We introduce a new class \code{Polypath} into Android SDK; \code{Polypath} exports the asynchronous path changing API \code{ApplyPath(app\_name,path\_name)}. When \code{ApplyPath()} is invoked, it sends \code{app\_name} and \code{path\_name} to the path manager\xspace through a named Unix socket. Then, the path manager\xspace communicates with the event and buffer managers to apply the path according to the design described in \S\ref{sec:poly}. To implement paths and binding between path and application, we leverage that both data, i.e. events and buffer handles, and control, i.e. sync pulse\xspace, of Android's I2D path\xspace are handled by a series of function calls. For example, \code{InputConsumer} delivers input events using a chain of function calls, \code{consume()$\rightarrow$consumeBatch()$\rightarrow$consumeSamples()}. By changing these function calls, we can implement many path designs with various tradeoffs. For example, one can add interpolated/predicted events, drop events, or even generate virtual sync pulses\xspace to emulate \SI{120}{Hz} display. We implement \textsf{Presto}\xspace in the same way. To allow multiple path designs to coexist, we replace these functional calls with function pointers. By default, these pointers point to the corresponding function calls of Android's legacy implementation. When applying a new path design, we simply redirect the necessary pointers. This implementation is efficient in terms of both code size and runtime overhead. Because each application has its own dedicated event and buffer managers, one obvious alternative is to implement the event and buffer managers for each path and create an instance for each application that asks for the path. For example, we could implement a version of \code{libinput} for each path and an application will simply link to the corresponding version. This mechanism, however, has two disadvantages. First, it adds to software bloat because sharing common code between paths is hard, requiring major refactoring of Android's event and buffer managers. Moreover, it incurs high overhead when an application changes its path, e.g., that of unlinking and linking \code{libinput}. \subsection{Implementing \textsf{Presto}\xspace}\label{sec:impl_presto} \textsf{Presto}\xspace, as a path the {\scshape Polypath}\xspace supports, modifies the bindings in the event and buffer mangers for JITT\xspace and PAR\xspace. The implementation includes 991 lines of C++, 35 lines of Java, and 212 lines of Linux kernel codes. \subsubsection{JITT\xspace: Just-in-Time Trigger}\label{sec:impl_presto_jitt} We implement JITT\xspace by revising the event manager (\code{libinput} and \code{DisplayEventReceiver}) and buffer manager (\code{BufferQueue}). The predictor for {\small $T_{app}$} tracks {\small $T_{app}$} history and predicts based on a simple algorithm that averages the recent 32 measurements of {\small $T_{app}$}, or roughly half a second. We empirically set {\small $T_{out}$} to \SI{3.5}{ms} based on profiling of \code{BufferQueue} and \code{SurfaceFlinger}. The constant time is conservatively determined to give \code{SurfaceFlinger} enough time to transfer the ownership of multiple applications' graphics buffers, from \code{BufferQueue} to the hardware composer. To trigger the event manager, we modified \code{DisplayEventReceiver} to intercept the sync pulse\xspace from the display subsystem and re-fire it at the predicted time $(t_{refresh} - T')$. When \code{BufferQueue} is requested to give a \state{filled} buffer by the \code{SurfaceFligner}, it waits until the predicted time $(t_{refresh} - T_{out})$ and then responds with the latest \state{filled} buffer just before the next screen refresh. \subsubsection{PAR\xspace: Position-Aware Buffer Manager}\label{sec:impl_position} We implement PAR\xspace by modifying the buffer manager (\code{BufferQueue}) and Android's ION memory manager in the kernel. Recall that when the application requests a buffer, PAR\xspace responds with the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer in the application's buffer manager only if it is confident that the application would finish writing into the buffer BEFORE the display subsystem starts externalizing a dirty region. Our implementation conveniently obtains the prediction of how long it will take the application to finish writing into the buffer from JITT\xspace, i.e., {\small $T'_{app}$}. We profile that the display subsystem reads the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer at \SI{221}{M} pixels per second. If the application does not already provide information about the dirty region, e.g. via an SDK like~\cite{191579}, our implementation identifies the starting point of the dirty region by modifying Android ION's \code{ioctl()} syscall to compare frames in software. We compare the frames in the kernel space because graphics buffers are not directly accessible from the user space for security reasons. \code{BufferQueue} passes a buffer's ION \code{fd} to the kernel via the syscall. Then, the kernel finds the corresponding memory area represented in \code{scatterlist}~\cite{scatterlist}, samples 1\% of the frame, and then compares them with those of the previous frame. One can increase the number of samples to track dirty region more accurately; however, 1\% from a 2560$\times$1440 screen (Nexus 6) is sufficient to check the dirty regions of applications updating the entire screen, such as animation and scroll. \subsection{Abstract} Modern mobile systems use a single input-to-display path to serve all applications. In meeting the visual goals of all applications, the path has a latency inadequate for many important interactions. To accommodate the different latency requirements and visual constraints by different interactions, we present {\scshape Polypath}\xspace, a system design in which application developers (and users) can choose from multiple path designs for their application at any time. Because a {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system asks for two or more path designs, we present a novel fast path design, called \textsf{Presto}\xspace. \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces latency by judiciously allowing frame drops and tearing. We report an Android 5-based prototype of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace with two path designs: Android legacy and \textsf{Presto}\xspace. Using this prototype, we quantify the effectiveness, overhead, and user experience of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace, especially \textsf{Presto}\xspace, through both objective measurements and subjective user assessment. We show that \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces the latency of legacy touchscreen drawing applications by almost half; and more importantly, this reduction is orthogonal to that of other popular approaches and is achieved without any user-noticeable negative visual effect. When combined with touch prediction\xspace, \textsf{Presto}\xspace is able to reduce the touch latency below \SI{10}{ms}, a remarkable achievement without any hardware support. \section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro} The input-to-display path, or \emph{I2D path\xspace} for short, is an important operating system (OS) service because it determines the user-perceived latency of interaction. Today's mobile OSes employ the same path design for all interactions, a system design we call \emph{{\scshape Monopath}\xspace}. This path design therefore must meet the visual goals of all applications: consistent frame rate, no frame drops, and no tearing effects. It achieves this with a coarse-grained design at the cost of long latency, over \SI{60}{ms}~\cite{agawi,lesnumeriques_21devices,lesnumeriques_note3}. Although this latency may be fine for point/selection-based interactions~\cite{seow2008designing}, it is annoying for others. For example, touchscreen-based drawing and dragging manifest latency as a spatial gap between the touch point and the visual effect~\cite{1msdelay}; a latency of \SI{60}{ms} produces an obvious, annoying gap, as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:touchdelay}. The same is true for augmented-reality interactions based on head-mounted displays. The original motivation of our work is to reduce the latency for such demanding interactions. \begin{figure} \centering \subfloat[Stock Android \label{sfig:testa}]{ \includegraphics[width=.4\linewidth]{figs/distance_stock.png} }\hspace{0.5cm} \subfloat[\textsf{Presto}\xspace \label{sfig:testb}]{ \includegraphics[width=.4\linewidth]{figs/distance_presto.png} } \caption{Touchscreen drawing translates latency, e.g., \SI{82}{ms}, into a visible gap, e.g., \SI{20}{mm}, as the pen moves and the line head falls behind (\program{Autodesk Sketch}, camera captured). } \label{fig:touchdelay} \end{figure} We quickly realized that latency reduction is not free. Without specialized, expensive hardware like that used in~\cite{ng2012designing}, one has to make tradeoffs between the visual goals and latency. Luckily, we find these goals are not necessary or can be relaxed for many interactions under modern hardware and software. All these point to the {\scshape Monopath}\xspace design of modern mobile OSes as the fundamental problem. To cater to the different latency requirements and visual constraints of diverse interactions, we argue that mobile OSes should follow \emph{{\scshape Polypath}\xspace} and support multiple I2D path\xspace designs in the same system. Our guiding principles for {\scshape Polypath}\xspace are twofold: (\textit{i}) different applications and different parts of an application can employ different path designs; and (\textit{ii}) application developers and users should decide which part of an application employs which path design. In this paper, we report our design of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace that supports unmodified legacy applications. The key insight behind the design is that the interface between an application and the rest of the I2D path\xspace is clean and independent; each group of events delivered by the input to the application can be handled by a given path design, independently of the group before or after. Our {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system provides an asynchronous API for developers and users to bind a path design to an application; it further ensures that an input event only experiences one path design, a property we call \emph{path integrity}. Because a {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system asks for two or more path designs, we provide a novel I2D path\xspace design, called \textsf{Presto}\xspace. Compared to the path used in today's {\scshape Monopath}\xspace systems, \textsf{Presto}\xspace almost halves the latency by judiciously allowing frame drops and tearing, making a very different tradeoff. In particular, \textsf{Presto}\xspace overcomes the coarse granularities of the legacy path design through two key techniques. \emph{Just-in-time trigger} eliminates strict synchronization in the path with the display. \emph{Just enough pixels} allows the I2D path\xspace to operate on only updated pixels, or dirty regions, of a frame. We report an Android 5-based implementation of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace that supports two path designs: Android legacy and \textsf{Presto}\xspace. We evaluate its effectiveness in latency reduction, overhead, and user experience with both objective measurements and subjective assessment. Our measurements show that \textsf{Presto}\xspace reduces the latency by \SI{32}{ms} on average for top drawing applications from Android Play Store, with a power overhead that can be eliminated with SDK support. The effectiveness is obvious from Figure~\ref{fig:touchdelay}. Importantly, we show that the latency reduction resulting from \textsf{Presto}\xspace is orthogonal to that from known techniques such as touch prediction\xspace used by iOS 9. When combined with touch prediction\xspace, \textsf{Presto}\xspace is able to reduce the touch latency below \SI{10}{ms}, a remarkable achievement without any hardware support. Double-blind user evaluation demonstrates that for the drawing applications tested, \textsf{Presto}\xspace improves the user experience without noticeable side effects. \vspace{+0.5ex} In summary, we make the following contributions: \begin{itemize}[leftmargin=] \vspace{-1ex}\item We present a general model for the I2D path\xspace and identify that coarse granularity in today's I2D path\xspace design contributes significantly to the interaction latency. We show that this legacy design sacrifices latency to strictly meet several visual goals that are not always necessary today. \vspace{-0.5ex}\item We provide a design and implementation of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace that supports multiple I2D path\xspace designs in the same system. {\scshape Polypath}\xspace allows application developers and users to make different tradeoffs for latency without affecting other applications. \vspace{-0.5ex}\item As part of our {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system, we present \textsf{Presto}\xspace, a novel I2D path\xspace design that reduces latency by almost half. We provide a prototype implementation of \textsf{Presto}\xspace based on Android 5 that supports unmodified legacy applications and evaluate it with both objective measurements and subjective assessment. \end{itemize} \subsection{JEP\xspace: Just-Enough Pixels}\label{sec:design_jep} As explained in \S\ref{sec:path}, in modern mobile systems, when an application requests a graphics buffer, the buffer manager will give it a \state{free} one. Therefore, the application cannot write into the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer that is being externalized by the display subsystem. This atomic buffer access avoids tearing but adds a latency of $0.5\cdot T_{sync}$ on average as discussed in \S\ref{sec:monopath_latency}. JEP\xspace reduces this latency by judiciously allowing the application to write into the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer, without tearing. JEP\xspace leverages partial-drawing APIs like~\cite{segal1992opengl, glsurfaceview} and a modern mobile display trend~\cite{191579, dsiCommand}: an in-display memory from which the display panel reads pixels, not directly receiving from the composer. The key idea is to make the atomic area smaller, i.e., the dirty region of the new frame, and let the display subsystem take only the dirty region to compose and update the in-display memory only before the display panel starts externalizing the dirty region. This is possible without tearing because a modern display externalizes a frame sequentially, pixel by pixel and updating only the dirty region reduces the memory copy between the buffer and the display subsystem, e.g., by \SI{7178.0}{KB/s}~\cite{191579}. Specifically, JEP\xspace needs to answer two questions: (1) where is the starting point of the dirty region? That is, in how many pixels will the display externalize before reaching the dirty region? (2) how fast is the display subsystem externalizing pixels? The use of partial-drawing APIs answers (1). The answer to (2) is independent of applications and can be accurately profiled. For example, in our prototype, we find the display subsystem externalizes \SI{221}{M} pixels per second. Because most legacy mobile applications do not use the partial-drawing APIs and not all mobile displays feature the internal memory, we next present PAR\xspace, an approximation of JEP\xspace, to support legacy applications and displays. \input{position} \subsection{JITT\xspace: Just-In-Time Trigger}\label{sec:design_jitt} JITT\xspace removes synchronization in the event and buffer managers. With JITT\xspace, the event manager judiciously decides when to deliver buffered events to the application; and the buffer manager transfers buffer ownership as soon as the application finishes drawing, without waiting for the sync pulse\xspace. Ideally, the buffer manager would deliver the buffer filled by the application's response right before the next display refresh. Recall that we denote the time it takes the application to process the events and fill the buffer as {\small $T_{app}$}, the time it takes the buffer manager to transfer the buffer ownership to the display subsystem as {\small$T_{out}$}. For brevity, we denote {\small $(T_{app}+T_{out})$} as {\small$T$}. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figs/design_predictionErr.pdf} \caption{JITT\xspace removes synchronization in the event and buffer managers. It decides when the event manager delivers events to the application so that the buffer manager would deliver the buffer filled by the application right before the next display refresh. To do so, it must predict how long it will take from the event delivery to the buffer delivery, or {\small$T$}. Overprediction {\small$(T'>T)$} leads to an increase in latency by {\small$(T'-T)$}; underprediction {\small$(T'<T)$} leads to an increase in latency by {\small$T_{sync}$}.} \label{fig:jitt} \end{figure} In the ideal case with JITT\xspace, no events would have to wait more than {\small$(T+T_{sync})$} for their application response to externalize, with average being {\small$(T+0.5\cdot T_{sync})$}. This is illustrated by the perfect prediction path in Figure~\ref{fig:jitt}. Therefore, knowing when the display refreshes next, denoted by {\small$t_{refresh}$}, JITT\xspace must predict {\small$T$}, and let the event manager deliver the events at {\small$(t_{refresh}-T')$} where $'$ indicates prediction. {\small$T_{app}$} and {\small$T_{out}$} can be easily predicted using history. Much of the prediction algorithm is system-specific and we will revisit when reporting the implementation (\S\ref{sec:impl_presto_jitt}). Below, we focus on one important design issue. Inaccurate prediction increases latency of JITT\xspace. An overprediction {\small$(T'>T)$} makes the event manager deliver events too soon. That is, if events arrive between {\small$(t_{refresh}-T')$} and {\small$(t_{refresh}-T)$}, the corresponding frame would wait for the screen refresh and increase the average latency by {\small$(T'-T)$}. This is illustrated by the overprediction path in Figure~\ref{fig:jitt}. An underprediction {\small$(T'<T)$} makes the event manager wait too long to deliver the buffered events and as a result, the buffer manager will not be able to transfer the resulting graphics buffer to the display subsystem by the next display refresh, adding an entire {\small$T_{sync}$} to the average latency. This is illustrated by the underprediction path in Figure~\ref{fig:jitt}. Apparently, the latency penalty is significantly higher in the case of underprediction. JITT\xspace copes with underprediction in two ways. First, it favors overprediction between overprediction and underprediction. That is, it looks for the upper end when using history. Moreover, with prediction {\small$T'$}, instead of triggering the event manager at {\small$(t_{refresh}-T')$}, JITT\xspace calculates when the last event would arrive before {\small$(t_{refresh}-T')$} and triggers the event manager when this event arrives. This trick essentially adds a variable offset to {\small$T'$} in favor of overprediction. Second, JITT\xspace recovers from underprediction by dropping the frame in the buffer delayed due to underprediction. Importantly, this recovery mechanism does not drop two frames in a row. When underprediction happens, the buffer manager will have two \state{filled} buffers when JITT\xspace triggers it: one delayed and the other newly produced. Then, the buffer manager drops the older buffer by marking it as \state{free} and transfers the newer one to the display subsystem. If JITT\xspace underpredicts one more {\small $T$} in a row, the buffer manager does not drop the delayed frame anymore but propagates the delay until no underprediction happens or the application stops producing frames. The worst case is when {\small$T_{app}$} changes abruptly and the JITT\xspace buffer manager drops every other frame, the frame rate becomes half, or \SI{30}{fps} on modern mobile systems. \subsection{Coarse-Grained I2D Path Design}\label{sec:monopath_latency} \begin{figure}[t] \vspace{0pt} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth,trim={5cm 0cm 2cm 0}]{figs/latency_by_sync.pdf} \caption{The timeline for the legacy I2D path\xspace in action: the sync pulse\xspace fired by the display controller triggers the event and buffer managers, causing waiting and delay. } \label{fig:latency_path_origin} \end{figure} At the cost of long latency, the I2D path\xspace in today's mobile OSes guarantees three visual goals: a consistent frame rate, no frame drops, and no tearing effects. It achieves it with a design that is coarse-grained in both time and space. In time, its event and buffer managers strictly synchronize with the sync pulse produced by the display controller; in space, it assumes a buffer can not be read and written at the same time. Figure~\ref{fig:latency_path_origin} provides a timeline for the legacy I2D path\xspace. \textbf{Synchronization}:~~ In the legacy design, both the event and buffer managers synchronize with a periodical signal, a.k.a. the sync pulse\xspace, fired by the display subsystem when refreshing. The event manager waits for a sync pulse\xspace to deliver buffered events to the application. Assume the application takes {\small $T_{app}$} to process the events, produce a frame and write it into a graphics buffer. It will wait another {\small $(T_{sync}-T_{app})$} until the next sync pulse\xspace so that the buffer manager can process the buffer. Therefore, synchronization at the event manager introduces an average latency of {\small $(T_{sync}-T_{app})$}. Android reduces this by triggering the event manager \SI{7.5}{ms} after the sync pulse\xspace~\cite{graphicxImpl}. In this case, the latency would be {\small $(T_{sync}-T_{app}-7.5_{ms})$}. The buffer manager waits for a sync pulse\xspace to change graphics buffers' ownership among the application, display subsystem and itself. Assuming this process takes {\small $T_{out}$}, this synchronization introduces an average latency of {\small $(T_{sync}-T_{out})$} because the buffers will be externalized only at the next sync pulse\xspace. These synchronizations together ensure a \emph{consistent frame rate}. Synchronization of the buffer manager additionally ensures \emph{no frame drops}. No matter how quickly an application finishes drawing, the buffer manager transfers buffer ownership only on a sync pulse\xspace. \textbf{Atomic Buffer}:~~ Noticeably, the buffer manager does not give a \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer to the application, avoiding the same buffer being read by the display and written by an application at the same time. This is sufficient but not necessary to \emph{avoid tearing effects}. However, the buffer manager does not have better strategy because it has no idea about which pixels have been changed from one frame to the next, i.e., dirty region. This strategy makes an average latency of {\small $0.5\cdot T_{sync}$} due to the display refreshing necessary because the application has to finish writing in a buffer before the display starts to externalize it. As a result, any \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer has to wait for the next display refreshing to be sequentially externalized, introducing an average latency of {\small $0.5\cdot T_{sync}$}. \vspace{+2ex}All together, we estimate the average latency due to the coarse-granularities as \vspace{-2mm} \begin{equation} \small 2.5\cdot T_{sync}-(T_{app}+T_{out}) \label{eq:latency} \end{equation} \vspace{-2mm} For a typical Android application, this latency is about \SI{26.6}{ms} with {\small $T_{sync}=$ \SI{1/60}{s}} and the \SI{7.5}{ms} optimization deducted. This accounts for close to half of the latency we observe on Android devices. One na\"ive way to reduce this latency is to simply reduce {\small $T_{sync}$}. However, this would incur proportionally higher power consumption by the display subsystem. Even worse, when reducing {\small $T_{sync}$}, the subsystems will have to process proportionally faster because their processing time must be masked by {\small $T_{sync}$}, leading to system-wide proportionally higher power consumption and the use of expensive hardware. \section{0pt}{8pt plus 4pt minus 2pt}{4pt plus 2pt minus 2pt} \titlespacing\subsection{0pt}{6pt plus 4pt minus 2pt}{2pt plus 2pt minus 2pt} \titlespacing\subsubsection{0pt}{4pt plus 2pt minus 2pt}{2pt plus 2pt minus 2pt} \setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{-5pt} \setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{8pt} \sisetup{load-configurations = abbreviations} \usepackage{tikz} \newcommand\circledwhite[1]{\tikz[baseline=(char.base)]{ \node[shape=circle,draw,inner sep=0.5pt] (char) {#1};}} \newcommand\circled[1]{\tikz[baseline=(char.base)]{ \node[shape=circle,draw,fill=black,text=white,inner sep=0.5pt] (char) {#1};}} \newcommand{\txtcircle}[1]{\tikz[baseline=(char.base)]{ \node[shape=circle,draw,inner sep=0.5pt] (char) {\small #1};}} \newcommand{\txtcircleN}[1]{\raisebox{.5pt}{\textcircled{\raisebox{-.9pt} {#1}}}} \definecolor{lightgray}{gray}{0.9} \definecolor{lightblue}{rgb}{0.9,0.9,1} \definecolor{red}{rgb}{1,0,0} \definecolor{darkgreen}{rgb}{0.4,0.7,0.3} \newcommand{\txtcircleG}[1]{\tikz[baseline=(char.base)]{ \node[shape=circle,fill=darkgreen,inner sep=0.5pt] (char) {\footnotesize \color{white}#1};}} \newcommand{\state}[1]{\textsc{#1}} \newcommand{\program}[1]{\textsf{\small #1}} \newcommand{\code}[1]{\texttt{\small #1}} \section{Design of {\scshape Polypath}\xspace}\label{sec:poly} Because all existing mobile OSes are {\scshape Monopath}\xspace, we face many important decisions when designing {\scshape Polypath}\xspace. In this section, we elaborate these decisions. By introducing multiple path designs, {\scshape Polypath}\xspace first faces the problem of naming and binding. That is, in a {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system, an application must be able to \emph{name} a path design and be able to use it by \emph{binding} to it. Indeed, much of our {\scshape Polypath}\xspace design involves answering questions about the naming and binding. In this section, we speak of binding in an abstract way because different systems may implement it differently. First, we must support legacy applications that are designed with the {\scshape Monopath}\xspace system in mind. This is possible via two design choices. (\textit{i}) First, as apparent from Figure~\ref{fig:io_path}, there are two interfaces between an application and the rest of path: event delivery from the event manager and the buffer exchange with the buffer manager. As long as these two interfaces are kept unchanged, a path design should support unmodified legacy applications. (\textit{ii}) Moreover, the naming of path and the binding between path and application must be achieved outside the application. In our {\scshape Polypath}\xspace design, they are realized by an OS module, called \emph{path manager\xspace}. The path manager\xspace records the path preference of each application during app installation and updates the record via a system API it exports. The API has the simple form of \code{ApplyPath(app\_name, path\_name)}. Importantly, the decision to support legacy applications further allows us to focus on the OS part of I2D path\xspace, which includes the event and buffer managers. As a result, when we say \emph{path design} in this work, we are referring to the design of the path, event and buffer managers. Second, we must decide on the lifetime of the binding between an application and a path design. That is, when is a binding created and when does it change? In one extreme, the path manager can decide binding for each sequence of events delivered to the application and as a result, can change the binding from one sequence of events to the next. We consider this fine granularity as unnecessary. Instead, we opt for bind-by-need strategy similar to call-by-need evaluation~\cite{henderson1976lazy}. That is, once a binding is created, at the time of the application launch, it lasts until the application or the system explicitly asks for a change, via the path changing API. This design invokes the path manager much less frequent and therefore has higher efficiency and better reliability. Finally, when and how can the path binding of an application be changed? We note that the invocation of \code{ApplyPath()} can be asynchronous, i.e., it can happen any time during the application's lifetime. Notably, the path design consists of two disjoint parts, linked by the application: the \emph{event manager} and the \emph{buffer manager}. If the path design is changed after the event manager delivers the events to the application but before the buffer manager gives the application a buffer, the events will experience the event and buffer managers from two different designs. This behaviors violates the expectation of developers and users that an event should experience the same path design, a property we call \emph{path integrity}. Therefore, at the invocation of \code{ApplyPath()}, if the event manager has already buffered events, the path manager\xspace ensures that these events follows the current path; otherwise, it binds the new path to the application for the incoming events. We note that this {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system design naturally supports any number of paths to be added or removed from the system. When the system cannot find the path required by an application, it can fall back to a default. Additionally, applications using the same path design in {\scshape Polypath}\xspace are as isolated from each other as they would be in the {\scshape Monopath}\xspace system. \subsubsection{PAR\xspace: Position-Aware Rendering}\label{sec:design_position} To support legacy applications and displays, PAR\xspace allows an application to write in the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer that is being externalized by the display subsystem. To minimize the risk of tearing effects caused by concurrent buffer accesses, PAR\xspace must be confident that the application would finish writing into the buffer BEFORE the display subsystem starts externalizing a dirty region. Therefore, in addition to the previous two questions to JEP\xspace, PAR\xspace must answer a third question: how long will it take the application to finish drawing into the buffer? Notably, the answer is essentially {\small $T_{app}$} of which a prediction is available from JITT\xspace as described in~\S\ref{sec:design_jitt}. Like in JITT\xspace, underprediction is more harmful than overprediction in PAR\xspace: underprediction risks tearing effects while overprediction only decreases latency reduction. To further limit tearing effects, we exploit the fact that many applications will have visual effects and henceforth dirty regions limited to around the touched position; and tearing in this area is barely distinguishable from effect of latency as shown in \S\ref{sec:newrequirements}. \textsf{Presto}\xspace will apply PAR\xspace only if the dirty region is within a predefined rectangle, 200 by 200 pixels in our implementation, centered at the latest touch point. This also simplifies the implementation. \textsf{Presto}\xspace will first check if there is any change outside the rectangle around the touch point, i.e., any dirty region outside it. If so, it stops. Otherwise, PAR\xspace estimates if the application can finish writing before the display reaches the edge of the rectangle. If yes, it will respond to the application with the \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer. To check if there is a dirty region outside the rectangle, PAR\xspace can leverage help from the application, the answer to (1). For legacy applications that do not use the partial-drawing APIs, PAR\xspace compares the two adjacent frames by sampling. We discuss how we implement it and its overhead in \S~\ref{sec:impl_position} and \ref{sec:overhead}, respectively. \section{\textsf{Presto}\xspace: A Fast Path Design}\label{sec:rapido} Because {\scshape Polypath}\xspace asks for two or more I2D path\xspace designs and existing mobile OSes only provides one, we next present a novel I2D path\xspace design, called \textsf{Presto}\xspace. Compared to the path used in today's {\scshape Monopath}\xspace system, \textsf{Presto}\xspace almost halves the latency by making a different tradeoff between latency and other computing goals. In particular, \textsf{Presto}\xspace eliminates the coarse granularities of the legacy path design, as discussed in \S\ref{sec:monopath_latency}, through two key techniques, \emph{just-in-time trigger}, or JITT\xspace, and \emph{just-enough pixels}, or JEP\xspace. Speaking of tradeoff, \textsf{Presto}\xspace judiciously allows frame drops (JITT\xspace) and tearing (JEP\xspace) in favor of short latency. JITT\xspace eliminates the synchronization of the event and buffer managers. It aims to get as many input events to the application as the resulting frame will be ready by the next display refresh. The JITT\xspace buffer manager transfers the buffer ownership to the display subsystem immediately after the application finishes drawing, without waiting for a sync pulse\xspace. JEP\xspace and its approximation, \emph{position-aware rendering}, or PAR\xspace, further alleviate the atomic use of buffers by judiciously allowing an application to write into a \state{busy$_{disp}$} buffer that is being externalized by the display. \input{jit} \input{jep} \section{Related Work}\label{sec:related} There is a large body of literature from the systems community that reduces interaction latency by proper OS design. To the best of our knowledge, {\scshape Polypath}\xspace is the first in the public domain that serves different I2D path\xspace designs to different interactions; \textsf{Presto}\xspace is the first I2D path\xspace design that achieves low latency by eliminating synchronization and buffer atomicity in I2D path\xspace. \textbf{Resource Management for Low Latency}:~~A faster computer system reduces the application execution time {\small$(T_{app}+T_{out})$} (\S\ref{sec:monopath_latency}). The OS can also favor interactive applications in resource management to reduce their {\small$(T_{app}+T_{out})$}~\cite{endo1996using,jones1997cpu,endo2000improving,goel2002supporting,yan2005mascots,yang2008redline}. Many have explored the use of cloud resources to improve the interactive performance of mobile applications, e.g.,~\cite{gordon2012osdi,gordon2015mobisys}. These solutions are complementary to \textsf{Presto}\xspace: they reduce latency when {\small$(T_{app}+T_{out})>T_{sync}$} while \textsf{Presto}\xspace is most effective when {\small$(T_{app}+T_{out})<T_{sync}$}. Additionally, when {\small$(T_{app}+T_{out})<T_{sync}$}, these solutions improve the opportunity for \textsf{Presto}\xspace by reducing {\small$T_{app}+T_{out}$} as in Equation~\ref{eq:latency}. \textbf{Speculation for Low Latency}:~~Event prediction and speculative execution have also been studied to conceal latency. Event prediction, or touch prediction\xspace in Apple's term, is widely used for the virtual reality with the head mounded display. To compensate for prediction errors, researchers have explored speculative execution~\cite{lee2015outatime} and post image processing~\cite{mark1997post}. All these solutions, as discussed in~\S\ref{sec:orthogonal}, are complementary to \textsf{Presto}\xspace, and can be implemented as their own paths in {\scshape Polypath}\xspace. \textbf{Specialized Hardware for Low Latency}:~~As part of a testbed for studying touch latency, Ng et al. report an ultra-low latency touch system~\cite{ng2012designing,ng2014blink} that achieves a latency as short as \SI{1}{ms}. The system employs a proprietary touch sensor with a very high sampling rate (\SI{1}{KHz}), FPGA-based low-latency (\SI{0.1}{ms}) data processing, and an ultra-high speed digital light projector (\SI{32000}{fps}). With completely custom software and hardware, it is not feasible for mobile systems, let alone supporting any legacy applications as \textsf{Presto}\xspace does. \textbf{Alternatives to VSync}:~~Games on non-mobile devices often provide an asynchronous, or \emph{vsync-off}, mode to reduce latency. In the vsync-off mode, the event manager delivers input events to the game without any delay. The game processes events without waiting for a sync pulse\xspace; when the game is in the middle of processing events, it buffers the events. Similarly, the buffer manager swaps graphics buffers without waiting for a sync pulse\xspace, even when the display is reading. This vsync-off mode, unfortunately, can introduce tearing effects anywhere on the screen~\cite{fastsync}. JITT\xspace avoids it by swapping graphics buffers only when a sync pulse\xspace is fired; PAR\xspace checks dirty regions and confines the tearing effects, if any, to a small area under the touch position. In contrast, the vsync-off mode blindly ignores the sync pulses\xspace. Furthermore, simply disabling vsync on mobile devices is not feasible because display controllers on SoCs~\cite{instrumentsomap4460,tegrak1} swap buffers only at a sync pulse\xspace regardless of when an application finishes rendering. Suppose that an application generates a frame \SI{1}{ms} before a sync pulse\xspace and another application generates a frame \SI{5}{ms} before a sync pulse\xspace. Regardless of when the rendering finishes, the two frames will be swapped and displayed at the next sync pulse\xspace. When a display controller swaps buffers only on a sync pulse\xspace, an application should generate multiple frames within a sync pulse\xspace period in order to reduce latency. Generating multiple frames within a sync pulse\xspace period leads to higher GPU power consumption on a mobile device~\cite{bui2015rethinking,nixon2014mobile,yan2015optimizing} as well as more memory usage. Nvidia's G-Sync~\cite{g-sync} reduces latency in a way very similar to JITT\xspace but requires proprietary GPU and display. JITT\xspace times the event manager carefully so that the resulting frame will be ready to display right before the next sync pulse\xspace. In contrast, a G-Sync GPU generates a sync pulse\xspace when it finishes rendering to synchronize the event and buffer managers, and the display. \textbf{Latencies in VR Systems}:~~State-of-the-art tethered VR systems~\cite{htcVive,oculusRift} have latencies between \SI{20}{} and \SI{22}{ms}, much lower than those on mobile systems. However, the tethered systems are very different from mobile systems in hardware and software. They have much faster and more power-hungry hardware: inertial sensors with high sampling rates (e.g., \SI{1}{KHz}~\cite{lavalle2014head}) and low latencies (e.g., \SI{2}{ms}~\cite{oculusSensor}), powerful GPUs, and higher display refresh rates (e.g., \SI{90}{} or \SI{120}{Hz}). Their software takes away the composer and remove one $T_{sync}$ period from the I2D path\xspace because VR systems has only one foreground application at a time. Importantly, indirect input devices used in VR controllers make users less sensitive to the latency~\cite{deber2015much}. However, direct input devices such as see-through displays used in AR systems~\cite{hololens,moverio} and touchscreens, which this paper focuses on, manifest latency as a spatial gap and require a lower latency. \textsf{Presto}\xspace with {\scshape Polypath}\xspace may reduce latency from AR and VR systems; however, the latency reduction will be ineffective because the average latency due to the coarse-granularities is smaller than \eqref{eq:latency} and the latency caused by the input hardware is much smaller, too. Finally, the focus of this work, the I2D path\xspace, is reminiscent of the \emph{path} abstraction that represents data and control flows crossing layered architectures~\cite{hutchinson1991x,przemyslaw1995extensibility,mosberger1996making,ford1997flux,kohler2000click,fassino2002think}. Despite the conceptual similarity, the I2D path\xspace is unique in its system context, its periodical pace and its concern with latency rather than throughout. \subsection{Design Tradeoffs in I2D Path\xspace Design}\label{sec:newrequirements} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth,trim={6cm 25cm -3cm 15cm},clip]{figs/tearingEffects.pdf} \caption{Tearing effect may happen when the display switches from one frame to the next in the middle of externalizing the first. As a result, the screen will show the early part of the first frame and the late part of the second, joined at the tearing line. If the tearing line cuts across a large dirty region, the tearing effect can be visible and annoying as is in (i). If the dirty region is very small, like in the cases of drawing, the tearing effect is indistinguishable from the effect from latency, as is in (ii), when compared to the perfect case in (iii).} \label{fig:tearing} \end{figure} The legacy path design analyzed above represents one particular point of tradeoff between latency and other computing goals. In some sense, it represents an extreme point: it efficiently and strictly meets all three visual goals, at the cost of latency. For many important latency-sensitive interactions, these goals can be relaxed, especially in view of the recent hardware and software development. As a result, \emph{different tradeoffs are possible}, especially in favor of short latency. First, HCI research has shown that different interactions have different latency requirements~\cite{Claypool:2006:LPA:1167838.1167860,Claypool:2010:LKP:1730836.1730863}. It is known that the human-perceptible threshold for causality is about \SI{100}{ms}~\cite{miller1968latency,seow2008designing}. That is, if we click a button on screen and the button changes within \SI{100}{ms}, we would barely notice the delay. As a result, the \SI{100}{ms} latency has been considered as adequate for keyboard/mouse-based interactions as well as touchscreen-based point/selection. In contrast, Ng. et al~\cite{ng2014blink,ng2012designing} showed that the just-noticeable difference (JND) latency for object dragging on the touchscreen is \SI{2}-\SI{11}{ms}, much shorter than what modern mobile systems can deliver. Microsoft went further to argue for \SI{1}{ms} latency for touchscreen interactions~\cite{1msdelay}. Latency reduction, however, is not free. Microsoft achieves it \SI{1}{ms} latency only with expensive, specialized hardware. Given the hardware, latency reduction often requires more computation, e.g, event prediction~\cite{lavalle2014head} and speculation~\cite{lee2015outatime}, or relaxing the visual goals, as explained below. Second, the three visual goals met by the legacy I2D path\xspace are not absolute. For some applications and interactions, they are not necessary at all, especially on modern mobile hardware and software. Hardware improvements, i.e., faster CPU, GPU and larger memory, have enabled a consistent frame rate of \SI{60}{fps} on modern mobile systems. Recent studies~\cite{claypool2007frame,claypool2006effects} have shown that users cannot perceive changes in frame rate when it is above \SI{30}{fps}. Similarly, frame drops can be allowed if they are not consecutive and the frame rate is kept above \SI{30}{fps}. For another example, drawing on touchscreen usually has visual effects limited to the touched position. Tearing effects would be barely noticeable by human eyes or even high-speed cameras. Indeed, they are almost indistinguishable from the effect of latency as highlighted by Figure~\ref{fig:tearing}. Moreover, it can be profitable for user experience to trade these visual goals for shorter latency. Janzen and Teather~\cite{janzen201460} showed that latency affects user performance with touchscreen interaction more than frame rate does. Our fast path design, \textsf{Presto}\xspace, to be presented in \S\ref{sec:rapido}, also carefully drops delayed frames in order to cut overall latency. We believe that it should be up to the application developers and users to determine what tradeoffs are profitable. Finally, on battery-powered mobile devices, the visual goals may be traded for lower power consumption. For example, on Nexus 6, lowering the frame rate from \SI{60} to \SI{30}{fps} reduces the overall system power consumption by \SI{300}{mW}, or 20\%, when running \program{Angrybird}. \vspace{+1ex}In summary, hardware and software advancements described above make more tradeoffs between latency and other computing goals possible. Because the latency of today's {\scshape Monopath}\xspace system is inadequate for many interactions, we argue for a {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system design in which multiple path designs making different tradeoffs for latency coexist. In a {\scshape Polypath}\xspace system, application developers and users can decide when to apply which path design to which application. \section{I2D Path\xspace and Its Tradeoffs}\label{sec:understanding} In this section, we present a conceptual model for the I2D path\xspace to understand its design tradeoffs. We show that the I2D path\xspace design of today's {\scshape Monopath}\xspace systems represents a specific tradeoff point in a large design space between latency and other computing goals. By showing many other possible, desirable tradeoff points, we motivate the need for {\scshape Polypath}\xspace operating systems in which multiple I2D path\xspace designs are supported. \subsection{I2D Path\xspace Model}\label{sec:path} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth,trim={3cm 3cm 7cm 2cm},clip]{figs/io_path} \caption{ A general model for the I2D path\xspace: the event manager batches events from the input subsystem and delivers them to the application; the application then draws a frame on a buffer supplied by the buffer manager. The buffer manager transfers buffer ownership to the display subsystem. } \label{fig:io_path} \end{figure} Based on an understanding of mainstream mobile OSes, i.e., iOS and Android, we devise a five-part model for the I2D path\xspace as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:io_path}. The model includes input, event manager, application, buffer manager, and display. All except application are part of the OS (not necessarily in kernel space though). The \emph{input} subsystem includes the input device driver. It samples the physical world and produces software events. The sampling rate is typically \SI{120}{Hz}~\cite{iosPrediction} but can range from \SI{80}{} to \SI{240}{Hz}. The \emph{event manager} is per-application. It buffers events from the input and delivers them to the application. The buffering is necessary because the input subsystem produces the events faster than the display refreshes. High-rate events are necessary because of application's desire for smooth visual effects. The \emph{buffer manager} is also per-application. It manages the application's \emph{graphics buffers}. The application processes the input events, takes a \state{free} buffer, marks it \state{busy$_{app}$}, draws a frame on it and then marks it \state{filled}. The \emph{display} subsystem includes the software part of the composer. It takes \state{filled} buffers from multiple applications, marks them as \state{busy$_{disp}$}, and handles them to the hardware, which composes the buffers and sends the composition to the display panel serially. After that, the display subsystem marks the buffers as \state{free}. Because composing is done by specialized hardware, it adds negligible latency. The display controller refreshes the display panel and fires a sync pulse\xspace periodically, with the period of {\small $T_{sync}$}. In modern mobile systems, {\small $T_{sync}$} is typically \SI{1/60}{s}~\cite{graphicxArch, iosPrediction}. \input{latency} \input{tradeoff}
\section{Introduction} \label{s1} Single-index models \citep[SIMs, e.g.,][]{Hard:Hall:Ichi:optm:1993, Ichimura:1993} are extremely useful tools for analysing complex multivariate data in a parsimonious yet flexible way. SIMs make the simplifying assumption that the conditional distribution of a response $Y$ given a set of covariates $\bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d$ depends only on the single index $\bm{x}^T \bm{\beta}$ for some vector of parameters $\bm{\beta} \in \mathbb{R}^d$, with the functional form of this dependency left unspecified. It is this balance of model parsimony, interpretability and flexibility that has seen SIMs find a wide range of applications in a variety of fields, such as in econometrics \citep[e.g.,][]{Horowitz:2009, Hu:Shiu:Wout:iden:2015} and survival analysis \citep[e.g.,][]{Hard:Hall:Ichi:optm:1993, SK:2014}. In this note we consider generalized single-index models (GSIMs) which assume that the conditional distribution of a response $Y$ given a set of covariates $\bm{x}$ has the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:pdf} Y \mid \bm{x} \sim f(y \| \bm{x}; \bm{\beta}) = \exp \left\{\frac{y g(\bm{x}^T \bm{\beta}) - b(g(\bm{x}^T \bm{\beta}))}{\varphi} + c(y; \varphi) \right\}, \end{equation} where the functions $b(\cdot)$ and $c(\cdot)$ are of known forms, $g: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a smooth but otherwise unspecified function, $\bm{\beta}$ is a vector of coefficients, and $\varphi$ is a dispersion parameter. This framework covers normal, Poisson, binomial and gamma responses, amongst others. Model (\ref{eq:pdf}) implies $E(Y\|\bm{x}) = b'(g(\bm{x}^T \bm{\beta}))$, where $b'(\cdot)$ is the canonical inverse-link function. As with classical generalized linear models (GLMs), the use of the canonical link generally leads to sensible conditional mean functions for any function $g$. For example, $b'(\cdot) = \exp(\cdot)$ for Poisson regression, ensuring non-negativity of the conditional mean for any value of the function $g$. For binomial responses, the canonical link $b'(\cdot) = \exp(\cdot)/(1 + \exp(\cdot))$ ensures that the conditional mean is between 0 and 1 for any value of the function $g$. The computational aspects of fitting GSIMs have been widely discussed in the literature. The terminology ``bundled parameter" was first used in \citet{Huang:1997} to describe $(\bm{\beta}, g(\cdot; \bm{\beta}))$, where the finite-dimensional index coefficients $\bm{\beta}$ of interest and the infinite-dimensional nuisance parameter $g(\cdot)$ are bundled together. Various methods are available for estimating $(\bm{\beta}, g(\cdot))$ simultaneously, for example, kernel smoothing \citep{Weisberg:1994}, average derivative estimation \citep{Hardle:1989}, sliced inverse regression \citep{YinCook2005}, local linear methods \citep{Carr:Fan:Gijb:Wand:gene:1997}, and penalized splines \citep{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017}. Implicit to any fitting method is the selection of a smoothing parameter, which is used to prevent overfitting and to regularize the underlying computational problem. The smoothing parameter is usually chosen via generalized cross-validation \citep[e.g.,][]{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017}, or set to some ``optimal" value relative to a working model \citep[e.g.,][]{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010}. All the above fitting methods have their own merits, and their corresponding estimators have competing attractive properties -- see individual references for details on each method. While most of the existing literature on GSIMs focus on model estimation and smoothing parameter selection, inferences on the index parameters $\bm{\beta}$ are less explored. This paper is mainly concerned with this latter problem. To this end, we propose a profile likelihood ratio test (PLRT) for testing the index parameters that is simple on both a conceptual and computational level. Conceptually, to test between two nested models we simply fit both models and compute a likelihood ratio statistic between the two models. This is then compared to the usual asymptotic $\chi^2$ distribution, or an $F$ distribution for a finite-sample adjustment. Computationally, the PLRT involves no more than adding a few lines of code to existing software for fitting GSIMs. For this paper, we recommend the \texttt{gam} (generalized additive models) function in the state-of-the-art R package \texttt{mgcv} \citep{Wood:2016}, although other software can be modified in a similar way to carry out the proposed PLRT procedure. The R code to carry out these computations is particularly simple, and can be downloaded from the Online Supplement. A reviewer pointed out that our model estimation procedure is similar to that in \citet{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017}, where generalized partially linear single-index models are investigated. Indeed, both papers carry out model fitting via penalized splines. However, \citet{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017} focus on model fitting and parameter estimation, while the main focus here is on parameter inferences. Although \citet{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017} establish large-sample properties for their estimator and propose a sandwich formula for estimating the asymptotic variances for Wald-based inferences, the practical performance of their approach is not examined in their numerical or data analysis examples. The proposed PLRT also enjoys some unique advantages over Wald-based inferences, which we now highlight. In addition to being conceptually and computationally simple, the proposed PLRT method is also invariant to model parametrization. A well-known property of SIMs and GSIMs is that they are not generally identifiable. Two popular sets of identifiability constraints on $\bm{\beta}$ are: \begin{enumerate} \item $\bm{\beta}$ contains no intercept term, $\beta_1 > 0$, and $\\| \bm{\beta} \\|^2 = 1$ \citep[e.g.,][]{Yu:2002, Hard:Mull:Sper:Werw:nonp:2004, Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010, Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011}, \item $\bm{\beta}$ contains no intercept term, and $\beta_1 = 1$ \citep[e.g.,][]{Hard:Mull:Sper:Werw:nonp:2004}. \end{enumerate} Although the fitted model is the same under any set of identifiability constraints, inferences based on Wald-tests are generally not invariant to parametrization. For example, in either parametrization above it is not possible to test $\beta_1 = 0$, that is, if covariate $x_1$ has no overall effect on $Y$. In parametrization 2, it is also not possible to compute standard errors for the estimated coefficient for $x_1$ as $\beta_1$ is always set to 1. Instead, one needs to relabel the covariates so that $x_1$ no longer corresponds to the first coefficient, in order to carry out inferences on the effect of covariate $x_1$. In contrast, the proposed PLRT is invariant to parametrization as it exploits the fact that the fitted model, and subsequently the maximized likelihood, is the same regardless of parametrization. Thus, we can simply fit the model with and without the covariate $x_1$ and compare the maximal log-likelihoods achieved, regardless of which identifiability constraint is used. The PLRT approach also exhibits substantially less bias than the usual Wald tests in all our simulation settings (see Section \ref{s3}). We suspect that this is because the proposed PLRT bypasses explicit estimation of the variance matrix which is at the crux of Wald-based inferences. This variance matrix is typically estimated by plugging in the estimated $\hat{\bm{\beta}}$ and $\hat g$ into the expression for the asymptotic variance \citep[e.g.,][Section 4]{Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017}. The estimation of $g$ is generally very noisy, which leads to inaccurate variance estimation and subsequently biased Wald statistics. The level of bias can be severe, as demonstrated in our simulations in Section \ref{s3}. We stress that we use only the default automated smoothing parameter selection from the \texttt{gam} function when implementing the proposed PLRT. In particular, we never ``hand-pick" a smoothing parameter value to make our method look superior to competing methods in any of our simulations or data analysis example. \section{Related methods} There are two closely related approaches for inferences on index coefficients using likelihood-type functions. These are the generalized likelihood ratio test \citep[GLRT;][]{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010} and the conditional quasi-likelihood ratio test \citep[QLRT;][]{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011}. We compare and contrast these methods here. \subsection{Generalized likelihood ratio test} The GLRT approach of \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010} employs local-linear estimation for the function $g$ in the special case of additive errors with constant variance. This is done via the following three steps: \begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=] \item For each $z$ and $\boldsymbol{\beta}$, minimize $\sum_{i=1}^n [Y_i - a - b(\boldsymbol{x}_i^T \boldsymbol{\beta} - z)]^2 K_h(\boldsymbol{x}_i^T \boldsymbol{\beta} - z)$ in $a$ and $b$, where $K_h$ is some kernel function with bandwidth $h$, giving local estimates of the intercept $\hat a = \hat a(z; \boldsymbol{\beta}, h)$ and slope $\hat b = \hat b(z; \boldsymbol{\beta}, h)$. \item Minimize the residual sum of squares $\sum_{i=1}^n [Y_i - \hat a(\boldsymbol{x}_i^T\boldsymbol{\beta}; \boldsymbol{\beta}, h)]^2$ in $\boldsymbol{\beta}$, subject to identifiability constraint $\boldsymbol{\beta}^T \boldsymbol{\beta} = 1$. This gives the estimate $\hat{\boldsymbol{\beta}}$. \item Estimate $g$ by $\hat g(\cdot \ ; h) = \hat a(\cdot \ ; \hat{\boldsymbol{\beta}}, h)$. \end{enumerate} To test the null hypothesis $H_0: \boldsymbol{\beta}_{\{l\}} = 0 $ against the alternative $H_1: \mbox{ not all } \boldsymbol{\beta}_{\{l\}} = 0$, where $l \subset \{1,2,,\ldots, d\}$ is some subset of indices, the GLRT proceeds by carrying out the above three steps under both $H_0$ and $H_1$, and computing the log ratio of the residual sum of squares. This can then be shown to follow a scaled asymptotic $\chi^2$ distribution, with the scaling factor and degrees of freedom depending on the kernel function $K$, the bandwidth $h$, and the support of the estimated linear predictor $\boldsymbol{x}_i^T \hat{ \boldsymbol{\beta}}$ under both the null and alternative hypotheses. To carry out the GLRT in practice, \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010} suggest two tweaks to the theory. First, instead of directly using the asymptotic $\chi^2$ result, the authors recommend bootstrap resampling to estimate the quantiles of the null distribution. This is because the null distribution depends on the estimated support from both the null and alternative fitted models. In this sense, the GLRT exhibits a non-standard type of Wilks phenonenom. Second, the recommended bandwidth for hypothesis testing is different to the optimal bandwidth for fitting the model. More precisely, if $\hat{h}_\text{opt}$ is the estimated optimal bandwidth for fitting the model, then the corresponding optimal bandwidth for hypothesis testing was found to be $\hat{h}_\text{opt} \times n^{-1/20}$ numerically. This treats model fitting and model inferences on slightly different footings. These two tweaks were employed throughout the simulation studies and data analysis example in \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010}. The main advantage of the proposed PLRT framework over the GLRT is that it is simpler to implement in practice. In particular, the asymptotic distribution for calibrating the test does not depend on a chosen kernel function, a chosen bandwidth, nor the support of the fitted linear predictors. It also does not require bootstrap approximations for the null distribution, nor tweaking of the bandwidth -- in fact, we use only the default automated smoothing parameter selection from the \texttt{gam} function from the \texttt{mgcv} package \citep{Wood:2016}. That is, we simply fit the model under both the null and alternative hypotheses using the default automated smoothing parameter selection, and directly compare the likelihood ratio statistic to an asymptotic $\chi^2$ distribution, with degrees of freedom depending only on the number of constraints imposed by the null hypothesis. Thus, PLRT is much more computationally efficient than GLRT. Indeed, our numerical examples in Section \ref{s3} demonstrate that the proposed PLRT is over two magnitudes of order faster to carry out than the GLRT approach. The GLRT approach is also inappropriate for data with non-constant variance, which is typical of count, binomial and time-to-event responses. However, such responses pose no problems for the proposed PLRT approach as it is based on the generalized linear model framework \citep{McCullagh:1989}. Finally, the code for implementing the GLRT is not readily available, even after contacting the authors. To this end, we emulated the approach in R using the \texttt{npindex} function from the \texttt{np} package \citep{RH:2016}, and we used this implementation for our simulation studies in Section \ref{s3}. Our replica code is provided in the Online Supplement. \subsection{Conditional quasi-likelihood ratio test} For handling data with non-constant variance, \citet{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011} replace the sum of squares criterion in the above three steps from \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010} with a quasi-likelihood criterion specified via mean-variance relationship. A conditional quasi-likelihood ratio test (QLRT) can then be constructed for inferences on the index coefficients $\bm{\beta}$. More precisely, to test the null hypothesis $H_0: \boldsymbol{\beta}_{\{l\}} = 0 $ against the alternative $H_1: \mbox{not all } \bm{\beta}_{\{l\}} = 0$, where $l \subset \{1,2,,\ldots, d\}$ is some subset of indices, the QLRT first fits a local linear quasi-likelihood model under $H_1$. Then, conditional on the fitted smooth function $\hat g$ obtained under $H_1$, a second quasi-likelihood model under $H_0$ is fitted. A quasi-likelihood ratio statistic between the two models fits is computed, which can then be compared to an asymptotic $\chi^2$ distribution with degrees of freedom given by the number of constraints imposed by $H_0$. This approach is conditional because the fitted smooth function $\hat g$ under the alternative hypothesis is treated as fixed under the null hypothesis and also in the subsequent quasi-likelihood ratio statistic. In contrast, the proposed PLRT approach is an unconditional test as it refits the smooth function $g$ and the coefficients $\bm{\beta}$ under both the null and alternative hypotheses. In practice, the QLRT also differs from the proposed approach as it requires selection of an additional adjustment factor to enhance the stability and accuracy of corresponding algorithm. \citet{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011} suggest numerically searching for the ``optimal" value of this adjustment factor over some interval determined by the dimension of the problem, with the criterion for being ``optimal" defined relative to some assumed working model. In contrast, the proposed PLRT does not require any additional stability parameter. Moreover, while the asymptotic theory for the QLRT is valid for any well-behaving bandwidth selection method, such as cross-validation, the actual bandwidth selection method used throughout the simulation studies in \citet{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011} seems to be fine-tuned using knowledge of the true underlying function $g$. For real data analysis problems where the true curve is unknown, the authors recommend ``trying a number of smoothing parameters that smooth the data and picking the one that seems most reasonable". This approach can be subjective and ambiguous. In contrast, the PLRT approach we examine here is implemented in the same automated way in all of our simulations and data analysis examples. In particular, we never fine-tune the smoothing parameter using knowledge of the true curve in any of our numerical studies. The R code to implement the PLRT is also particularly simple. \vspace{-2.2mm} \section{Model and main results} \label{s2} \subsection{Model and estimation} A wide range of nonparametric estimation approaches exist for fitting generalized single-index models (\ref{eq:pdf}) to data, including kernel and local polynomial regression \citep{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011} and sliced inverse regression \citep{YinCook2005}. In this paper, we consider penalized regression splines for both model fitting and parameter inferences. We find penalized splines particularly simple to work with on both a theoretical and practical level. More precisely, the smooth function $g(\cdot)$ is approximated by a series expansion, $ g(\cdot) = \bm{\delta}^T B(\cdot) \ , $ where $\bm{\delta}$ is a vector of spline coefficients, and $B(\cdot)$ is a set of basis functions. Various types of basis functions can be used here, with the two most popular choices being cubic regressions splines \citep[Section 4.1.2]{Wood:2006} and truncated P-splines \citep{Yu:2002, Yu:Wu:Zhang:pen:2017}. The theory and methodology in this paper are valid for both of these approaches. For parameter identifiability in model estimation, we use the first set of constraints from Section \ref{s1}. That is, the parameter space of $\bm{\beta}$ is $\{\bm{\beta} = (\beta_1, \dots, \beta_d)^T: \\| \bm{\beta} \\|^2 = 1, \beta_1 > 0, \bm{\beta} \in \mathbb{R}^d \}$, where $\\| \cdot \\|$ denotes the Euclidean norm. The parameter $\bm{\beta}$ is on the boundary of a unit ball, which violates the usual regularity conditions needed to establish asymptotic properties of subsequent estimators \citep[Section 2]{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011}. By introducing a $(d-1)$-dimensional parameter $\bm{\phi} = (\phi_1, \ldots, \phi_{d-1})^T$, we can parametrize $\bm{\beta}$ through $\bm{\beta}(\bm{\phi}) = (\sqrt{1-\\| \bm{\phi} \\|^2}, \phi_1, \ldots, \phi_{d-1})^T$, where $\bm{\phi}$ satisfies the constraint $\\| \bm{\phi} \\| \le 1$. If the true value $\bm{\phi}_$ is such that $\\|\bm{\phi}_\\| <1$, then standard regularity conditions hold. \begin{remark} Identifiability constraints are only needed for model estimation. The fitted model and, subsequently, the likelihood value achieved are the same regardless of which set of identifiability constraints is used. Thus, parameter inferences based on the likelihood are invariant to parametrization. It is this key property that we exploit in Section \ref{se:LRT} of this paper. \end{remark} A penalized likelihood estimator of $\bm{\theta} = (\bm{\phi}^T, \bm{\delta}^T)^T$ can then be obtained by maximizing the penalized log-likelihood function, \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:obj} \ell_{n \lambda}(\bm{\theta}) = \ell_n(\bm{\theta}) - \frac{n}{2}\lambda_n \bm{\delta}^T D \bm{\delta} \ , \end{eqnarray} where $\ell_n(\bm{\theta}) = \sum_{i=1}^n [y_i \bm{\delta}^T B(\bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}(\bm{\phi})) - b(\bm{\delta}^T B(\bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}(\bm{\phi})))]$ is the unscaled log-likelihood, $\lambda_n \geq 0$ is a smoothing parameter, and $D$ is a positive semi-definite symmetric matrix satisfying $ \bm{\delta}^T D \bm{\delta} = \int [g''(z)]^2 dz \ . $ This penalizes the curvature of $g$ to avoid the overfitting of regression curve. A smaller value of $\lambda$ results in a more wiggly fitted function $\hat{g}$ that may capture local fluctuations, while a larger value of $\lambda$ leads to an increasingly linear estimation of function $g$. Finally, the dispersion parameter $\varphi$ can be estimated from the Pearson residuals using the method-of-moments estimator, $ \hat \varphi = (n-k)^{-1}\sum_{i = 1}^n (Y_i - \hat{\mu}_i)^2/\hat v_i $, where $k$ is the degree of the freedom of the fitted model, $\hat{\mu}_i$ are the estimated means, and $\hat v_i = b''(\hat{\boldsymbol{\delta}} B(\boldsymbol{x}_i^T \boldsymbol{\beta}(\hat{ \boldsymbol{\phi}})))$ are the estimated (unscaled) variances. \subsection{Large sample properties} We follow the fixed-knot asymptotics of \citet{Yu:2002} and assume that the true underlying function $g$ is itself a spline function. For functions $g$ that are not spline functions, the asymptotic bias can be offset by increasing the number of knots. However, as \citet[Section 3]{Yu:2002} argue, the variability in the choice of smoothing parameter in practice is typically larger than this asymptotic bias and so fixed-knot asymptotics are a reasonable approximation for practical purposes. The assumptions we impose on $\bm{\theta} = (\bm{\phi}^T, \bm{\delta}^T)^T$ and the corresponding parametrized space $\Theta$ are specified in the Appendix. Results 1 and 2 below follow from \citet{Yu:2002}. \begin{result}[Consistency] Under Assumptions A1--A3 in the Appendix, if the smoothing parameter $\lambda_n = o(1)$ then there exists a local maximizer $\hat{\bm{\theta}}$ of (\ref{eq:obj}) such that $\\|\hat{\bm{\theta}} - \bm{\theta} \\| = O_p(n^{-1/2}+\lambda_n)$. In particular, $\hat{\bm{\theta}} \rightarrow \bm{\theta}$ in probability. \end{result} \begin{result}[Asymptotic normality] Under Assumptions A1--A3 in the Appendix, if the smoothing parameter $\lambda_n = o(n^{-1/2})$ then a sequence of constrained penalized estimators $\hat{\bm{\theta}} = (\hat{\bm{\phi}}^T, \hat{\bm{\delta}}^T)^T$ exists, is consistent, and is asymptotically normally distributed. That is, $ \sqrt{n}(\hat{\bm{\theta}} - \bm{\theta}_) \rightarrow N\left(0, I(\bm{\theta}_)^{-1}\right) $ in distribution, where $I(\theta_)$ is the Fisher information matrix defined in the Appendix. Moreover, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:asymnorm} \sqrt{n}\left( \begin{array}{c} \hat{\bm{\beta}} - \bm{\beta} \\ \hat{\bm{\delta}} - \bm{\delta} \\ \end{array} \right) \rightarrow N\left(0, J(\bm{\theta})I(\bm{\theta})^{-1}J(\bm{\theta})^T\right) \end{equation} in distribution, where $J$ is the Jacobian matrix for transforming back from $\bm{\theta} = (\bm{\phi}^T,\bm{\delta}^T)^T$ to $(\bm{\beta}^T,\bm{\delta}^T)^T$. \end{result} Result 2 is often used to motivate Wald statistics for inferences on the regression parameters $\bm{\beta}$, with the asymptotic variance in (\ref{eq:asymnorm}) estimated using a plug-in estimator by substituting the fitted $\hat{\bm{\delta}}$ and $\hat{\bm{\beta}}$ in for $\bm{\delta}$ and $\bm{\beta}$. However, Wald tests using a plug-in estimator of variance can be very biased in practice, as demonstrated in our simulations in Section \ref{s3}. We suspect that this is due to the fact that $\hat g$ can still exhibit a lot of local fluctuations even with large sample sizes. Another drawback is that the Wald-test is not invariant to the choice of identifiability constraints. As mentioned in Section \ref{s1}, it is not possible to test if $\beta_1 = 0$, that is, if covariate $x_1$ has no overall effect on $Y$, without first reparametrizing the model so that $x_1$ is no longer the first covariate. \subsection{Profile likelihood ratio test} \label{se:LRT} To overcome the drawbacks of the Wald-test, we propose an alternative approach for inferences on $\bm{\beta}$ that does not require explicit estimation of the variance, is easy to implement computationally, and is invariant to identifiability constraints. The method is based on the profile loglikelihood function for $\bm{\beta}$, which is defined as $$ pl(\bm{\beta}) = \sum_{i=1}^n [y_i \hat{\bm{\delta}}_\beta^T B(\bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}) - b(\hat{\bm{\delta}}_\beta^T B(\bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}))] \ , $$ where $\hat{\bm{\delta}}_\beta$ is the maximizer of the penalized log-likelihood (\ref{eq:obj}) for fixed $\bm{\beta}$. A profile likelihood ratio test (PLRT) statistic can be then be constructed by comparing the profile likelihoods achieved under the null and alternative hypotheses. More precisely, suppose we are interested in testing the hypothesis $H_0: M\bm{\beta} = 0$ versus $H_1: M\bm{\beta} \neq 0$, where $M$ is a $r \times d$ matrix with rank $r < d$ and $MM^T = I$. For example, if we are testing whether $x_1$ and $x_3$ have no overall joint effect on the response $Y$, then $r = 2$ and $M $ is $$ M = \left( \begin{array}{cccccc} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \end{array} \right). $$ To carry out this test, we simply fit two models, one with the constraint $M \bm{\beta} = 0$ and one without, and evaluate the maximum profile likelihoods under the null and alternative hypotheses. The profile likelihood ratio statistic can then be shown to have usual $\chi^2$ asymptotic distributions. The proof of Proposition 1 is given in the Supplemental Materials. \begin{proposition}[Profile likelihood ratio test] Suppose Assumptions A1--A3 in the Appendix hold and $\lambda_n = o(n^{-1/2})$. Then under the null hypothesis $H_0$, $ 2\left\{\sup_{H_1} pl(\bm{\beta}) - \sup_{H_0} pl(\bm{\beta}) \right\} \rightarrow \varphi \, \chi_r^2 $ in distribution as $n \rightarrow \infty$. \label{prop:LRT} \end{proposition} In practice, $\varphi$ is typically unknown and we replace it with its estimate $\hat \varphi$. A finite-sample adjustment to the above test is to compare the profile likelihood ratio to an $rF_{r, \ n-df(H_1)}$ distribution instead, where $df(H_1)$ is the degrees of freedom of the fitted model obtained under alternative hypothesis. This is justified since $rF_{r, \ n - df(H_1)} = \chi_r^2 + o_P(1)$ for large $n$. We can also use the PLRT to define equivalent standard errors for $\hat \beta_j$ via \begin{equation} \label{eq:se} \mbox{se}_{eq}(\hat{\beta}_j) = \frac{ \sqrt{\hat{\varphi}} \, \|\hat{\beta}_j\|}{\sqrt{2\left\{\sup pl(\bm{\beta}) - \sup_{\beta_j = 0} pl(\bm{\beta}) \right\}}} \end{equation} where $\sup_{\beta_j = 0} pl(\bm{\beta})$ is the maximal log-likelihood achieved under the constraint $\beta_j = 0$. By construction, the $t$-statistic $\|\hat \beta_j\|/\mbox{se}_{eq}(\hat \beta_j)$ achieves the same significance as the PLRT for testing $\beta_j = 0$. A null value other than 0 can also be used to calculate the equivalent standard error, but in the absence of any additional knowledge about the true parameter value, the choice of 0 is a good default to use in practice. \section{Simulation studies} \label{s3} To assess the practical performance of the proposed PLRT approach for inference on the index parameters $\bm{\beta}$, we looked at five sets of simulations covering continuous and binary responses, and monotonic, unimodal and sinusoidal means curves. We employed cubic regression splines for the first two sets of simulations and truncated cubic splines for the other three, demonstrating that the methodology works well for either choice of basis functions. For monotonic or unimodal regressions, we follow the recommendation in \citet{Yu:2002} and set the default number of knots to $10$. For more complex regressions, the number of knots may be increased -- see \citet{Yu:2002} and \citet{Ruppert:2002} for more discussions on selecting the number of knots. The practical performance of the proposed PLRT approach was compared to that of the standard Wald test, as well as that of the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT) of \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010}. Interestingly, computer software for implementing the GLRT was not readily available, even after contacting the authors. For the purposes of this paper, we replicated the GRLT method ourselves in \texttt{R} using the \texttt{npindex} function from the \texttt{np} package \citep{RH:2016}. We employed local constant estimation using second order Epanechnikov kernels. All three methods were run on a Windows desktop with an i7-3770 CPU running at 3.40 GHz and 16.0 GB RAM. \subsection{Continuous responses with sinusoidal means} To compare the performance of the GLRT, Wald and PLRT approaches for continuous data, we generated synthetic datasets using the sinusoidal model from \citet{Cui:Hard:Zhu:efm:2011}, $$Y_i \ \|\ \bm{x}_i \sim N(\sin(a \bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}), \, \sigma^2) \ , \quad \mbox{ for } i=1,2,\ldots,n \ ,$$ with sample sizes $n=100$ and $400$ covering moderately small to moderately large sample sizes. The true index parameters were set to $\bm{\beta} = (\beta_1,\beta_2, \beta_3, \ldots,\beta_{10})^T = (2,1,0,\ldots,0)^T / \sqrt{5}$. Each covariate in $\bm{x}_i$ were generated independently from a $N(2, 1)$ distribution and the error standard deviation $\sigma$ was set to $0.2$. Two different periodicities were considered, with $a = \pi/2$ corresponding to a unimodal mean function and $a = 3\pi/4$ corresponding to a mean function with one peak and one trough. A total of $N = 1000$ simulations were carried out for each setting. For each simulated dataset, a Gaussian GSIM model was fit using either local linear estimation for the GLRT approach, or penalized cubic regression splines for the Wald and PLRT approaches. The bandwidth for the local linear approach was chosen via least-squares cross-validation method as implemented in the \texttt{np} package, while the smoothing parameter for penalized cubic splines was chosen via the default cross-validation method as implemented in the \texttt{mgcv} package. In keeping with the recommendation in \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010}, the bandwidth for inferences in the GLRT approach was modified to be $\hat h_{\rm{opt}} \times n^{-1/20}$, where $\hat h_{\rm{opt}}$ was the estimated optimal bandwidth for model fitting. For each dataset, 200 bootstraps were used for the GLRT method due to its slow computation speeds (see average run times in Table \ref{tab:exp1}). Table \ref{tab:exp1} displays the Type 1 error rates at nominal 1\%, 5\% and 10\% levels for simultaneously dropping $1,3,5$ and $7$ zero index coefficients using the GLRT, Wald test and the proposed PLRT approach from Proposition \ref{prop:LRT}. Here, dropping 1 covariate refers to testing $\beta_{10} = 0$, dropping 3 refers to testing $\beta_8 = \beta_9 = \beta_{10} = 0$, dropping 5 refers to testing $\beta _6 = \cdots = \beta_{10} = 0$ and dropping 7 refers to testing $\beta_4 = \cdots = \beta_{10} = 0$ simultaneously. Note that $\beta_3, \beta_4, \ldots, \beta_{10}$ are all exchangeable, so there is no loss of generality in defining hypotheses in this sequential manner. From Table \ref{tab:exp1} we see that the proposed PLRT provides substantially less biased Type 1 error rates than those of the GLRT and Wald tests for both periodicities. While Type 1 error rates of both the Wald and PLRT methods approach nominal levels as the sample size increases, the PLRT always exhibits comparable, if not superior, performance throughout. Note that it was not feasible to run the GLRT on sample sizes of $n=400$ due to its extremely slow computation speed (see next paragraph). The Type 1 error rates in Table \ref{tab:exp1} suggest that the proposed PLRT can perform well for parameter inferences in Gaussian single-index models. Also displayed in Table \ref{tab:exp1} are the average computer run times for simultaneously dropping 7 covariates, $\beta_4 = \cdots = \beta_{10} = 0$, for each synthetic dataset using each of the three methods. We see that the computation times for the PLRT approach are comparable to that of the simple plug-in Wald test, but are over two orders of magnitude faster than the GLRT approach. Indeed, the long computation times for the GLRT make it rather infeasible for use in practice, taking over 83 minutes on average to analyze a {\it single} dataset of sample size $n=100$, and over 200 minutes to analyze a single dataset of sample size $n=400$. In contrast, the proposed PLRT approach does not require bootstrapping to approximate the null distribution of the test statistic, making it much more computationally efficient. This, coupled with its superior accuracy, makes it more appealing to use in practice. \begin{table} \tbl{Continuous responses with sinusoidal means - Type 1 error rates (\%) for simultaneously dropping 1, 3, 5 and 7 covariates, and average run times for simultaneously dropping 7 covariates, using GLRT, Wald and PLRT methods. Sample sizes $n = 100$ and $400$. $N = 1000$ simulations in each setting.} {\begin{tabular}{lllrrrrrrrrrrrrr}\toprule & & & \multicolumn{12}{c}{\underline{Nominal significance levels (\%)}} \\ & & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 1 covariate}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 3 covariates}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 5 covariates}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 7 covariates}} & run time \\ a & $n$ & method& 1 & 5 & 10 & 1 & 5 & 10 & 1 & 5 & 10 & 1 & 5 & 10 & (mins) \\ \colrule $\pi/2$ & 100 & GLRT & 7.0 & 13.2& 20.0 & 6.8 & 12.8& 16.6 & 5.6 & 8.2 & 12.4 & 8.2 & 11.2 & 15.0 & 83.10 \\ & & Wald & 2.3 & 6.7 & 12.1 & 2.5 & 8.5 & 14.3 & 3.0 & 9.8 & 15.8 & 3.1 & 10.5 & 17.7 & 0.28 \\ & & PLRT & 1.6 & 6.2 & 11.9 & 2.0 & 7.5 & 13.0 & 1.6 & 7.4 & 14.4 & 1.4 & 7.1 & 13.2 & 0.33 \\ & 400 & GLRT & \multicolumn{12}{c}{not feasible} & $>200.00$ \\ & & Wald & 1.7 & 6.6 & 10.4 & 2.0 & 7.4 & 14.8 & 2.9 & 8.9 & 14.9 & 3.0 & 9.5 & 15.6 & 0.48 \\ & & PLRT & 1.4 & 5.9 & 9.7 & 1.2 & 6.1 & 12.2 & 1.8 & 7.2 & 13.4 & 1.2 & 6.7 & 11.9 & 0.55 \\ $3\pi/4$ & 100 & GLRT & 5.2 & 10.0& 14.4 & 6.0 & 9.6 & 14.8 & 5.4 & 10.8& 16.2 & 10.4& 15.6 & 19.8 & 94.04 \\ & & Wald & 1.9 & 6.2 & 12.2 & 2.8 & 7.6 & 12.4 & 3.1 & 8.7 & 14.1 & 3.5 & 9.9 & 16.0 & 0.66 \\ & & PLRT & 2.3 & 6.2 & 12.6 & 1.9 & 6.9 & 11.0 & 1.9 & 6.5 & 13.1 & 1.7 & 7.6 & 12.6 & 0.71 \\ & 400 & GLRT & \multicolumn{12}{c}{not feasible} & $>250.00$\\ & & Wald & 1.1 & 5.8 & 11.6 & 1.3 & 7.3 & 13.2 & 1.6 & 7.5 & 13.6 & 1.5 & 8.0 & 14.1 & 0.87 \\ & & PLRT & 1.1 & 5.6 & 10.8 & 0.9 & 6.4 & 11.9 & 0.9 & 6.1 & 11.1 & 0.9 & 5.5 & 10.6 & 0.98 \\ \botrule \end{tabular}} \label{tab:exp1} \end{table} We also looked at the accuracy of the equivalent standard error (\ref{eq:se}) obtained by inverting the PLRT. The simulation standard deviations, average Wald-based standard errors, and average equivalent standard errors of $\hat \beta_1$ and $\hat \beta_2$ for estimating the two non-zero coefficients $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ are given in the left half of Table \ref{tab:exp3}. These results suggest that the PLRT provides both accurate Type 1 errors for testing zero coefficients and accurate equivalent standard errors for inferences on non-zero coefficients. \begin{table} \tbl{Simulation ``true" standard errors ($\times 10^{-2}$), average Wald-based standard errors ($\times 10^{-2}$), and average equivalent standard errors ($\times 10^{-2}$) obtained by inverting the PLRT for $\hat \beta_1$ and $\hat \beta_2$ for simulated continuous data with sinusoidal means (Section 4.1) and simulated binary data with non-canonical means (Section 4.2). $N = 1000$ simulations in each setting.} {\begin{tabular}{lllccclllcc}\toprule \multicolumn{5}{c}{\underline{\hspace{8mm}Continuous responses\hspace{8mm}}} & & \multicolumn{5}{c}{\underline{\hspace{18mm}Binary responses\hspace{18mm}}} \\ \vspace{-2mm} \\ model & $n$ & method & se$(\hat \beta_1)$ & se$(\hat \beta_2)$ && model & $n$ & method & se$(\hat \beta_1)$ & se$(\hat \beta_2)$ \\ \colrule $a=\pi/2$ & 100 & true & 0.98 & 1.92 && c-log-log & 350 & true & 3.43 & 6.91 \\ & & Wald & 0.93 & 1.84 && & & Wald & 3.08 & 6.07 \\ & & PLRT & 0.96 & 1.90 && & & PLRT & 3.15 & 6.24 \\ & 400 & true & 0.43 & 0.85 && & 700 & true & 2.30 & 4.53 \\ & & Wald & 0.42 & 0.84 && & & Wald & 2.20 & 4.36 \\ & & PLRT & 0.42 & 0.87 && & & PLRT & 2.21 & 4.41 \\ $a=3\pi/4$ & 100 & true & 0.62 & 1.25 && unimodal & 350 & true & 3.80 & 7.11 \\ & & Wald & 0.71 & 1.32 && & & Wald & 3.45 & 6.61 \\ & & PLRT & 0.64 & 1.29 && & & PLRT & 3.43 & 6.72 \\ & 400 & true & 0.29 & 0.58 && & 700 & true & 2.42 & 4.70 \\ & & Wald & 0.28 & 0.57 && & & Wald & 2.43 & 4.75 \\ & & PLRT & 0.30 & 0.57 && & & PLRT & 2.38 & 4.71 \\ & & & & && monotonic & 350 & true & 4.33 & 9.17 \\ & & & & && & & Wald & 3.96 & 8.14 \\ & & & & && & & PLRT & 4.10 & 8.56 \\ & & & & && & 700 & true & 2.67 & 5.67 \\ & & & & && & & Wald & 2.70 & 5.58 \\ & & & & && & & PLRT & 2.74 & 5.74 \\ \botrule \end{tabular}} \label{tab:exp3} \end{table} \subsection{Binary responses with non-canonical mean curves} We also compared the performance of the GLRT, Wald and PLRT approaches on binary data generated from the following three models: \begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=] \setlength\itemsep{0.1em} \item c-log-log: \hspace{13mm} $P(Y_i = 1 \mid \bm{x}_i) = 1 - \exp(-\exp(\bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta}))$ ; \item Unimodal: \hspace{10.5mm} $\mbox{logit}\left\{P(Y_i = 1 \mid \bm{x}_i) \right\}= -0.05(0.5 - 4 \bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta})^2 + 0.8$ ; \item Monotonic: \hspace{10mm} $ \mbox{logit}\left\{P(Y_i = 1 \mid \bm{x}_i)\right\} = \exp(5 \bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta} - 2)/ \{1+\exp(5 \bm{x}_i^T \bm{\beta} - 3)\} - 1.5 $; \end{enumerate} In each of the above settings, the sample size was set to either $n=350$ or $700$, corresponding to moderate and large sample sizes for binary data, respectively. The true index coefficients were set to $\bm{\beta} = (\beta_1,\beta_2,\beta_3,\beta_4)^T = (2,1,0,0)^T/\sqrt{5}$, and each covariate in $\bm{x}_i$ were simulated independently from a uniform distribution on $(-2,2)$. A total of $N=1000$ simulations were carried out for each setting. For each simulated dataset, a binary GSIM model was fit using either local linear estimation for the GLRT approach, or penalized truncated cubic splines for the Wald and PLRT approaches. Again, the bandwidth for the local linear approach was chosen via the default least-squares cross-validation method as implemented in the \texttt{np} package, while the smoothing parameter for penalized cubic splines was chosen via the default cross-validation method as implemented in the \texttt{mgcv} package. In keeping with the recommendation in \citet{Zhan:Huan:Lv:stat:2010}, the bandwidth for inferences in the GLRT approach was again modified to be $\hat h_{\rm{opt}} \times n^{-1/20}$, where $\hat h_{\rm{opt}}$ was the estimated optimal bandwidth for model fitting. For each dataset, 200 bootstraps were again used for the GLRT method due to its slow computation speeds (see average run times in Table \ref{tab:exp234}). \begin{table} \tbl{Binary responses with non-canonical mean models - Type 1 error rates (\%) and average run times (minutes) for simultaneously dropping 1 and 2 covariates using the GLRT, Wald and PLRT approaches. Sample sizes $n = 350$ and $700$. $N=1000$ simulations in each setting.} {\begin{tabular}{lllrrrrrrr}\toprule & & & \multicolumn{6}{c}{\underline{Nominal significance levels (\%)}} \\ & & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 1 covariate}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Drop 2 covariates}} & run time \\ model & $n$ & method & 1 & 5 & 10 & 1 & 5 & 10 & (mins) \\ \colrule c-log-log & 350 & GLRT & 1.8 & 10.0 & 21.0 & 2.2 & 11.6 & 22.0 & 105.93 \\ & & Wald & 2.7 & 8.2 & 12.5 & 3.3 & 10.7 & 16.0 & 0.06 \\ & & PLRT & 2.1 & 6.4 & 11.3 & 1.3 & 7.7 & 12.8 & 0.10 \\ & 700 & GLRT & 1.4 & 6.4 & 14.4 & 1.4 & 10.0 & 19.0 & 157.00 \\ & & Wald & 2.0 & 5.8 & 10.6 & 1.7 & 6.7 & 11.9 & 0.08 \\ & & PLRT & 1.2 & 4.9 & 9.7 & 1.3 & 5.6 & 10.9 & 0.13 \\ unimodal & 350 & GLRT & 7.8 & 17.4 & 21.8 & 7.8 & 15.4 & 21.2 & 75.02 \\ & & Wald & 2.3 & 6.9 & 13.3 & 2.5 & 7.4 & 13.4 & 0.07 \\ & & PLRT & 1.7 & 6.5 & 12.8 & 1.6 & 6.8 & 11.9 & 0.20 \\ & 700 & GLRT & 15.6& 18.2 & 20.2 & 12.8& 14.4 & 16.2 & 180.68 \\ & & Wald & 1.1 & 5.8 & 10.4 & 1.2 & 4.9 & 10.7 & 0.10 \\ & & PLRT & 1.0 & 5.6 & 10.3 & 1.1 & 4.8 & 9.9 & 0.24 \\ monotonic & 350 & GLRT & 2.0 & 6.8 & 12.2 & 1.8 & 8.2 & 14.0 & 68.05 \\ & & Wald & 2.5 & 8.1 & 15.1 & 3.8 & 10.1 & 16.0 & 0.08 \\ & & PLRT & 1.7 & 6.7 & 12.5 & 2.6 & 7.3 & 13.2 & 0.19 \\ & 700 & GLRT & 5.6 & 7.6 & 12.8 & 4.6 & 9.6 & 13.4 & 154.60 \\ & & Wald & 1.6 & 7.6 & 13.7 & 1.8 & 8.4 & 13.7 & 0.12 \\ & & PLRT & 1.6 & 6.9 & 12.9 & 1.6 & 7.0 & 11.9 & 0.29 \\ \botrule \end{tabular}} \label{tab:exp234} \end{table} Table \ref{tab:exp234} displays the Type 1 error rates at nominal 1\%, 5\% and 10\% levels for simultaneously dropping 1 and 2 zero index coefficients using the GLRT, Wald test and the proposed PLRT approach from Proposition \ref{prop:LRT}. The results demonstrate that the proposed PLRT exhibits substantially less biased Type 1 error rates than those of the GLRT and Wald tests for all three mean models and for both sample sizes. The Wald test and PLRT both approach their nominal rates as the sample size increases, but the GLRT actually diverges. The particularly poor performance of the GLRT approach reflects the fact that it was designed for single-index models with additive errors and constant variance -- here, even bootstrapping the test statistic does not provide a good enough approximation to the null distribution when the data are binary. Also displayed in Table \ref{tab:exp234} are the average computation times for simultaneously dropping 2 covariates (i.e., $\beta_3 = \beta_4 = 0$) for each synthetic dataset using each of the three methods. We again see that the computation times for the PLRT approach are comparable to that of the simple plug-in Wald test, but over two orders of magnitude faster than the GLRT approach, which took over 68 minutes to analyze a single dataset of sample size $n=350$ and over 154 minutes to analyze a single dataset of sample size $n=700$. These computation times make the GLRT approach unusable in practice. In contrast, the proposed PLRT is both more accurate and computationally more efficient, making it more appealing to use in practice. Finally, we also looked at the accuracy of the equivalent standard errors (\ref{eq:se}) for binary GSIMs obtained by inverting the PLRT. The simulation standard deviations, average Wald-based standard errors, and average equivalent standard errors of $\hat \beta_1$ and $\hat \beta_2$ for estimating the two non-zero coefficients $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ are given in the right half of Table \ref{tab:exp3}. These results again suggest that the PLRT provides both accurate Type 1 errors for testing zero coefficients and accurate equivalent standard errors for inferences on non-zero coefficients. \section{Data analysis example} \label{s4} We apply the proposed PLRT method to make inferences on the relationship between the prevalence of bile duct hyperplasia in rats and 5 covariates, namely, gender, dose level, initial weight, cage position and age at death. The response is a binary variable, with $y = 1$ and $y = 0$ denoting the presence and absence of nonlethal lesions in the bile duct at death, respectively. The dataset consists of 319 samples and comes from \citet{Dinse:1984}. \citet[Section 6.4.1]{Green:1994} analyze the subset of male rats using a binary GSIM implemented via natural cubic splines with a fixed smoothing parameter. However, no standard errors or inferences for the index coefficients are provided. Here, we give a full analysis of the dataset by fitting a binary GSIM, with smoothing parameter chosen automatically by the \texttt{gam} function, computing standard errors and assessing the relative importance of each covariate. The R code for carrying out these calculations is provided in the Online Supplement. Estimated index coefficients from the fitted model, along with standard errors and $p$-values based on both the PLRT and the usual plug-in estimator of variance, are displayed in Table \ref{tab:rat}. We see that inferences based on the two methods are qualitatively different here. For example, the PLRT suggests that dose level is a more important predictor than gender, but Wald-tests suggest the opposite. Age at death is not significant according to the Wald-test, but it is highly significant according to the PLRT. Because the PLRT exhibits substantially less bias in our simulations, we argue that they should be more reliable here. A logistic regression model was also fit to the data for comparison, with the corresponding estimates, standard errors and $p$-values displayed in Table \ref{tab:rat}. From Figure~\ref{fig:rat}, we find that the logistic model may be inadequate in capturing the functional relationship between the covariates and the tumour prevalence of rats. Specifically, the estimated mean curves obtained from the nonparametric GSIM suggest that the probability of tumour presence may increase up to some threshold but stays comparatively flat thereafter. This trend is not captured by the logistic model. \begin{table} \tbl{Rats tumour prevalence data analysis -- estimated coefficients, standard errors (se) and $p$-values based on profile likelihood ratio tests (PLRT) and Wald tests using plug-in estimator of variance.} {\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrrr}\toprule & \multicolumn{5}{c}{\underline{Generalized single-index model}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Logistic regression}} \\ & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\underline{\hspace{3mm} PLRT\hspace{3mm}}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\underline{\hspace{3mm}Wald\hspace{3mm}}} \\ Covariate & $\hat{\beta}$ & se & $p$ & se & $p$ & $\hat{\beta}$ & se & $p$ \\ \colrule Gender & 0.945 & 0.458 & 0.040 & 0.054 & $<$0.001 & 1.127 & 0.431 & 0.009 \\ Dose level & 0.258 & 0.090 & 0.005 & 0.126 & 0.042 & 0.152 & 0.082 & 0.061 \\ Initial weight & 0.002 & 0.006 & 0.707 & 0.016 & 0.880 & -0.003 & 0.009 & 0.753 \\ Cage position & 0.200 & 0.099 & 0.044 & 0.129 & 0.121 & 0.131 & 0.097 & 0.177 \\ Age at death & -0.034& 0.009 & $<$0.001 & 0.018 & 0.061 & -0.024 & 0.007 & 0.001 \\ \botrule \end{tabular}} \label{tab:rat} \end{table} \begin{figure} \center \includegraphics[scale = 0.6, trim={0 10 0 50}, clip]{rat2.eps} \vspace{-3mm} \caption{Scatterplot (with jitter) of tumour presence data, with fitted mean curves using generalized single-index (lines) and logistic regression (+ signs) models, for male (blue) and female (red) rats.} \label{fig:rat} \end{figure} \section{Discussion} The proposed PLRT approach is demonstrated to be both conceptually and computationally simple to implement, invariant to identifiability constraints, and can exhibit substantially less bias than standard Wald tests and the recently proposed GLRT method for inferences on the index parameters in GSIMs. Moreover, the computational times for the PLRT are comparable to the simple plug-in Wald test, and over two orders of magnitude faster than the GLRT. We believe that the accuracy of the PLRT can be further improved upon using Bartlett-type corrections. The method can also be extended to partially linear single-index models. These are topics for future research. \vspace{-1mm} \section{Acknowledgements} \vspace{-3mm} We thank Bret Hanlon, Mark Hannay, the associate editor and two anonymous referees for comments and suggestions that improved the paper. \vspace{-2mm} \section{Disclosure statement} \vspace{-3mm} No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. \vspace{-2mm} \section{Supplemental material} \label{SM} \vspace{-3mm} The Online supplement includes R code, another data analysis example and a proof of Proposition 1. \vspace{-2mm}
\section{Transport properties} \label{apppendixA} Fig.~\ref{Fig5}(a) shows temperature dependence of the in-plane resistivity $\rho(T)$ for \BKFAx. Resistivity of the undoped and underdoped compounds shows a sharp drop at $T_{SDW}$ and a metallic behavior below $T_{SDW}$. For the superconducting compounds, such as BK40, $\rho(T)$ shows a sharp SC transition. Fig.~\ref{Fig5}(b) shows the magnetic susceptibility as a function of temperature, measured in a 10~Oe magnetic field. $T_c$ can be defined by the onset of the zero-field-cooling diamagnetic susceptibility. Similarly, Fig.~\ref{Fig5}(c) and Fig.~\ref{Fig5}(d) display the transport properties in \BFCAx\ and \BFAPx, respectively. \begin{figure}[tbh] \includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig5} \caption{(Color online) Temperature dependence of (a) the in-plane resistivity and (b) the magnetic susceptibility in \BKFAx. (c) Temperature dependence of the in-plane resistivity in \BFCAx. (d) Temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility in \BFAPx.} \label{Fig5} \end{figure}
\section{Introduction} \label{s:intro} Fix a number field $K$ with ring of integers $\cO_K$, as well as a finite set $S$ of places of $K$ that contains the archimedean places. Denote by $\cO_{K,S}$ the corresponding ring of $S$-integers. The purpose of this short note is to introduce a qualitative conjecture, in the spirit of {\sc Campana}, to the effect that certain subsets of rational points on a variety over $K$ or a Deligne--Mumford stack over $\cO_{K,S}$ cannot be Zariski dense; see Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}. This conjecture interpolates, in a way that we make precise, between {\sc Lang}'s conjecture for rational points on varieties over $K$ of general type, and the conjecture of {\sc Lang} and {\sc Vojta} that asserts that $\cO_{K,S}$-points on a variety of logarithmic general type are not Zariski-dense. One might thus expect our conjecture to follow from {\sc Vojta}'s quantitative conjecture on integral points; we show this is the case. As an application we show, assuming Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}, that for a fixed positive integer $g$, there is an integer $m_0$ such that, for any $m > m_0$, no principally polarized abelian variety $A/K$ of dimension $g$ with semistable reduction outside of $S$ has full level-$m$ structure. Let $\mathscr{X} \to \Spec \cO_{K,S}$ be a smooth proper morphism from a scheme or Deligne--Mumford stack, and let $\mathscr{D}$ be a fiber-wise normal crossings divisor on $\mathscr{X}$. We say that $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ is a \defi{normal crossings model} of its generic fiber $(X,D)$. Write $\mathscr{D} = \sum_i \mathscr{D}_i$ and let $D_i$ be the generic fiber of $\mathscr{D}_i$. For each $D_i$ appearing in $D$, choose $0\leq \epsilon_i \leq 1$; write $\vec\epsilon = (\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2,\dots)$, $D_{\vec\epsilon} = \sum_i\epsilon_iD_i$, and $\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon} = \sum_i\epsilon_i\mathscr{D}_i$. Given a maximal ideal $q$ of $\cO_{K,S}$ with localization $\cO_{K,q}$, and a point $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,q})$, we denote by $n_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x)$ the intersection multiplicity of $x$ and $\mathscr{D}_i$, and for real numbers $a_i$, we define $n_q(\sum_i a_i \mathscr{D}_i,x)$ as $\sum_i a_in_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x)$; see \S\ref{s:IntMults} for details. \begin{definition} \label{def:Campana} A point $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})$ is called an \defi{$\vec\epsilon$-Campana point} of $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ if for every maximal ideal $q\subset\cO_{K,S}$ such that $n_q(\mathscr{D},x) > 0$ we have $n_q(\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon},x) \geq 1$. We write $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ for the set of $\vec\epsilon$-Campana points of $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$. \end{definition} \begin{conjecture}[$\vec\epsilon$-Campana Conjecture] \label{conj:Campana} If $K_X + \sum(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i$ is big, then $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ is not Zariski-dense in $X$. \end{conjecture} \begin{remark} {\sc Campana} stated the case of Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana} for curves in~\cite[Conjecture~4.5 and Remark~4.6]{Campana-surfaces}. {\sc Abramovich} gave a higher dimensional statement of it in~\cite[Conjecture~2.4.19]{A-Clay}. Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana} is a streamlined version of this generalization. \end{remark} \begin{remark} Setting $\epsilon_i = 1$ for all $i$ in Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}, the condition $n_q(\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon},x) \geq 1$ is automatically satisfied for all rational points and all $q$. Also $K_X + \sum(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i = K_X$, hence we recover {\sc Lang}'s conjecture for rational points on varieties of general type. At the other end of the spectrum, setting all the $\epsilon_i = 0$, the condition $n_q(\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon},x) \geq 1$ can only be satisfied if $n_q(\mathscr{D},x) = 0$ at all $q\subset\cO_{K,S}$, so $x$ is $S$-integral on $\cX \smallsetminus \cD$. Hence we get the {\sc Lang--Vojta} conjecture: $S$-integral points on a variety of logarithmic general type are not Zariski-dense. We show in \S\ref{s:Vojta} that Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana} follows from {\sc Vojta}'s conjecture. \end{remark} \subsection{Application} We give an application of Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}, in the spirit of our recent work~\cite{Alevels,AV-Campana-Vojta}. Recall that, for a positive integer $m$, a \defi{full level}-$m$ structure on an abelian variety $A/K$ of dimension $g$ is an isomorphism of group schemes on the $m$-torsion subgroup \begin{equation} \label{eq:levelstructure} \phi\colon A[m] \,\xrightarrow{\ \sim\ }\, (\ZZ/m\ZZ)^g \times (\mu_{m})^g. \end{equation} \begin{theorem} \label{thm:main} Let $K$ be a number field, $S$ a finite set of places, and let $g$ be a positive integer. Assume Conjecture \ref{conj:Campana}. Then there is an integer $m_0$ such that, for any $m > m_0$, no principally polarized abelian variety $A/K$ of dimension $g$ with semistable reduction outside $S$ has full level-$m$ structure. \end{theorem} \begin{remark} In~\cite{AV-Campana-Vojta}, we prove a version of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} without a semistability assumption on the abelian variety $A$, at the cost of assuming {\sc Vojta}'s conjecture. \end{remark} The idea behind Theorem~\ref{thm:main} is the following. Let $({\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g)_K$ denote the moduli stack parametrizing principally polarized abelian varieties of dimension $g$ over $K$. We show in Proposition~\ref{prop:inCampana} that for $\epsilon > 0$ and $\vec\epsilon = (\epsilon,\epsilon,\dots)$, if $X \subseteq ({\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g)_K$ is closed, then the set $X(K,S)_{\geq m_0}$ of $K$-rational points of $X$ corresponding to abelian varieties $A/K$ admitting full level-$m$ structure for some $m \geq m_0$ and having semistable reduction outside of $S$ lies inside an $\vec\epsilon$-Campana set, for $m_0 \gg 0$. We then use a result on logarithmic hyperbolicity~\cite[Theorem~1.6]{Alevels} to verify the hypothesis of Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana} in this case, and a Noetherian induction argument to conclude the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}. \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main}} \subsection{Moduli spaces and toroidal compactifications} We follow the notation of~\cite[\S4]{AV-Campana-Vojta}, working over $\Spec \ZZ$: \medskip \begin{tabular}{ll} ${\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g \subset {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g$ & a toroidal compactification of the moduli \emph{stack} of \\ & principally polarized abelian varieties of dimension $g$\\[1mm] $\cA_g \subset {\overline{\mathcal{A}}}_g$ & the resulting compactification of the moduli \emph{space} of \\ & principally polarized abelian varieties of dimension $g$\\[1mm] \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{ll} ${\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]} \subset {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$ & a compatible toroidal compactification of the moduli \emph{stack} of \\ & principally polarized abelian varieties of dimension $g$\\ & with full level-$m$ structure\\[1mm] $\cA_g^{[m]} \subset {\overline{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]}$ & the resulting compactification of the moduli space of \\ & principally polarized abelian varieties of dimension $g$\\ & with full level-$m$ structure\\[1mm] \end{tabular} \medskip As noted in~\cite{AV-Campana-Vojta}, we may use a construction by {\sc Faltings} and {\sc Chai}~\cite{Faltings-Chai} of the stack ${\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$, which is a priori smooth over $\Spec \ZZ[1/m,\zeta_m]$, where $\zeta_m$ is a primitive $m$-th root of unity, to obtain a stack we denote by $({\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]})_{\ZZ[1/m]}$, smooth over $\ZZ[1/m]$. This stack is extended over all of $\Spec \ZZ$ by defining ${\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$ as the normalization of ${\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g$ in $({\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]})_{\ZZ[1/m]}$. Unfortunately, even the interior of this stack over primes dividing $m$ does not have a modular interpretation. See, however, the results of {\sc Madapusi Pera} in \cite[Appendix A]{AV-Campana-Vojta}. \subsection{Semistability and integrality} We require the following well-known statement essentially contained in \cite{Faltings-Chai}. \begin{proposition} \label{Prop:integrality} Let $K$ be a number field, $S$ a finite set of places. Let $A/K$ be a principally polarized abelian variety with full level-$m$ structure, and with semistable reduction outside of $S$. Then the point $x_m\colon\Spec K \to {\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]}$ associated to $A$ extends to an integral point $\xi_m\colon\Spec \cO_{K,S} \to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} First consider the case $m=1$. By \cite[Theorem IV.5.7(5)]{Faltings-Chai} the extension exists if and only if, for every prime $q\not\in S$ and for any strictly henselization $V$ of $\cO_{K,q}$ with valuation $v$, the bimultiplicative form $v\circ b$ corresponds to a point of a cone only depending on $q$. (Here $b$ is the symmetric bimultiplicative form associated to the degeneration of $A$ at $q$ by the theory of degenerations, as indicated in \cite[Proposition IV.5.1]{Faltings-Chai}.) This condition is automatic for a Dedekind domain such as $\cO_{K,q}$, see \cite[Remark IV.5.3]{Faltings-Chai}, hence our proposition holds in case $m=1$. To prove the statement in general, consider the point $x\colon \Spec K \to {\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g$ obtained by composing $x_m$ with ${\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]} \to {\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g$. Since the proposition holds for $m=1$, the point $x$ extends to $\xi\colon \Spec \cO_{K,S} \to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g$. Since ${\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]} \to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g$ is representable and finite, the stack $Z:=\Spec \cO_{K,S} \times_{{\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g} {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$, where the projection on the left is $\xi$, is in fact a scheme finite over $\Spec \cO_{K,S}$. The point $x_m$ defines a point $\Spec K \to Z$, which extends to a point $\Spec \cO_{K,S} \to Z$ by the valuative criterion for properness. Composing with the projection $Z \to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$ gives the desired point $\xi_m$. \end{proof} \subsection{Intersection multiplicities} \label{s:IntMults} Let $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ be a normal crossings model, and let $I_{\mathscr{D}_i}$ denote the ideal of $\mathscr{D}_i$. Given a maximal ideal $q$ of $\cO_{K,S}$ with localization $\cO_{K,q}$, and a point $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,q})$, define $n_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x)$ through the equality of ideals in $\cO_{K,q}$ \[ I_{\mathscr{D}_i}\big\|_x = q^{n_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x)}. \] We call $n_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x)$ the intersection multiplicity of $x$ and $\mathscr{D}_i$. \subsection{Notation for substacks} Let $X \subseteq ({\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g)_K$ be a closed substack, let $X'\to X$ be a resolution of singularities, $X' \subset \overline X'$ a smooth compactification with $D = \overline X' \smallsetminus X'$ a normal crossings divisor. Assume that the rational map $f\colon{\overline{X}}' \to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g$ is a morphism. Let $X'_m = X'\times_{{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g}{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]}$, and let ${\overline{X}}'_m \to{\overline{X}}'\times_{{\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g} {\overline{\mathcal{A}}}_g^{[m]}$ be a resolution of singularities with projections $\pi_m^X\colon {\overline{X}}'_m\to \overline{X}'$ and $f_m\colon {\overline{X}}'_m\to {\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g^{[m]}$. We now spread these objects over $\cO_{K,S}$ for a suitable finite set of places $S$ containing the archimedean places. Let $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ be a normal crossings model of $({\overline{X}}',D)$ over $\Spec \cO_{K,S}$. As above, write $\mathscr{D} = \sum_i \mathscr{D}_i$. Such a model exists, even for Deligne--Mumford stacks, by \cite[Proposition~2.2]{Olsson}. To avoid clutter, in the special case when $\vec\epsilon = (\epsilon,\epsilon,\dots)$, an $\vec\epsilon$-Campana point of $\mathscr{X}$ shall be called an $\epsilon$-Campana point, and we write $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\epsilon\mathscr{D}}$ for the set of $\epsilon$-Campana points of $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$. \subsection{Levels and Campana points} Let $X(K,S)_{[m]}$ be the set of $K$-rational points of $X$ corresponding to principally polarized abelian varieties $A/K$ with semistable reduction outside $S$, admitting full level-$m$ structure. Define \begin{equation} \label{eq:toinfty} X(K,S)_{\geq m_0} := \bigcup_{m \geq m_0} X(K,S)_{[m]}. \end{equation} \begin{proposition} \label{prop:inCampana} Fix $\epsilon > 0$. Then there exists $m_0$ such that $X(K,S)_{\geq m_0}$ is contained in the set $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\epsilon\mathscr{D}}$ of $\epsilon$-Campana points of $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $x_m \in X'_m(K)$, and write $\pi_m(x_m) =: x$ for its image in ${\overline{X}}'(K)$. Let $q \notin S$ be a finite place of $K$, and let $\cO_{K,q}$ be the corresponding local ring. Let $\xi\colon \Spec\cO_{K,q} \to {\overline{X}}'$ and $\xi_m\colon \Spec\cO_{K,q} \to {\overline{X}}'_m$ be the extensions of $x$ and $x_m$ to $\Spec \cO_{K,q}$, which exist by Proposition \ref{Prop:integrality}. Write $E$ for the boundary divisors of $\left({\overline{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}}_g\right)_K$; on ${\overline{X}}'$ we have an equality of divisors \[ f^E = \sum a_iD_i, \] where each $a_i>0$; see \cite[Equation (4.3)]{Alevels}. It follows from~\cite[Proposition~4.3]{AV-Campana-Vojta} that there exists an integer $M$ depending only on $g$ such that \[ n_q(\mathscr{D},x) \geq \frac{m}{M\cdot\max\{a_i\}}. \] We note that in our case we can take $M = 1$ because $x$ and $x_m$ could be extended to $\cO_{K,q}$-points, as the proof of~\cite[Proposition~4.3]{AV-Campana-Vojta} shows. Thus, if $m \geq \max\{a_i\}/\epsilon$, the point $x \in {\overline{X}}'(K)$ is an $\epsilon$-Campana point. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}] We proceed by Noetherian induction. For each integer $i \geq 1$, let \[ W_i = \overline{{\widetilde{\mathcal{A}}}_g(K)_{\geq i}}. \] Note that $W_i$ is a closed subset of $\cA_g$, and that $W_i \supseteq W_{i+1}$ for every $i$. The chain of $W_i$ must stabilize by the Noetherian property of the Zariski topology of $\cA_g$. Say $W_n = W_{n+1} = \cdots$. We claim that $W_n$ has dimension $\leq 0$. Suppose not, and let $X \subseteq W_n$ be an irreducible component of positive dimension. Fix $\epsilon > 0$ so that $K_X + (1 - \epsilon)D$ is big: such an $\epsilon$ exists by~\cite[Corollary~1.7]{Alevels}. Hence the hypothesis of Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana} holds (with all $\epsilon_i$ equal to $\epsilon$.) By Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}, the set $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\epsilon\mathscr{D}}$ of $\epsilon$-Campana points is not Zariski dense in $X$. On the other hand, Proposition~\ref{prop:inCampana} shows there is an integer $m_0$ such that $X(K,S)_{\geq m_0} \subseteq \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\epsilon\mathscr{D}}$, from which is follows that $X(K,S)_{\geq m_0}$ is not Zariski-dense in $X$. Thus $W_{m_0}$, which equals $W_n$, does not contain $X$, and thus $X$ is not an irreducible component after all. This proves that $\dim W_n \leq 0$. Finally, if $W_n$ is a finite set of points, then we can apply the {\sc Mordell--Weil} theorem to conclude that $W_n(K)_{[m]} = \emptyset$ for all $m \gg 0$. \end{proof} \section{Vojta's conjecture and Campana points} \label{s:Vojta} \subsection{Counting functions for integral points} Let $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ be a normal crossings model. For $q \in \cO_{K,S}$, we denote by $\kappa(q)$ the residue field of the associated local ring. Following {\sc Vojta}~\cite[p.~1106]{VojtaABC}, for $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})$, define the \defi{counting function} \begin{equation} \label{eq:N} N(D,x) = \sum_{q \in \Spec\cO_{K,S}} n_q(\mathscr{D},x) \log \|\kappa(q)\|, \end{equation} as well as the \defi{truncated counting function} \begin{equation} \label{eq:N1} N^{(1)}(D,x) = \sum_{\substack{q \in \Spec\cO_{K,S} \\ n_q(\mathscr{D},x)>0}} \log \|\kappa(q)\|. \end{equation} The quantities on the right hand sides of~\eqref{eq:N} and~\eqref{eq:N1} depend on the model $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ and the finite set $S$ only up to functions bounded on $X(\cO_{K,S})$. Since we are interested in these quantities only up to such functions, the notation $N(D,x)$ and $N^{(1)}(D,x)$ does not reflect the model $(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{D})$ or the finite set $S$. \subsection{Vojta's conjecture for integral points} For a smooth proper Deligne--Mumford stack $\mathscr{X} \to \Spec \cO_{K,S}$ over the ring of $S$-integers $\cO_{K,S}$ of a number field $K$, we write $X = \mathscr{X}_K$ for the generic fiber, which we assume is irreducible, and $\underline{X}$ for the coarse moduli space of $X$. Similarly, for a normal crossings divisor $\mathscr{D}$ of $\mathscr{X}$, we write $D$ for its generic fiber. For a divisor $H$ on $\underline{X}$, we denote by $h_H(x)$ the Weil height of $x$ with respect to $H$, which is well-defined up to a bounded function on $\underline{X}(\overline{K})$. If $H$ is only a divisor on $X$, then some positive integer multiple $rH$ descends to $\underline{X}$. Given a point $x \in X(\overline{K})$ we define $h_H(x) = \frac{1}{r} h_{rH} (\underline{x})$, where $\underline{x}$ is the image of $x$ in $\underline{X}(\overline{K})$. The following is a version of Vojta's conjecture for stacks, applied to integral points: \begin{conjecture} \label{conj:Vojta} Let $\mathscr{X}\to \Spec \cO_{K,S}$, $X$, $\underline{X}$, and $D$ be as above. Suppose that $\underline{X}$ is projective, and let $H$ be a big line bundle on it. Fix $\delta>0$. Then there is a proper Zariski-closed subset $Z \subset X$ containing $D$ such that \[ N^{(1)}(D,x) \geq h_{K_X(D)}(x)- \delta h_H(x) - O(1) \] for all $x\in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})\smallsetminus Z(K)$. \end{conjecture} In \cite{AV-Campana-Vojta} we showed that a stronger conjecture, which applies to points $x\in X(\overline K)$ with $[K(x):K]$ bounded, follows from Vojta's original conjecture for schemes \cite{VojtaABC}. Here we have stated only its outcome for integral points. \subsection{From Vojta's conjecture to Conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}} \begin{lemma} \label{lem:Ntoh} If $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})$ is an $\vec\epsilon$-Campana point, then \[ N^{(1)}(D,x) \leq N(D_{\vec\epsilon},x) \leq h_{D_{\vec\epsilon}}(x) + O(1). \] \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ is an $\vec\epsilon$-Campana point, and $n_q(\mathscr{D},x) > 0$, then we have \[ \sum_i\epsilon_i\cdot n_q(\mathscr{D}_i,x) = n_q(\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon},x) \geq 1. \] The definition~\eqref{eq:N1} of $N^{(1)}(D,x)$ gives \begin{align} N^{(1)}(D,x) &= \sum_{n_q(\mathscr{D},x) > 0} \log \|\kappa(q)\|\\ &\leq\sum_{n_q(\mathscr{D},x) > 0} n_q(\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon},x) \log \|\kappa(q)\|\\ &= N(D_{\vec\epsilon},x) \\ &\leq h_{D_{\vec\epsilon}}(x) + O(1), \end{align*} where the last inequality follows as in~\cite[p.~1113]{VojtaABC} or~\cite[Theorem~B.8.1(e)]{HindrySilverman}. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} \label{cor:notdense} {\sc Vojta}'s conjecture~\ref{conj:Vojta} implies the $\vec\epsilon$-Campana conjecture~\ref{conj:Campana}. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Since the divisor $K_X + \sum_i(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i$ is big, we may choose an ample $\QQ$-divisor $H$ such that $K_X + \sum_i(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i - H$ is effective. Let $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ be an $\vec\epsilon$-Campana point. Applying Conjecture~\ref{conj:Vojta}, we obtain a proper Zariski closed subset $\mathscr{Z} \subset \mathscr{X}$ such that if $x \notin \mathscr{Z}$, the inequality \[ N^{(1)}(D,x) \geq h_{K_X(D)}(x)- \delta h_H(x) - O(1) \] holds. By Lemma~\ref{lem:Ntoh}, we may replace the left hand side with $h_{D_{\vec\epsilon}}(x) + O(1)$ to get \[ h_{D_{\vec\epsilon}}(x) + O(1) \geq h_{K_X(D)}(x)- \delta h_H(x) - O(1). \] This implies that \[ O(1) \geq h_{K_X\left(\sum_i(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i\right)}(x)- \delta h_H(x). \] By our choice of $H$, we have \[ O(1) \geq (1 - \delta)h_{K_X\left(\sum_i(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i\right)}(x). \] Since $K_X + \sum_i(1 - \epsilon_i)D_i$ is big, the set of $x \in \mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ that avoid $\mathscr{Z}$ is finite~\cite[Theorem~B.3.2(g)]{HindrySilverman}. Since $\mathscr{Z}$ is a proper Zariski-closed set, we conclude that the set $\mathscr{X}(\cO_{K,S})_{\mathscr{D}_{\vec\epsilon}}$ of $\vec\epsilon$-Campana points is not Zariski-dense in $X$. \end{proof} \bibliographystyle{plain}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} Massive stars ($M_{\star} > 8\,M_{\odot}$) have a very short pre-main-sequence phase \citep[$\sim$10$^{4}$ -- a few $\times$ 10$^{5}$\,years, e.g.][]{davies_2011,mottram_2011}, meaning that they spend the entirety of their formation stages deeply embedded in their parent molecular clouds. Such short formation timescales also mean that there are far fewer examples of young, massive stars when compared with their lower mass counterparts. This inherent scarcity means that young massive stars are, on average, located in much more distant star forming regions ($>1$\,kpc). All of these factors contribute to the extreme difficulty of observing young massive stars directly. As a result, their formation mechanisms are poorly understood. \smallskip In particular, the process by which young massive stars accrete their high masses is not known. There is little time to accumulate such large masses during their short formation timescales, and accretion onto the central object may be halted or substantially reduced by energetic feedback processes (such as high radiation pressures, strong stellar winds and ionising radiation). Models have suggested that channelling material through a circumstellar accretion disc can overcome these feedback mechanisms \citep[e.g.][]{yorke_2002, krumholz_2009, kuiper_2010, kuiper_2011, harries_2014, klassen_2016}. \smallskip Observationally, however, it is not yet clear whether circumstellar accretion discs surround massive young stellar objects (MYSOs) of all masses and evolutionary stages. In particular, convincing candidates for Keplerian discs around embedded O-type (proto)stars are proving to be particularly elusive \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{cesaroni_2007,wang_2012,beltran_2016}. Infrared (IR) interferometry \citep{kraus_2010, boley_2013} and high-resolution near-infrared spectroscopy \citep{bik_2004, davies_2010, wheelwright_2010, ilee_2013, ilee_2014} have revealed discs on scales of less than $1000$\,au around MYSOs, but these techniques are limited to relatively evolved, IR-bright objects. Longer-wavelength interferometric observations allow access to the circum(proto)stellar environments of less evolved, more embedded MYSOs, but often probe larger spatial scales. In many cases, velocity gradients detected in millimetre and centimetre-wavelength molecular line observations trace `toroids' --- large-scale (1000s to $\gtrsim$10,000\,au), massive ($\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{toroid}} \ge \mathrm{M}_{\star}$), non-equilibrium rotating structures \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{cesaroni_2005_apss,cesaroni_2006,cesaroni_2007,beuther_2008,beltran_2011,cesaroni_2011,johnston_2014}. The clustered nature of massive star formation also complicates the search for accretion disc candidates, as multiplicity and rotation can both produce velocity gradients \citep[c.f.][]{patel_2005,brogan_2007,comito_2007}, and very high angular resolution observations are required to distinguish between these scenarios. \smallskip Searching for small-scale Keplerian accretion discs around embedded distant MYSOs requires sub-arcsecond-resolution observations with (sub)millimetre interferometers. Recent studies of this type have yielded a handful of candidate Keplerian discs around O-type (proto)stars \citep{jimenez-serra_2012,qiu_2012,wang_2012,hunter_2014,johnston_2015,zapata_2015}, as well as adding to the sample of good candidates for Keplerian discs around B-type (proto)stars \citep[e.g.][]{sanchez_2013,beltran_2014,cesaroni_2014}. \smallskip In this paper, we report sub-arcsecond resolution Submillimeter Array (SMA) observations of a candidate disc around a high-mass (proto)star, G11.92--0.61 MM1 (hereafter MM1), identified in the course of our studies of GLIMPSE Extended Green Objects \citep[EGOS;][]{cyganowski_2008}. MM1 is one of three compact millimetre continuum cores detected in thermal dust emission in our initial SMA 1.3\,mm observations of the EGO G11.92--0.61 \citep[][resolution $\sim$2.4\arcsec]{cyganowski_2011sma}, which is located in an infrared dark cloud (IRDC) $\sim$1\arcmin\/ SE of the more evolved massive star-forming region \emph{IRAS} 18110--1854. The three members of the G11.92--0.61 (proto)cluster are only resolved at (sub)millimetre and longer wavelengths \citep{cyganowski_2011sma,cyganowski_2014}; the total luminosity of the region is $\sim$10$^{4}$$L_\odot$ \citep{cyganowski_2011sma,moscadelli_2016}. MM1 exhibits copious molecular line emission from hot-core molecules \citep{cyganowski_2011sma, cyganowski_2014} and is coincident with a 6.7 GHz Class II CH$_{3}$OH maser \citep{cyganowski_2009} and strong H$_{2}$O masers \citep{hofner_1996,breen_2011,sato_2014,moscadelli_2016}, all indicative of the presence of a massive (proto)star. MM1 also has a weak ($\lesssim$1\,mJy) cm-wavelength counterpart, CM1, first detected at 1.3\,cm by \citet{cyganowski_2011vla,cyganowski_2014} and recently also at 4.8 and 2.3\,cm by \citet{moscadelli_2016} as part of a Very Large Array (VLA) survey of BeSSeL H$_{2}$O maser sources. \smallskip \citet{cyganowski_2011sma} detected a single dominant bipolar molecular outflow towards the G11.92--0.61 millimetre (proto)cluster, driven by MM1 and traced by well-collimated, high-velocity $^{12}$CO(2--1) and HCO$^{+}$(1--0) emission. Near-infrared H$_{2}$ emission \citep{lee_2012,lee_2013} and 44\,GHz Class I CH$_{3}$OH masers \citep{cyganowski_2009} also trace shocked outflow gas. On small ($< 1000$\,au) scales, the H$_{2}$O maser proper motions indicate a collimated NE-SW flow, consistent with the orientation of the large-scale molecular outflow \citep{cyganowski_2011sma, cyganowski_2014, moscadelli_2016}. In our $\sim$2.4\arcsec-resolution SMA data, the compact, hot-core molecular line emission associated with MM1 displays a velocity gradient oriented roughly perpendicular to the outflow axis, leading \citet{cyganowski_2011sma} to suggest an unresolved disc as a possible explanation, but requiring higher angular resolution data for confirmation. \smallskip In this paper, we present sub-arcsecond-resolution line and continuum observations of G11.92-0.61 obtained with the highest angular resolution possible with the SMA at 1.3 mm. Together with new VLA subarcsecond-resolution centimetre continuum observations, we use the SMA data to study the molecular gas kinematics of MM1 and to constrain the nature of the central source. Our observations are summarised in Section~\ref{sec:obs}, and our results in Section~\ref{sec:results}. Section~\ref{sec:discussion} presents our modelling of the kinematics and physical properties of the candidate disc and of the centimetre-(sub)millimetre wavelength emission from the central source, and discusses our results. Our conclusions are summarised in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions}. We adopt the maser parallax distance to G11.92--0.61 of 3.37$^{+0.39}_{-0.32}$\,kpc throughout \citep{sato_2014} \begin{table} \begin{minipage}{0.9\textwidth} \centering \caption{Parameters of the SMA and VLA observations.} \label{tab:obs} \begin{tabular}{lcccc} \hline Parameter & SMA 1.3\,mm & SMA 0.88\,mm & VLA 3\,cm & VLA 0.9\,cm \\ \hline Observing date (UT) & 2011 Aug 28 & 2011 Aug 19 & 2015 Jun 25 & 2015 Feb 9-10 \\ Project code & 2011A-S076 & 2011A-S076 & 15A-232 & 15A-232\\ Configuration & Very Extended & Extended & A & B \\ Phase Center (J2000): & & & \\ ~~~~~R.A. & 18$^{\rm h}$13$^{\rm m}$58$\fs$10 & 18$^{\rm h}$13$^{\rm m}$58$\fs$10 & 18$^{\rm h}$13$^{\rm m}$58$\fs$10 & 18$^{\rm h}$13$^{\rm m}$58$\fs$10 \\ ~~~~~Dec. & $-$18$\degr$54\arcmin16\farcs7 & $-$18$\degr$54\arcmin16\farcs7 & $-$18$\degr$54\arcmin16\farcs7 & $-$18$\degr$54\arcmin16\farcs7 \\ Primary beam size (FWHP) & 52\arcsec & 34\arcsec & 4\arcmin\/ & 1.3\arcmin\/ \\ Frequency coverage: & & & & \\ Lower band (LSB) center & 218.9 GHz & 335.6 GHz & 9 GHz & 31 GHz\\ Upper band (USB) center & 230.9 GHz & 347.6 GHz & 11 GHz & 35 GHz \\ Bandwidth & 2 $\times$ 4 GHz & 2 $\times$ 4 GHz & 2 $\times$ 2.048 GHz & 4 $\times$ 2.048 GHz \\ Subbands & n/a & n/a & 2 $\times$ 16 & 4 $\times$ 16 \\ Channel spacing & 0.8125 MHz & 0.8125 MHz & 1 kHz & 1 kHz \\ & & & (30\,km\,s$^{-1}$) & (9\,km\,s$^{-1}$) \\ Gain calibrator(s) & J1733--130, J1924--292 & J1733--130, J1924--292& J1832--2039 & J1832--2039 \\ Bandpass calibrator & 3C84 & 3C84 & J1924--2914 & J1924--2914 \\ Flux calibrator & Callisto$^{a}$ & Callisto$^{a}$ & J1331+3030 & J1331+3030 \\ Synthesised beam$^{b}$ & 0\farcs57$\times$0\farcs37 & 0\farcs80$\times$0\farcs70 & 0\farcs30$\times$0\farcs17 & 0\farcs31$\times$0\farcs17 \\ & ($\mathrm{P.A.}=30^{\circ}$) & ($\mathrm{P.A}.=54^{\circ}$) & ($\mathrm{P.A.}=0^{\circ}$) & ($\mathrm{P.A.}=-5^{\circ}$) \\ Continuum rms noise$^{b}$ & 0.7 mJy beam$^{-1}$ & 3 mJy beam$^{-1}$ & 6.1 $\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$ & 7.6 $\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$ \\ Spectral line rms noise$^{c}$ & 23 mJy beam$^{-1}$ & 55 mJy beam$^{-1}$ ($^{12}$CO) & n/a & n/a \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{flushleft} \small{$a$: Using Butler-JPL-Horizons 2012 models.}\\ \small{$b$: SMA: for combined LSB+USB continuum image (Briggs weighting, robust = 0.5).}\\ \small{$c$: Typical rms per channel; Hanning-smoothed. For $^{12}$CO(3--2), rms is per smoothed 3\,km\,s$^{-1}$ channel \citep[see also][]{cyganowski_2014}.}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{minipage} \end{table} \section{Observations} \label{sec:obs} \subsection{Submillimeter Array (SMA) \label{sec:obs_sma}} The SMA 1.3\,mm Very Extended configuration (VEX) dataset is described in \citet{cyganowski_2014}, which uses these data to study G11.92--0.61 MM2, a candidate massive prestellar core located $\sim$7\farcs2 from MM1 in the G11.92--0.61 millimetre (proto)cluster. The SMA 1.3\,mm observations were taken in good weather, with $\tau_{\rm 225 GHz}\sim$0.05 and system temperatures at source transit T$_{\rm sys}\sim$90\,K; eight antennas were available for the observations. Key observational parameters are listed in Table~\ref{tab:obs}. The 1.3\,mm line data were resampled to a common velocity resolution of 1.12\,km\,s$^{-1}$, then Hanning-smoothed. The projected baselines ranged from $\sim$20--394 k$\lambda$, corresponding to a largest angular scale (for sensitivity to smooth emission) of $\sim$9\arcsec\/ \citep[see also][]{cyganowski_2014}. We carefully identified the line-free portions of the spectrum in order to perform continuum subtraction and to generate a continuum image with minimal line contamination. The effective bandwidth of the continuum image is approximately two thirds of the total observed bandwidth. All measurements were made from images corrected for the primary beam response. \smallskip To measure the position angle of the bipolar molecular outflow driven by MM1, we make use of the $^{12}$CO(3--2) line included in the 0.88\,mm SMA dataset presented in \citet{cyganowski_2014}. Details of the SMA 0.88\,mm observations are included in Table~\ref{tab:obs} for completeness; here, we consider only the $^{12}$CO(3--2) data. \subsection{Jansky Very Large Array (VLA)} In 2015, we observed G11.92--0.61 with the NRAO Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) in two bands (X and Ka, 3\,cm and 0.9\,cm) under project code 15A--232. The observations were taken with dual circular polarization, with on-source observing times of 39 minutes and 86 minutes at 3 and 0.9\,cm, respectively. Further details of the observations are given in Table~\ref{tab:obs}. Due to the broad bandwidth of the datasets, we imaged them using 2 Taylor terms to account for the spectral index of the emission and performed phase-only self-calibration. Due to the proximity of the cometary ultra-compact (UC) H\,{\sc ii} region G11.94--0.62 \citep{Wood1989apjs} about $1'$ to the north-northeast, we needed to include that source in the model. The X-band image was made with a minimum uv distance of 1300~k$\lambda$ in order to remove ripple from G11.94--0.62 in the vicinity of G11.92--0.61. Our previously-published VLA observations in K-band \citep[1.2\,cm;][]{cyganowski_2014} are also used in modelling the spectral energy distribution in Section~\ref{sec:ff_sed}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figs/continuum.pdf} \caption{\textit{Left:} Contours of SMA 1.3\,mm VEX continuum (black) and blue/redshifted $^{12}$CO(3--2) emission overlaid on a three-color \emph{Spitzer} image (RGB: 8.0, 4.5, 3.6\,$\mu$m). The outflow position angle ($52\degr$) is indicated by the dotted black line (see Section \ref{sec:results_compactlines}). The field of view is centred on MM1, and MM2 is visible $\sim$7\arcsec\/ to the northwest. Positions of 44\,GHz Class I CH$_{3}$OH masers (magenta circles) and 6.7\,GHz Class II CH$_{3}$OH masers (green diamonds) from \citet{cyganowski_2009} are marked. The 6.7\,GHz maser $\sim$5\arcsec\/ north of MM1 is coincident with the millimetre continuum source MM3 \citep[][undetected in the VEX observations]{cyganowski_2011sma}. \textit{Right:} Zoomed view of MM1, showing the SMA 1.3\,mm VEX continuum (greyscale, linear from 0 to 0.1\,Jy\,beam$^{-1}$), $^{12}$CO(3-2) emission (blue/red dashed contours) and 6.7 GHz maser (diamond). In addition, VLA 3.0\,cm (white) and 0.9\,cm (black) contours are overlaid, along with positions of 22\,GHz H$_{2}$O masers (cyan triangles, \citealt{moscadelli_2016}). Beams are shown at lower left in each panel. Levels: 1.3\,mm: (5,25)$\sigma$, where $\sigma=0.7$\,mJy \,beam$^{-1}$; 3.0\,cm: (5,15,25)$\sigma$, where $\sigma=6.1$\,$\mu$Jy\,beam$^{-1}$; 0.9\,cm: (5,15,50)$\sigma$, where $\sigma=7.6$\,$\mu$Jy\,beam$^{-1}$; $^{12}$CO: 0.8\,Jy\,beam$^{-1}$\,km\,s$^{-1}$ $\times$ (5,10,15) (blue), $\times$ (5,10,15,20,25) (red).} \label{fig:outflow} \end{figure} \section{Results} \label{sec:results} \subsection{Continuum emission} \label{sec:cont_results} Figure~\ref{fig:outflow} shows our new VLA centimetre-wavelength continuum images overlaid on the 1.3\,mm SMA VEX image from \citet{cyganowski_2014}; observed centimetre continuum properties for CM1 are listed in Table~\ref{tab:cm_prop}. The continuum emission from CM1 is compact at all wavelengths. The fitted centroid positions for CM1 in the 3.0 and 0.9\,cm images are consistent within $<$0\farcs01, and are within $\sim$0\farcs05 of the 1.3 mm MM1 peak \citep[fitted centroid position, Table 2 of][]{cyganowski_2014}. CM1 is unresolved in our deep VLA images, indicating that the source of centimetre-wavelength emission is smaller than our $\sim$1000$\times$570\,au beam. This result is consistent with recent VLA observations at 4.8, 2.3 and 1.4\,cm (resolution 0\farcs32, 0\farcs19, and 0\farcs1, respectively): in all cases, the fitted source size is less than the size of the synthesised beam \citep[][their Table 3]{moscadelli_2016}. \begin{table} \begin{minipage}{0.955\textwidth} \centering \caption{Observed continuum emission properties.} \label{tab:cm_prop} \begin{tabular}{cccccccc} \hline & \multicolumn{2}{c}{J2000} & Peak & Integrated & & & \\ Obs. $\lambda$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Coordinates$^{a}$} & Intensity$^{a}$ & Flux Density$^{a}$ & Size$^{a}$ & Size$^{a}$ & P.A. \\ & $\alpha (\mathrm{h~m~s})$ & $\delta (\degr~'~'')$ & (mJy beam$^{-1}$) & (mJy) & (\arcsec $\times$ \arcsec) & (au $\times$ au) & ($^{\circ}$) \\ \hline 1.3\,mm & 18 13 58.1099 & $-$18 54 20.141 & $90.0\pm1.0$ & $138.0\pm2.0$ & $0.34\pm0.01 \times 0.29\pm0.01$ & $1150 \times 960$ & $125\pm7$ \\ 0.9\,cm & 18 13 58.1108 & $-$18 54 20.185 & $0.548\pm0.011$ & $0.715\pm0.023$ & $0.16\pm0.02 \times 0.10\pm0.01$ & $550 \times 330$ & $160\pm12$ \\ 3.0\,cm & 18 13 58.1113 & $-$18 54 20.191 & $0.203\pm0.009$ & $0.161\pm0.014$ & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{flushleft} \small{$a$: From two-dimensional Gaussian fitting; ``size'' is deconvolved source size. If no size is given, the source could not be deconvolved from the beam, and thus its appearance cannot be distinguished from that of a point source. Statistical uncertainties are indicated by the number of significant figures.}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{minipage} \end{table} \subsection{Compact molecular line emission: MM1} \label{sec:results_compactlines} In our SMA 1.3\,mm VEX observations, the molecular line emission detected towards G11.92-0.61 consists primarily of compact emission, coincident with the MM1 (sub)millimetre continuum source, from species characteristic of hot cores \citep[including CH$_3$CN, OCS, CH$_3$CH$_2$CN, and HC$_3$N; see also Figure 2 of][]{cyganowski_2014}. From the 8\,GHz of bandwidth observed with the SMA at 1.3\,mm, we identified 31 lines from 10 different chemical species that are potentially strong and unblended enough to be used to study the kinematics of MM1. Details for these lines are given in Table~\ref{tab:linelist}, ordered by decreasing E$_{\rm upper}$. For all lines included in Table~\ref{tab:linelist}, we created and inspected integrated intensity (moment 0) and velocity (moment 1) maps. The moment 1 maps were constructed using an intensity threshold of 5$\sigma$, and the velocity extent was chosen to avoid contamination from nearby lines where possible. \smallskip \begin{table} \begin{minipage}{0.715\textwidth} \begin{center} \caption{Properties of spectral lines used in kinematic analysis.} \label{tab:linelist} \begin{tabular}{lccccc} \hline Species & Transition & Frequency & E$_{\mathrm{upper}}$ & Catalog$^{a,b}$ & Notes$^{c}$ \\ & & (GHz) & (K) & & \\ \hline CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=8$ & 220.47581 & 525.6 & JPL & \\ \hcccn\ v$_{\rm 7}=$1 & $J=24$--23 l=1f & 219.17376 & 452.3 & CDMS & \\ \hcccn\ v$_{\rm 7}=$1 & $J=24$--23 l=1e & 218.86080 & 452.1 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($A$) & 18$_{3,16}$--17$_{4,13}$ & 232.78350 & 446.5 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=7$ & 220.53932 & 418.6 & JPL & PA, DT\_ALL \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($E$) & 15$_{4,11}$--16$_{3,13}$ & 229.58907 & 374.4 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$OH\/ v$_t$=1 ($A$) & 6$_{1,5}$--7$_{2,6}$ & 217.29920 & 373.9 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=5$ & 220.64108 & 247.4 & JPL & \\ HNCO$^{d}$ & 10$_{2,9}$--9$_{2,8}$ & 219.73385 & 228.3 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=4$ & 220.67929 & 183.1 & JPL & PA, DT\_ALL \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($A$) & 10$_{2,8}$--9$_{3,7}$ & 232.41859 & 165.4 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($A$) & 10$_{2,9}$--9$_{4,6}$ & 231.28110 & 165.3 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ CH$_3$CH$_2$CN\ & 27$_{0,27}$--26$_{0,26}$ & 231.99041 & 157.7 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$CH$_2$CN\ & 26$_{2,25}$--25$_{2,24}$ & 229.26516 & 154.0 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$CH$_2$CN\ & 26$_{1,25}$--25$_{1,24}$ & 231.31042 & 153.4 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$CH$_2$CN\ & 25$_{2,24}$--24$_{2,23}$ & 220.66092 & 143.0 & CDMS & PA, DT\_ALL \\ CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=3$ & 220.70902 & 133.2 & JPL & PA, DT\_ALL \\ \hcccn\ & $J=24$--23 & 218.32472 & 131.0 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$OCHO ($A$)$^{e}$ & 20$_{1,20}$--19$_{1,19}$ & 216.96590 & 111.5 & JPL & \\ OCS & $J=19$--18 & 231.06099 & 110.9 & CDMS & PA, DT\_ALL \\ HNCO & 10$_{1,10}$--9$_{1,9}$ & 218.98101 & 101.1 & CDMS & PA, DT\_ALL \\ CH$_3$CN\ & $J=12$--11, $K=2$ & 220.73026 & 97.4 & JPL & PA, DT\_ALL \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($E$) & 8$_{0,8}$--7$_{1,6}$ & 220.07849 & 96.6 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($E$)$^{f}$ & 8$_{-1,8}$--7$_{0,7}$ & 229.75876 & 89.1 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ H$_{2}$CO & 3$_{2,1}$--2$_{2,0}$ & 218.76007 & 68.1 & CDMS & PA, DT\_ALL \\ HNCO & 10$_{0,10}$--9$_{0,9}$ & 219.79827 & 58.0 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($E$) & 5$_{1,4}$--4$_{2,2}$ & 216.94560 & 55.9 & CDMS & \\ CH$_3$OH\/ ($E$) & 3$_{-2,2}$--4$_{-1,4}$ & 230.02706 & 39.8 & CDMS & PA, DT\_CH$_3$OH \\ SO & 6$_{5}$--5$_{4}$ & 219.94944 & 35.0 & CDMS & \\ H$_{2}$CO & 3$_{0,3}$--2$_{0,2}$ & 218.22219 & 21.0 & CDMS & \\ DCN & $J=3$--2 & 217.23854 & 20.9 & CDMS & PA, DT\_ALL \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{center} \small{$^{a}$ CDMS = \url{http://www.astro.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/cdmssearch}}\\ \small{$^{b}$ JPL = \url{http://spec.jpl.nasa.gov/ftp/pub/catalog/catform.html}}\\ \small{$^{c}$ PA: line included in calculation of median position angle (Section~\ref{sec:results_compactlines}); DT\_ALL: Potentially `disc tracing' --- results of centroid plot included in the kinematic fitting, all lines excluding CH$_{3}$OH (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}); DT\_CH$_3$OH: Potentially `disc tracing' --- results of centroid plot included in the kinematic fitting, CH$_{3}$OH lines (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics})} \\ \small{$^{d}$ Blended with the HNCO 10$_{2,8}-$9$_{2,7}$ line at 219.73719\,GHz, which has the same E$_{\mathrm{upper}}$ and CDMS intensity; the velocity separation from this reference transition is -4.56 km s$^{-1}$.}\\ \small{$^{e}$ Blended with three other CH$_{3}$OCHO transitions with the same line intensity and E$_{\mathrm{upper}}$; the velocity separations from this reference transition are +1.57, -0.48, and -2.10\,km\,s$^{-1}$.}\\ \small{$^{f}$ This line exhibits thermal emission towards MM1, though maser emission is observed towards the G11.92$-$0.61 outflow lobes \citep{cyganowski_2011sma}.}\\ \end{minipage} \end{table} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{figs/moment1_others_grid_dots.pdf} \caption{First moment maps (colourscale) of selected spectral lines from Table~\ref{tab:linelist}, overlaid with contours of the SMA VEX 1.3\,mm continuum emission (levels 5 \& 25$\sigma$, where $\sigma=0.7$\,mJy beam$^{-1}$). The colourscale is centred on the systemic velocity of the system, 35.2\,km\,s$^{-1}$ \citep{cyganowski_2011sma}. Each panel is labeled with the species name and the excitation energy (in Kelvin) of the upper level of the transition. The position angle of the outflow from Fig~\ref{fig:outflow} is shown with a dashed black line. Black dots in the lower middle panel denote the twist in the zero-velocity gas (Section~\ref{sec:results_compactlines}). The cut used to generate the PV diagrams in Figure~\ref{fig:pv} is shown in the lower right panel with a solid black line. The beam is shown in the lower left of each panel as a dashed ellipse.} \label{fig:mom1_grid} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{figs/moment1_ch3cn_grid_dots.pdf} \caption{First moment maps for minimally-blended CH$_{3}$CN transitions (we omit $K=6$ as it is blended with HNCO and $K=5$ as it is blended with CH$_{3}^{13}$CN $K=0$), overlaid with zeroth moment contours and displayed alongside the 1.3 mm continuum emission from Figure \ref{fig:outflow}. The excitation energy (in Kelvin) of the upper level of each transition is indicated. Black dots in the upper middle panel denote the twist in the zero-velocity gas (Section~\ref{sec:results_compactlines}). The continuum peak is marked with a black cross, and the beam is shown in the lower left corner of each panel as a dashed ellipse. Contours are 3, 6 and 9\,$\sigma$, where $\sigma$ for the zeroth moment maps is 0.19, 0.22, 0.19, 0.16 and 0.16\,$\mathrm{Jy}\,\mathrm{beam}^{-1}$, respectively.} \label{fig:ch3cn_mom1} \end{figure} \smallskip Figures~\ref{fig:mom1_grid} and \ref{fig:ch3cn_mom1} present moment 1 maps for selected lines from Table~\ref{tab:linelist}, chosen to represent the range of chemical species, line emission morphologies, kinematics, and line excitation temperatures present in our SMA VEX 1.3 mm data. Strikingly, all ten species show a consistent velocity gradient across the MM1 (sub)millimetre continuum source, with a sharp transition from redshifted emission (to the South-East) to blueshifted emission (to the North-West). The orientation of the velocity gradient is consistent with that seen at $\sim$2\farcs4 resolution by \citet{cyganowski_2011sma} in SO, HNCO, CH$_3$OH, and CH$_3$CN. We measured the position angle of the velocity gradient for each of the 31 transitions in Table~\ref{tab:linelist} by calculating the position angle of the line joining the RA/Dec centroid positions of the emission in the most redshifted and the most blueshifted velocity channels \citep[a similar approach to that of][]{hunter_2014}. The median and standard deviation of the position angle across the fifteen transitions that we select as potentially disc-tracing based on our kinematic fitting and moment analysis (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}, Table~\ref{tab:linelist}) is 127$\pm$18$\degr$. We note that the variation in the median position angle from including a different selection of lines in the calculation is well within the scatter indicated by the standard deviation of 18$\degr$, and adopt a position angle of 127$\degr$ for constructing the position-velocity (PV) diagrams presented in Figure~\ref{fig:pv}. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.92\textwidth]{figs/pv_all_grid.pdf} \caption{Position-velocity diagrams of selected lines from Table \ref{tab:linelist}, ordered by decreasing E$_{\mathrm{upper}}$. Solid white contours correspond to levels of 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5\,Jy\,beam$^{-1}$. The v$_{\mathrm{lsr}}$ of the system from \citet{cyganowski_2011sma}, 35.2\,km\,s$^{-1}$, is shown with a horizontal dotted line; the position of the 1.3 mm continuum peak from the SMA VEX observations is defined as offset$=$0\farcs0. The CH$_{3}$CN $K=2$ transition displays contamination at high blueshifted velocities from a nearby line. Overlaid are the best fitting disc models from Section\,\ref{sec:kinematics}: the best fit model for all lines, excluding CH$_{3}$OH (M$_{\mathrm{enc}}$ = 60\,M$_{\odot}$, $i = 35\degr$, R$_{\mathrm{o}}$ = 1200\,au) is shown with a solid black line, and the best fit model for CH$_{3}$OH lines only (M$_{\mathrm{enc}}$ = 34\,M$_{\odot}$, $i = 52\degr$, R$_{\mathrm{o}}$ = 1200\,au) is shown with a solid red line. These two models are almost identical in position-velocity space. The dashed black line shows a model identical to that of the best fitting disc model for all lines (excluding CH$_{3}$OH), but with R$_{\mathrm{o}}$ = 1800\,au, providing a better fit to some transitions.} \label{fig:pv} \end{figure} \smallskip Notably, the position angle of the velocity gradient is nearly identical to that of the 2D Gaussian model fit to the 1.3\,mm dust emission of 125$\pm$7$\degr$ \citep{cyganowski_2014}. This alignment, and the sharp transition from redshifted to blueshifted emission, are reminiscent of Keplerian discs observed around low-mass stars \citep[e.g.][]{hughes_2011,walsh_2014}. The position angles of MM1's velocity gradient and dust emission are also nearly perpendicular to that of the high-velocity bipolar molecular outflow driven by MM1. The outflow position angle, estimated as the position angle of the line joining the peaks of the redshifted and blueshifted $^{12}$CO (3--2) lobes, is $\sim$52$\degr$ (Figure~\ref{fig:outflow}). For the innermost part of the outflow (shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:outflow}), the estimated position angle is $\sim$45$\degr$, an offset of 82$\degr$ from the velocity gradient seen in the compact molecular line emission. Both estimates of the outflow position angle are consistent with the outflow being perpendicular to the velocity gradient in the compact gas, within the scatter in our estimate of the latter. This configuration strongly suggests a disc-outflow system, and motivates a more detailed examination of the kinematics of MM1 by means of PV diagrams (Figure~\ref{fig:pv}). \smallskip As illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:pv}, the MM1 PV diagrams exhibit the characteristic pattern expected for a Keplerian disc --- the highest velocities are seen closest to the central source, while the most spatially extended emission is seen at lower velocities (e.g. closer to the v$_{\mathrm{LSR}}$ of the system). These key features are consistent across a range of molecular tracers and transition excitation energies, and support our use of Keplerian disc models to interpret the kinematics of MM1 (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}). There are also, however, some potentially illuminating differences amongst the prospective disc tracers. Notably, most of the lines do not peak towards the central source, instead showing offsets in position and/or velocity (Figure~\ref{fig:pv}: the position of the 1.3\,mm continuum peak from our SMA VEX observations is defined as offset=0\farcs0). More surprisingly, these offsets do not appear to be simple functions of molecular abundance or transition excitation energy, in contrast to the pattern seen in the candidate massive disc NGC 6334I(N)-SMA 1b \citep{hunter_2014}. In MM1, low-temperature transitions of abundant molecules, including DCN(3--2) and H$_2$CO(3$_{\mathrm{2,1}}$--2$_{\mathrm{2,0}}$), show a double-peaked structure with a local minimum towards the central source, consistent with a radial temperature gradient (increasing inwards, see also Section~\ref{sec:results_extent}) and a moderately edge-on viewing angle. However, higher-temperature transitions of CH$_{3}$CN and CH$_3$OH also show notably double-peaked or asymmetric structure. In contrast, the peak of the OCS(19--18) emission (with a moderate E$_{\mathrm{upper}}$ of 110.9\,K) is coincident with the central source. Interestingly, CH$_{3}$CN emission in two other candidate discs around (proto)O-stars \citep[CH$_{3}$CN $K=3$ in NGC 6334I(N)-SMA 1b and $K=2$, $K=4$, and $K=6$ in AFGL4176-mm1:][respectively]{hunter_2014,johnston_2015} exhibits asymmetries similar to those we observe in CH$_{3}$CN towards MM1, though these asymmetries are not reproduced by current models \citep[e.g. Figure 4 of][]{johnston_2015}. In MM1, as in NGC 6334I(N)-SMA 1b, HNCO differs from other species in displaying a compact morphology in PV diagrams. Based on the present data, it is difficult to disentangle the effects of molecular abundance \citep[e.g. potential chemical segregation, as observed in AFGL2591 by][]{jimenez-serra_2012} from those of molecular excitation in the MM1 disc. Higher angular resolution (sub)millimetre observations would be required to obtain well-resolved images of many different molecular species. \smallskip The moment maps shown in Figure~\ref{fig:mom1_grid} also highlight that though all species share a consistent velocity gradient (from redshifted in the South-East to blueshifted in the North-West), SO(6$_{\mathrm{5}}$--5$_{\mathrm{4}}$) and HC$_3$N $v=0$ (24--23) exhibit emission that is notably spatially extended compared to the millimetre continuum and to other molecules. The SO line is low-temperature (E$_{\mathrm{upper}}=35.0$\,K) and is clearly detected in the G11.92--0.61 outflow in our lower-resolution SMA data \citep[e.g. Figure 3 of][]{cyganowski_2011sma}, suggesting possible outflow contribution to the emission detected in our high-resolution SMA VEX observations. The extended emission from HC$_3$N $v=0$ (24--23), with its higher excitation energy (E$_{\mathrm{upper}}=131.0$\,K), is perhaps more surprising, though recent observations have found that HC$_3$N emission is associated with gas shocked by outflows driven by low-mass (proto)stars \citep[e.g.][]{shimajiri_2015,benedettini_2013}. Within $\sim$10\,km\,s$^{-1}$ of the systemic velocity (e.g., the range shown in Figure~\ref{fig:mom1_grid}), the kinematics of outflow-tracing molecules such as $^{12}$CO and HCO$^{+}$ are very confused, with both redshifted and blueshifted emission detected to both the NE and SW of MM1 \citep[e.g. Figures 7 and 8 of][]{cyganowski_2011sma}. It is thus plausible that (the base of) the MM1 outflow contributes to the SO and HC$_3$N emission detected in our SMA VEX observations. In addition, given the apparent elongation along the outflow axis in moment 0 maps of many of the lines examined, it is also possible that the base of the outflow contributes to more lines, though we note that as the beam is elongated in a similar direction, this effect is difficult to quantify with our current observations. \smallskip Several of the moment 1 maps (e.g. CH$_3$CN $K=2,3,4$, OCS(19--18), H$_{2}$CO(3$_{\mathrm{2,1}}$--2$_{\mathrm{2,0}}$), SO($6_{5}$ -- $5_{4}$), OCS(19--18) and DCN(3--2)) also exhibit an interestingly asymmetric feature: a twisted structure that is most clearly seen by examining the gas moving at the systemic velocity (white in Figures \ref{fig:mom1_grid} \& \ref{fig:ch3cn_mom1}, marked with black dots). Based on the orientation of the blue- and red-shifted emission (i.e. in opposition to the movement of the outflowing material), we suggest that this twisting is likely due to the effect of infalling material. Such an interpretation is also strengthened by the requirement of an infall component to be used in our modelling of the PV diagrams (see Figure \ref{fig:pv} and Section \ref{sec:kinematics}) \subsection{Extent of gas and dust emission in the disc} \label{sec:results_extent} The thermal dust emission from MM1 is unresolved in our SMA 1.3\,mm VEX observations, with a fitted deconvolved source size of $1150\times960$\,au \citep{cyganowski_2014}. In contrast, the molecular line emission from the disc is marginally resolved in some lower-excitation transitions. For example, for the blended $K=0$ and $K=1$ components of CH$_3$CN(12--11), the deconvolved size of the 2D Gaussian fit to the moment 0 map is 0\farcs80$\pm$0\farcs06$\,\times\,$0\farcs53$\pm$0\farcs04 ($\mathrm{P.A.}=47\pm8$), or $\sim2700\times1800$\,au. The CH$_3$CN ladder is of particular interest, as the relative spatial extents of the different k-components are expected to depend primarily on gas temperature. Figure~\ref{fig:ch3cn_mom1} presents contours of integrated intensity for the $K=2$, $K=3$, $K=4$, $K=7$, and $K=8$ transitions of CH$_3$CN(12--11), which range in excitation energy from E$_{\mathrm{upper}}=97.4$ -- 525.6\,K, overlaid on the moment 1 maps of these transitions (we omit $K=0$ and $K=1$ because they are blended with each other, $K=6$ because it is blended with HNCO(10$_{1,9}$-9$_{1,8}$ at 220.585 \,GHz, and $K=5$ because it is blended with CH$_{3}^{13}$CN K=$0$). As illustrated by Figure~\ref{fig:ch3cn_mom1}, all transitions display a similar velocity gradient, but the low-$k$, low-excitation transitions of CH$_3$CN are significantly more extended than the high-$k$, high-excitation transitions. This pattern of decreasing spatial extent with increasing excitation energy is suggestive of an increasing temperature gradient towards a central source. The temperature structure of the gas around MM1, as determined from modelling the CH$_3$CN emission, is discussed further in Section~\ref{dis:cassis}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/dust_gas.pdf} \caption{Azimuthal averages of the normalised intensity of the CH$_{3}$CN $K=3$ line (blue) and 1.3 mm continuum emission (black), centered around the bi-section between the most red and blue shifted channel centroids, with 1$\sigma$ errors shown as shaded regions. Azimuthal averages of the beams are shown with dashed lines.} \label{fig:azimuthal} \end{figure} \smallskip To investigate the differing extents of the dust and gas emission, we performed simple azimuthal averages (i.e.\ not accounting for any ellipicity effects) on both the continuum and the CH$_3$CN $K=3$ line emission (the lowest-energy k component that is well separated from neighboring lines, see also top panel of Figure~\ref{fig:ch3cn_cassis}). As shown in Figure \ref{fig:azimuthal}, this analysis confirms that the CH$_{3}$CN $K=3$ emission is more extended than the 1.3 mm continuum, by approximately 0\farcs1 at maximum deviation. Figure \ref{fig:azimuthal} also highlights that the continuum emission, unlike the $K=3$ line emission, is unresolved by our SMA observations. A larger spatial extent of gas emission in comparison to dust continuum emission is a result often seen in observations of circumstellar discs around lower-mass young stars \citep[e.g.][]{guilloteau_2011,perez_2012,de-gregorio-monsalvo_2013}. In such systems, the spatial difference is often suggested to be due to either radial migration of the dust towards the central star, or viscous outward spreading of the gas \citep[e.g.][]{alexander_2006}. \section{Discussion} % \label{sec:discussion} % \subsection{Molecular line modelling: gas kinematics} \label{sec:kinematics} In order to further investigate the kinematic origin of each emission line, we fitted a 2-dimensional Gaussian to each channel using the \textsc{casa imfit} routine. For a given line and channel, this fit provides the location of the centroid, whose position on the sky is recorded along with the channel velocity. This process is then repeated for all channels across a given line. The morphology of the resulting centroid plots often exhibits a closed loop structure, with the most red- and blue-shifted channels closest together, and velocities between these channels tracing an arc across the sky (Figure~\ref{fig:all_centroids}). However, the size of this loop varies from line to line, with some lines exhibiting more linear centroid plots (e.g. the CH$_{3}$OH transitions). For each line, we define a velocity centre --- the on-sky position that bisects the positions of the most red- and blue-shifted channel centroids. The position of this velocity centre for each line differed slightly, however all were consistent to within approximately 0\farcs05 (or $\sim200$\,au at the distance of MM1). \smallskip Based on careful examination of the individual line centroid plots and the corresponding moment 1 maps, we selected a subset of potentially disc-tracing (DT) lines. In order to model the kinematic origin of these lines, we adopted an approach similar to that presented in \citet{sanchez_2013}, and use a model of a geometrically thin Keplerian disc \citep{maret_2015} to compare with the centroid information. The model disc is characterised by a central mass (M$_{\star}$), an outer radius (R$_{\mathrm{o}}$) and an inclination to the line of sight ($i$, where $i=0$ corresponds to a face on disc), and is assumed to emit uniformly as a function of radius (though we note that adopting different intensity distributions does not alter the results of our fitting). The model is given a number of velocity channels with width consistent with that of our observations, and is assumed to lie at the same distance as MM1 (3.37\,kpc). \smallskip For each combination of free parameters, a spectral cube is created for the model, and then a first moment map is produced. This is then compared to the centroid plots. The chi-squared landscape is explored in a grid based fashion using the \textsc{scipy optimize brute} module, where the ranges for each parameter were $1 < \mathrm{M}_{\star} < 90$\,M$_{\odot}$, $600 < \mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{o}} < 1400$\,au, and $0 < i < 90\degr$. Once a minimum within the grid is recovered, a Nelder-Mead (or \textsc{ameoba}) minimisation technique is used to refine the best fitting parameters. Due to the slightly different morphologies of the CH$_{3}$OH centroid plots, we chose to perform the fitting on two collections of centroid locations --- those obtained from all lines but excluding CH$_{3}$OH (labelled `DT\_ALL' in Table\,\ref{tab:linelist}), and only the CH$_{3}$OH lines (labelled `DT\_CH$_{3}$OH' in Table\,\ref{tab:linelist}). The best fitting disc model for all lines surrounds an enclosed mass of $60^{+21}_{-27}$\,M$_{\odot}$ at an inclination of $35^{+20}_{-6}\degr$. The best fitting disc model for only the CH$_{3}$OH transitions surrounds an enclosed mass of $34^{+28}_{-12}$\,M$_{\odot}$ at an inclination of $52^{+11}_{-14}\degr$. In both cases, the disc extended to 1200\,au. Figure \ref{fig:all_centroids} shows the resulting best fitting models for each of these collections. \smallskip \begin{figure} \flushleft \includegraphics[width=0.901\textwidth]{figs/all_centroids_single_nocbar.pdf} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figs/all_centroids.pdf} \caption{Top: centroid plots for the CH$_{3}$CN K=3 (left) and the CH$_{3}$OH 229.75\,GHz (right) transitions, displaying the differing morphology characteristic of CH$_{3}$OH. Bottom: Results of the kinematic fitting procedure described in Section~\ref{sec:kinematics} for the two collections of centroid points --- all 'disc-tracing' lines other than CH$_{3}$OH (left) and 'disc-tracing' CH$_{3}$OH transitions only (right). The best fitting disc model for all lines (except CH$_{3}$OH) surrounded an enclosed mass of $60^{+21}_{-27}$\,M$_{\odot}$ at an inclination of $35^{+20}_{-6}\degr$, with an outer radius R$_{\mathrm{o}} = 1200^{+100}_{-100}$\,au. The best fitting disc model for only the CH$_{3}$OH transitions surrounded an enclosed mass of $34^{+28}_{-12}$\,M$_{\odot}$ at an inclination of $52^{+11}_{-14}\degr$, with an outer radius R$_{\mathrm{o}} = 1200^{+100}_{-100}$\,au. In both cases, the position angle of the disc was fixed to 127$\degr$. Axes are in offsets with respect to the velocity centre as defined in Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}.} \label{fig:all_centroids} \end{figure} Based on the results of the fitting to the centroid maps, we can follow the prescription of \cite{cesaroni_2011} and overlay theoretical position-velocity models for these Keplerian discs on Figure \ref{fig:pv}. In this case, the region on a position-velocity diagram within which emission is expected can be expressed as \begin{equation} V = \sqrt{GM}\frac{x}{R^{\frac{3}{2}}} + \sqrt{2GM}\frac{z}{R^{\frac{3}{2}}}, \end{equation} where the first term is the contribution from the Keplerian disc, and the second the contribution due to free fall. $V$ is the velocity component along the line of sight, $M$ is the enclosed mass, $x$ and $z$ are the co-ordinates along the disc plane and line of sight, respectively, and $R = \sqrt{x^2 + z^2}$ is the distance from the centre of the disc. \smallskip The models overlaid on Figure \ref{fig:pv} correspond to the best fitting solutions found from the centroid fitting --- the best fit model for all `disc-tracing' lines other than CH$_{3}$OH (M$_{\mathrm{enc}}$ = 60\,M$_{\odot}$, $i = 35\degr$, R$_{\mathrm{o}}$ = 1200\,au, based on nine transitions) is shown with a solid black line, and the best fit model for `disc-tracing' CH$_{3}$OH lines (M$_{\mathrm{enc}}$ = 34\,M$_{\odot}$, $i = 52\degr$, R$_{\mathrm{o}}$ = 1200\,au, based on six transitions) is shown with a solid red line. These models produce almost identical projections in position-velocity space. For all transitions, the model accurately reproduces the range of velocities displayed in the data. The major differences arise in the spatial extent of the emission, with molecules such as CH$_{3}$CH$_{2}$CN, HNCO, DCN and CH$_{3}$CN $K=7$ appearing to originate from smaller radii than molecules such as OCS or the lower $K$ transitions of CH$_{3}$CN. For this reason, we also overplot a model identical to the best fitting disc model for all lines (excluding CH$_{3}$OH), but with R$_{\mathrm{o}} = 1800$\,au, as a dashed black line. Interestingly, while there seems to be a dependence of location/extent of emission on excitation energy for the CH$_{3}$CN transitions, there appears not to be a similar trend across all molecules. This can most easily be seen by comparing DCN (E$_{\mathrm{upper}} = 20.9$\,K) with, for example, CH$_{3}$OH $v_{t}=1$ (E$_{\mathrm{upper}} = 373.9$\,K), whose PV diagrams show similar spatial extents. \smallskip We can also estimate an inclination angle from the observed ellipicity of the deconvolved Gaussian model for the SMA VEX 1.3\,mm continuum emission \citep{cyganowski_2014}. Assuming circular symmetry, this implies an inclination angle for the dust disc of $\sim31^{+5\degr}_{-7\degr}$. While we interpret this result with some caution because the continuum is unresolved by our observations, this estimate provides an independent line of evidence for a moderately inclined disc. \subsection{Molecular line modelling: gas temperatures and physical properties from CH$_{3}$CN} \label{dis:cassis} To determine the physical properties of the gas around MM1, we follow the approach of \citet{hunter_2014} and use the CASSIS package to model the line intensities and profiles of the CH$_{3}$CN and CH$_{3}^{13}$CN emission line ladders, which have been shown to provide robust measurements of gas physical conditions in hot cores \citep[e.g.][]{pankonin_2001, araya_2005}. \smallskip In order to quantify any spatial variations in these physical conditions, we extract the CH$_3$CN spectra on a pixel-by-pixel basis across the location of MM1. The physical model used to fit the data was assumed to be in local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE), and possessed six free parameters --- CH$_{3}$CN column density, excitation temperature, line width, emission region diameter, velocity, and the isotopic ratio of $^{12}$C / $^{13}$C. The ranges explored for each parameter were as follows --- column density: $10^{16} < N_{\mathrm{CH}_{3}\mathrm{CN}} \leq 10^{18}$\,cm$^{-2}$; excitation temperature: $40 < T_{\mathrm{ex}} \leq 250$ K; line width: $3 < \Delta \nu \leq 8$\,km\,s$^{-1}$; size: $0.1\arcsec < \theta \leq 0.5\arcsec$; velocity: $31 < v < 42$\,km\,s$^{-1}$; isotopic ratio: $55 < \,^{12}\mathrm{C} / ^{13}\mathrm{C} \leq 85$. The fitting was performed using a Markov-Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) minimisation strategy --- an initial guess for each parameter is taken, and randomised steps in each parameter are taken to explore the resulting goodness of fit. These steps are initially large, but decrease as the fitting procedure progresses in order to refine the best fitting parameters. The number of iterations was set to 5000, and the cutoff parameter to determine when the step size becomes fixed was set to 2500. The best fitting values for each pixel are taken from the execution that achieved an acceptance rate of 0.5. To ensure only data with a reliable signal-to-noise ratio were used in the fitting procedure, only pixels with spectra where the $K=3$ transition was detected above $5 \sigma$ were included in the modelling, which ensured the fitting routine was always given at least the $K=0/1$ (blended with each other), $K=2$ and $K=3$ transitions to fit. The subsequent best fitting model spectra were then examined by eye, and any inadequate fits were discarded from the final results. \smallskip In all cases, we found that models with a single component of emitting material could not adequately reproduce the line ratios observed in the CH$_{3}$CN and CH$_{3}^{13}$CN spectra. Instead, two components of emitting material were required to adequately reproduce the emission \citep[similar to observations of hot cores, e.g.][]{cyganowski_2011sma, hernandez-hernandez_2014}. In these two component fits, each component was given a set of independent parameters as listed above. \smallskip \begin{figure} \includegraphics[height=0.9\textheight]{figs/cassis_grid.pdf} \caption{Results from CASSIS fitting to the CH$_{3}$CN spectra across the region of MM1. \textit{Top:} fitting results (red) to the spectrum (black) from a single pixel. \textit{Bottom:} Column densities ($N$), temperatures ($T$) and line widths ($\Delta v$) as derived from the fits for the first component (left) and second component (right). White contours correspond to the labeled values with tick marks on each colourbar. The black contour shows the 3$\sigma$ level of the moment 0 map for the $K=2$ transition (where $\sigma=0.19$\,Jy beam$^{-1}$), and the black cross marks the location of the 1.3mm continuum peak.} \label{fig:ch3cn_cassis} \vspace{1cm} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:ch3cn_cassis} shows the results of the fitting procedure. The top panel shows the results of a fit to an individual pixel, with the respective transitions of CH$_{3}$CN and CH$_{3}^{13}$CN labelled, along with the transition of $^{13}$CO that appears within that range of frequencies. There is good agreement between the line ratios and line widths of the model and the data, suggesting we are placing strong constraints on the parameters. The lower panels of Figure~\ref{fig:ch3cn_cassis} show the results for the first component (left) and second component (right). The first component is characterised by cooler material ($\sim 150$\,K), with a higher column ($\sim 10^{18}$\,cm$^{-2}$) and a larger linewidth ($\sim 8$\,km\,s$^{-1}$), while the second component is warmer ($\sim 250$\,K) with a lower column ($\sim 10^{16}$\,cm$^{-2}$) and exhibits a range of linewidths (5--8\,km\,s$^{-1}$). These two temperature components may be identified with two distinct reservoirs of CH$_{3}$CN in the disc, as seen in recent chemical models of circumstellar discs around low to intermediate mass young stars. These models show that substantial reservoirs of CH$_{3}$CN can exist in both the disc midplane and disc atmosphere \citep{walsh_2015}. In the upper regions of these disc models, ion-molecule chemistry dominates the production of CH$_3$CN (with a small contribution from the thermal desorption of ice mantles), and strong UV fluxes (when present) dominate the destruction through photodissociation. For the midplane regions, which hold the majority of the CH$_3$CN reservoir, production is dominated by thermal desorption from ice mantles in regions where the temperature exceeds 150\,K, and the molecule simply freezes out in regions with lower temperatures (C.~Walsh, private communication). It is interesting to note that while the parameters of the first, lower-temperature component appear relatively symmetric about the continuum peak, the temperature and linewidth of the second component exhibit significant asymmetries towards the South-West. In particular, the high temperatures seen towards the South-West would be consistent with a disc oriented as modelled in Section \ref{sec:kinematics}, if the disc was sufficiently flared and the disc was optically thick. Such a geometry would also explain the orientation of the looped centroids of emission seen in Section \ref{sec:kinematics}. \subsection{Nature of the central cm-wavelength source} \label{sec:ff_sed} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/freefree.pdf} \caption{Spectral energy distribution of MM1 from centimetre to submillimetre wavelengths including data from this paper (3.0 and 0.9\,cm VLA), \citet{cyganowski_2014} (1.2\,cm VLA, 1.3\,mm, 1.1\,mm, and 0.88\,mm SMA), and \citet{cyganowski_2011sma} (1.4\,mm CARMA), shown as filled points. These measurements are integrated flux densities from two-dimensional Gaussian fitting; the error bars represent the statistical uncertainties from the fit combined in quadrature with conservative estimates for the absolute flux calibration uncertainty (see Section~\ref{sec:ff_sed}). Shown as open points are flux densities from \citet{moscadelli_2016} (4.3-5.5, 2.3 and 1.4\,cm VLA, see Table~\ref{tab:sed}). The best fitting model, shown as a solid black line, combines dust emission, a uniform density HC~H\,{\sc ii} region, and an ionised jet with a power-law density profile (labelled black dotted lines). For comparison, the dashed red line and dashed blue line show a dust and jet model, and a dust and HC~H\,{\sc ii} model, respectively (Section~\ref{sec:ff_sed}).} \label{fig:sed} \end{figure} \begin{table} \centering \begin{minipage}{0.9\columnwidth} \centering \caption{Measured continuum flux densities included in the spectral energy distribution shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sed}.} \label{tab:sed} \begin{tabular}{lccc} \hline Wavelength & Frequency & Flux Density & Reference$^{a}$ \\ & (GHz) & (mJy) & \\ \hline 5.5 cm & 5.50 & $0.075 \pm 0.008$ & M16 \\ 4.8 cm & 6.2 & $0.112 \pm 0.011$ & M16 \\ 4.3 cm & 6.98 & $0.086 \pm 0.009$ & M16 \\ 3.0 cm & 10.0 & $0.161 \pm 0.014$ & This work \\ 2.3 cm & 13.1 & $0.19 \pm 0.02$ & M16 \\ 1.4 cm & 21.7 & $0.42 \pm 0.05$ & M16 \\ 1.2 cm & 24.9 & $0.654 \pm 0.082$ & C14 \\ 0.9 cm & 33.0 & $0.715 \pm 0.023$ & This work \\ 1.4 mm & 216.5 & $169 \pm 13$ & C11 \\ 1.3 mm & 225.1 & $148 \pm 3$ & C14 \\ 1.1 mm & 273.7 & $397 \pm 6$ & C14 \\ 0.88 mm & 341.6 & $525 \pm 8$ &C14 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \begin{flushleft} \small{$a$: M16: \citet{moscadelli_2016}; C14: \citet{cyganowski_2014}; C11: \citet{cyganowski_2011sma}}\\ \end{flushleft} \end{minipage} \end{table} In order to constrain the properties of the central cm-wavelength source, we model the free-free and dust emission simultaneously, using an approach similar to that of \citet{hunter_2014}. We first construct the spectral energy distribution (SED) of MM1 shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sed} (filled points) from our new VLA observations, the four datapoints in \citet{cyganowski_2014} (1.2\,cm, 1.3\,mm, 1.1\,mm, and 0.88\,mm), and the 1.4\,mm CARMA measurement from \citet{cyganowski_2011sma}. We choose these measurements because they are, by design, as comparable as possible in angular resolution and \emph{uv}-coverage (the new 3.0 and 0.9\,cm VLA data are of higher resolution than the other datasets, but designed to be well-matched to each other). The error bars plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:sed} represent conservative estimates of the absolute flux calibration uncertainty (15 per cent for SMA 1.3\,mm VEX, 5 per cent for VLA $\lambda>2.5$~cm, 10 per cent for VLA $\lambda<2.5$~cm, 20 per cent for higher-frequency SMA and for CARMA 1.4\,mm), added in quadrature with the statistical uncertainties from the Gaussian fitting. \smallskip To model the centimetre-submillimetre wavelength SED, we combine a free-free model \citep{olnon_1975} with a single-temperature modified graybody function representing the dust emission \citep[e.g.][]{gordon_1995, rathborne_2010}. We explored modelling the free-free component with the various \citet{olnon_1975} model geometries for the ionised gas: spherical (uniform density), Gaussian, power law, and truncated power law ($n_{e} \propto r^{-2}$, transitioning to a central constant-density sphere to avoid a singularity). We found that the uniform density sphere model best reproduces the centimetre-wavelength shape of the SED ($\lambda = 0.9-3$~cm), so we focus on that model for our detailed exploration of parameter space. The initial combined model has seven free parameters: the electron density (n$_{e}$), radius (R$_{e}$), and electron temperature (T$_{e}$) of the ionised sphere and the angular diameter ($\theta_{\rm d}$), temperature (T$_{\rm d}$), grain opacity index ($\beta$), and reference opacity ($\tau_{\rm 1.3\,mm}$) of the dust emission. Since we have seven data points with which to constrain seven free parameters, we explore parameter space by constructing a 40 by 40 point grid of electron density (10$^{5.6}$--10$^{7.2}$\,cm$^{-3}$) and R$_{e}$ (15--65\,au), and fitting for the other five parameters (n$_e$, $\theta_{\rm d}$, T$_{\rm d}$, $\beta$, and $\tau_{\rm 1.3\,mm}$) at each point in the n$_e$-R$_e$ grid \citep[see also][]{hunter_2014}. The fit ranges for the free parameters were T$_e=6000$--$11000$\,K, $\beta=0.5$--$2.5$, $\theta_{\rm d}=0.2$--$2.0$\arcsec, and T$_{\rm d}=150$--$250$\,K; $\tau_{\rm 1.3\,mm}$ was unconstrained. The range for T$_{\rm d}$ was chosen based on our modelling of the CH$_{3}$CN emission (Section~\ref{dis:cassis}). At high density, as in MM1, gas and dust temperatures are expected to be coupled \citep[e.g.][]{ceccarelli_1996,kaufman_1998}; since $\beta$ and T$_{\rm d}$ are degenerate, we use the gas temperature measurement to better constrain the dust model. \smallskip The combined model of a uniform-density ionised sphere and graybody dust emission provides a good fit to the observed centimetre-submillimetre SED of MM1 at wavelengths $\lambda \leq 3$~cm ($\nu\ge$10 GHz), as shown by the dashed blue curve in Figure~\ref{fig:sed}. The best-fit parameters of the dust component are T$_{\rm d}=172$\,K, $\beta=2.1$, $\tau_{\mathrm 1.3\,mm}=0.86$, and $\theta_{\rm d}=0\farcs20\sim700$\,au. Because the primary aim of our SED modelling is to better understand the nature of the central ionised source, we consider the best-fit dust parameters as indicative, noting in particular the degeneracy between dust temperature and $\beta$ due to having measurements only on the Rayleigh-Jeans portion of the dust emission spectrum. Overlaying the flux densities of \citet{moscadelli_2016} in Figure~\ref{fig:sed} (open points), we find reasonable consistency at 2.3 and 1.4~cm considering the difference in uv range, but an excess of emission at 4.8--5.5\,cm compared to our best-fit dust and uniform ionised sphere model. \smallskip Given the observed spectral index at these wavelengths \citep[$\alpha=0.57\pm0.63$;][]{moscadelli_2016}, we model this excess as an ionised jet in the form of a truncated power law density profile ($F_\nu \propto \nu^{0.6}$). Fitting to all of the datapoints shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sed} (and listed in Table~\ref{tab:sed}), we compare three models: (i) a three component model including dust, a uniform density ionised sphere (which we interpret as a hypercompact (HC) H\,{\sc ii} region, as discussed below), and an ionised jet; (ii) a two component model including only dust and a uniform density ionised sphere; and (iii) a two component model including only dust and an ionised jet. For the three component model, the dust parameters were fixed to those described above, in light of the large number of free parameters. We first attempted to fit for all six ionised gas parameters (three describing the ionised sphere, and three for the jet), but found that the jet component is not well constrained, especially considering the dispersion in the published flux density measurements at 4.3--5.5\,cm, which is due in part to the complexity in the deconvolution of the bright UC~H\,{\sc ii} region (G11.94-0.62) located $\sim1'$ to the north-northeast \citep{Wood1989apjs}. For this reason, we adopted a nominal central density of $n_e = 10^6$\,cm$^{-3}$ and electron temperature of $T_e$=10$^4$~K and fit only for the size of the jet. To assess which of the three models --- (i), (ii), or (iii), above --- provides the best description of the data, we computed the reduced $\chi^{2}$ for the best-fit model of each class. The three-component model best represents the data, with a reduced $\chi^{2}$ of 1.4, compared to a reduced $\chi^{2}$ of 3.0 for the model with only dust and an ionised sphere, and a reduced $\chi^{2}$ of 7.0 for the model with only dust and an ionised jet. The dust and jet model is shown as a dashed red curve in Figure~\ref{fig:sed}, which illustrates that this model produces a poor overall fit to the SED, failing to reproduce the $\sim 1.3$\,cm and $\leq 1.1$\,mm emission. For the three-component model, the best-fit ionised gas parameters are electron temperature $T_e=9500$\,K, electron density $n_e=5.8 \times 10^{6}$\,cm$^{-3}$ and radius $R_e$=21\,au ($\sim$ 0\farcs006 at a distance of 3.37\,kpc) for the HC~H\,{\sc ii} region, and a half-power radius of 17\,au ($\sim$0\farcs005 at 3.37\,kpc) for the jet. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sed}, the three-component combined model (whose individual components are shown as dotted lines) produces a reasonable fit to the SED. The modelled source sizes for both the ionised and dust components are consistent with observational constraints, e.g.\ with CM1 being unresolved in all of our VLA observations and in those of \citet{moscadelli_2016} (see also Section~\ref{sec:cont_results}), and with MM1 being unresolved by the SMA \citep{cyganowski_2014}. \smallskip Our modelling results support a picture in which the centimetre-wavelength continuum emission associated with MM1 arises from a very small hypercompact (HC) H\,{\sc ii} region that is gravitationally `trapped' by an accretion flow \citep[e.g.][]{keto_2003,keto_2007}, possibly accompanied by a compact ionised jet. These results are consistent with other evidence for ongoing accretion by the central (proto)star, including the fact that it drives an active outflow (Figure \ref{fig:outflow}). Indeed, the momentum outflow rate estimated by \citet{moscadelli_2016} from VLBA observations of H$_{2}$O masers is exceptionally high, $2\times10^{-2}$ M$_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$\,km\,s$^{-1}$. A high accretion rate could also explain the moderate luminosity of the region ($\sim$10$^{4}$\,L$_{\odot}$) compared to the enclosed mass implied for MM1 by our kinematic modelling (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}): in evolutionary models of massive (proto)stars, high accretion rates result in large radii and low effective temperatures \citep[e.g.][]{hosokawa_2009,hosokawa_2010}. Finally, the early evolutionary stage implied by a gravitationally trapped H\,{\sc ii} region and a swollen, non-ZAMS configuration is consistent with the short dynamical timescale of the outflow driven by MM1, $\lesssim$10,000 years \citep{cyganowski_2011sma}. \smallskip The self-consistent scenario outlined above --- in which a high rate of accretion governs many observable characteristics --- leads us to favour a HC H\,{\sc ii} region interpretation of the centimetre-wavelength ($\lambda = 0.9-3$\,cm) emission from MM1. We note, however, that HC H\,{\sc ii} regions and ionised winds or jets can be difficult to differentiate observationally. The distinction is in part dynamical --- jets have higher velocities than winds (as reflected in larger radio recombination line widths and/or proper motions), which have higher velocities than HC H\,{\sc ii} regions \citep[e.g.][]{hoare_2007,hoare_franco_2007}. The other distinction is the source of ionising photons: for HC H\,{\sc ii} regions (including ionised accretion flows or discs), photoionisation by the central massive (proto)star dominates, while in jets and winds, shocks may contribute significantly to the ionisation \citep[e.g.][]{shepherd_2004,keto_2007,galvan-madrid_2010}. Neither distinguishing property can be directly accessed with existing observations, and both HC H\,{\sc ii} regions and ionised winds or jets are characterised by intermediate centimetre-wavelength spectral indices (S$_\nu \propto \nu^\alpha$, $-0.1 < \alpha < 2$). \citet{moscadelli_2016} interpret the centimetre-wavelength emission from G11.92--0.61 MM1 as arising from an ionised wind, based largely on their measured centimetre-wavelength spectral indices. The difference in interpretation likely stems from our more extensive wavelength coverage (e.g. into the submillimetre) and the inclusion of a dust component in our modelling: a three-component combined model, including dust, an HC H\,{\sc ii} region, and an ionised jet, provides the best description of the observed SED, as discussed above. \citet{moscadelli_2016} also report a slight elongation in their highest-resolution (1.4\,cm) image, but the continuum emission is not well-resolved (see also Section~\ref{sec:cont_results}). Additional, higher angular resolution VLA observations (e.g.\ at 0.9\,cm and 0.7\,cm, in the most-extended A-configuration) are necessary to establish whether or not the ionised component is spatially extended on $\sim$0\farcs1 scales. Importantly, a contribution to the centimetre-wavelength emission from an ionised wind or jet --- as in our three component model (Figure~\ref{fig:sed}) --- is entirely consistent with our conclusion that the central source of MM1 is a very young massive (proto)star, characterised by ongoing accretion and a swollen, non-ZAMS configuration. \subsection{Physical properties of the disc estimated from dust emission} \label{sec:dust_mass} Our modelling of MM1's centimetre-submillimetre wavelength SED confirms that the observed 1.3\,mm flux density is dominated by thermal dust emission: in our best-fit model, dust accounts for 99.5 per cent of the emission at 1.3\,mm. We estimate a gas mass for the disc from the measured 1.3\,mm integrated flux density using a simple model of isothermal dust emission, corrected for dust opacity \citep[][Equation 3]{cyganowski_2011sma}. As in \citet{cyganowski_2014}, these estimates assume a gas-to-dust mass ratio of 100 and a dust opacity $\kappa_{\rm 1.3\,mm}=1.1$\,cm$^{2}$\,g$^{-1}$ \citep[for grains with thin ice mantles and coagulation at 10$^{8}$\,cm$^{-3}$;][]{ossenkopf_1994}. For these estimates, we adopt the average temperatures of the cool and warm components from our pixel-by-pixel CH$_{3}$CN modelling, 153$\pm$10\,K and 227$\pm$14\,K (Section~\ref{dis:cassis}; the quoted uncertainty is the standard deviation over all fitted pixels), and the best-fit dust temperature from Section~\ref{sec:ff_sed} of 172\,K. As these temperatures are very similar to the range adopted by \citet{cyganowski_2014} based on fitting the CH$_{3}$CN spectrum at the millimetre continuum peak, the mass estimates are nearly identical to those in \citet{cyganowski_2014}: M$_{\rm gas}=$ 3.3\,M$_{\odot}$, 2.9\,M$_{\odot}$, and 2.1\,M$_{\odot}$ for T$_{\rm dust}=153$\,K, 172\,K, and 227\,K, respectively. We note that even if the centimetre-wavelength continuum emission arose entirely from an ionised wind \citep[e.g.][]{moscadelli_2016} with $\alpha=0.6$ out to millimetre wavelengths, the contribution to the 1.3\,mm flux density would be negligible for our mass estimates ($\sim$1\,mJy contribution at 1.3\,mm, corresponding to a difference in the estimated mass of $\sim0.02$--$0.04$\,$M_\odot$, depending on T$_{\rm dust}$). \smallskip Calculating corresponding H$_2$ number densities for a cylindrical, rather than a spherical, geometry yields estimates of n$_{\rm H_2}\sim$ 2--$3\times$10$^{10}$\,cm$^{-3}$ for a characteristic disc height of 7\,au and n$_{\rm H_2}\sim$ 5--$8\times$10$^{9}$\,cm$^{-3}$ for a disc height of 30\,au (measured from the midplane). We emphasise that these estimated number densities are averages over the entire disc, based on an isothermal estimate of the gas mass associated with the observed dust emission --- which, as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:results_extent}, is likely more compact than the gas disc. We also note that while the calculated dust opacities, estimated as $\tau_{\rm dust}=-\mathrm{ln}(1- T_{\rm b} / T_{\rm dust})$, are moderate \citep[0.2--0.3, comparable to the estimates in][]{cyganowski_2014}, these are similarly averages over the entire source, and do not capture variations in opacity within the disc (e.g. associated with a dense midplane). \subsection{G11.92--0.61 MM1 in context} \label{sec:context} The results of our kinematic fitting (Section~\ref{sec:kinematics}) suggest that G11.92$-$0.61 MM1 may be the most massive proto-O star to date with strong evidence for the presence of a Keplerian disc. Of candidates reported in the literature, only AFGL 2591-VLA3 has a comparable central source mass: $\sim$40 M$_{\odot}$ \citep[L$\sim$2$\times$10$^{5}$\,L$_{\odot}$;][]{jimenez-serra_2012, sanna_2012}, compared to $\sim$30-60 M$_{\odot}$ for MM1. Studies of other proto-O stars with evidence for Keplerian discs find enclosed or central source masses of $<$30\,M$_{\odot}$. For NGC6334I(N)-SMA 1b, perhaps the closest analogue to G11.92$-$0.61 based on IR properties, \citet{hunter_2014} find an enclosed mass of 10-30 M$_{\odot}$. Interestingly, IRAS 16547-4247 and AFGL 4176 --- regions with luminosities 6-10$\times$ that of G11.92$-$0.61 \citep[$\sim$10$^{4}$\,L$_{\odot}$;][]{cyganowski_2011sma,moscadelli_2016} --- also have enclosed or central source masses of $<$30\,M$_{\odot}$ \citep{zapata_2015,johnston_2015}. Taken at face value, this collection of results suggests that enclosed mass does not scale directly with luminosity for proto-O stars. However, the differences between the estimated luminosities of different sources are comparable to the uncertainties in the estimates, particularly for sources that do not have maser parallax distances (e.g. IRAS 16547-4247 and AFGL 4176). \smallskip In contrast, our estimated (gas) mass for the MM1 disc is similar to the mass estimates obtained for other candidate discs around proto-O stars using similar dust properties. In the context of comparing the small number of discs around O-type (proto)stars, it is worth noting the substantial uncertainty in mass estimates associated with the (assumed) dust opacity, $\kappa_\nu$. Our estimates above \citep[like those of][]{wang_2012,hunter_2014,zapata_2015} adopt dust opacities from \citet{ossenkopf_1994} for grains with ice mantles. For \citet{draine_2003} interstellar grains, $\kappa_{\rm 1.2 mm}$ is lower by a factor of $\gtrsim$5 (for R$_{V}=5.5$, as adopted by \citealt{johnston_2015}), yielding mass estimates that are larger by the same factor. This difference in assumed dust properties accounts for the much larger mass reported by \citet{johnston_2015} for the AFGL 4176 disc ($\sim$12 M$_{\odot}$), compared to the values of a few solar masses ($\sim$2-6 M$_{\odot}$) characteristic of MM1 and other massive disc candidates \citep[e.g.][]{wang_2012,hunter_2014,zapata_2015}. \smallskip The relatively large disc-to-star mass ratio derived from our observations of G11.92$-$0.61 MM1 ($\gtrsim$0.035) indicates that self-gravity may play a role in the evolution of the disc. Self-gravitating discs are efficient transporters of angular momentum, and hence provide a suitable means of assembling relatively massive stars on short timescales. In a companion paper (Forgan et al, submitted) we compute simple semi-analytic models of self-gravitating discs \citep{forgan_2011a,forgan_2013}, both for MM1 and for other massive Keplerian disc candidates recently observed. We find that these simple models provide reasonably good estimates of the observed disc mass, given the observational constraints on the disc inner and outer radii, stellar mass and accretion rate. Most intriguingly, the models predict that the disc around MM1 should be sufficiently unstable to fragment into low mass protostars. These objects are beyond the resolution of our observations at this time, but may be detectable with e.g.\ ALMA. \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusions} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/mm1_morph_compass.pdf} \caption{A proposed morphology for the immediate vicinity of MM1 as viewed from Earth. The maximum velocity gradient obtained from the line channel analysis (red-blue points) lies perpendicular to the axis of the molecular outflow (Fig. \ref{fig:outflow}). The closed loop structure of the channel centroids (Fig. \ref{fig:all_centroids}) for many of the emission lines can be explained by a flared, optically thick Keplerian disc, viewed at an intermediate inclination. Such a disc would also exhibit a hot spot in temperature towards the South-West (Fig. \ref{fig:ch3cn_cassis}).} \label{fig:morph} \end{figure} In this paper, we have used sub-arcsecond ($\lesssim$1550\,au) resolution SMA 1.3 mm and VLA 3.0 and 0.9 cm observations of the high-mass (proto)star G11.92--0.61 MM1 to characterise the nature of the central source and examine the kinematics and physical conditions of the gas surrounding it. Our main findings are: \begin{itemize} \item The compact molecular line emission associated with the MM1 millimetre continuum source exhibits a velocity gradient that is approximately perpendicular to the high-velocity bipolar molecular outflow driven by MM1. The velocity gradient of the compact gas is remarkably consistent, being seen in lines of varying excitation energy and in 10 different chemical species, including CH$_{3}$OH, CH$_{3}$OCHO, OCS, HNCO, CH$_{3}$CH$_{2}$CN, H$_{2}$CO and DCN. \smallskip \item From the 8 GHz of bandwidth covered by our SMA observations, we identify 15 potentially `disc tracing' lines. For all of these lines, position-velocity diagrams exhibit the characteristic pattern expected for a Keplerian disc: the highest velocities are seen nearest the central source, and the most spatially extended emission at lower velocities. \smallskip \item Our kinematic modelling of the MM1 disc yields a best-fit enclosed mass of $60^{+21}_{-27}$\,M$_{\odot}$ and disc inclination of $35^{+20}_{-6}\degr$ (to the line of sight), using all `disc-tracing' lines other than CH$_{3}$OH (nine transitions). The six `disc-tracing' transitions of CH$_{3}$OH exhibit a somewhat different morphology than the rest of the lines in plots of emission centroid position as a function of velocity, and were fit separately. The best fitting disc model for the CH$_{3}$OH transitions yields a disc enclosing a mass of $34^{+28}_{-12}$\,M$_{\odot}$ at an inclination of $52^{+11}_{-14}\degr$. Together these results imply a central source mass of $\sim$30--60 M$_{\odot}$, making MM1 potentially the most massive proto-O star with strong evidence for a Keplerian disc. \smallskip \item For many observed molecular lines, the extent of the gas emission is larger than that of the dust continuum emission from the disc. From our kinematic modelling of the gas emission, we find a disc outer radius of 1200\,au. \smallskip \item Two temperature components are required to fit the CH$_{3}$CN J=12-11 emission from the MM1 disc using an LTE radiative transfer model. The cooler ($153\pm10$\,K) and warmer ($227\pm14$\,K) components may correspond to CH$_{3}$CN reservoirs in different disc layers, as in recent models of discs around low-mass protostars \citep{walsh_2015}. \smallskip \item Our modelling of the centimetre-submillimetre wavelength SED of MM1 confirms that the observed 1.3\,mm flux density is dominated by dust. Applying a simple model of isothermal dust emission, we estimate a disc gas mass of 2.1--3.3\,M$_{\odot}$ (for T$_{\rm dust}=227$--153\,K). This mass estimate is similar to those for most other candidate Keplerian discs around proto-O stars that assume similar dust properties. MM1's relatively high disc-to-star mass ratio ($\gtrsim$ 0.035) suggests that the disc may be self-gravitating, which we explore in a companion modelling paper (Forgan et al., submitted). \smallskip \item From our SED modelling, we find that the centimetre-wavelength flux density of MM1 is dominated by free-free emission. We model the free-free and dust emission simultaneously, and find that the ionised gas is best-fit by a model of a uniform density ionised sphere with electron temperature 9500\,K, electron density $5.8\times10^{6}$\,cm$^{-3}$ and radius 21\,au. These properties are consistent with a very small, gravitationally trapped HC H{\sc ii} region, possibly accompanied by a compact ionised jet. \end{itemize} In combination, our results suggest that G11.92--0.61 MM1 is likely a young proto-O star, in a swollen, non-ZAMS configuration, surrounded by a Keplerian disc with a morphology similar to that shown in Figure~\ref{fig:morph}. Our observations and modelling support a self-consistent picture in which accretion is ongoing, and a high accretion rate governs many observable properties, including the presence of a gravitationally trapped HC H{\sc ii} region and a moderate luminosity ($\sim$ 10$^{4}$ L$_{\odot}$) for a massive ($\sim$30-60M$_{\odot}$) central star. Future higher angular resolution observations will be required to spatially resolve the protostar-disc system. Such observations will be essential to compare the role and physics of disc accretion in high- and low-mass star formation, and to develop a clearer understanding of the accretion processes at work in massive young stellar objects. \section*{Acknowledgements} We would like to thank Melvin Hoare, Simon Purser and Katharine Johnston for helpful discussions regarding the nature of the centimetre-wavelength emission, and Catherine Walsh for kindly providing further information on the behaviour of CH$_{3}$CN in her chemical models. We also thank Kenny Wood, Claire Davies, and Christine Koepferl for their input at an early stage of this project, and the referee for a constructive report. \smallskip JDI gratefully acknowledges support from the DISCSIM project, grant agreement 341137, funded by the European Research Council under ERC-2013-ADG. CJC acknowledges support from STFC grant ST/M001296/1. PN, CJC and JDI gratefully acknowledge support in the form of an Undergraduate Research Bursary from the Royal Astronomical Society. DF acknowledges support from the ECOGAL project, grant agreement 291227, funded by the European Research Council under ERC-2011-ADG. This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services; Astropy, a community-developed core Python package for Astronomy \citep{astropy_2013}; APLpy, an open-source plotting package for Python hosted at \url{http://aplpy.github.com}, and the CASSIS software and VADMC databases (\url{http://www.vamdc.eu/}). CASSIS has been developed by IRAP-UPS/CNRS (\url{http://cassis.irap.omp.eu}). The Submillimeter Array is a joint project between the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics, and is funded by the Smithsonian Institution and the Academia Sinica. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under agreement by the Associated Universities, Inc. \bibliographystyle{mnras}
\section{Introduction} Let $G$ be a finite, simple, and undirected graph with vertex set $V(G)$ and edge set $E(G)$. For a vertex $v \in V(G)$, the \emph{open neighborhood of $v$} is the set $N_G(v)=\{u \in V(G) \mid uv \in E(G)\}$ and the \emph{closed neighborhood of $v$} is the set $N_G[v]=N_G(v) \cup \{v\}$. Two distinct vertices $u_1$ and $u_2$ in $G$ are called \emph{true twins} if $N_G[u_1]=N_G[u_2]$, and \emph{false twins} if $N_G(u_1)=N_G(u_2)$. The \emph{degree}, $\deg_G(v)$, of a vertex $v \in V(G)$ is $\|N_G(v)\|$; a \emph{leaf} (or an \emph{end-vertex}) is a vertex of degree one, and we denote by $\sigma(G)$ the number of leaves of $G$. A \emph{regular graph} is a graph where each vertex has the same degree, and a regular graph with vertices of degree $k$ is called a $k$-regular graph. We denote by $\bigtriangleup(G)$ and $\delta(G)$, respectively, the maximum degree and the minimum degree of $G$. The distance between two vertices $u,v \in V(G)$, denoted by $d_G(u, v)$, is the length of a shortest path between $u$ and $v$ in $G$; we drop the subscript $G$ if it is clear in context. The diameter, $diam(G)$, of $G$ is $\max\{d(u,v) \mid u, v \in V(G)\}$. A set $S \subseteq V(G)$ is a \emph{vertex cover} of $G$ if every edge of $G$ is incident with at least one vertex of $S$, and the \emph{vertex cover number} $\alpha(G)$ of $G$ is the minimum cardinality over all vertex covers of $G$. A \textit{matching} $M$ in a graph $G$ is a set of pairwise non-adjacent edges, i.e., no two edges in $M$ share a common vertex. A \textit{maximum matching} is a matching that contains the largest possible number of edges, and the \textit{matching number} $\nu(G)$ of $G$ is the size of a maximum matching. A \emph{Hamiltonian cycle} is a cycle that visits each vertex exactly once, and a graph that contains a Hamiltonian cycle is called a \emph{Hamiltonian graph}. The \emph{complement} $\overline{G}$ of $G$ is the graph whose vertex set is $V(G)$ and $uv \in E(\overline{G})$ if and only if $uv \not\in E(G)$ for $u,v \in V(G)$. We denote by $P_n$, $C_n$, and $K_n$, respectively, the path, the cycle, and the complete graph on $n$ vertices. A vertex $z \in V(G)$ \emph{strongly resolves} a pair of vertices $x,y \in V(G)$ if there exists a shortest $y-z$ path containing $x$ or a shortest $x-z$ path containing $y$. A set of vertices $S \subseteq V(G)$ \emph{strongly resolves} $G$ if every pair of distinct vertices of $G$ is strongly resolved by some vertex in $S$; then, $S$ is called a \emph{strong resolving set} of $G$. The \emph{strong metric dimension} of $G$, denoted by $sdim(G)$, is the minimum cardinality over all strong resolving sets of $G$. Seb\"{o} and Tannier \cite{MathZ} introduced strong metric dimension. They observed that if $S=\{w_1, w_2, \ldots, w_k\}$ is a strong resolving set, then the vectors $\{r(v \| S) \mid v \in V(G)\}$ uniquely determine the graph $G$, where $r(v\|S)=(d(v, w_1), d(v, w_2), \ldots, d(v, w_k))$; see~\cite{sdimF} for a detailed explanation. A vertex $u \in V(G)$ is \emph{maximally distant} from $v \in V(G)$ if $d(u,v) \ge d(w, v)$ for every $w \in N_G(u)$. If $u$ is maximally distant from $v$ and $v$ is maximally distant from $u$ in $G$, then we say that $u$ and $v$ are \emph{mutually maximally distant} in $G$, and we write $u$ MMD $v$ for short. It was shown in~\cite{sdim} that if two vertices $x$ and $y$ are mutually maximally distant in $G$, then any strong resolving set $S$ of $G$ must contain either $x$ or $y$. Following~\cite{sdim_Cartesian}, the strong resolving graph of $G$, denoted by $G_{SR}$, has vertex set $V(G_{SR})=M(G)=\{x \in V(G): \exists y \in V(G) \mbox{ with } x \mbox{ MMD } y\}$ and $uv \in E(G_{SR})$ if and only if $u$ and $v$ are mutually maximally distant in $G$. Oellermann and Peters-Fransen~\cite{sdim} proved that determining the strong metric dimension of a graph is an NP-hard problem. Let $S\{x, y\}$ denote the set of vertices $z$ such that $x$ lies on a $y-z$ geodesic or $y$ lies on an $x-z$ geodesic in $G$. Let $g: V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a real valued function and, for any set $U \subseteq V(G)$, let $g(U)=\sum_{v \in U}g(v)$. The function $g$ is a \emph{strong resolving function} of $G$ if $g(S\{x, y\}) \ge 1$ for every pair of distinct vertices $x, y$ of $G$. The \emph{fractional strong metric dimension} of $G$, denoted by $sdim_f(G)$, is $\min\{g(V(G)): g \mbox{ is a strong resolving function of }G\}$. Notice that $sdim_f(G)$ reduces to $sdim(G)$ if the codomain of strong resolving functions is restricted to $\{0,1\}$. Fractional strong metric dimension was introduced in~\cite{sdimF}, and further studied in~\cite{fracsdim}. For the fractionalization of graph parameters, see~\cite{new3}. In this paper, we obtain some interesting new results on the fractional strong metric dimension of connected graphs, and investigate the fractional strong metric dimension of the corona product, the lexicographic product, and the Cartesian product of graphs. We refer to~\cite{book-products} on the product of graphs. This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we review some known results and also obtain new results on the fractional strong metric dimension of graphs. We also provide a family of graphs $\mathcal{F}$ such that, for $G \in \mathcal{F}$, $\min\{\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}, sdim(G)\}$ can be arbitrarily larger than $sdim_f(G)$. In section 3, we study the fractional strong metric dimension of corona product graphs $G \odot H$; we explicitly compute $sdim_f(G \odot H)$ for a connected graph of order at least two, and obtain bounds for $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)$. In section 4, we study the fractional strong metric dimension of lexicographic product graphs $G[H]$, where $G$ and $H$ each is a graph of order at least two, with $G$ being connected. Based on~\cite{lexi_dimF} and~\cite{lexi_sdim}, we obtain some bounds for $sdim_f(G[H])$. We also obtain some classes of graphs satisfying $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{\|V(G)\|\cdot\|V(H)\|}{2}$. In section 5, we study the fractional strong metric dimension of Cartesian product graphs $G \square H$, where both $G$ and $H$ are connected graphs of order at least two. We obtain sharp bounds for $sdim_f (G \square H)$, and obtain some classes of graphs satisfying $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{\|M(G)\|\cdot\|M(H)\|}{2}$. We also provide a family of Cartesian product graphs such that $\frac{\|M(G)\| \cdot\|M(H)\|}{2}-sdim_f(G \square H)$ can be arbitrarily large. \section{Some results on arbitrary connected graphs}\label{sect-general} In this section, we recall some known results and also obtain new results on the fractional strong metric dimension of connected graphs; these are useful in the sections that follow. We first recall some known results. \begin{observation}\emph{\cite{sdimF}}\label{observation-1} Let $G$ be a connected graph. \begin{itemize} \item[\emph{(a)}] If $v$ is a cut-vertex of $G$, then $g(v)=0$ for any minimum strong resolving function $g$ of $G$; \item[\emph{(b)}] If $x$ MMD $y$ in $G$, then $S\{x,y\}=\{x,y\}$ and hence $g(x)+g(y)\ge 1$ for any strong resolving function $g$ of $G$. \end{itemize} \end{observation} \begin{theorem}\label{sdimbounds} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$. Then $1 \le sdim_f(G) \le \frac{n}{2}$. Moreover, \begin{itemize} \item[\emph{(a)}]\emph{\cite{sdimF}} $sdim_f(G)=1$ if and only if $G=P_n$ and, \item[\emph{(b)}]\emph{\cite{fracsdim}} $sdim_f(G)=\frac{n}{2}$ if and only if there exists a bijection $\alpha$ on $V(G)$ such that $\alpha(v)\neq v$ and $S\{v, \alpha(v)\}=\{v,\alpha(v)\}$ for every $v\in V(G)$. \end{itemize} \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{sdimF}}\label{sdimFthm} \begin{itemize} \item[\emph{(a)}] For any tree $T$, $sdim_f(T)=\frac{1}{2}\sigma(T)$. \item[\emph{(b)}] For the Petersen graph $\mathcal{P}$, $sdim_f(\mathcal{P})=5$. \item[\emph{(c)}] For the cycle $C_n$ on $n \ge 3$ vertices, $sdim_f(C_n)=\frac{n}{2}$. \item[\emph{(d)}] For the wheel $W_{n}$ on $n \ge 4$ vertices, we have \begin{equation}\nonumber sdim_f(W_{n})=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 2 & \mbox{ if } n=4\\ \frac{1}{2}(n-1) & \mbox{ if } n \ge 5. \end{array} \right. \end{equation} \item[\emph{(e)}] For $k \ge 2$, let $K_{a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_k}$ be a complete $k$-partite graph of order $n=\sum_{i=1}^{k}a_i$. Then \begin{equation}\nonumber sdim_f(K_{a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_k})=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{n-1}{2} & \mbox{ if $a_i=1$ for exactly one } i \in \{1,2, \ldots, k\}\\ \frac{n}{2} & \mbox{ otherwise }. \end{array}\right. \end{equation} \item[\emph{(f)}] For $s, t \ge 2$, $sdim_f(P_s \square P_t)=2$, where $P_s \square P_t$ denotes the Cartesian product of two paths $P_s$ and $P_t$. \end{itemize} \end{theorem} Given a minimum strong resolving set $S$ of a graph $G$, it is clear that a function on $V(G)$ which assigns 1 to each vertex of $S$ and 0 to the rest of the vertices of $G$ is a strong resolving function. Thus, the following obvious observation follows. \begin{observation}\emph{\cite{sdimF}}\label{observation} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim_f(G) \le sdim(G)$. \end{observation} Next, we recall a lower bound for $sdim_f(G)$ in terms of $sdim(G)$. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{fracsdim}}\label{lowersdimF} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim_f(G) \ge \max\left\{\frac{1}{2} sdim(G),1\right\}$. \end{theorem} Next, we recall some results involving the vertex cover number $\alpha(G)$ of a graph $G$. Based on the strong resolving graph $G_{SR}$ defined in \cite{sdim}, where $V(G_{SR})=V(G)$ and $uv \in E(G_{SR})$ if and only if $u$ MMD $v$ in $G$, Oellermann and Peters-Fransen proved the following crucial relationship between the strong metric dimension of a graph $G$ and the vertex cover number of $G_{SR}$. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{sdim}}\label{v_cover} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim(G)=\alpha(G_{SR})$. \end{theorem} For the case in which the strong resolving graph of a graph is bipartite, the following well known result plays a very important role. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{E,K}}\label{KE} $($K\"{o}nig-Egerv\'{a}ry$)$ If $G$ is a bipartite graph, then $\alpha(G)=\nu(G)$. \end{theorem} In connection with the matching number $\nu(G)$ of a graph $G$, the following lower bound for the fractional strong metric dimension of graphs can be quite useful. \begin{proposition}\label{matchingN} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim_f(G) \ge \nu(G_{SR})$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $g: V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a strong resolving function of $G$. Let $\mathcal{M}=\{u_iv_i \in E(G_{SR}): 1 \le i \le m\}$ be a maximum matching of $G_{SR}$. For each $i \in \{1,2,\ldots, m\}$, $u_iv_i \in \mathcal{M}$ implies that $u_i$ MMD $v_i$ in $G$, and thus $g(u_i)+g(v_i) \ge 1$. By summing over $m$ such inequalities, we have $\sum_{i=1}^{m} [g(u_i)+g(v_i)] \ge m$. Since any two vertices in $\{u_i, v_i : 1 \le i \le m\}$ are distinct, we have $sdim_f(G) \ge m=\nu(G_{SR})$.~\hfill \end{proof} As an immediate consequence of Theorem~\ref{KE} and Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, we have the following result. \begin{cor}\label{cor_bipartite} Let $G$ is a connected graph of order at least two. If $G_{SR}$ is a bipartite graph, then $sdim_f(G)=sdim(G)$. \end{cor} \begin{proof} Let $G_{SR}$ be a bipartite graph. By Theorem~\ref{v_cover}, Theorem~\ref{KE}, and Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, $sdim_f(G) \ge \nu(G_{SR})=\alpha(G_{SR})=sdim(G)$. Since $sdim_f(G) \le sdim(G)$ by Observation~\ref{observation}, we have $sdim_f(G)=sdim(G)$. \end{proof} Corollary~\ref{cor_bipartite} is applicable to a number of classes of graphs, including $P_n$, $C_{2k}$, and the hypercube $Q_n$, whose strong resolving graphs are respectively $P_2$, $\bigcup_{i=1}^{k}P_2$, and $\bigcup_{i=1}^{2^{n-1}}P_2$, as one may readily check. For several other interesting constructions of strong resolving graphs, we suggest the recent survey~\cite{survey}.\\ The set $M(G)=\{x \in V(G): \exists y \in V(G) \mbox{ with } x \mbox{ MMD } y\}$ has been called the set of \emph{boundary vertices} of $G$, and we recall the following result. \begin{proposition}\emph{\cite{fracsdim}}\label{uppersdimF} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim_f(G) \le \frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\|$. \end{proposition} For a vertex transitive graph $G$, it is clear that $M(G)=V(G)$; in fact, equality in the bound of Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF} is always attained for it. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{fracsdim}}\label{v_transitive} If $G$ is a vertex-transitive graph, then $sdim_f(G)=\frac{\|V(G)\|}{2}$. \end{theorem} From Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}, one can easily see that $sdim_f(\mathcal{P})=5$, $sdim_f(C_n)=\frac{n}{2}$, $sdim_f(C_n \square K_m)=\frac{nm}{2}$, and $sdim_f(C_n \square C_n)=\frac{n^2}{2}$, where $n \ge 3$ and $m \ge 2$. Next, we consider graphs $G$ satisfying $sdim_f(G)=\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}$. \begin{proposition}\label{v_regular} Let $G$ be a connected graph. If each connected component of $G_{SR}$ is a regular graph, then $sdim_f(G)=\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $g:V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a strong resolving function of a connected graph $G$. Let $G_{SR}$ be a disjoint union of $G^1, G^2, \ldots, G^k$, where $k \ge 1$. For each $i \in \{1,2,\ldots,k\}$, let $G^i$ be a $r_i$-regular graph of order $m_i$, where $r_i \ge 1$ and $m_i \ge 2$. Notice that $M(G)=V(G_{SR})=\cup_{i=1}^{k}V(G^i)$ and $\|M(G)\|=\sum_{i=1}^{k}m_i$. For each $i \in \{1,2,\ldots,k\}$, since $\|E(G^i)\|=\frac{m_ir_i}{2}$, noting that each edge $uv\in E(G^i) \subseteq E(G_{SR})$ satisfies $g(u)+g(v) \ge 1$, there are $\frac{m_ir_i}{2}$ such inequalities for $G^i$ and the term $g(u)$ appears exactly $r_i$ times for each $u \in V(G^i)$. By summing over all such inequalities, we have $r_i \cdot g(V(G^i)) \ge \frac{m_ir_i}{2}$, i.e., $g(V(G^i)) \ge \frac{m_i}{2}$, for each $i \in \{1,2,\ldots, k\}$. Thus, $g(V(G))\ge g(M(G))=\sum_{i=1}^{k}g(V(G^i)) \ge \sum_{i=1}^{k}\frac{m_i}{2}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{k}m_i=\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\|$. On the other hand, $sdim_f(G) \le \frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}. Thus, $sdim_f(G)=\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}$.~\hfill \end{proof} It is worth noting that $sdim_f$ is not a monotone parameter with respect to subgraph inclusion in any sense (see~\cite{sdimF} for details). However, $sdim_f$ is indeed a monotone parameter with respect to subgraph inclusion for strong resolving graphs. Hereinafter, for graphs $H$ and $G$, we shall indicate that $H$ is a subgraph of $G$ by $H \subseteq G$. \begin{lemma}\label{sr_subgraph} Let $G$ and $H$ be connected graphs. If $H_{SR} \subseteq G_{SR}$, then $sdim_f(H) \le sdim_f(G)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $G$ and $H$ be connected graphs satisfying $H_{SR} \subseteq G_{SR}$. Let $g: V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a strong resolving function of $G$, and let $h=g\|_{V(H)}: V(H) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be the restriction of $g$ to $V(H)$. Since an edge in $H_{SR}$ is an edge in $G_{SR}$, $h$ is a strong resolving function of $H$; thus, $sdim_f(H) \le sdim_f(G)$.~\hfill \end{proof} As an immediate consequence of Proposition~\ref{v_regular} and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}, we have the following result. \begin{cor}\label{v_reg_sub} Let $G$ be a connected graph. If $G_{SR}$ contains a regular graph as a subgraph with the same vertex set $V(G_{SR})$, then $sdim_f(G)=\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}$. \end{cor} Now, one may have noticed that Observation~\ref{observation} and Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}, taken together, yield the following result. \begin{cor}\label{double_upper_bound} For any connected graph $G$, $sdim_f(G) \le \min \left\{\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}, sdim(G)\right\}$. \end{cor} One may wonder how far $sdim_f(G)$ can deviate from the two upper bounds in Corollary~\ref{double_upper_bound}. Although one example of a graph $G$ satisfying $sdim_f(G) < \frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\|$ was given in~\cite{fracsdim}, we advance further by showing that $\min \left\{\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}, sdim(G)\right\}$ can be arbitrarily larger than $sdim_f(G)$ with the next example. The example is very interesting for the fact that all the graphs we initially looked at -- common or standard examples -- achieved equality in Corollary~\ref{double_upper_bound}. \begin{remark}\label{graph_G_q} There is a family of graphs $G$ such that $\min \left\{\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}, sdim(G)\right\}-sdim_f(G)$ can be arbitrarily large. Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a family of graphs $G_q$, $q \ge 1$, constructed in the following way: \begin{itemize} \item[(i)] Consider $q+1$ paths $a_ib_ic_i$ for $i\in\{0,1,\ldots,q\}$; \item[(ii)] Add the edges $a_ia_0$, $b_ib_0$ and $c_ic_0$ for each $i\in\{1,\ldots,q\}$; \item[(iii)] Add the isolated vertices $y_i$ and $z_i$ for $i\in \{0,1,\ldots,q\}$; \item[(iv)] Add the edges $a_iy_i$ and $c_iz_i$ for each $i \in \{0,1,\ldots, q\}$; \item[(v)] Add a vertex $x$ and the edges $xa_0$ and $xc_0$. \end{itemize} For each $G_q\in \mathcal{F}$ (see $G_4 \in \mathcal{F}$ in Figure~\ref{G_4}), we will show that $\|M(G_q)\|=3q+3$, $sdim(G)=2q+2$, and $sdim_f(G_q)=q+2$. In constructing $(G_q)_{SR}$, notice the following: \begin{itemize} \item If we let $L=\cup_{i=0}^{q}\{y_i,z_i\}$, any two vertices in $L$ form an MMD pair in $G_{q}$, and no vertex in $L$ is MMD with any vertex in $V(G_q)-L$; \item For each $i\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, the vertex $b_i$ is MMD only with the vertex $x$ and vice versa; \item No vertex in $\cup_{i=0}^{q}\{a_i,c_i\}$ belongs to $M(G_q)$ by Observation~\ref{observation-1}(a), and $b_0\not\in M(G_q)$. \end{itemize} Since $(G_q)_{SR}$ consists of the disjoint union of a complete graph $K_{2q+2}$ and a star $K_{1,q}$ (see $(G_4)_{SR}$ in Figure~\ref{G_4}), we have $\|M(G_q)\|=3q+3$. By Theorem~\ref{v_cover}, $sdim(G_q)=\alpha((G_q)_{SR})=(2q+2-1)+1=2q+2$. Now, $sdim_f(G_q) \ge \nu ((G_q)_{SR})=q+1+1=q+2$ by Proposition~\ref{matchingN}. On the other hand, let $g:V(G_q) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a function defined by $g(x)=1$, $g(u)=\frac{1}{2}$ for each $u \in L$, and $g(w)=0$ for each $w \in V(G_q)-(\{x\} \cup L)$; then $g$ is a strong resolving function of $G_q$, and hence $sdim_f(G_q) \le 1+\frac{\|L\|}{2}=q+2$. Thus, $sdim_f(G_q)=q+2$. Therefore, for $q \ge 2$, $\min\{\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\|, sdim(G)\}-sdim_f(G)=\frac{1}{2}(3q+3)-(q+2)=\frac{1}{2}(q-1)$ can be arbitrarily large. \end{remark} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.5, transform shape] \node [draw, shape=circle] (b0) at (-0.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c0) at (3.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c1) at (2.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c2) at (2.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c3) at (4.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c4) at (4.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b3) at (0.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b4) at (0.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a0) at (-4.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a1) at (-5.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a2) at (-5.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a3) at (-3.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a4) at (-3.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b1) at (-1.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b2) at (-1.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (x) at (-0.5,-2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y0) at (-5.5,0.7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y1) at (-6.3,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y2) at (-5.8,5.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y3) at (-3.15,4) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y4) at (-3.3,7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z0) at (4.5,0.7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z1) at (1.95,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z2) at (2.25,5.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z3) at (4.85,4) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z4) at (4.7,7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y00) at (11.5,5.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y11) at (9.3,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y22) at (8.5,2.7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y33) at (8.5,0.8) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (y44) at (9.3,-1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z00) at (11.5,-2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z11) at (13.7,-1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z22) at (14.5,0.8) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z33) at (14.5,2.7) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (z44) at (13.7,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (x1) at (16.3,1.75) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b11) at (18,-2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b22) at (18,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b33) at (18,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b44) at (18,5.5) {}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-0.5,-2.45) {$x$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-4.5,-0.5) {$a_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-0.5,-0.5) {$b_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (3.5,-0.5) {$c_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-5.3,1.9) {$a_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1.5,2) {$b_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.8,1.9) {$c_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3.1,2.6) {$a_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (0.8,2.5) {$b_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.8,2.5) {$c_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-5.1,4.8) {$a_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1.5,5) {$b_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.85,4.8) {$c_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3.05,6.3) {$a_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (0.5,6.5) {$b_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.95,6.3) {$c_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-6,0.7) {$y_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-6.8,2.6) {$y_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-6.3,5.6) {$y_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3.2,7.5) {$y_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-2.6,4) {$y_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5,0.7) {$z_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.5,2.5) {$z_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.8,5.5) {$z_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.8,7.4) {$z_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5.4,4) {$z_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (11.5,6) {$y_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8.8,4.5) {$y_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8,2.8) {$y_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8,0.8) {$y_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8.7,-1) {$y_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (11.5,-2.5) {$z_0$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14.2,4.5) {$z_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (15,2.7) {$z_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (15,0.8) {$z_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14.2,-1.05) {$z_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (15.8,1.75) {$x$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (18.6,-2) {$b_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (18.6,0.5) {$b_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (18.6,3) {$b_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (18.6,5.5) {$b_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-0.5,-3.5) {\large $G_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14.4,-3.5) {\large $(G_4)_{SR}$}; \draw(x)--(a0)--(a4)--(b4)--(c4)--(c0)--(x); \draw(b0)--(a0)--(a3)--(b3)--(c3)--(c0)--(b0); \draw(a0)--(a2)--(b2)--(c2)--(c0); \draw(a0)--(a1)--(b1)--(c1)--(c0); \draw(b1)--(b0)--(b2); \draw(b3)--(b0)--(b4); \draw(a0)--(y0); \draw(a1)--(y1); \draw(a2)--(y2); \draw(a3)--(y3); \draw(a4)--(y4); \draw(c0)--(z0); \draw(c1)--(z1); \draw(c2)--(z2); \draw(c3)--(z3); \draw(c4)--(z4); \draw(y00)--(y11)--(y22)--(y33)--(y44)--(z00)--(z11)--(z22)--(z33)--(z44)--(y00); \draw(y00)--(y22)--(y44)--(z11)--(z33)--(y00); \draw(y11)--(y33)--(z00)--(z22)--(z44)--(y11); \draw(y00)--(y33)--(z11)--(z44)--(y22)--(z00)--(z33)--(y11)--(y44)--(z22)--(y00); \draw(y00)--(y44)--(z33)--(y22)--(z11)--(y00); \draw(y11)--(z00)--(z44)--(y33)--(z22)--(y11); \draw(y00)--(z00); \draw(y11)--(z11); \draw(y22)--(z22); \draw(y33)--(z33); \draw(y44)--(z44); \draw(b33)--(x1)--(b44); \draw(b11)--(x1)--(b22); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The graph $G_4\in \mathcal{F}$ and its strong resolving graph.}\label{G_4} \end{figure} The family $\mathcal{F}$ described in Remark~\ref{graph_G_q} yields the following realization result. \begin{cor} For any positive integer $k$, there exists a connected graph $G$ such that $$\min\left\{\frac{\|M(G)\|}{2}, sdim(G)\right\}-sdim_f(G)=k.$$ \end{cor} \begin{proof} Consider a graph $G_q\in \mathcal{F}$. As shown in Remark \ref{graph_G_q}, $\|M(G_q)\|=3q+3$, $sdim(G_q)=2q+2$, and $sdim_f(G_q)=q+2$. Hence, if $q= 2k+1\ge 3$, then $\min\{\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\|, sdim(G)\}-sdim_f(G)=k$.~\hfill \end{proof} \section{Corona product graphs} Let $G$ and $H$ be two graphs of order $n$ and $m$, respectively, and let $V(G)=\{u_1, u_2, \ldots, u_n\}$. The corona product $G \odot H$ is obtained from $G$ and $n$ copies of $H$, say $H_1, H_2, \ldots, H_n$, by drawing an edge from each vertex $u_i$ to every vertex of $H_i$ for each $i \in \{1,2,\ldots, n\}$. For results on the strong metric dimension of corona product graphs, see~\cite{cp}. We first consider the fractional strong metric dimension of $G \odot H$ when $G$ is a connected graph of order at least two. \begin{lemma}\label{lem_corona} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$. Let $H$ be a graph of order $m$, and let $H_1, H_2, \ldots, H_n$ be $n$ disjoint copies of $H$. If $g: V(G \odot H) \rightarrow [0,1]$ is a minimum strong resolving function of $G \odot H$, then \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] $g(V(H_i)) \ge 1$ for each $i \in \{1,2,\dots, n\}$; \item[(b)] $g(V(G))=0$. \end{itemize} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} (a) Let $x,y \in V(H_i)$. Since $d_{G \odot H}(x,u)=d_{G \odot H}(y,u)$ for each $u \not\in V(H_i)$, $S_{G \odot H}\{x,y\} \subseteq V(H_i)$; thus $g(V(H_i)) \ge 1$ for each $i \in \{1,2,\dots, n\}$. (b) Each $v\in V(G)$ is a cut-vertex in $G \odot H$; so the desired result follows from Observation~\ref{observation-1}(a).~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{proposition}\label{corona_equation} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$, and let $H$ be a graph of order $m \ge 1$. Then $sdim_f(G \odot H)=\frac{nm}{2}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$, and let $H$ be a graph of order $m$. Identify $G \odot H$ with $G \cup H_1 \cup H_2 \cup \cdots \cup H_n$ (each $H_i$ being a copy of $H$), along with the requisite, additional edges. First, notice that if $x \in V(H_i)$ and $y \in V(H_j)$ where $i\neq j$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in ${G \odot H}$: this is clear from the construction of the corona product. Let $g: V(G \odot H) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a strong resolving function of $G \odot H$. Then $g(x)+g(y) \ge 1$ for $x,y$ not contained in the same $H_i$. Notice that for each fixed $x\in V(H_i)$, there are $(n-1)m$ distinct $y$'s and their corresponding inequalities. On the other hand, the number of pairs $x,y$ where $\{x,y\}\not\subseteq V(H_i)$ (for the same $i$) is clearly ${n\choose 2}m^2$. We thus have $(n-1)m \sum_{i=1}^{n} g(V(H_i)) \ge {n \choose 2}m^2$. Combining the last inequality with the fact $g(V(G\odot H))=\sum_{i=1}^{n} g(V(H_i))$ as indicated by Lemma~\ref{lem_corona}(b), we conclude $sdim_f(G \odot H) \ge \frac{nm}{2}$. Since the function $g$, defined by $g(w)=\frac{1}{2}$ for each $w \in \cup_{i=1}^{n}V(H_i)$ and $g(u)=0$ for each $u \in V(G)$, is a strong resolving function of $G \odot H$, we conclude that $sdim_f(G \odot H)=\frac{nm}{2}$.~\hfill \end{proof} It's noteworthy that the result of Proposition~\ref{corona_equation} depends only on all $H_i$'s having the same order; i.e., the adjacency structure of $H_i$ is immaterial. Next, we consider $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)$ when $H$ is a connected graph. \begin{proposition} If $H$ is a connected graph, then $sdim_f(H) \le sdim_f(K_1 \odot H) \le \frac{1}{2}(1+\|V(H)\|)$ and both bounds are sharp. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} The upper bound follows from Theorem~\ref{sdimbounds}. For the lower bound, it suffices to show that each MMM pair in $H$ is also an MMD pair in $K_1 \odot H$, for then $H_{SR}\subseteq (K_1\odot H)_{SR}$ and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph} applies. Let $x,y\in V(H)$ be an MMD pair in $H$. If $d_H(x,y)\geq 2$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in $K_1\odot H$, since $d_{K_1\odot H}(x,y)=\mbox{min}\{2, d_H(x,y)\}$. (Note that a diametral pair of vertices is obviously an MMD pair.) If $d_H(x,y)=1$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in $H$ implies that $N_{H}[x]=N_{H}[y]$. The construction of $K_1\odot H$ ensures that $N_{K_1\odot H}[x]=N_{K_1\odot H}[y]$, which in turn implies that $x$ MMD $y$ in $K_1\odot H$. The lower bound is sharp: if $H$ is a cycle $C_n$ where $n\geq 4$, then $sdim_f(H)=\frac{\|V(H)\|}{2}=sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)$ by parts (c) and (d) of Theorem~\ref{sdimFthm}, noting that $K_1\odot C_n$ is $W_{n+1}$; for another example, if $H$ is the house graph (see Figure~\ref{fig_house}), then $H_{SR}=(K_1 \odot H)_{SR} \cong P_5$ and $\alpha(P_5)=2$, and thus $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=sdim_f(H)=2=sdim(H)<\frac{\|V(H)\|}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{v_cover} and Corollary~\ref{cor_bipartite}. The upper bound is also sharp: if $H=K_m$, then $K_1 \odot H \cong K_{m+1}$ and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=sdim_f(K_{m+1})=\frac{m+1}{2}=\frac{1}{2}(1+\|V(H)\|)$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}.~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.65, transform shape] \node [draw, shape=circle] (u1) at (-2,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u2) at (-3,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u3) at (-3,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u4) at (-1,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u5) at (-1,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (v) at (4,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u11) at (7,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u22) at (6,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u33) at (6,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u44) at (8,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u55) at (8,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u111) at (14,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u333) at (13,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u555) at (13,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u222) at (15,-1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u444) at (15,0) {}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-2,1.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3.5,0) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3.5,-1.5) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-.5,-1.5) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-.5,0) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (3.5,0) {$v$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (7,1.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5.5,-0.3) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5.5,-1.5) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8.5,-1.5) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (8.5,0) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14,1.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12.5,0) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12.5,-1.5) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (15.5,-1.5) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (15.5,0) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-2,-3.5) {\large $H$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (6.5,-3.5) {\large $K_1 \odot H$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14,-3.5) {\large $H_{SR}=(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$}; \draw(u1)--(u2)--(u3)--(u4)--(u4)--(u5)--(u1); \draw(u2)--(u5); \draw(v)--(u11)--(u55)--(u44)--(u33)--(v); \draw(v).. controls (7,3).. (u55); \draw(v).. controls (5,-3).. (u44); \draw(v)--(u22)--(u55); \draw(u11)--(u22)--(u33); \draw(u555)--(u333)--(u111)--(u444)--(u222); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The house graph $H$, $K_1 \odot H$, $H_{SR}$, and $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$.}\label{fig_house} \end{figure} Next, we consider $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)$ when $H$ is a disconnected graph. We first recall the following \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{matching_k}}\label{mk} For $k \ge 2$, let $G=K_{a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_k}$ be a complete $k$ partite graph of order $n=\sum_{i=1}^{k}a_i$ with $a_k=\max\{a_i: 1 \le i \le k\}$. Then $\nu(G)=\min\{n-a_k, \lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor\}$. \end{theorem} \begin{proposition}\label{disconnectedH} Let $H$ be a disconnected graph of order $m$ such that $H$ consists of a disjoint union of graphs $H^1, H^2, \ldots, H^k$ of order $a_1,a_2, \ldots, a_k$, respectively, and let $a_k=\max\{a_i: 1 \le i \le k\}$. Then $ \min\{m-a_k, \lfloor\frac{m}{2}\rfloor\} \le sdim_f(K_1 \odot H) \le \frac{m}{2}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Since $K_1 \odot H$ contains a cut-vertex by disconnectedness of $H$, the upper bound follows from Observation~\ref{observation-1}(a). If $x \in V(H^i)$ and $y \in V(H^j)$ for $i \neq j$, then $x$ and $y$ form an MMD pair in $K_1 \odot H$. So, $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$ contains $K_{a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_k}$ as a subgraph. Thus, the lower bound follows from Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}, and Theorem~\ref{mk}.~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{remark} (a) There exists a disconnected graph $H$ achieving the upper bound of Proposition~\ref{disconnectedH}. If $H=\overline{K}_m$, then $K_1 \odot H \cong K_{1,m}$ and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=sdim_f(K_{1,m})=\frac{m}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimFthm}(a); moreover, if $m$ is even, $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)$ equals both the upper and lower bound of Proposition~\ref{disconnectedH}. (b) There is a disconnected graph $H$ that does not achieve the upper bound of Proposition~\ref{disconnectedH}. Let $H^1$ be the leftmost graph given in Figure~\ref{fig_coronaLB} and let $H=H^1 \cup K_1$. One can readily check that $(H^1)_{SR}$ and $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$ are as drawn in Figure~\ref{fig_coronaLB}. Since $\{v, u_1, u_3\}$ is a minimum vertex cover of $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$, $\alpha((K_1 \odot H)_{SR})=3$. Since $\{u_1u_4, u_3u_6, vu_2\}$ is a maximum matching of $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$, $\nu((K_1 \odot H)_{SR})=3$. By Observation~\ref{observation}, Theorem~\ref{v_cover}, and Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, we have $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=sdim(K_1 \odot H)=3=\lfloor\frac{\|V(H)\|}{2}\rfloor<\frac{\|V(H)\|}{2}$. The problem of finding an example achieving the lower bound of Proposition~\ref{disconnectedH} still remains. \end{remark} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.65, transform shape] \node [draw, shape=circle] (u1) at (-2.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u2) at (-3.5,2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u3) at (-4.5,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u4) at (-3.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u5) at (-1.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u6) at (-1.5,2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u11) at (4,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u33) at (3,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u55) at (5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u44) at (5.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u66) at (3,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u444) at (9.6,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u111) at (11.2,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u333) at (13,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u666) at (14.6,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u555) at (12,2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (u222) at (16.2,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (v) at (12.4,0) {}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-2.5,3.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-4,2.3) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-5.1,1.1) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-4,-0.2) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-0.95,-0.2) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,2.2) {$u_6$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5.5,3.5) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4,3.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.4,1.5) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (2.4,0.5) {$u_6$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (5.55,1.5) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (9.5,3.5) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (11.2,3.5) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (13,3.5) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14.6,3.5) {$u_6$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (16.3,3.5) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12.5,2) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12.4,-0.5) {$v$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-2.5,-2) {\large $H^1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.4,-2) {\large $(H^1)_{SR}$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12.7,-2) {\large $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$}; \draw(u1)--(u2)--(u3)--(u4)--(u5)--(u6)--(u1); \draw(u2)--(u4)--(u6)--(u2)--(u5); \draw(u11)--(u33)--(u55)--(u11); \draw(u11)--(u44); \draw(u33)--(u66); \draw(u444)--(u111)--(u333)--(u666)--(v)--(u444); \draw(u111)--(u555)--(u333)--(v)--(u111); \draw(u555)--(v)--(u222); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{The graphs $H^1$, $(H^1)_{SR}$, and $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$.}\label{fig_coronaLB} \end{figure} \section{Lexicographic product graphs} The \emph{lexicographic product} of two graphs $G$ and $H$, denoted by $G[H]$, is the graph with the vertex set $V(G) \times V(H)$ such that $(u,v)$ is adjacent to $(u', v')$ if and only if either $uu' \in E(G)$, or $u=u'$ and $vv' \in E(H)$. Let $G$ be a connected graph of order at least two, and let $H$ be a graph of order at least two. We state the following observation from~\cite{lexi_dimF} that, for two distinct vertices $x=(x_1,x_2)$ and $y=(y_1, y_2)$ in $G[H]$, \begin{equation} d_{G[H]}(x,y)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1 & \mbox{ if } x_1=y_1 \mbox{ and } x_2y_2 \in E(H),\\ 2 & \mbox{ if } x_1=y_1 \mbox{ and } x_2y_2 \not\in E(H),\\ d_G(x_1,y_1) & \mbox{ if } x_1 \neq y_1. \end{array}\right. \end{equation} Next, we recall the following useful result that will be used in computing $sdim_f(G[H])$. \begin{lemma}\emph{\cite{lexi_sdim}}\label{lexi_ttwin} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order at least two, and let $H$ be a graph of order at least two. Let $x=(x_1,x_2)$ and $y=(y_1, y_2)$ be two vertices in $G[H]$. \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] If $N_{G}[x_1] \neq N_{G}[y_1]$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in $G[H]$ if and only if $x_1$ MMD $y_1$ in $G$. \item[(b)] If $N_{G}[x_1]=N_{G}[y_1]$ for $x_1 \neq y_1$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in $G[H]$ if and only if $\deg_{H}(x_2)=\deg_{H}(y_2)=\|V(H)\|-1$. \item[(c)] If $x_1=y_1$, then $x$ MMD $y$ in $G[H]$ if and only if $d_H(x_2,y_2) \ge 2$ or $N_{H}[x_2]=N_{H}[y_2]$. \end{itemize} \end{lemma} Next, we recall a structural description of $(G[H])_{SR}$, when $G$ is true twin-free. We need the following notations introduced in~\cite{lexi_sdim}: Given a graph $H$, denote by $H^$ the graph with $V(H^)=V(H)$ and $xy\in E(H^)$ if and only if either $d_H(x,y)\geq 2$ or $x,y$ are true twins in $H$. Also, denote by $H_{-}$ the graph obtained from $H$ by omitting all isolated vertices of $H$. \begin{proposition}\emph{\cite{lexi_sdim}}\label{structure_SRofLex} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n\geq 2$, and let $H$ be a graph of order at least two. Suppose $G$ has no true twin vertices, then $$(G[H])_{SR}\cong (G_{SR}[H^])\cup\bigcup_{i=1}^{n-\|M(G)\|}(H^)_{-}.$$ \end{proposition} Based on Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(c), we have the following \begin{lemma}\label{lem_k} Let $G$ and $H$ each be a connected graph of order at least two, with $G$ being connected. If $diam(H) \le 2$ and $sdim_f(H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(H)\|$, or $diam(H)>2$ and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(H)\|$, then $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} First, let $diam(H) \le 2$ and $sdim_f(H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(H)\|$. Then $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $\|V(G)\|$ copies of $H_{SR}$, and thus $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge \|V(G)\|sdim_f(H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. Since $sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{1}{2}\|V(G[H])\|=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimbounds}, $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$. Second, let $diam(H)>2$ and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(H)\|$. We note, by Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(c), that $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $\|V(G)\|$ copies of $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$. So, $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge \|V(G)\| sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}, and $sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimbounds}; thus $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{1}{2}\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|$.~\hfill \end{proof} Next, we consider $sdim_f(G[H])$ for $H \in \{K_m, C_m, P_m\}$. We first recall the following result that will be used. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{dirac}}\label{hamiltonian} If $G$ is a simple graph of order $n \ge 3$ with $\delta(G) \ge \frac{n}{2}$, then $G$ is a Hamiltonian graph. \end{theorem} \begin{cor} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$. Then \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] $sdim_f(G[K_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ for $m\ge 2$; \item[(b)] $sdim_f(G[C_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ for $m \ge 3$; \item[(c)] $sdim_f(G[P_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ for $m \ge 2$ and $m \neq 3$. \end{itemize} \end{cor} \begin{proof} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$. (a) For $m \ge 2$, $diam(K_m)=1 \le 2$ and $sdim_f(K_m)=\frac{m}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}; thus $sdim_f(G[K_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ by Lemma~\ref{lem_k}. (b) If $m \in \{3,4,5\}$, then $diam(C_m) \le 2$ and $sdim_f(C_m)=\frac{m}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}; thus, by Lemma~\ref{lem_k}, $sdim_f(G[C_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ for $m \in \{3,4,5\}$. Next, let $m \ge 6$; then $diam(C_m)>2$ and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot C_m)=sdim_f(W_{m+1})=\frac{m}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimFthm}(d). So, by Lemma~\ref{lem_k}, $sdim_f(G[C_m])=\frac{1}{2}nm$ for $m \ge 6$. (c) Since $P_2=K_2$, the equality holds for $m=2$ by (a) of the current corollary. So, let $m \ge 4$; then $diam(P_m)>2$ and $M(K_1 \odot P_m)=V(P_m)$. Let $P_m$ be given by $u_1u_2 \ldots u_m$. If $m=4$, then $(K_1 \odot P_4)_{SR}$ contains two paths, $u_1u_3$ and $u_2u_4$. So, $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_4) \ge \nu((K_1 \odot P_4)_{SR})=2$ by Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_4) \le \frac{\|M(K_1 \odot P_4)\|}{2}=2$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}; thus $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_4)=2$. Next, we consider for $m \ge 5$. If $m=5$, then $(K_1 \odot P_5)_{SR}$ contains a 5-cycle $u_1u_3u_5u_2u_4u_1$. Now, notice $(K_1 \odot P_m)_{SR} \cong \overline{P}_m$, the complement of $P_m$, when $m\geq 4$. Since $\overline{P}_m$, when $m\geq 6$, is a simple graph of order $m$ with minimum degree at least $\frac{m}{2}$, $(K_1 \odot P_m)_{SR}$ is a Hamiltonian graph by Theorem~\ref{hamiltonian}. Since $(K_1 \odot P_m)_{SR}$ contains an $m$-cycle $C_m$ for $m \ge 5$, $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_m) \ge sdim_f(C_m)=\frac{m}{2}$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph} and Proposition~\ref{v_regular}, and $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_m) \le \frac{\|M(K_1 \odot P_m)\|}{2}=\frac{m}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}; thus $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_m)=\frac{m}{2}$ for $m \ge 5$. Therefore, for $m \ge 4$, $sdim_f(K_1 \odot P_m)=\frac{m}{2}$, and hence $sdim_f(G[P_m])=\frac{nm}{2}$ by Lemma~\ref{lem_k}.~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{remark} We note that $sdim_f(G[P_3])$ may or may not achieve the value $\frac{3}{2}\|V(G)\|$. First, we show that $sdim_f(P_4[P_3])=5<6=\frac{\|V(P_4[P_3])\|}{2}$. It was shown in~\cite{lexi_sdim} that $(P_4[P_3])_{SR} \cong K_2[K_2 \cup K_1] \cup 2K_2$. So, $sdim_f(P_4[P_3]) \ge \nu((P_4[P_3])_{SR})=5$ by Proposition~\ref{matchingN} and $sdim_f(P_4[P_3]) \le \frac{\|M(P_4[P_3])\|}{2}=\frac{10}{2}=5$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}. Second, we show that $sdim_f(C_5[P_3])=\frac{15}{2}=\frac{\|V(C_5[P_3])\|}{2}$. By Proposition~\ref{structure_SRofLex}, $(C_5[P_3])_{SR}\cong (C_5)_{SR}[P_3^]$, because $C_5$ is true twin-free and $M(C_5)=V(C_5)$. Since $(C_5)_{SR} \cong C_5$ and $P_3^\cong K_2\cup K_1$, we have $(C_5[P_3])_{SR}\cong C_5[K_2\cup K_1]$. Now, one sees that 3 disjoint copies of $C_5$ are contained as a subgraph in $(C_5[P_3])_{SR}$. Hence, $sdim_f(C_5[P_3]) \ge 3 \cdot sdim_f(C_5)=3 \cdot \frac{5}{2}=\frac{15}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive} and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}, and $sdim_f(C_5[P_3]) \le \frac{\|V(C_5[P_3])\|}{2}=\frac{15}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimbounds}. \end{remark} Next, we obtain bounds for $sdim_f(G[H])$ in case of true twin-free graphs $G$. Figure~\ref{diagram} is a schematic of proof for Theorem~\ref{lexi2} that may be helpful to readers. \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.55, transform shape] \node [scale=1.4] at (3.5,6.5) {\tiny $V(G_{SR})$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (9.5,6.5) {\tiny $V(G)-V(G_{SR})$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,4.2) {\tiny $V(H_{SR})$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1.7,1.2) {\tiny $V(H)-V(H_{SR})$}; \draw(0,0)--(12,0)--(12,6)--(0,6)--(0,0); \draw(0,2.5)--(7,2.5)--(7,6); \filldraw[fill=gray, draw=black] (7,0) rectangle (12,2.5); \draw[dashed](0,6)--(0,7); \draw[dashed](7,6)--(7,7); \draw[dashed](12,6)--(12,7); \draw[dashed](-2,6)--(0,6); \draw[dashed](-2,2.5)--(0,2.5); \draw[dashed](-2,0)--(0,0); \draw[<-](0,6.5)--(2.5,6.5); \draw[->](4.5,6.5)--(7,6.5); \draw[<-](7,6.5)--(8,6.5); \draw[->](11,6.5)--(12,6.5); \draw[->](-1,4.7)--(-1,6); \draw[->](-1,3.7)--(-1,2.5); \draw[->](-1,1.6)--(-1,2.5); \draw[->](-1,0.8)--(-1,0); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{Schematic of proof for Theorem~\ref{lexi2}.}\label{diagram} \end{figure} \begin{theorem}\label{lexi2} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$ without true twin vertices, $H$ be a graph of order $m \ge 2$, and let $\|M(G)\|=n'$ and $\|M(H)\|=m'$. If $diam(H) \le 2$, then $$sdim_f(G[H]) \ge \max\{n sdim_f(H)+(m-m') sdim_f(G),(n-n') sdim_f(H)+m sdim_f(G)\}$$ and $$sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{1}{2}(nm'+mn'-n'm'),$$ where both bounds are sharp. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$ without true twin vertices, and let $H$ be a graph of order $m \ge 2$. Let $\|V(G_{SR})\|=\|M(G)\|=n'$ and $\|V(H_{SR})\|=\|M(H)\|=m'$. First, we prove the lower bound. By Proposition~\ref{structure_SRofLex}, $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $m$ copies of $G_{SR}$ and $(n-n')$ copies of $H_{SR}$ as a subgraph; thus, $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge m \cdot sdim_f(G)+(n-n') \cdot sdim_f(H)$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. Also, from Proposition~\ref{structure_SRofLex}, one can see that $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $n' \cdot H_{SR} \cup (m-m') \cdot G_{SR} \cup (n-n') \cdot H_{SR}$ as a subgraph, and thus $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge n' \cdot sdim_f(H)+(m-m') \cdot sdim_f(G)+(n-n') \cdot sdim_f(H)=n \cdot sdim_f(H)+(m-m') \cdot sdim_f(G)$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. For the upper bound, notice that $\|M(G[H])\|=\|V(G)\| \cdot \|V(H)\|-\|V(G)-V(G_{SR})\|\cdot\|V(H)-V(H_{SR})\|=nm-(n-n')(m-m')=nm'+mn'-n'm'$ (see Figure~\ref{diagram}); thus, $sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{1}{2}(nm'+mn'-n'm')$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}. For the sharpness of the lower bound, let $G=K_{1,n-1}$ ($n \ge 3$) and $H$ be the house graph in Figure~\ref{fig_house}. Notice that $G$ contains no true twin vertices, $diam(G)=2$, and $\|M(G)\|=\|V(G)\|-1$. Since $(K_{1,n-1})_{SR} \cong K_{n-1}$ and $H^ \cong P_5$, by Proposition~\ref{structure_SRofLex}, $(G[H])_{SR} \cong (G_{SR}[H^]) \cup H^ \cong (K_{n-1}[P_5]) \cup P_5$. Since $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $5K_{n-1} \cup 2K_2$ as a subgraph, $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge \frac{5(n-1)}{2}+2=\frac{5n-1}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{v_regular} and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. Now, for $u=(x,y) \in V(G[H])$, let $g: V(G[H]) \rightarrow [0,1]$ a function defined by \begin{equation} g(u)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1 & \mbox{ if $x$ is the non-leaf vertex in $G$ and $y$ is adjacent to a leaf in $H$},\\ \frac{1}{2} & \mbox{ if $x$ is a leaf in $G$},\\ 0 & \mbox{otherwise}, \end{array}\right. \end{equation} One can readily check that $g$ is a strong resolving function of $G[H]$ with $g(V(G))=2+\frac{5(n-1)}{2}$; thus, $sdim_f(G) \le \frac{5n-1}{2}$. Therefore, $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{5n-1}{2}=\max\{2n, \frac{5n-1}{2}\}$, achieving the lower bound. For the sharpness of the upper bound, let $G$ and $H$ be isomorphic to the house graph on 5 vertices in Figure~\ref{fig_house}. Since $G$ contains no true twin vertices, $diam(G)=2$, and $(G)_{SR}=(H)_{SR} \cong H^* \cong P_5$, we have $(G[H])_{SR} \cong (G)_{SR}[H^] \cong P_5[P_5]$ by Proposition~\ref{structure_SRofLex}. Since $(G[H])_{SR} \cong P_5[P_5]$ contains 5 copies of $C_5$ as a subgraph (see Figure~\ref{fig_lexipf}), $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge 5 \cdot \frac{5}{2}=\frac{25}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{v_regular} and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. On the other hand, $sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{25}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}. Thus, $sdim_f(G[H])= \frac{25}{2}$, achieving the upper bound.~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.55, transform shape] \node [draw, shape=circle] (1) at (0,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2) at (0,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3) at (0,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4) at (0,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (5) at (0,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (11) at (1.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (22) at (1.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (33) at (1.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (44) at (1.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (55) at (1.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (111) at (3,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (222) at (3,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (333) at (3,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (444) at (3,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (555) at (3,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (1111) at (4.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2222) at (4.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3333) at (4.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4444) at (4.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (5555) at (4.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (11111) at (6,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (22222) at (6,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (33333) at (6,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (44444) at (6,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (55555) at (6,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a1) at (10,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a2) at (10,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a3) at (10,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a4) at (10,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a5) at (10,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a11) at (11.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a22) at (11.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a33) at (11.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a44) at (11.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a55) at (11.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a111) at (13,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a222) at (13,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a333) at (13,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a444) at (13,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a555) at (13,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a1111) at (14.5,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a2222) at (14.5,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a3333) at (14.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a4444) at (14.5,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a5555) at (14.5,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a11111) at (16,6) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a22222) at (16,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a33333) at (16,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a44444) at (16,1.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a55555) at (16,0) {}; \node [scale=1.4] at (3,-1.5) {\large $P_5[P_5]$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (13.1,-1.5) {\large $5C_5 \subset P_5[P_5]$}; \draw(1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5)--(55)--(44)--(33)--(22)--(11)--(1)--(22)--(2)--(33)--(3)--(44)--(4)--(55); \draw(1111)--(2222)--(3333)--(4444)--(5555)--(55555)--(44444)--(33333)--(22222)--(11111)--(1111)--(22222)--(2222)--(33333)--(3333)--(44444)--(4444)--(55555); \draw(111)--(222)--(333)--(444)--(555); \draw(2)--(11)--(111)--(1111)--(222)--(22)--(111)--(2222)--(222)--(11); \draw(3)--(22)--(333)--(2222); \draw(4)--(33)--(222)--(3333)--(333)--(33); \draw(5)--(44)--(333)--(4444)--(444)--(44); \draw(33)--(444)--(3333); \draw(44)--(555)--(4444); \draw(55)--(444)--(5555)--(555)--(55); \draw(1)--(33)--(5)--(22)--(4)--(11)--(3)--(55)--(2)--(44)--(1)--(55); \draw(5)--(11)--(333)--(55)--(222)--(44)--(111)--(33)--(555)--(22)--(444)--(11)--(555); \draw(55)--(111)--(3333)--(555)--(2222)--(444)--(1111)--(333)--(5555)--(222)--(4444)--(111)--(5555); \draw(555)--(1111)--(33333)--(5555)--(22222)--(4444)--(11111)--(3333)--(55555)--(2222)--(44444)--(1111)--(55555); \draw(5555)--(11111); \draw(2222)--(11111); \draw(3333)--(22222); \draw(4444)--(33333); \draw(5555)--(44444); \draw[thick](a1)--(a2)--(a22)--(a111)--(a11)--(a1); \draw[thick](a3)--(a4)--(a5)--(a44)--(a33)--(a3); \draw[thick](a1111)--(a222)--(a2222)--(a22222)--(a11111)--(a1111); \draw[thick](a55)--(a555)--(a5555)--(a333)--(a444)--(a55); \draw[thick](a3333)--(a4444)--(a55555)--(a44444)--(a33333)--(a3333); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{$P_5[P_5]$ and five disjoint 5-cycles as a subgraph of $P_5[P_5]$.}\label{fig_lexipf} \end{figure} If $diam(H)>2$, then, by Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(c), we need to replace $H_{SR}$ (for the case of $diam(H) \le 2$) by $(K_1 \odot H)_{SR}$ in Proposition~\ref{lexi2}. So, we have the following \begin{cor} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order $n \ge 2$ without true twin vertices, $H$ be a graph of order $m \ge 2$, and let $\|M(G)\|=n'$ and $\|M(K_1 \odot H)\|=m'$. If $diam(G)>2$, then $$sdim_f(G[H]) \ge \max\{n sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)+(m-m')sdim_f(G), (n-n') sdim_f(K_1 \odot H)+m sdim_f(G)\}$$ and $$sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{1}{2}(nm'+mn'-n'm').$$ \end{cor} In the forgoing results, we have imposed true twin-freeness upon $G$ in the lexicographic product $G[H]$. To give a bound on $sdim_f(G[H])$ in terms of the factors $G$ and $H$ while allowing the left factor $G$ to have true twins, we adapt an argument of Feng and Wang in~\cite{lexi_dimF} for fractional metric dimension to the present setting. We need a few further preliminary notions.\\ Let $u_1 \equiv u_2$ if $u_1=u_2$, $N_G[u_1]=N_G[u_2]$, or $N_G(u_1)=N_G(u_2)$. Hernando et al.~\cite{Hernando} proved that `$\equiv$' is an equivalence relation and that the equivalence class of each vertex is of one of the following three types: a class with one vertex (type 1), a clique with at least two vertices (type 2), and an independence set with at least two vertices (type 3). Denote by $O_i$ the collection of equivalence classes of type $i$ for each $i\in \{1,2,3\}$, and let $m_i=\sum_{C \in O_i} \|C\|$; notice that $\|V(G)\|=m_1+m_2+m_3$. \\ Given $x,y\in V(G)$, define $SL\{x,y\}=(N[x]\cup N[y])\cap S\{x,y\}$. By a ``strong locating function" we mean a function $f: V(G)\rightarrow [0,1]$, where $f(SL\{x,y\})\geq 1$ for any two distinct vertices $x,y$. Denote by $sl_f(G)$ the minimum weight of all strong locating functions of $G$. Clearly, $sl_f(G)\geq sdim_f(G)$, since $SL\{x,y\}\subseteq S\{x,y\}$. Note that if $diam(G)\leq 2$, then $sl_f(G)=sdim_f(G)$. Also, if $xy\in E(G)$, then $SL\{x,y\}=\{x,y\}\cup(N(x)\triangle N(y))$, where $\triangle$ denotes the symmetric difference between two sets. \begin{lemma}\label{dis_when_equiv} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order at least $2$ and $H$ be a graph. Let $(u_1,v_1)$ and $(u_2,v_2)$ be two distinct vertices of $G[H]$. Suppose $u_1\equiv u_2$. Then \begin{equation} S_{G[H]}\{(u_1,v_1),(u_2,v_2)\}=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \bigcup_{v\in SL_H\{v_1,v_2\}}\{(u_1,v)\} & \mbox{ if } u_1=u_2,\\ \bigcup_{v\in N_{\overline{H}}[v_1]}\{(u_1,v)\}\cup \bigcup_{v\in N_{\overline{H}}[v_2]}\{(u_2,v)\} & \mbox{ if } N_G[u_1]=N_G[u_2],\\ \{(u_1,v_1),(u_2,v_2)\} & \mbox{ if } N_G(u_1)=N_G(u_2). \end{array}\right. \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The formula easily follows from the distance relations on $G[H]$ and the fact that, for distinct vertices $x$ and $y$, $x\equiv y$ in $G$ implies that $x \mbox{ MMD } y$ in $G$. ~\hfill \end{proof} Given a function $f: V(G[H])\rightarrow [0,1]$, denote by $f_u$ the function on $V(H)$ such that $f_u(v)=f(u,v)$. \\ \begin{lemma}\label{f_u} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order at least $2$ and let $H$ be a graph. If $f$ is a strong resolving function of $G[H]$, then $f_u$ is a strong locating function of $H$ for any $u\in V(G)$. In particular, this means $sdim_f(G[H])\geq \|V(G)\|sl_f(H)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Given distinct vertices $v_1,v_2\in V(H)$, we have $$f_u(SL_H\{v_1,v_2\})=\sum_{v\in SL_H\{v_1,v_2\}}f(u,v)=f(S_{G[H]}\{(u,v_1),(u,v_2)\})\geq 1$$ by Lemma~\ref{dis_when_equiv} and the fact that $f$ is a strong resolving function of $G[H]$. ~\hfill \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{tfn_result} Let $G$ be a connected graph of order at least $2$ and let $H$ be a graph. Then $$sdim_f(G[H])\geq m_1(G)sl_f(H)+\frac{m_2(G)}{2}sdim_f(K_2[H])+\frac{m_3(G)}{2}\|V(H)\|.$$ \end{theorem} \begin{proof} First, to ease notation, we will denote $f(X)$ by $\|f\|$ when $f$ is a function from domain $X$ to $[0,1]$. Now, let $f$ be a strong resolving function of $G[H]$ with $\|f\|=sdim_f(G[H])$. Let $O_1 \cup O_2 \cup O_3$ partition $V(G)$ as described. Then $$\|f\|=\sum_{C\in O_1}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|+\sum_{C\in O_2}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|+\sum_{C\in O_3}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|.$$ Immediately, we see that Lemma~\ref{f_u} yields $\sum_{C\in O_1}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|\geq m_1(G)sl_f(H)$.\\ Second, we will show that \begin{equation}\label{1} \displaystyle\sum_{C\in O_2}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|\geq\frac{m_2(G)}{2}sdim_f(K_2[H]). \end{equation} Choose any $C\in O_2$ and any distinct vertices $u_1,u_2\in C$. Let $V(K_2)=\{a_1, a_2\}$ and define $g: V(K_2[H])\rightarrow [0,1]$ by $g(a_i,v)=f_{u_i}(v)$. We claim that $g$ is a strong resolving function of $K_2[H]$. Let $x=(a_1,v_1),y=(b_2,v_2)$ be two distinct vertices of $K_2[H]$; we need to show that $g(S_{K_2[H]}\{x,y\})\geq 1$. If $b_2=a_1$, then $g(S_{K_2[H]}\{x,y\})=\sum_{v\in SL_H\{v_1,v_2\}} g(a_1,v)=\sum_{v\in SL_H\{v_1,v_2\}} f_{u_1}(v)=f_{u_1}(SL_H\{v_1,v_2\})\geq 1$ by Lemma~\ref{dis_when_equiv} and Lemma~\ref{f_u}. If $b_2=a_2$, notice that $N_{K_2}[a_1]=N_{K_2}[a_2]$, as is $N_{G[H]}[u_1]=N_{G[H]}[u_2]$. Thus, we have $g(S_{K_2[H]}\{x,y\})=f(S_{G[H]}\{(u_1,v_1),(u_2,v_2)\})\geq 1$ by Lemma~\ref{dis_when_equiv}. Since $g$ is a strong resolving function of $K_2[H]$, we have $\|f_{u_1}\|+\|f_{u_2}\|\geq sdim_f(K_2[H])$. Summing over all pairs of distinct vertices of $C$, we have $\sum_{u_1,u_2\in C, u_1\neq u_2}(\|f_{u_1}\|+\|f_{u_2}\|)\geq {\|C\|\choose 2}sdim_f(K_2[H])$. Since $\sum_{u_1,u_2\in C, u_1\neq u_2}(\|f_{u_1}\|+\|f_{u_2}\|)=(\|C\|-1)\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|$, we have $\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|\geq \frac{\|C\|}{2}sdim_f(K_2[H])$ and $(\ref{1})$ follows.\\ Third, we show that \begin{equation}\label{2} \displaystyle\sum_{C\in O_3}\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|\geq\frac{m_3(G)}{2}\|V(H)\|. \end{equation} For any $C\in O_3$ and any distinct vertices $u_1, u_2\in C$, notice that we have $(u_1,v_1)$ MMD $(u_2,v_2)$ in $G[H]$ for any $v_1,v_2\in V(H)$. Thus, each $C\in O_3$ induces the subgraph $K_{\|C\|}[H]$ in $(G[H])_{SR}$. By Corollary~\ref{v_reg_sub}, $K_{\|C\|}[H]$ contributes $\frac{\|C\|}{2}\|V(H)\|$ to $sdim_f(G[H])$. Thus, we have $\sum_{u\in C}\|f_u\|\geq\frac{\|C\|}{2}\|V(H)\|$, and $(\ref{2})$ follows.~\hfill \end{proof} We conclude this section with an example on computing $sdim_f(G[H])$ when $G$ contains vertices of true twins, false twins, and neither. Let $G$ and $H$ be the graphs drawn in Figure~\ref{lexi_tfn_ex}. Notice that $u_1$ and $u_3$ are true twin vertices, $u_2$ and $u_4$ are false twin vertices, and $u_5$ and $u_6$ are neither in $G$. First, we compute the lower bound of $sdim_f(G[H])$ using Theorem~\ref{tfn_result}. Notice that $m_i(G)=2$ for each $i \in \{1,2,3\}$, and $sl_f(H)=sdim_f(H)$ since $diam(H)=2$. By Theorem~\ref{tfn_result}, $sdim_f(G[H]) \ge 2 sdim_f(H)+sdim_f(K_2[H])+\|V(H)\|=2(1)+3+3=8$, since $K_2[P_3]$ contains 3 disjoint MMD pairs. Second, we show that $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{17}{2}$. Notice that: (i) since $u_1$ and $u_3$ are true twin vertices in $G$ and $\deg_H(w_2)=\|V(H)\|-1$, $(u_1, w_2)$ MMD $(u_3, w_2)$ in $G[H]$ by Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(b); (ii) since no two vertices in $S=\{u_2, u_4, u_6\}$ are true twin vertices and any two vertices in $S$ form an MMD pair in $G$, $(u_2, w_i)$ MMD $(u_4, w_i)$ and $(u_2, w_i)$ MMD $(u_6, w_i)$ and $(u_4, w_i)$ MMD $(u_6,w_i)$ in $G[H]$ for each $i \in \{1,2,3\}$ by Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(a); (iii) since $d_H(w_1,w_3)=2$, for each $j \in \{1,3,5\}$, $(u_j,w_1)$ MMD $(u_j, w_3)$ in $G[H]$ by Lemma~\ref{lexi_ttwin}(c). See Figure~\ref{lexi_tfn_ex} for a subgraph of $(G[H])_{SR}$ described above. Since $(G[H])_{SR}$ contains $4K_2$ and $3K_3$ as a subgraph, $sdim_f(G[H])\ge 4+3 \cdot \frac{3}{2}=\frac{17}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{v_regular} and Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. On the other hand, noting that $(u_5, w_2) \in (V(G)-M(G)) \times (V(H)-M(H))$, we have $sdim_f(G[H]) \le \frac{\|M(G[H])\|}{2}=\frac{17}{2}$ by Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF}. Thus, $sdim_f(G[H])=\frac{17}{2}$. \begin{figure}[ht] \centering \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.5, transform shape] \node [draw, shape=circle] (1) at (-2.5,4) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2) at (-1,5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3) at (0.5,4) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4) at (-1,0) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (5) at (-1,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (6) at (-1,2) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (a) at (4,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (b) at (4,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (c) at (4,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (1b) at (11,5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (1a) at (10,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (1c) at (10,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3b) at (13,5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3a) at (12,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (3c) at (12,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2a) at (17.5,5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4a) at (20.5,5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (6a) at (19,4.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2b) at (17.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4b) at (20.5,3) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (6b) at (19,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (2c) at (17.5,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (4c) at (20.5,1) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (6c) at (19,0.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (5a) at (14,2.5) {}; \node [draw, shape=circle] (5c) at (14,0.5) {}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-3,4) {$u_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,5.5) {$u_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,3.5) {$u_5$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,1.6) {$u_6$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,-0.5) {$u_4$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (1,4) {$u_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.7,4.5) {$w_1$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.7,2.5) {$w_2$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4.7,0.5) {$w_3$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (9.8,5) {$(u_1,w_2)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14.2,5) {$(u_3,w_2)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (10,3) {$(u_1,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (10,0) {$(u_1,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12,3) {$(u_3,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (12,0) {$(u_3,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14,3) {$(u_5,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (14,0) {$(u_5,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (17.3,5.5) {$(u_2,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (17.3,3.5) {$(u_2,w_2)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (17.3,1.5) {$(u_2,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (19,4.2) {$(u_6,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (19,2.2) {$(u_6,w_2)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (19,0.2) {$(u_6,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (20.6,5.5) {$(u_4,w_1)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (20.6,3.5) {$(u_4,w_2)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (20.6,1.5) {$(u_4,w_3)$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (-1,-1.5) {\large $G$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (4,-1.5) {\large $H$}; \node [scale=1.4] at (16,-1.5) {\large $(G[H])_{SR}\supseteq 3K_3 \cup 4K_2$}; \draw [dashed] (7,-2)--(7,5.5); \draw(1)--(2)--(3)--(5)--(1)--(4)--(3)--(1); \draw(5)--(6); \draw(a)--(b)--(c); \draw(1b)--(3b); \draw(1a)--(1c); \draw(3a)--(3c); \draw(2a)--(4a)--(6a)--(2a); \draw(2b)--(4b)--(6b)--(2b); \draw(2c)--(4c)--(6c)--(2c); \draw(5a)--(5c); \end{tikzpicture} \caption{An example of $G[H]$ with $G$ containing true twins, false twins, and neither.}\label{lexi_tfn_ex} \end{figure} \section{Cartesian product graphs} The \emph{Cartesian product} of two graphs $G$ and $H$, denoted by $G \square H$, is the graph with the vertex set $V(G) \times V(H)$ such that $(u,v)$ is adjacent to $(u', v')$ if and only if either $u=u'$ and $vv' \in E(H)$, or $v=v'$ and $uu' \in E(G)$. The \emph{direct product} (or \emph{tensor product}) of two graphs $G$ and $H$, denoted by $G \times H$, is the graph with the vertex set $V(G) \times V(H)$ such that $(u,v)$ is adjacent to $(u', v')$ if and only if $uu' \in E(G)$ and $vv' \in E(H)$. N.B.: the direct product is herein introduced and considered only insofar as it pertains to our study of the Cartesian product; the connection between the two products is indicated in the following theorem. \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{sdim_Cartesian}}\label{cartesian} Let $G$ and $H$ be two connected graphs of order at least two. Then $$(G \square H)_{SR} \cong G_{SR} \times H_{SR}.$$ \end{theorem} \begin{theorem}\emph{\cite{kronecker}}\label{kro} Let $G$ and $H$ be connected graphs of order at least two. Then \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] $G \times H$ is connected if and only if either $G$ or $H$ contains an odd cycle, and \item[(b)] $G \times H$ has exactly two components if and only if neither $G$ nor $H$ contains an odd cycle. \end{itemize} \end{theorem} As an immediate consequence of Theorem~\ref{kro}(b), the following result follows. \begin{cor}\emph{\cite{direct2}}\label{d_K2} For a connected graph $G$ with no odd cycles, $G \times K_2=2G$. \end{cor} Next, we recall a result on the matching number of direct product graphs. \begin{lemma}\emph{\cite{matching_direct}}\label{d_matching} For any graphs $G$ and $H$, $\nu(G \times H) \ge 2 \cdot \nu(G) \cdot \nu(H)$. \end{lemma} Moreover, the following result is found in~\cite{am}, and we provide a proof here for readers' convenience. \begin{lemma}\emph{\cite{am}}\label{d_matching-K_n} For any graph $G$ and any integer $n\ge 2$, $\nu(G \times K_n) \ge n \cdot \nu(G)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $\{g_1g_1', g_2g_2',\ldots, g_rg_r'\}$ be a maximum matching of $G$ and let $V(K_n)=\{h_1,h_2,\ldots,h_n\}$. Since $\cup_{i=1}^{r}\{(g_i,h_1)(g'_i,h_2), (g_i,h_2)(g'_i,h_3),\ldots,(g_i,h_{n-1})(g'_i,h_n),(g_i,h_n)(g'_i,h_1)\}$ forms a matching in $G \times K_n$ of cardinality $n \cdot \nu(G)$, the desired result follows.~\hfill \end{proof} We also note that Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, Theorem~\ref{cartesian}, and Lemma~\ref{d_matching}, combined together, gives the following \begin{cor} Let $G$ and $H$ be two connected graphs of order at least two. Then $sdim_f(G \square H) \ge 2 \cdot \nu(G_{SR}) \cdot \nu(H_{SR})$. \end{cor} Now, noting that $\|M(G \square H)\|=\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|$, Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF} translates to the following \begin{cor}\label{cor_C} For two connected graphs $G$ and $H$, $sdim_f(G \square H) \le \frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|$. \end{cor} The next result follows from Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, Theorem~\ref{cartesian}, Lemma~\ref{d_matching-K_n}, and Corollary~\ref{cor_C}. \begin{cor}\label{cc_kn} For any graph $G$ and any integer $n\ge 2$, $n\cdot \nu(G_{SR})\le sdim_f(G \square K_n) \le \frac{n\|M(G)\|}{2}$. \end{cor} The next lemma is useful for determining graphs achieving the upper bound of Corollary~\ref{cor_C}. \begin{lemma}\emph{\cite{CxC}}\label{direct_cxc} Let $G$ and $H$ be two Hamiltonian graphs of order $n$ and $m$, respectively. If $n$ or $m$ is odd, then $G \times H$ is a Hamiltonian graph. \end{lemma} \begin{proposition}\label{cor_HxH} If $G_{SR}$ and $H_{SR}$ are Hamiltonian graphs, $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $G_{SR}$ and $H_{SR}$ be Hamiltonian graphs of order $n$ and $m$, respectively. If $n$ or $m$ is odd, $G_{SR} \times H_{SR}$ is a Hamiltonian graph by Lemma~\ref{direct_cxc}, and hence $G_{SR} \times H_{SR}$ contains a cycle $C_{nm}$ as a subgraph; thus, $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|$ by Corollary~\ref{v_reg_sub} and Theorem~\ref{cartesian}. If both $n$ and $m$ are even, $G_{SR} \times H_{SR}$ contains two disjoint union of $\frac{nm}{2}$-cycles as a subgraph; thus, $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|$ by Corollary~\ref{v_reg_sub} and Theorem~\ref{cartesian}.~\hfill \end{proof} Next, we indicate some Cartesian product graphs achieving the upper bound of Corollary~\ref{cc_kn}. \begin{cor} Let $n\ge 2$ be an integer. \begin{itemize} \item[(a)] If $G_{SR}$ is a Hamiltonian graph, then $sdim_f(G \square K_n)=\frac{n \|M(G)\|}{2}$. \item [(b)] For any tree $T$ of order at least two, $sdim_f(T \square K_n)=\frac{n \sigma(T)}{2}$. \item [(c)] Let $K_{r_1,\ldots,r_k}$ be a complete $k$-partite graph, where $k \ge 2$. If $r_i \ge 2$ for each $i\in \{1,2,\ldots,k\}$, or $r_j=1$ for at least two different $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, k\}$, then $sdim_f(K_{r_1,\ldots,r_k} \square K_n)=\frac{n}{2}\sum_{i=1}^k r_i$. \end{itemize} \end{cor} \begin{proof} (a) Let $G_{SR}$ be a Hamiltonian graph of order $m$. If $n \ge 3$, then $K_n$ is also a Hamiltonian graph, and hence $sdim_f(G \square K_n)=\frac{1}{2}\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(K_n)\|=\frac{n}{2}\|M(G)\|$ by Proposition~\ref{cor_HxH}. If $n=2$, then $(G \square K_2)_{SR} \cong G_{SR} \times K_2$ contains $C_{2m}$ (if $G_{SR}$ contains an odd cycle) or $2C_m$ (if $G_{SR}$ contains no odd cycle) by Theorem~\ref{kro} and Corollary~\ref{d_K2}; thus, $sdim_f(G \square K_2)=\|M(G)\|$ by Corollary~\ref{v_reg_sub}. (b) Let $T$ be a tree of order at least two. Notice that $T_{SR} \cong K_{\sigma(T)}$, and $T_{SR} \cong K_2$ if and only if $T$ is a path. If $T$ is a path, then $\sigma(T)=2$ and $\nu(T_{SR})=1$, and thus $sdim_f(T \square K_n)=n=\frac{n}{2} \sigma(T)$ by Corollary~\ref{cc_kn}. Next, suppose that $T$ is not a path; then $\sigma(T) \ge 3$. If $n=2$, then $(T \square K_2)_{SR} \cong K_{\sigma(T)} \times K_2$ contains $C_{2\sigma(T)}$ as a subgraph, and thus, $sdim_f(T \square K_2)=\frac{1}{2} \|M(T)\| \cdot \|M(K_2)\|=\sigma(T)$ by Corollary~\ref{v_reg_sub}. If $n \ge 3$, then both $T_{SR} \cong K_{\sigma(T)}$ and $(K_n)_{SR} \cong K_n$ are Hamiltonian graphs, and hence $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{1}{2}\|M(T)\| \cdot \|M(K_n)\|=\frac{n}{2} \sigma(T)$ by Proposition~\ref{cor_HxH}. (c) For $k \ge 2$, let $G=K_{r_1,\ldots,r_k}$ be a complete $k$-partite graph of order $r=\sum_{i=1}^{k}r_i$. Let $r_k \ge \ldots \ge r_{2} \ge r_1$ by relabeling if necessary. First, suppose $r_1 \ge 2$. Then $G_{SR} \cong \cup_{i=1}^{k}K_{r_i}$ and $(G \square K_n)_{SR} \cong G_{SR} \times K_n \cong \cup_{i=1}^{k} (K_{r_i} \times K_n)$. Since each connected component of $(G \square K_n)_{SR}$ is a regular graph, $sdim_f(G \square K_n)=\frac{n\|M(G)\|}{2}=\frac{n}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{k}r_i$ by Proposition~\ref{v_regular}. Second, suppose that $r_1=r_2=\ldots, r_s=1$ for $s \ge 2$. If $s=k$, then $G \cong K_k$ and $sdim_f(G \square K_n)=sdim_f(K_k \square K_n)=\frac{kn}{2}=\frac{n}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{k}r_i$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}. If $s < k$ and $r_{s+1}>1$, then $G_{SR} \cong K_s \cup(\cup_{i=s+1}^{k}K_{r_i})$ and $(G \square K_n)_{SR} \cong G_{SR} \times K_n \cong (K_s \times K_n) \cup ( (\cup_{i=s+1}^{k}K_{r_i}) \times K_n)$. Since each connected component of $(G \square K_n)_{SR}$ is a regular graph, $sdim_f(G \square K_n)=\frac{n\|M(G)\|}{2}=\frac{n}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{k}r_i$ by Proposition~\ref{v_regular}.~\hfill \end{proof} Although a large number of Cartesian product graphs achieve equality in Corollary \ref{cor_C}, we will show that $\frac{\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(H)\|}{2} - sdim_f(G \square H)$ can be arbitrarily large by providing the following example. \begin{remark}\label{G_q_cartesian} There is a family of graphs $G$ such that $\frac{\|M(G)\| \cdot \|M(P_n)\|}{2} - sdim_f(G \square P_n)$ can be arbitrarily large. Let $\mathcal{F}^$ be a family of graphs $G_q$ ($q \ge 2$) constructed as described in the parts (i), (ii), and (v) of Remark~\ref{graph_G_q}, and let $P_n$ be an $n$-path given by $w_1w_2 \ldots w_n$ for $n \ge 2$. We will show that $\frac{\|M(G_q)\| \cdot \|M(P_n)\|}{2}=3q+1$ and $sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)=2q+2$ for $q,n \ge 2$. First, notice the following in constructing $(G_q)_{SR}$ for $q \ge 2$: \begin{itemize} \item[(1)] For each $i\in \{1,2,\ldots, q\}$, the vertex $a_i$ is MMD with each vertex in $(\cup_{j=1}^{q}\{c_j\})-\{c_i\}$; \item[(2)] Neither any two vertices in $\cup_{i=1}^{q}\{a_i\}$ nor any two vertices in $\cup_{i=1}^{q}\{c_i\}$ form an MMD pair, and $a_jc_j \not\in E((G_q)_{SR})$ for each $j\in \{1,2,\ldots, q\}$; \item[(3)] For each $i \in \{1, 2,\ldots, q\}$, the vertex $b_i$ is MMD only with the vertex $x$ and vice versa; \item[(4)] $\{a_0,b_0, c_0\} \cap M(G_q)=\emptyset$. \end{itemize} If we denote by $K^-_{q,q}$ a component of $(G_q)_{SR}$ that satisfies (1) and (2) of the above construction for $(G_q)_{SR}$ (i.e., $K^-_{q,q}$ is a complete bipartite graph $K_{q, q}$ minus a perfect matching), then $(G_q)_{SR}$ consists of two components, $K_{1,q}$ and $K^-_{q,q}$. Next, we consider the Cartesian product graph $G_q\square P_n$, where $q \ge 2$ and $n\ge 2$; then $(G_q \square P_n)_{SR} \cong (G_q)_{SR} \times P_2$ by Theorem~\ref{cartesian}. Since both $(G_q)_{SR}$ and $P_2$ are bipartite graphs, by Theorem~\ref{kro} and Corollary~\ref{d_K2}, $(G_q)_{SR} \times P_2$ is a disconnected graph with four components and $(G_q)_{SR} \times P_2 \cong 2K^-_{q,q} \cup 2 K_{1,q}$. We will show that $sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)=2q+2$ for $q,n \ge 2$. By Proposition~\ref{matchingN}, $sdim_f(G_q\square P_n)\ge \nu((G_q\square P_n)_{SR})=\nu ((G_q)_{SR} \times P_2)=2 \nu(K^-_{q,q})+2 \nu(K_{1,q})=2q+2$. On the other hand, for $v=(u,w) \in V(G_q\square P_n)$, let $f:V(G_q\square P_n)\rightarrow [0,1]$ be a function defined by \begin{equation} f(v)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1 & \mbox{if $u=x$ and $w \in \{w_1, w_n\}$},\\ \frac{1}{2} & \mbox{if $u \in \cup_{i=1}^{q}\{a_i, c_i\}$ and $w \in \{w_1, w_n\}$},\\ 0 & \mbox{otherwise}. \end{array}\right. \end{equation} Then $f$ is a strong resolving function of $G_q \square P_n$ with $g(V(G_q \square P_n))=2+2q$, and hence $sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)\le 2q+2$. Thus, we have $sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)=2q+2$ for $q,n \ge 2$. Since $\|M(G_q)\|=3q+1$ and $\|M(P_n)\|=2$ for $q,n \ge 2$, we have $\frac{\|M(G_q)\| \cdot \|M(P_n)\|}{2}=3q+1$. Now, for $q,n \ge 2$, notice that $\frac{\|M(G_q)\| \cdot \|M(P_n)\|}{2} - sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)=(3q+1)-(2q+2)=q-1$ can be arbitrarily large. \end{remark} From the family of Cartesian product graphs $G_q \square P_n$ considered in Remark~\ref{G_q_cartesian}, by taking $q=k+1 \ge 2$, we have the following realization result. \begin{cor} For any positive integer $k$, there exists a Cartesian product graph $G \square H$ such that $\frac{\|M(G_q)\| \cdot \|M(P_n)\|}{2} - sdim_f(G_q \square P_n)=k$. \end{cor} The problem of characterizing Cartesian product graphs $G \square H$ satisfying the upper bound of Corollary \ref{cor_C} -- more generally, characterizing graphs achieving equality in Proposition~\ref{uppersdimF} -- remains open. Now, we provide bounds for $sdim_f(G \square H)$ in terms of $sdim_f(G)$ and $sdim_f(H)$. \begin{theorem}\label{thm_Cartesian} Let $G$ and $H$ be connected graphs of order at least two. Then $$\max\{2sdim_f(G), 2sdim_f(H)\} \le sdim_f(G \square H) \le \min\{\|M(G)\|sdim_f(H), \|M(H)\|sdim_f(G)\},$$ and both bounds are sharp. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Let $G$ and $H$ be connected graphs of order at least two. To show the lower bound, it suffices to prove that $sdim_f(G \square H) \ge 2 sdim_f(G)$. Since $(G \square H)_{SR}=G_{SR} \times H_{SR} \supseteq G_{SR} \times K_2=(G \square K_2)_{SR}$ by Theorem~\ref{cartesian}, we have $sdim_f(G \square H) \ge sdim_f(G \square K_2)$ by Lemma~\ref{sr_subgraph}. We will show that $sdim_f(G \square K_2) \ge 2 sdim_f(G)$. Let $K_2$ be given by $y_1y_2$; then each vertex $x \in V(G)$ corresponds to two vertices $(x,y_1), (x,y_2) \in V(G \times K_2)$. Let $h: V(G \square K_2) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a strong resolving function of $G \square K_2$, and let $f: V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a function defined by $f(x)=\frac{1}{2}[h((x,y_1))+h((x,y_2))]$ for each $x \in V(G)$. Suppose that $x_1x_2 \in E(G_{SR})$. Then $(x_1,y_1)(x_2,y_2) \in E(G_{SR} \times K_2)$ and $(x_2,y_1)(x_1,y_2) \in E(G_{SR} \times K_2)$; thus, $h((x_1,y_1))+h((x_2,y_2)) \ge 1$ and $h((x_2,y_1))+h((x_1,y_2))\ge 1$. So, $f(x_1)+f(x_2)=\frac{1}{2}[h((x_1,y_1))+h((x_1,y_2))]+\frac{1}{2}[h((x_2,y_1))+h((x_2,y_2))]=\frac{1}{2}[h((x_1,y_1))+h((x_2,y_2))+h((x_2,y_1))+h((x_1,y_2))] \ge \frac{1}{2} \cdot 2=1$. Since $f$ satisfies $f(u)+f(v) \ge 1$ for any $uv \in E(G_{SR})$, $f$ is a strong resolving function of $G$. Since $h(V(G \square K_2))=2 f(V(G))$ for any strong resolving function $h$, $sdim_f(G \square K_2) \ge 2 sdim_f(G)$; thus, $sdim_f(G \square H) \ge 2 sdim_f(G)$. To show the upper bound, it suffices to prove $ sdim_f(G \square H) \le \|M(H)\|sdim_f(G)$. Let $V(G_{SR})=\{u_1, u_2, \ldots, u_n\}$ and $V(H_{SR})=\{w_1, w_2, \ldots, w_m\}$. Let $f_G: V(G) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a minimum strong resolving function of $G$ (i.e., $f_G(V(G))=sdim_f(G)$), and let $f_{G \square H}: V(G \square H) \rightarrow [0,1]$ be a function defined by $f_{G \square H} ((u,w))=f_G(u)$ for each $u \in V(G)$ and for each $w \in V(H)$. Suppose that $u_1u_2 \in E(G_{SR})$ by relabeling if necessary; then $f_G(u_1)+f_G(u_2) \ge 1$. Notice that each vertex in $H_{SR}$ is incident to at least one edge in $H_{SR}$, since each vertex in $H_{SR}$ has degree at least one. For each edge $w_iw_j \in E(H_{SR})$, $(u_1,w_i)(u_2,w_j) \in E(G_{SR} \times H_{SR})$ and $(u_2,w_i)(u_1,w_j) \in E(G_{SR} \times H_{SR})$; thus, $f_{G \square H}((u_1,w_i))+f_{G \square H}((u_2,w_j))=f_G(u_1)+f_{G}(u_2) \ge 1$ and $f_{G \square H}((u_2,w_i))+f_{G \square H}((u_1,w_j))=f_G(u_2)+f_G(u_1) \ge 1$. So, $f_{G \square H}$ is a strong resolving function of $G \square H$ with $f_{G \square H}(V(G \square H))=\|V(H_{SR})\|sdim_f(G)=\|M(H)\| sdim_f(G)$; thus $sdim_f(G \square H) \le f_{G \square H}(V(G \square H))=\|M(H)\|sdim_f(G)$. For the sharpness of the lower bound, let $G=P_n$ and $H=P_m$ for $n,m \ge 2$; then $sdim_f(G)=1=sdim_f(H)$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimbounds}(a) and $sdim_f(G \square H)=2$ by Theorem~\ref{sdimFthm}(f). So, $sdim_f(G \square H )=2=\max\{2 sdim_f(G), 2 sdim_f(H)\}$. For the sharpness of the upper bound, let $G=C_n$ and $H=C_m$ for $n,m \ge 3$; then $sdim_f(G)=\frac{n}{2}$, $sdim_f(H)=\frac{m}{2}$, and $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{nm}{2}$ by Theorem~\ref{v_transitive}. Since $\|M(G)\|=n$ and $\|M(H)\|=m$, we have $sdim_f(G \square H)=\frac{nm}{2}=\min\{\|M(G)\|sdim_f(H), \|M(H)\|sdim_f(G)\}$.~\hfill \end{proof} Since $\|M(G)\| \le \|V(G)\|$ for any connected graph $G$, we have the following \begin{cor} For connected graphs $G$ and $H$ of order at least two, $$\max\{2sdim_f(G), 2sdim_f(H)\} \le sdim_f(G \square H) \le \min\{\|V(G)\|sdim_f(H), \|V(H)\|sdim_f(G)\}.$$ \end{cor} \begin{remark} We note that, if $sdim_f$ is replaced by $sdim$ in Theorem~\ref{thm_Cartesian}, the lower bound fails to hold. It was shown in~\cite{sdim_Cartesian} that $sdim(G \square H) \ge sdim(G) \cdot sdim(H)$; thus, $sdim(G \square K_2) \ge sdim(G)$. We note that there exists a graph $G$ such that $sdim(G \square K_2)<2 sdim(G)$. If $G=C_{2k+1}$ ($k \ge 1$), then $G_{SR} \cong C_{2k+1}$ and $G_{SR} \times K_2 \cong C_{4k+2}$. So, $sdim(G \square K_2)=\alpha(G_{SR} \times K_2)=2k+1<2(k+1)=2 \alpha (G_{SR})=2sdim(G)$. \end{remark}

\section{Introduction} Despite the term ``join'' appearing in the literature on GDBMSs, there is no counterpart of the relational join operator over two distinct graphs. Recalling relational algebra's joins, those are defined as a composition of a selection predicate and a cartesian product between two tables. In literature ``graph join'' describes an operation which is neither binary (that is, involving two distinct graphs) nor involving graphs as a whole (that is, graph paths obtained in traversal operations over one single graph are considered instead). In current literature ``join'' expresses a ``path join'' \cite{LiM03,Holzschuher,Gao} over path queries of arbitrary length, where specifically joins are performed over adjacent vertices \cite{Atre,Yuan,Fletcher09}. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{.2\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{graphplanes2_mod2a} \subcaption{$G_1=(V_1,E_1,A_1)$}\label{fig:figmaina} \end{minipage}% \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \rowcolor{lightgray} \multicolumn{3}{\|c\|}{$V_1\mathtt{(User,MsgTime1)}$} \\ \hline Vertex & \texttt{User} & \texttt{MsgTime1} \\ \hline $v_2$ & Alice & 1\\ $v_3$ & Bob & 3 \\ $v_4$ & Carl & 2 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \subcaption{$V_1$}\label{fig:v1} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.2\linewidth} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|} \hline \rowcolor{lightgray} \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{$E_1$} \\ \hline Source & Destination \\ \hline $v_3$ & $v_2$\\ $v_4$ & $v_3$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \subcaption{$E_1$}\label{fig:e1} \end{minipage}\\ \bigskip \begin{minipage}[b]{.2\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{graphplanes2_mod2b} \subcaption{$G_2=(V_2,E_2,A_2)$}\label{fig:figmainb} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \rowcolor{lightgray} \multicolumn{3}{\|c\|}{$V_2\mathtt{(User,MsgTime2)}$} \\ \hline Vertex & \texttt{User} & \texttt{MsgTime2} \\ \hline $w_1$ & Dan & 6\\ $w_2$ & Alice & 7\\ $w_3$ & Bob & 3 \\ $w_4$ & Carl & 2 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \subcaption{$V_2$}\label{fig:v2} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.2\linewidth} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|} \hline \rowcolor{lightgray} \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{$E_2$} \\ \hline Source & Destination \\ \hline $w_1$ & $w_2$\\ $w_2$ & $w_3$\\ $w_4$ & $w_3$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \subcaption{$E_2$}\label{fig:e2} \end{minipage} \caption{\textit{Dual representation of graphs as both graphs and data tables}.}\label{fig:dataexample} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[!t] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{ER} \caption{\textit{View of the data graph as a relational database}.} \label{fig:ger} \end{figure} In order to reinforce such statement, we should see that the so-called graph joins in graph database literature are always defined over a single graph \cite{SIGMOD2015Atre} even if there are some graph query languages, like SPARQL, that allow accessing multiple graph resources in a same query\footnote{See ``named graphs'' in SPARQL.}. In the particular case of SPARQL, the join operation is expressed as a join between graph paths through relational join operators \cite{SparQLExpr,SIGMOD2015Atre} through triple composition. The introduction of an explicit graph join operator allows to better delineate the problem, and hence helps finding a tailored algorithm that performs the join operation profitably. By doing so we obtain a specific join algorithm that has a running time that is lower than the time required to perform the same operation over current graph database query languages. In this paper we outline two contributions: \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Definition of the Graph Join operator}: this operation joins the vertices and combines the edges with different possible semantics. In particular we propose two different semantics, that are the \textbf{conjunctive join} and the \textbf{disjunctive join}. The first one forms an edge between two joined vertices iff such vertices were connected by an edge in both graphs; the second one forms an edge if the vertices were connected in at least one of the two graphs. \item \textbf{CoGrouped Graph Conjunctive $\theta$-Join}: this algorithm implements the graph join with the conjunctive semantics. First, we index and load into secondary memory the graph data structure by associating each vertex to a specific hash value. As a last step, we perform a join over the operands which are stored in secondary memory by both (i) joining only the vertices which have the same hash value, and (ii) linking such joined vertices according to the conjunctive semantics. \end{itemize} % As a secondary outcome of the flexibility of the graph join definition, we implement specific graph operations even though those are not literary specified as graph joins. \textit{Subgraph extractions from two graphs} over user communities \cite{Berlingerio11,Boden12} and \textit{(Unweighted) Ontology RollUp} \cite{Mabroukeh11} over a same graph are just a few examples. % % Section \ref{sec:gdm} outlines the details of our proposed graph data model and defines the graph join operation (Section \ref{subsec:joindefs}). Section \ref{sec:algos} develops both the basic version of the join definitions and the proposed CoGrouped Graph Conjunctive $\theta$-Join, specifically designed for the graph conjunctive join. Section \ref{ref:structure} exposes the graph data structures that are used both to store the result in primary memory and the join operands in secondary memory. Section \ref{sec:dataset} describes the experiment's set-up where we generalize the subgraph extraction problem in order to increase the results' multiplicity. In Section \ref{src:conc} we draw our conclusions and outline our future works. Section \ref{sec:dbqlang} provides more details on the state of the art of current graph database languages and on the usage of the term ``join'' on current graph database literature. \section{Graph Data Model}\label{sec:gdm} We now define a simplified Property Graph data model, which uses only the basic desired feature that are required to develop a graph join operation over graphs. \begin{definition}[Graph Data Model] A graph is defined as a triple $(V,E,A)$, where $V$ is a set of vertices, that are represented as tuples having a schema $A$. $E$ is a set of (unlabelled) edges defined as a pair of vertices in $V^2$. \end{definition} Using the former definition, we can represent any graph through a ER diagram (Figure \ref{fig:ger}). This simplified model could be even stored in a relational database (Figure \ref{fig:dataexample}), because each vertex is an entity and the edges are the binary relations among the vertices. Similar attempts have been carried out for the Property Graph model \cite{preSQLGraph,SQLGraph}. \begin{example} Figure \ref{fig:figmaina} and \ref{fig:figmainb} represent two communication patterns between the two vertices, where each vertex represents a post created by an user and each edge $(u,v)$ represents that $u$ receives a reply from $v$. Consequently, we have: \begin{gather} G_1=(\Set{v_2,v_3,v_4},\Set{(v_2,v_3),(v_3,v_2),(v_4,v_3)},\Set{User,MsgTime1})\qquad\qquad\quad\\ G_2=(\Set{w_1,w_2,w_3,w_4},\Set{(w_1,w_2),(w_2,w_3),(w_3,w_2),(w_4,w_3)},\Set{User,MsgTime2}) \end{gather} Each graph can be represented by two tables, one for the vertices (Figure \ref{fig:v1} and \ref{fig:v2}) and the other for the edges (Figure \ref{fig:e1} and \ref{fig:e2}). \end{example} The evidence of a viable mapping between graphs and relational databases is used in the following subsection to outline the graph join operation. % \begin{figure}[!b] \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{g1g2_general_conjdisj} \caption{\textit{Given two graph with vertices with same id, hence sharing the same value, the graph conjunctive join extracts the common pattern, while the disjunctive join retrieves at least one edge shared among the matched vertices}.} \label{fig:conjdisjbasicex} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[!t] \centering \begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth} \begin{minipage}[b]{.2\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{g1_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1$}\label{fig:figjoing1} \end{minipage} \quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.18\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{g2_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_2$}\label{fig:figjoing2} \end{minipage} \end{adjustbox}\\ \bigskip \begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth} \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{z1_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1\Join_\theta^\wedge G_2$}\label{fig:figjoina} \end{minipage}\quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{z3_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1\Join_\theta^\vee G_2$}\label{fig:figjoinda} \end{minipage}\quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{z2_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1\Join_{\theta'}^\wedge G_2$}\label{fig:figjoinb} \end{minipage}\quad \begin{minipage}[b]{.25\linewidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.75]{z4_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1\Join^\vee_{\theta'} G_2$}\label{fig:figjoindb} \end{minipage} \end{adjustbox} \caption{\textit{Representation of $G_1\Join_\theta^\vee G_2$, where $\theta$ is defined as ${\texttt{MsgTime1}\leq\texttt{MsgTime2}}$ and $\theta'$ is defined as ${\texttt{MsgTime2}\leq\texttt{MsgTime1}}$}.} \label{fig:dataexamplejoin1d} \end{figure} \subsection{Graph Joins}\label{subsec:joindefs} We conceive graph joins as an extension of the relational join operator. We propose a graph join between two graphs $G_1\Join_\theta^{\textup{\textbf{op}}}G_2$, where the vertices are considered as to-be-joined relational tuples ($V_1\Join_\theta V_2$), and the resulting edges are given by combining the graph operand's edges $E_1$ and $E_2$ with a specific \textbf{op} semantics. The graph join operator has two parameters: the $\theta$ binary predicate over the vertices and the \textbf{op} semantics that combines the edges from both graphs. This modularity is similar to the graph products defined in graph theory literature \cite{Hammack,ProductGraphs}, where instead of a join between vertices we have a cross product. \begin{definition}[General Graph $\theta$-Join] Given two data graphs $G_1=(V_1,E_1,A_1)$ and $G_2=(V_2,E_2,A_2)$, a \textbf{general graph $\theta$-join} is defined as follows: \begin{gather} G_1\Join_\theta^{\textbf{\textup{op}}} G_2=(V_1\Join_\theta V_2,E_{\textup{\textbf{op}}},A_1\cup A_2) \end{gather} where $\theta$ is a binary predicate over the vertices and $\Join_\theta$ the $\theta$-join among the vertices (as tables), and $E_{\textup{\textbf{op}}}$ is a subset of all the possible edges linking the vertices in $V_1\Join_\theta V_2$ expressed with the \textup{\textbf{op}} semantics. $\Join_\theta$ is defined as the relational join among relations as follows: \begin{gather} V_1\Join_\theta V_2=\Set{v\oplus v''\|v\in V_1, v''\in V_2,\theta(v,v''), (v\oplus v'')[A_1]=v, (v\oplus v'')[A_2]=v''} \end{gather} Moreover, $\oplus$ is the operation of merging two vertices (and hence, two tuples). \end{definition} If we impose that $E_{\textup{\textbf{op}}}$ contains an edge iff an edge between the merged vertices appears in both original graphs (and hence in both $E_1$ and $E_2$), we obtain a \textbf{Conjunctive Join}, that in graph theory is known as \textit{Kronecker graph product} \cite{Weichsel,Hammack}. In this case $E_{\textup{\textbf{op}}}$ is defined with the ``$\wedge$'' semantics as follows: \begin{gather} E_{\wedge}=\{(v\oplus v'',v'\oplus v''')\in (V_1\Join_\theta V_2)^2\mid (v,v')\in E_1\wedge (v'',v''')\in E_2 \} \end{gather} Such edge semantics extracts all the shared edge patterns between the two graphs among equivalent vertices, where $\theta$ determines whether the two vertices are equivalent or not. Given this definition, we could provide an implementation for the Unweighted Ontology RollUp \cite{Mabroukeh11} operator: \begin{example} Given a graph $G=(V,E)$ where each edge represents a ``is-a'' relation, then $G\Join_{(v,v')\in E}^\wedge G$ produces the rollup for each ontology object $o\in V$ over which ``is-a'' relations are formulated. E.g., if \textup{camera} ``is-a'' \textup{device} and \textup{device} ``is-a'' \textup{hardware}, then in the resulting graph \textup{camera-device} ``is-a'' \textup{device-hardware} \end{example} This graph join semantics is implemented in our proposed algorithm in Section \ref{sec:cogroup}. As an alternative, we would like to grasp from both graphs all the edges that are shared among the equivalent edges (see Figure \ref{fig:conjdisjbasicex}): this is possible with the \textbf{Disjunctive Join}, where $E_{\textup{\textbf{op}}}$ is defined with the ``$\vee$'' semantics as follows: \begin{gather} E_{\vee}=\{(v\oplus v'',v'\oplus v''')\in V_1\Join_\theta V_2\mid (v, v')\in E_1\vee (v'', v''')\in E_2\} \end{gather} In order to differentiate the two proposed graph joins, that is when the conjunctive edge semantics is used instead of the disjunctive one, we use $G_1\Join^\wedge G_2$ for the graph conjunctive join, and $G_1\Join^\vee G_2$ for the graph disjunctive one. \begin{example}\label{ex:4} Let us now consider the two graphs in Figure \ref{fig:dataexample} and try to define the join $G_1\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime1}\leq\texttt{MsgTime2}} G_2$, where each vertex value is provided inside a table. We want to select the communication patterns that are shared at increasing times: the resulting graph is given in Figure \ref{fig:figjoina}, where each $z_i$ is defined as $v_i\oplus w_i$. Observe that the graph conjunctive join operation is symmetric as the one defined in relational algebra, and hence: \[G_1\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime1}\leq\texttt{MsgTime2}}^\wedge G_2=G_2\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime1}\leq\texttt{MsgTime2}}^\wedge G_1\] On the other hand, the result of performing the symmetric operation, that is $G_1\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime2}\leq\texttt{MsgTime1}} G_2$, is provided in Figure \ref{fig:figjoinb}. Observe that the graph disjunctive join operation is symmetric as the one defined in relational algebra, and hence: \[G_1\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime2}\leq\texttt{MsgTime1}}^\vee G_2=G_2\Join_{\texttt{MsgTime2}\leq\texttt{MsgTime1}}^\vee G_1\] Let us now consider the same examples provided previously but performed over the Disjunctive Join: as we can see from Figure \ref{fig:figjoinda}, such implementation allows obtaining the edges from the two graphs and behaves as a missing data operator for the edges. As we can see from Figure \ref{fig:figjoindb}, whether both graphs share the same edge, the final edge is not duplicated. \end{example} \section{Algorithms}\label{sec:algos} In this section we design both a basic approach implementing the graph join for both conjunctive ($\wedge$) and disjunctive ($\vee$) semantics (Section \ref{sub:baisc}), and then we outline the proposed join algorithm for the conjunctive semantics (Section \ref{sec:cogroup}), focusing more specifically on the equijoin case (the discussion on the less-equal join is postponed to Appendix \ref{app:leq}). \begin{algorithm}[!b] \caption{Basic Join, implementing both conjunctive and disjunctive join, depending on \textbf{op}'s definition (that can be either \textbf{and} or \textbf{or})}\label{alg:triviial} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Procedure{Join}{$G_1,G_2,\theta,$\textbf{op}}\Comment{$G_1\Join_\theta^{\textup{\textbf{op}}} G_2$} \State $V\gets V_1\Join_\theta V_2; E\gets \emptyset$ \For{\textbf{each} $l\oplus r\in V$} \For{\textbf{each} $ll\oplus rr\in V$} \If{($(l,ll)\in E_1$ \textbf{op} $(r,rr)\in E_2$)} \State $E\gets E\cup \{(v,v_2)\}$ \EndIf \EndFor \EndFor \State \textbf{return} $(V,E,A_1\cup A_2)$ \EndProcedure \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} \subsection{Basic implementation}\label{sub:baisc} A basic implementation of both conjunctive and disjunctive join is provided in Algorithm \vref{alg:triviial}. This simple algorithm can be immediately translated in common graph query languages such as Cypher and SPARQL. To the best of our knowledge, no graph language exists where such graph join operator is designed as a specific operator and hence, the computation of such kind of query is not optimized, although all the graph database indexing techniques are used. With this implementation we first perform the $\theta$ join over the graphs' vertices (line 2), then we visit the graph searching for the neighbours (line 4) and then we check if the selected vertices satisfy the specific semantics through the \textbf{op} semantics. \begin{figure}[!th] \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{\linewidth} \hspace{2cm} \includegraphics[scale=0.75]{basic_structure.pdf} \subcaption{Data structures used to implement the graph in secondary memory. Each data structure represents a different file.}\label{fig:graphstructure} \end{minipage}\\ \begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth} \hspace{-0.5cm} \begin{minipage}[b]{.1\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.68]{g1_mod_tab} \subcaption{$G_1$}\label{fig:figjoing1bis} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[b]{0.8\textwidth} \hspace{1cm}\includegraphics[scale=0.62]{example.pdf} \subcaption{Implementation of graph $G_1$ in secondary memory.}\label{fig:graphimplement} \end{minipage}% \end{adjustbox} \caption{\textit{Graph representation in secondary memory}.} \end{figure} \subsection{Implementing the Conjunctive $\theta$-Join\\ through hashing}\label{sec:cogroup} We propose an implementation of the Conjunctive $\theta$-join through hashing that uses the CoGrouping \cite{Dittrich}, that is a proposed generalization for relational tables' join, combining the Sort-Merge Join approach and the Partition-based Hash Join. With the former approach the tuples are sorted by their join keys, while with the latter the input is divided in small co-partitions \cite{SchuhCD16}. In particular, (partition) hash joins associate all the vertices with a same hash value to a same given bucket and can be only applied over equi-join predicates \cite{Zeller}. On the other hand, by ordering the buckets by hash value, we can both decrease the time required to search the buckets with the same hash value, and use the hash join even when the predicate is a ``$\leq$'' over at most one single attribute per graph, containing ordinal values. Since we would like to have an algorithm supporting both equijoins and ``$\leq$'' predicates, we use the CoGrouped (hash) join technique; hereby we call such algorithm ``\textbf{CoGrouped Graph Conjunctive $\theta$-Join}''. As a first step, for each vertex of the left graph $G_1=(V_1,E_1,A)$ we have to reduce the number of the vertices that have to be scanned in the right graph $G_2=(V_2,E_2,B)$ while searching for a possible match. Our aim is to prune the combination of visited pair of distinct vertices, jointly from the left and right graph, to the sole matching ones as much as possible. In order to do so we have to associate to each vertex $u,v$ a value generated from a \textit{vertex hashing function} $h$ such that, if they jointly satisfy the $\theta$ predicate ($\theta(u,v)$), then their values $h(v)$ and $h(v)$ \textit{match}. If $\theta$ is defined as an equivalence predicate over (a subset of) the attributes in $A$ and $B$ such as: \begin{equation} \label{key:qe} \theta(u,v)=u.A_{i_1}=v.B_{j_1}\wedge\dots\wedge u.A_{i_m}=v.B_{j_m} \end{equation} then we have that $h$ has to be defined over the values of $A_{i_1},\dots,A_{i_m}$ and $B_{j_1},\dots,B_{j_m}$, and the hash values \textit{match} iff $h(u)=h(v)$. Hereby we shall impose that if the vertices $u$ and $v$ satisfy the equi-join predicate in Equation \ref{key:qe}, then such vertices have the same hash value ($h(u)=h(v)$). This technique also applies whether the predicate $\theta$ is defined as a total order over at most one attribute of a vertex (e.g. $\theta(u,v)=u.A\leq v.B$) and in this case the hashing function should be monotone w.r.t. the ordered values (if $u.A\leq v.B$, then the hashes \textit{match} with $h(u)\leq h(v)$). In our case study we examine the algorithm when the join predicate is expressed in an equivalence form such as Equation \ref{key:qe}. On the other hand, Appendix \ref{app:leq} provides some details on the case of the less-equal ($\leq$) predicate, both providing the algorithm and the experimental results. This paragraph describes the first part of the algorithm, where the join operation is performed among the vertices' tables, $V_1$ and $V_2$, as in the standard relational CoGrouping join scenario. By sorting the vertices for both graphs by hash value, the vertices having the same hash value are stored contiguously. As a result, we can directly access to the vertices with hash code $h_c$ ($u\in V_1$ and $v\in V_2$ having $h(u)=h_c=h(v)$). In order to visit only the vertices having hash values that are shared between the two indexed graphs, we preventively evaluate the set $HI$ storing the hash values shared on both graphs ($HI:=h(V_1)\cap h(V_2)$). We still have to check if the predicate $\theta$ is satisfied for each pair of such vertices ($\theta(u,v)$) as long as the join condition holds (that is $(u\oplus v)[A]=u\wedge (u\oplus v)[B]=v$). If all those tests are passed, then the joined vertex $u\oplus v$ is the next vertex candidate for the resulting graph. The last step of the algorithm involves the creation of the edges between the joined vertices, $u\oplus v$, and their neighbours. Since the neighbours must be elements of $V_1\Join_\theta V_2$, by graph join definition we choose, among all the possible neighbours, those that have a hash value $h_d$ appearing in both graphs ($h_d\in HI$). In particular even in this case, the vertices have to pass the previously described tests. Algorithm \ref{alg:cogrouped} implements the CoGrouped Graph Conjunctive EquiJoin described idea in pseudocode with no assumptions regarding both the operands' and the result's data structure. Better performances can be achieved by using ad hoc graph data representations, as described in the following section. \begin{algorithm}[!b] \caption{CoGrouped Graph Conjunctive EquiJoin}\label{alg:cogrouped} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Procedure{CoGroupedJoin}{$G_1,G_2,\theta$}\Comment{$G_1\Join_\theta^{\wedge} G_2$} \State $V\leftarrow \emptyset;\; E\leftarrow \emptyset$ \State $HI\leftarrow h(V_1)\cap h(V_2)$ \For{\textbf{each} $h_c\in HI$} \For{\textbf{each} $u\in V_1,v\in V_2$ \textbf{s.t.} $h(u)=h_c=h(v)$} \If{$\theta(u,v), (u\oplus v)[A]=u, (u\oplus v)[B]=v$} \State $V\leftarrow V\cup \{u\oplus v\}$ \For{\textbf{each} $nu\in out_{V_1}(u)$} \If{$h(nu)\notin HI$} \textbf{continue} \EndIf \For{\textbf{each} $nv\in out_{V_2}(v)$} \If{$h(nv)\neq h(nu)$} \textbf{continue} \EndIf \If{$\theta(nu,nv),$\par \hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent $(nu\oplus nv)[A]=nu,$\par \hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent\hskip\algorithmicindent$(nu\oplus nv)[B]=nv$} \State {$V\leftarrow V\cup \{nu\oplus nv\}$} \State {$E\leftarrow E\cup \{(u\oplus v, nu\oplus nv)\}$} \EndIf \EndFor \EndFor \EndIf \EndFor \EndFor \EndProcedure \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} \pagebreak \section{Graph Data Structures}\label{ref:structure} In this section we show the two different strategies that our algorithm uses in order to compute the previously described algorithm efficiently. We first describe the result graph data structure that has to allow a fast element insertion and exiguous memory occupation (Section \ref{sub:bulkgraph}), and then the secondary memory data structure that allows a quick scan of the graph's vertices (Section \ref{sub:secstor}). \subsection{Bulk Graph}\label{sub:bulkgraph} The graph resulting from a join graph query could be too large to fit in main memory. For this reason some implementations like RDF4J do not explicitly store the result unless explicitly required, but actually evaluate the query step by step. On the other hand Neo4J sometimes fails to accomplish in providing the final result due to the employment of all the available RAM memory (Table \ref{tab:evaluatejoin}). In order to allow the storage of the whole result in main memory we chose to implement an ad-hoc graph data structure represented as an adjacency list, where each entry represents a result's vertex and where each vertex's neighbour is only represented by its id. \subsection{Secondary Storage}\label{sub:secstor} The proposed algorithm shows that we can achieve the advantages of a CoGrouped join iff the vertices are all sorted by hash value. If such hash-sorted vertices are stored in a linear data structure as in Figure \ref{fig:graphstructure} (e.g. an array, $VA\texttt{[]}$), then we could create an hash index (e.g. $Hash\texttt{[]}$) where each record stores the hash value \texttt{value} and the offset \texttt{VAOffset} of \textit{VA} where to retrieve the vertices with the same hash. Let us now focus on \textit{VA}'s vertices. Each vertex in \textit{VA} is stored by omitting the vertices' attributes and storing only the values (\texttt{val[1]\dots val[M]}) and, in order to avoid data replication, each incoming vertex \texttt{in[i]} and outgoing vertex \texttt{out[j]} is stored only by its id. Given that \textit{VA}'s vertices have variable data size, we need another linear data structure (e.g. $VertexIndex\texttt{[]}$) for accessing efficiently such vertices. The \texttt{Id} vertex is stored at the record with number \texttt{Id} in $VertexIndex\texttt{[]}$; in such record \texttt{VAOffset} points out where the current vertex is stored in \textit{VA}. Consequently, this indexing data structure allows accessing each vertex in $O(1)$ time by its \texttt{Id}. Further details on how to implement such data structure are given in Appendix \ref{spec:implement}, where Algorithm \ref{alg:cogrouped} is rewritten using these data structures. \begin{example} The graph depicted in Figure \ref{fig:figjoing1bis} could be represented in Figure \ref{fig:graphimplement}, and hence the graph data model implementation can be presented as follows: \[G_1=(VertexIndex,VA,Hash,\Set{\texttt{User},\texttt{MsgTime1}})\] where the first three arrays refer to the graph implementation previously described (Figure \ref{fig:graphstructure}) and $\Set{\texttt{User},\texttt{MsgTime1}}$ refers to the attribute schema associated to the graph. \end{example} While modern Relational DBMSs uses variants of the B-Tree data structure to store tuples in main memory, we decided to use a linear data structure, since the most frequent operation for the Join algorithm is the linear scan of all the vertices that share the same hashing value. More precisely, a visit of a balanced binary search tree with $N$ vertices takes $2N$ (because some vertices are visited two times), while the visit of a linear data structure with $N$ records takes exactly $N$. We can access to our data structure using memory mapping techniques: by doing so we delegate the Operating System to handle which pages have to be either cached or retrieved from secondary memory. As a consequence, no cache has to be implemented in the graph join code, since the whole process is completely transparent to the programmer. The design of the previously described algorithm also permits to reduce the amount of page faults, since all the vertices with the same hash value are always stored in a contiguous block in \textit{VA}. Going more specifically on our implementation, the whole code was written in Java. In order to perform memory mapping I/O over files greater of \texttt{MAX\_INT} size, we had to use the \texttt{JNA} library, through which it is possible to directly interact with the \texttt{mmap} system call. In this way we can potentially address at least 64TB of data in virtual memory without explicitly allocating any data value: as a result we avoid creating objects in Java, thus also reducing the amount of work of the Java Garbage Collector, since all the comparisons are done over the data's in-memory representation. \begin{table}[!p] \caption{Benchmarking the time ($\varsigma$) required to load and index the LiveJournal graph join operands in secondary memory} \label{tab:storing} \centering \scalebox{0.8}{ \begin{tabular}{cc\|rrr\|rr} \toprule \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Operands Size ($\|V\|$)}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Operands Storing Time} (ms)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Speed-up}} \\ Left & Right & Neo4J ($\varsigma_N$) & RDF4J ($\varsigma_R$) & Our Storage Proposal ($\varsigma'$) & Neo4J ($\sfrac{\varsigma_N}{\varsigma'}$) & RDF4J ($\sfrac{\varsigma_R}{\varsigma'}$)\\ \midrule \csvreader[late after line=\\]{creation.csv}{}{\csvcoli & \csvcoli & \csvcolii & \csvcoliii & \csvcoliv & \csvcolv & \csvcolvi \bottomrule \end{tabular}} \end{table} \begin{table}[!p] \caption{LiveJournal graph Join Running Time ($\tau$). GDBMS are tested with different languages: Neo4J is tested with Cypher and RDF4J is tested with SPARQL}\label{tab:evaluatejoin} \begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth} \begin{tabular}{@{}cc\|rl\|rrr\|rr@{}} \toprule \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Operands Size ($\|V\|$)}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Result}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Join Time} $\tau$(ms)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Speed-up}} \\ Left & Right & Size ($\|V\|$) & Avg. Multiplicity & Neo4J-Cypher ($\tau_N$) & RDF4J-SPARQL ($\tau_R$) & Our CoGrouped Join ($\tau'$) & Cypher ($\sfrac{\tau_N}{\tau'}$) & SPARQL ($\sfrac{\tau_R}{\tau'}$) \\ \midrule \csvreader[late after line=\\]{calc2.csv}{}{\csvcoli & \csvcoli & \csvcolii & \csvcoliii & \csvcoliv & \csvcolv & \csvcolvi& \csvcolvii & \csvcolviii}% \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{adjustbox} \end{table} \begin{table}[!p] \caption{This table sums up the results achieved in the two previous tables. It shows that the sum of our proposal's secondary memory operand store and indexing time plus the graph join time ($\varsigma'+\tau'$) is less than the sole graph join time of with the GDBMSs' query languages ($\tau_N$, $\tau_R$). This motivates the usage of our proposal as an implementation of the join operation over the already existing GDBMSs.}\label{tab:outperf} \centering \scalebox{0.8}{ \begin{tabular}{cc\|rr\|r\|rr} \toprule \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Operands Size ($\|V\|$)}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Join Time} (ms)} & \multirow{2}{}{\parbox{5.9cm}{Our proposal's \textbf{storing-indexing graph} $+$ \textbf{CoGrouped join time} (ms) ($\varsigma'+\tau'$)}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Speed-up}} \\ Left & Right & Neo4J ($\tau_N$) & RDF4J ($\tau_R$) & & Neo4J ($\frac{\tau_N}{\varsigma'+\tau'}$) & RDF4J ($\frac{\tau_R}{\varsigma'+\tau'}$) \\ \midrule \csvreader[late after line=\\]{sum2.csv}{}{\csvcoli & \csvcoli & \csvcolii & \csvcoliii & \csvcoliv & \csvcolv & \csvcolvi}% \bottomrule \end{tabular}} \end{table}\begin{table}[!p] \caption{LiveJournal join operands occupation in secondary memory expressed in Block Size (\texttt{du -hsk}) on a HFS file system.} \label{tab:size} \centering \scalebox{0.8}{ \begin{tabular}{cc\|rrr\|rr} \toprule \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Operands Size ($\|V\|$)}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Block Size} (KB)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Gain}} \\ Left & Right & Neo4J ($s_N$) & RDF4J ($s_R$) & Our Storage Proposal ($s'$) & Neo4J ($\sfrac{s_N}{s'}$) & RDF4J ($\sfrac{s_R}{s'}$)\\ \midrule \csvreader[late after line=\\]{store_R.csv}{}{\csvcoli & \csvcoli & \csvcolii & \csvcoliii & \csvcoliv & \csvcolv & \csvcolvi}% \bottomrule \end{tabular}} \end{table} \begin{figure}[!p] \centering \begin{adjustbox}{max width=.9\textwidth} \hspace{-0.5cm} \centering \begin{minipage}[b]{0.6\textwidth} \hspace{1cm}\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{sum_size2} \subcaption{Comparing current solutions' query time with our proposal's loading+indexing+query time for the LiveJournal Social Network Graph (Table \ref{tab:outperf}).}\label{fig:sumsize} \end{minipage} \qquad \begin{minipage}[b]{.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[scale=0.35]{sum_size_youtube} \subcaption{Comparing current solutions' query time with our proposal's loading+indexing+query time for the YouTube Graph.}\label{fig:sumsizey} \end{minipage} \end{adjustbox} \caption{\textit{Plots for the benchmark tests}.} \end{figure} \section{Dataset}\label{sec:dataset} We tested our algorithm using the LiveJournal \cite{dataSIOC} and the YouTube \cite{Yang2015} Social Network Graphs. The former contains 4,847,571 unlabelled vertices and 68,993,773 edges, while the latter contains 1,134,890 unlabelled vertices and 2,987,624 edges. In both graphs each vertex represents a user which is connected to one if its friends by an edge. For both graphs we followed the same procedure for obtaining our graph join operands through random walk sampling. Such procedure is described below. Since no data values are given within the datasets, we enriched each graph: we used the guidelines of the LDBC Social Network Benchmark protocol \cite{Erling}, and hence associated to each user an IP address, an Organization and the year of employment\footnote{The resulting enriched graph is available at \url{http://jackbergus.alwaysdata.net/BolognaGraph2016.tar.gz}}. We choose to not use the whole LDBC model, both because we prefer to test our dataset with real world graph data, and because those guidelines are specifically built for generating RDF graphs. For each social network graoh, the left and right graph operands were obtained by starting the random walk from a same vertex but using a different seed for the graph traversal. Moreover, such operands were obtained incrementally by visiting each time a number of vertices that is a power of $10$. The operands were stored in secondary memory as Neo4J graphs, as RDF4J native triple stores and with our proposed implementation. Since Neo4J's query language (Cypher) does not support querying two distinct graphs, both left and right operands were stored in the same graph database. Before discussing the indexing implementation choices for Neo4J, RDF4J and our proposed implementation, we must discuss the graph join operation that will be benchmarked. We perform the algorithm using as operands the two distinct subgraphs with a same vertex size, where the $\theta$ predicate is the following one:\[\begin{split} \theta(u,v)\overset{def}{=}&u.Year1 = v.Year2\; \wedge\\ & u.Organization1 = v.Organization2 \end{split}\] In this way we generalize the ``subgraph extraxtion from two graphs'' problem by matching not only one user per time, but also all the users with the same employment year and work for the same organization. The resulting graph has an edge between two vertices iff there was a friendship relation among the two users in the original graph. In order to compare our indexed implementation with other indexing features of both graph databases, for Neo4J we create the indices over the $Year$ and $Organization$ attributes and, for the RDF triple store where no properties are associated to the vertices, we create all the indices over the stored triples (subject, object and predicate). While Neo4J can directly store the data as described by our data model, RDF4J requires to translate such data since it uses the RDF data model. In order to do so, for each attribute $A_i$ of our vertex $v$ we create a triple $(v,A_i,v[A_i])$, representing two nodes, $v$ and $v[A_i]$, linked by an edge $A_i$. Regarding our proposed data structure, we associate to each vertex the hashing value obtained from an automatically generated hashing composition between the hashes of the field $Year$ and $Organization$. The hash function used for both fields are Java standard hashing functions. \section{Results}\label{ref:results} We evaluated our proposed implementation against Neo4J and RDF4J with a computer with a 2.2 GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 16 GB of RAM at 1600 MHz, and an SSD Secondary Storage with an HFS file system. Moreover, Neo4J is already optimized for SSD \footnote{``I presume you use a sensible machine, with a SSD (or enough IOPS) and decent amount of RAM.'' \texttt{\small http://neo4j.com/blog/neo4j-2-2-query-tuning/}}, and all triple stores have been tested with SSD secondary storage\footnote{RDF4J is previously known as Sesame: \texttt{\small https://www.w3.org/wiki/LargeTripleStores}}. All the queries (either in Cypher or SPARQL) have been evaluated using Java: this means that our solution has been implemented in Java\footnote{See our code in \url{https://bitbucket.org/unibogb/databasemappings/}, released under GPLv3.} using the JNA library for calling the OS memory mapping methods, and the Java APIs for both Neo4J and RDF4J. We chose those two graph databases because they implement two different graph query languages that are based upon distinct graph data model: Neo4J stores Property Graphs and queries the graphs with Cypher, while RDF4J is a triple store that queries the graph data with SPARQL. We chose not to test our graph joins over the SQLGraph model \cite{SQLGraph} since there is no existing implementation of such model and, most importantly, the Gremlin query language allows only to perform graph traversal queries that usually return a bag of values (see Section \ref{sec:dbqlang} for further details). While Neo4J explicitly produces the result in the graph database and returns it through the API interface, RDF4J explicitly evaluates the query either by creating a new graph in main memory or by iterating over an API object. Consequently, we choose to evaluate RDF4J while storing the result in a main-memory graph. All the benchmarks are produced by performing a trimmed mean of $10$ runs over the same dataset. In such trimmed mean the fastest and the slowest results are removed. Since Cypher stores the newly created vertices and edges into the secondary memory operands' property graphs, after each run we have to completely delete the database in order to perform with no result stored in the graph database. As a consequence we decided to sequentially perform the benchmarks over the different graph data sizes for each GDBMS (i.e. we first perform the join over the $10\times 10$ operands, then over the $10^2\times 10^2$ operands and so on), and to perform the next run for Neo4J after re-creating the graph database in secondary memory. For the next run we recreate all the graph databases, and we recommence the mentioned process. Our solution outperforms the implementation over Neo4J an order of magnitude and at most two orders of magnitude, while RDF4J performances degrades drastically when reaching graph operands with larger size (we outperform by at most five orders of magnitude with $10^4$ vertices' operand size). Moreover, we set a timeout of four hours (4H) while performing the benchmark tests. Table \ref{tab:evaluatejoin} provides the time that is required to evaluate the join operation for the LiveJounral dataset. The operand size is expressed with the number of the graphs' vertices. We can see that our solution outperforms the two benchmarked systems: while RDF4J behaves better than Neo4J on data with small operand size ($10$, $10^2$), the opposite situation happens when operands have greater size (up to $10^6$). A graphical representation is given in Figure \ref{fig:sumsize}. In particular, Figure \ref{fig:sumsizey} plots the same results for the YouTube social network graphs: as we can see, even if the speed-up in such solution is lower than in the previous dataset, our join implementation still outperforms the opponents' graph join implementations. Table \ref{tab:storing} shows that our implementation is faster to store than both Neo4J's property graph and RDF4J's triple store. Moreover, our graph data structure requires less secondary memory blocks to be stored (Table \ref{tab:size}). The constant gain of our implementation against Neo4J is supported by the fact that Neo4J has a secondary memory cache in order to speed up the graph traversal query process. On the other hand, RDF4J through the Sail storage represents the RDF triples into a B-Tree structure. Anyway, we must clarify that our data structures contain neither locks nor cache areas for other graph operations, that are usually implemented in all-round GDBMS solutions. Table \ref{tab:outperf} shows that the time required for both loading and indexing the operands in secondary memory and join them is still lesser than the sole join query time for Neo4J and RDF4J (except for the case of the operand size $10$ over RDF4J, when RDF4J outperforms our proposed solution). \section{Conclusions}\label{src:conc} We propose a new graph operation that, to the best of our knowledge, is not supported on current graph query languages, that is the graph join. This is a binary operation performing a relational join over the graphs' vertices tables that, in a second step, creates the edges according to a specific semantics. The results highlight how our proposed graph data structure and join algorithm can be used for implementing the graph join operation over the state-of-the-art graph database management systems. This is due to the fact that the time that it takes to both store the proposed graph data structure in secondary memory and to join them is less than the sole query time of such systems ($\tau_N>\varsigma'+\tau'$ and $\tau_R>\varsigma'+\tau'$). Our graph join algorithm assumed that the graph operand's edges are not labelled: further tests have to be carried out to both extend our data structure and our algorithm, in order to allow more of one type of edges at a time. \subsection{Future Works} The array data structure of our graph data model allows implementing the join algorithm with a parallel approach: we could easily assign to each process a subset of vertices with a specific hash code, store the result into a subset bulk graph and to append the partial results, by linking the end of one stack with the beginning of the next partial computation. As a next step we could see that it is possible to define a specific case of $\theta$-join when the relation $\theta$ is defined over some edges that can link either two distinct graphs, or the edges of a same given graph. Consequently, given a set of edges $E$, $\Re_E$ is defined as the relation $v\Re_E v'\Leftrightarrow (v,v')\in E$. A specific application of such kind of join can be found in OrientDB's (No)SQL language, where no joins, either explicit or implicit in the from clause (multiple tables) are allowed between vertices. { The Disjunctive Join acts as a missing data operator for the edges. The disjunctive join does not allow inheriting missing information from the two graph operands, since only the vertices that match over the two graphs are returned. Consequently, as done in the relational data model, we could provide more details on graph outer joins (such as left, right and full). While the graph conjunctive join acts as an intersection between the two graphs, the graph disjunctive full-outer join could act as a graph union operation. } \section{Related Work}\label{sec:dbqlang} Graph Query Languages can be categorised in two main classes; the first class of languages try to find a possible match for a specific traversal expression (Section \ref{subsec:traversal}): as a consequence such graph queries do not manipulate the graph data structure. The second class of queries use traversal expressions to extract a portion of the graph that has to be queried and altered in a next step. \subsection{Graph Traversal lanugages}\label{subsec:traversal} \phparagraph{GraphLOG} The \textbf{GraphLOG} \cite{graphlog} query language subsumes a property graph data structure (\textit{direct labelled multigraph}) where no properties are associated, neither to vertices nor to edges. Such query language is conceived to be visually representable, and hence path queries are represented as graphs, where simple regular expressions can be associated to the edges. The concept of visually representing graph traversal queries involving path regex-es was later on adopted in \cite{n3}, where some algorithms are showed for implementing such query language in polynomial time. Such language does not support some path summarization queries that were introduced in GraphLOG \cite{GraphLogAggr}. \phparagraph{NautiLOD} The \textbf{NautiLOD} \cite{NautiLOD} query language was conceived for performing path queries (defined through regular expressions) over RDF graphs with recursion operators (Kleene Star). The same paper shows that queries can be evaluated in polynomial time. \phparagraph{Gremlin} Another graph traversal language, \textbf{Gremlin}, have been proved to be Turing Complete \cite{Rodriguez15}: by the way this is not a desired feature for query languages since it must guarantee that each query always returns an answer and that the evaluation of the query always terminates. Another problem with this query language is based on its semantics: while all the other graph traversal languages return the desired subgraph, Gremlin returns a bag of values (e.g. vertices, values, edges). This peculiarity does not allow the user to take advantage of partial query evaluations and to combine them in a final result. \subsection{(Proper) Graph Query Languages}\label{subsec:proper} All the following graph query languages offer only a limited support to pattern extraction from graphs, except from SPARQL, that has been recently extended in order to allow path traversal queries \cite{Kostylev2015}. Consequently, such languages focus more on the graph data manipulation part. \phparagraph{BiQL} \textbf{BiQL} \cite{BiQL,BiQL2} is a SQL-like query language that allows to (i) update the data graph with new vertices and edges, (ii) filter the desired vertices through a \texttt{WHERE} clause, (iii) extract desidered subgraph through path expressions and (iv) provide some basics path and vertex summarization results. This language has not got a formal semantics yet and it is still under development, but has the aim to develop a closed language under query compositionality. The query patterns do not allow expressing regex-es over the paths. \phparagraph{SPARQL} At the time of writing, the most studied graph query language that has been studied both in terms of semantics and expressive power is \textbf{SPARQL}, as it is the most time-worn language among those that are both well-known and implemented. Some studies on the expressive power of SPARQL \cite{SparQLExpr,SPARQLSem} showed that such graph query language syntax allows to write very costly queries that can be computed more efficiently whether only a specific class of (equivalent) queries is allowed. As a result, the design flaws of a query language relapse on the computational cost of the allowed queries. These problems could be avoided from the very beginning whether the formal study had preceded the practical implementation of the language. However, such limitations do not preclude some interesting properties: the algebraic language used to formally represent SPARQL performs queries' incremental evaluations \cite{SparqlIncr}, and hence allows to boost the querying process while data undergoes updates (both incremental and decremental). Moreover, while SPARQL was originally designed to return tabular results, later extensions tried to overcome to such problem with the \texttt{CONSTRUCT} clause, that returns a new graph. Last but not least, the usage of so-called \textit{named graphs} allows to perform queries over two distinct RDF graphs. \phparagraph{LDQL} The NautiLOD language was later on extended in \textbf{LDQL} \cite{Hartig2015,HartigP15a}, where SPARQL patterns are added and different path union and concatenation are allowed. For this specific graph query language the time complexity of the query evaluation has not been studied in the time of the writing. Even if it is claimed that such language is more general than SPARQL, this language do not allow to create new graphs and to concatenate vertex values through the \texttt{BIND} clause, since most of the SPARQL operations are not matched by the sole RDFs triple matching. \phparagraph{Cypher} Cypher \cite{Neo4jMan,Robinson,CypherCheat} is yet another SQL-like graph query language for property graphs. No formal semantics for this language were defined from the beginning as in GraphQL, but nervelessly some theoretic results have been carried out for a subset of \textbf{Cypher} path queries \cite{Neo4jAlg} by using an algebra adopting a path implementation over the relational data model. Similarly to BiQL, this language does not allow to express complex graph traversal patterns, but it allows to update a property graph and to produce a new graph as a result. \phparagraph{GraphQL and GRAD} \textbf{GraphQL} \cite{HePhD} is yet another graph query language with an SPARQL-like syntax, mainly conceived for pattern extraction from the data, called \textit{graph motifs}, and their construction. The language allows graphs naming similarly to SPARQL \textit{named graphs}. The most interesting scientific contribution of He \cite{HePhD} is the first attempt in defining a graph algebra for collection of graphs. This approach has been finally specialized for single graphs in the \textbf{GRAD} algebra \cite{GRAD,Ghrab2015}. In this latter definition the \textit{cartesian product} and \textit{join} operations are still defined over graph collections and are still not specialized for the single graphs. Consequently, in both languages the cartesian product over two graph collections produces a graph containing two (possibly) disjoint graph components. The graph join over the two collections only merges the matched vertices and no considerations are made on the graphs' edges structure. In the end, GRAD propose an alternative graph data model that could be expressed as a specific implementation of the Property Graph model. \subsection{Proposed Graph Products and Joins} \phparagraph{Discrete Mathematics} At the time of writing, the only field where graph joins where effectively discussed is Discrete Mathematics. In this field such operations are defined over either on finite graphs or on finite graphs with cycles, and are named \textit{graph products} \cite{Hammack}. As the name suggests, every graph product of two graphs, e.g. $G_1=(V_1,E_1)$ and $G_2=(V_2,E_2)$, produces a graph whose vertex set is defined as $V_1\times V_2$, while the edge set changes accordingly to the different graph product definition. Consequently the Kroneker Graph Product \cite{Weichsel} is defined as follows: \begin{gather} G_1\times G_2=(V_1\times V_2, \Set{((g,h),(g',h'))\in V_1\times V_2\|(g,g')\in E_1,(h,h')\in E_2}) \end{gather} while the \textit{cartesian graph product} \cite{ImrichP07} is defined as follows: \begin{gather} G_1\square G_2=(V_1\times V_2,\Set{((g,h),(g',h'))\in V_1\times V_2\|(g=g',(h,h')\in E_2) \vee (h=h', (g,g')\in E_1)}) \end{gather} Please observe that this definition creates a new vertex which is a pair of vertices: hereby such operation is defined differently from the relational algebra's cartesian product, where the two vertices are merged. As a consequence, such graph products admit commutativity and associativity properties only up to graph isomorphism. Other graph products are \textit{lexicographic product} and \textit{strong product} \cite{Hammack,ProductGraphs}. \begin{table}[!t] \centering \begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth} \begin{threeparttable} \begin{tabular}{\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline \small & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Closure Property}\vline & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Graph Operators} \vline& \\ & Input\tnote{a} & Output\tnote{a} & \shortstack{Update \\ Values} & Summarization\tnote{a} & Graph Join & \shortstack{Traversal with \\ Branches} & \shortstack{Incremental \\ Update} \\\hline GraphLOG & Labelled Graph & Labelled Graph & \xmark & \cmark(over Paths) & \xmark & \cmark, graphical, RegEx & \xmark\\\hline NautiLOD & WLOD & WLOD & \xmark & \xmark & \xmark & \cmark, disjunctive, RegEx & \xmark\\\hline Gremlin & PG & \shortstack{Bag of vertices,\\ edges or values} & \xmark & \cmark (Bag) & \xmark & \cmark & Titan Script\tnote{b}\\\hline BiQL & PG, only edge weight & PG, only edge weight & \cmark & \cmark (PG) & \xmark & \xmark & \xmark\\\hline SPARQL & RDF Graph & Table, Graph & \xmark & \xmark & \xmark & \shortstack{Triples with variables,\\ Property Path} & \shortstack{With \cite{SparqlIncr} \\ algebra}\\\hline LDQL & WLOD & WLOD & \xmark & \xmark & \xmark & \shortstack{SPARQL Triples,\\ NautiLOD} & \xmark \\\hline Cypher & PG & PG or Tables & \cmark & \cmark (Tables) & \xmark & \shortstack{\cmark, no RegEx} & \xmark\\\hline GRAD & GRAD & GRAD & \xmark & \xmark & \xmark & \shortstack{\xmark, separately in GraphQL} & (possible) \\\hline \end{tabular} \begin{tablenotes} \small \item[a] PG, shorthand for Property Graph \item[b] \texttt{http://s3.thinkaurelius.com/docs/titan/0.5.0/hadoop-distributed-computing.html} \end{tablenotes} \end{threeparttable} \end{adjustbox} \caption{Comparing graph query languages} \label{tab:summinglang} \end{table} \phparagraph{Graph Database} Table \ref{tab:summinglang} summarizes some graph database languages features that were previously described in Section \ref{sec:dbqlang}. As we can see, no previously described graph query language has a join operand between graphs. Consequently, our paper proposes such operand and outlines an algorithm that can be used in order to implement some cases of the graph conjunctive join. As previously described in the introduction, the term ``join'' in graph databases has been used to indicate other types of non-binary graph operations: some papers \cite{LiM03,Holzschuher,Gao,Zou09} use the term ``path join'' as path queries of arbitrary length, while others more specifically \cite{Atre,Yuan,Fletcher09} refer to joins between adjacent vertices. While the first definition mainly focuses on path extraction from a single graph as a specific instance of a pattern extraction problem, the second problem focuses on the definition of new edges as a result of graph traversal queries. \pagebreak \bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\section{Introduction} The current work is concerned with the construction of random feature maps for operator-valued kernels and their applications in vector-valued learning. Much work has been done in machine learning recently on these kernels and their associated RKHS of vector-valued functions, both theoretically and practically, see e.g. \citep{MichelliPontil05, Carmeli2006, Reisert2007, Caponnetto08, ICML2011Brouard, ICML2011Dinuzzo,Kadrietal2011, MinhVikasICML2011, Zhangetal:JMLR2012, VikasMinhLozano:UAI2013}. While rich in theory and potentially powerful in applications, one of the main challenges in applying operator-valued kernels is that they are computationally intensive on large datasets. In the scalar setting, one of the most powerful approaches for scaling up kernel methods is Random Fourier Features \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007}, which applies Bochner's Theorem and the Inverse Fourier Transform to build random features that approximate a given shift-invariant kernel. The approach in \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007} has been improved both in terms of computational speed \citep{Fastfood:ICML2013} and rates of convergence \citep{Fourier:UAI2015,Fourier:NIPS2015}. {\bf Our contributions}. The following are the contributions of this work. \begin{enumerate} \item {\it Firstly}, we construct random feature maps for operator-valued shift-invariant kernels using the operator-valued version of Bochner's Theorem. The {\it key differences} between the operator-valued and scalar settings are the following. The first key difference is that, in the scalar setting, a positive definite function $k$, with normalization, is the Fourier transform of a probability measure $\rho$, which is {\it uniquely determined} as the inverse Fourier transform of $k$. In the operator-valued setting, $k$ is the Fourier transform of a {\it unique} finite positive operator-valued measure $\mu$. However, the probability measure $\rho$, which is necessary for constructing the random feature maps, must be {\it explicitly constructed}, that is it is {\it not} automatically determined by $k$. In this work, we present a general formula for computing a probability measure $\rho$ given a kernel $k$. The second key difference is that, in the operator-valued setting, the probability measure $\rho$ is generally {\it non-unique}, being a factor of $\mu$. As a consequence, we show that in general, there are (potentially infinitely) many random feature maps, which may be either unbounded or bounded. However, under appropriate assumptions, we show that there always exist bounded feature maps. This is true for many of the commonly encountered kernels, including separable kernels and curl-free and divergence-free kernels. \item {\it Secondly}, for the bounded feature maps, we show that the associated approximate kernel converges uniformly to the exact kernel in Hilbert-Schmidt norm on any compact subset in Euclidean space. \item {\it Thirdly}, when restricting to the scalar setting, our convergence holds for differentiable kernels, which is an improvement over the hypothesis of \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007,Fourier:UAI2015,Fourier:NIPS2015,Romain:2016}, which all require the kernels to be twice-differentiable. \item {\it Fourthly}, we show how operator-valued feature maps and their approximations can be used directly in a general learning formulation in RKHS. \end{enumerate} {\bf Related work}. The work most closely related to our present work is \citep{Romain:2016}. While the {\it formal constructions} of the Fourier feature maps in \citep{Romain:2016} and our work are similar, there are several {\it crucial differences}. The first and most important difference is that in \citep{Romain:2016} there is {no} general mechanism for computing a probability measure $\rho$, which is required for the construction of the Fourier feature maps. As such, the results presented in \citep{Romain:2016} are only for three specific kernels, namely separable kernels, curl-free and div-free kernels, {not} for a general kernel as in our setting. Moreover, for the curl-free and div-free kernels, \citep{Romain:2016} presented unbounded feature maps, whereas we show that, apart from unbounded feature maps, there are generally infinitely many bounded feature maps associated with these kernels. Secondly, more general than the matrix-valued kernel, i.e finite-dimensional, setting in \citep{Romain:2016}, we work in the operator-valued kernel setting, with RKHS of functions with values in a Hilbert space. In this setting, the convergence in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm that we present is {\it strictly stronger} than the convergence in spectral norm given in \citep{Romain:2016}. At the same time, our convergence requires {\it weaker assumptions} than those in \citep{Romain:2016} and previous results in the scalar setting \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007,Fourier:UAI2015,Fourier:NIPS2015}. {\bf Organization}. We first briefly review random Fourier features and operator-valued kernels in Section~\ref{section:background}. Feature maps for operator-valued kernels are described in Section~\ref{section:operator-feature}. The core of the paper is Section~\ref{section:operator-random}, which describes the construction of random feature maps using operator-valued Bochner's Theorem, the computation of the required probability measure, along with the uniform convergence of the corresponding approximate kernels. Section~\ref{section:learning} employs feature maps and their approximations in a general vector-valued learning formulation, with the accompanying experiments in Section~\ref{section:experiments}. All mathematical proofs are given in Appendix \ref{section:proofs}. \section{Background} \label{section:background} Throughout the paper, we work with shift-invariant positive definite kernels {$K$} on {$\mathbb{R}^n \times\mathbb{R}^n$}, so that {$K(x,t) = k(x-t) \forall x,t\in\mathbb{R}^n$} for some function {$k:\mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}$}, which is then said to be a {\it positive definite function} on $\mathbb{R}^n$. {\bf Random Fourier features for scalar-valued kernels \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007}}. Bochner's Theorem in the scalar setting, see e.g. \citep{ReedSimon:vol2}, states that a complex-valued, continuous function $k$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ is positive definite if and only if it is the Fourier transform of a finite, positive measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$, that is { \begin{align} \label{equation:Bochner-scalar} k(x) = \hat{\mu}(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i\langle \omega, x\rangle}d\mu(\omega). \end{align} } For our purposes, we consider exclusively the {\it real-valued} setting for $k$. Since $\mu$ is a finite positive measure, without loss of generality, we assume that $\mu$ is a probability measure, so that {$k(x) = \mathbb{E}_{\mu}[e^{-i\langle\omega, x\rangle}]$}. The measure $\mu$ is {\it uniquely determined} via $\hat{\mu} = k$. For the Gaussian function {$k(x) = e^{-\frac{\|\|x\|\|^2}{\sigma^2}}$}, we have {$\mu(\omega) = \frac{(\sigma\sqrt{\pi})^n}{(2\pi)^n}e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{4}} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(0, \frac{2}{\sigma^2}\right)$}. Consider now the kernel {$K(x,t) = k(x-t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i\langle \omega, x-t\rangle}d\mu(\omega)$}. Using the symmetry of {$K$} and the relation {$\frac{1}{2}(e^{ix} + e^{-ix}) = \cos(x)$}, we obtain { \begin{align} K(x,t) = \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}[e^{i\langle \omega, x-t\rangle} + e^{-i \langle \omega, x-t\rangle}]d\mu(\omega) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\cos(\langle \omega, x-t\rangle)d\mu(\omega). \end{align} } Let {$\{\omega_j\}_{j=1}^D$} be points in {$\mathbb{R}^n$}, independently sampled according to the measure {$\mu$}. Then we have an empirical approximation {$\hat{K}_D$} of {$K$} and the associated feature map {$\hat{\Phi}_D:\mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{2D}$}, as follows { \begin{align} \hat{K}_D(x,t) &= \frac{1}{D}\sum_{j=1}^D\cos(\langle \omega_j, x-t\rangle) = \frac{1}{D}\sum_{j=1}^D[\cos(\langle \omega_j, x\rangle)\cos(\langle \omega_j, t\rangle) + \sin(\langle \omega_j,x\rangle)\sin(\langle \omega_j, t\rangle) \nonumber \\ & = \langle \hat{\Phi}_D(x), \hat{\Phi}_D(t)\rangle, \;\;\;\text{where}\;\;\; \hat{\Phi}_D(x) = (\cos(\langle \omega_j, x\rangle),\sin(\langle \omega_j, x\rangle))_{j=1}^D \in \mathbb{R}^{2D}. \label{equation:feature-scalar} \end{align} } The current work generalizes the feature map {$\hat{\Phi}_D$} above to the case {$K$} is an operator-valued kernel and the corresponding $\mu$ is a positive operator-valued measure. {\bf Vector-valued RKHS}. Let us now briefly recall operator-valued kernels and their corresponding RKHS of vector-valued functions, for more detail see e.g. \citep{Carmeli2006, MichelliPontil05, Caponnetto08, MinhVikasICML2011}. Let $\mathcal{X}$ be a nonempty set, $\mathcal{W}$ a real, separable Hilbert space with inner product $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle_{\mathcal{W}}$, $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W})$ the Banach space of bounded linear operators on $\mathcal{W}$. Let {$\mathcal{W}^{\mathcal{X}}$} denote the vector space of all functions {$f:\mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{W}$}. A function {$K: \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W})$} is said to be an {\it operator-valued positive definite kernel} if for each pair {$(x,t) \in \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X}$, $K(x,t)^{} = K(t,x)$}, and for every set of points {$\{x_i\}_{i=1}^N$} in $\mathcal{X}$ and {$\{w_i\}_{i=1}^N$} in {$\mathcal{W}$}, {$N \in \mathbb{N}$}, { $\sum_{i,j=1}^N\langle w_i, K(x_i,x_j)w_j\rangle_\mathcal{W} \geq 0$. } For {$x\in \mathcal{X}$} and {$w \in \mathcal{W}$}, form a function {$K_xw = K(.,x)w \in \mathcal{W}^{\mathcal{X}}$} by { \begin{align} (K_xw)(t) = K(t,x) w \;\;\;\; \forall t \in \mathcal{X}. \end{align} } Consider the set {$\mathcal{H}_0 = {\rm span}\{K_xw \| x \in \mathcal{X}, w \in \mathcal{W}\} \subset \mathcal{W}^\mathcal{X}$}. For {$f= \sum_{i=1}^NK_{x_i}w_i$, $g = \sum_{i=1}^NK_{z_i}y_i \in \mathcal{H}_0$}, we define the inner product {$\langle f, g \rangle_{\H_K} = \sum_{i,j=1}^N\langle w_i, K(x_i,z_j)y_j\rangle_\mathcal{W}$}, which makes $\mathcal{H}_0$ a pre-Hilbert space. Completing $\mathcal{H}_0$ by adding the limits of all Cauchy sequences gives the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_K$. This is the reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) of {$\mathcal{W}$}-valued functions on {$\mathcal{X}$}. The {\it reproducing property} is \begin{align} \label{equation:reproducing2} \langle f(x),y\rangle_\mathcal{W} = \langle f, K_xy\rangle_{\H_K} \;\;\;\; \mbox{for all} \;\;\; f \in \mathcal{H}_K. \end{align} \subsection{Operator-Valued Feature Maps for Operator-Valued Kernels} \label{section:operator-feature} Feature maps for operator-valued kernels were first considered in \citep{Caponnetto08}. Let {$\mathcal{F}_K$} be a separable Hilbert space and {$\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W}, \mathcal{F}_K)$} be the Banach space of all bounded linear operators mapping from {$\mathcal{W}$ to $\mathcal{F}_K$}. A {\it feature map} for {$K$} with corresponding {\it feature space} {$\mathcal{F}_K$} is a mapping { \begin{align} \label{equation:feature-def} \Phi_K: \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W}, \mathcal{F}_K), \;\;\;\text{such that}\;\;\;K(x,t) = \Phi_K(x)^{}\Phi_K(t) \;\;\; \forall (x,t) \in \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X}. \end{align} } The operator-valued map {$\Phi_K$} is generally nonlinear as a function on $\mathcal{X}$. For each {$x \in \mathcal{X}$}, {$\Phi_K(x) \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W}, \mathcal{F}_K)$} and \begin{align} \langle w, K(x,t)w\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle w, \Phi_K(x)^{}\Phi_K(t)\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle \Phi_K(x)w, \Phi_K(t)w\rangle_{\mathcal{F}_K}. \end{align} In the following, for brevity, we also refer to the pair {$(\Phi_K, \mathcal{F}_K)$} as a feature map for {$K$}. {\bf Existence of operator-valued feature maps and the canonical feature map}. Let $K$ be any operator-valued positive definite kernel on $\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X}$, we now show that then there always exists at least one feature map, as follows. For each $x \in \mathcal{X}$, consider the linear operator $K_x: \mathcal{W} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \H_K$ defined by $K_xw(t) = K(t,x)w$, $x,t \in \mathcal{X}$, as above. Then { \begin{align} \|\|K_xw\|\|_{\H_K}^2 = \langle K(x,x)w, w\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} \leq \|\|K(x,x)\|\|\;\|\|w\|\|^2_{\mathcal{W}}, \end{align} } which implies that $K_x$ is a bounded operator, with { \begin{align} \|\|K_x: \mathcal{W} \rightarrow \H_K\|\| \leq \sqrt{\|\|K(x,x)\|\|}, \end{align} } Let $K_x^{}: \H_K \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{W}$ be the adjoint operator for $K_x$. The reproducing property states that $\forall w \in \mathcal{W}$, { \begin{equation} \langle f(x), w\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle f, K_xw\rangle_{\H_K} = \langle K_x^{}f, w\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} \ensuremath{\Rightarrow} K_x^{}f = f(x). \end{equation} } For any $u,v \in \mathcal{W}$, we have { \begin{align} \langle u, K(x,t)v\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle u, K_tv(x)\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle u, K_x^{}K_tv\rangle_{\mathcal{W}} = \langle K_xu, K_tv\rangle_{\H_K} \ensuremath{\Rightarrow} K(x,t) = K_x^{}K_t, \end{align} } from which it follows that { \begin{align} \Phi_K: \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W},\H_K), \;\;\; \Phi_K(x) = K_x \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{W},\H_K) \end{align} } is a feature map for $K$ with feature space $\H_K$, which exists for any positive definite kernel $K$. Following the terminology in the scalar setting \citep{Minh-Niyogi-Yao}, we also call it the {\it canonical feature map} for $K$. \begin{remark} In \citep{Caponnetto08}, it is {\it assumed} that the kernel has the representation {$K(x,t) = \Phi_K(x)^{}\Phi_K(t)$}. However, as we have just shown, for any positive definite kernel {$K$}, there is always at least one such representation, given by the canonical feature map above. \end{remark} Similar to the scalar setting \citep{Minh-Niyogi-Yao}, feature maps are generally {\it non-unique}, as we show below. However, they are all essentially equivalent, similar to the scalar case, as shown by the following. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:f-feature} Let {$(\Phi_K, \mathcal{F}_K)$} be any feature map for {$K$}. Then {$\forall f \in \H_K$}, there exists an {$\mathbf{h} \in \mathcal{F}_K$} such that \begin{equation} f(x) = K_x^{}f = \Phi_K(x)^{}\mathbf{h},\;\;\;\forall x \in \mathcal{X}. \end{equation} Furthermore, { $\|\|f\|\|_{\H_K} = \|\|\mathbf{h}\|\|_{\mathcal{F}_K}$. } \end{lemma} \section{Random Operator-Valued Feature Maps} \label{section:operator-random} We now present the generalization of the random Fourier feature map from the scalar setting to the operator-valued setting. We begin by reviewing Bochner's Theorem in the operator-valued setting in Section \ref{section:bochner}, which immediately leads to the formal construction of the Fourier feature maps in Section \ref{section:feature-construction}. As we stated, in the operator-valued setting, we need to explicitly construct the required probability measure. This is done individually for some specific kernels in Section \ref{section:special-construction} and for a general kernel in Section \ref{section:probability-construction}. \subsection{Operator-Valued Bochner Theorem} \label{section:bochner} The operator-valued version of Bochner's Theorem that we present here is from \citep{Neeb:Operator1998}, see also \citep{Falb:1969,Carmeli:2010}. Throughout this section, let {$\H$} be a separable Hilbert space. Let {$\L(\H)$} denote the Banach space of bounded linear operators on {$\H$}, {${\rm Sym}(\H) \subset \L(\H)$} denote the subspace of bounded, self-adjoint operators on {$\H$}, and {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H) \subset {\rm Sym}(\H)$} denote the set of self-adjoint, bounded, positive operators on {$\H$}. An operator {$A \in \L(\H)$} is said to be trace class, denoted by {$A \in {\rm Tr}(\H)$}, if {$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\langle\mathbf{e}_k, (A^{}A)^{1/2}\mathbf{e}_k\rangle < \infty$} for any orthonormal basis {$\{\mathbf{e}_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$} in {$\H$}. If {$A \in {\rm Tr}(\H)$}, then the {\it trace} of {$A$} is {${\rm tr}(A) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\langle \mathbf{e}_k, A\mathbf{e}_k\rangle$}, which is independent of the orthonormal basis. {\bf Positive operator-valued measures}. Let {$(\mathcal{X}, \Sigma)$} be a measurable space, where {$\mathcal{X}$} is a non-empty set and {$\Sigma$} is a $\sigma$-algebra of subsets of {$\mathcal{X}$}. A {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure {$\mu$} is a {\it countably additive}\footnote{Falb \citep{Falb:1969} used {\it weakly countably additive} vector measures, which are in fact {\it countably additive} \citep{Diestel:Sequences}.} function {$\mu: \Sigma \ensuremath{\rightarrow} {\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}, with {$\mu(\emptyset) = 0$}, so that for any sequence of pairwise disjoint subsets {$\{A_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty}$} in {$\Sigma$}, \begin{align} \mu(\cup_{j=1}^{\infty}A_j) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\mu(A_j),\;\;\; \text{which converges in the operator norm on $\L(\H)$}. \end{align} To state Bochner's Theorem for operator-valued measures, we need the notions of finite {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure and ultraweak continuity. Let {$\mathcal{X} = \mathbb{R}^n$} (a locally compact space in general). A {\it finite} {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued Radon measure is a {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure such that for any operator {$A \in {\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)\cap {\rm Tr}(\H)$}, the scalar measure \begin{align} \mu_A: \Sigma \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{+}, \;\;\; \mu_{A}(B) = {\rm tr}(A\mu(B)), \;\;\; B \in \Sigma, \end{align} is a finite positive Radon measure on {$\mathbb{R}^n$}. A function {$k:\mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \L(\H)$} is said to be {\it ultraweakly continuous} if for each operator {$A \in {\rm Tr}(\H)$}, the following scalar function is continuous \begin{align} k_A: \mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}, \;\;\; k_A(x) = {\rm tr}(Ak(x)). \end{align} The following is then the generalization of Bochner's Theorem to the vector-valued setting. \begin{theorem} [\textbf{Operator-valued Bochner Theorem} \citep{Neeb:Operator1998}] \label{theorem:Bochner-operator} An ultraweakly continuous function {$k: \mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \L(\H)$} is positive definite if and only if there exists a finite {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure {$\mu$} on {$\mathbb{R}^n$} such that \begin{align} \label{equation:k-expression1} k(x) = \hat{\mu}(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\exp(i \langle \omega,x\rangle)d\mu(\omega) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n} \exp(-i \langle \omega,x\rangle)d\mu(\omega). \end{align} The Radon measure {$\mu$} is uniquely determined by {$\hat{\mu} = K$}. \end{theorem} {\bf General case}. The above version of Bochner's Theorem holds in a much more general setting, where $\mathbb{R}^n$ is replaced by a locally compact abelian group $G$. For the general version, we refer to \citep{Neeb:Operator1998}. {\bf Determining {$\mu$} from {$k$}}. In order to compute feature maps using Bochner's Theorem, we need to compute $\mu$ from the given operator-valued function $k$. Suppose that the density function $\mu(\omega)$ of $\mu$ with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ exists. Let {$\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty}$} be any orthonormal basis for {$\H$}. For any vector {$\a = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j\mathbf{e}_j\in \H$}, we have \begin{align} \mu(\omega)\a = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\langle \mathbf{e}_j, \mu(\omega)\a\rangle\mathbf{e}_j = \sum_{j,l=1}^{\infty}a_l\langle \mathbf{e}_j, \mu(\omega)\mathbf{e}_l\rangle\mathbf{e}_j. \end{align} Thus {$\mu(\omega)$} is completely determined by the infinite matrix of inner products {$(\langle \mathbf{e}_j, \mu(\omega)\mathbf{e}_l\rangle)_{j,l=1}^{\infty}$}, which can be computed from {$k$} via the inverse Fourier transform {$\mathcal{F}^{-1}$} as follows. \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:mu-inversion} Assume that {$\langle \mathbf{e}_j, k(x)\mathbf{e}_l\rangle \in L^1(\mathbb{R}^n)$} {$\forall j,l \in \mathbb{N}$}. Then the density function $\mu(\omega)$ of $\mu$ with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ exists and is given by \begin{align} \langle \mathbf{e}_j, \mu(\omega)\mathbf{e}_l\rangle =\mathcal{F}^{-1}[\langle \mathbf{e}_j, k(x)\mathbf{e}_l\rangle]. \end{align} \end{proposition} The positive definite function $k$ gives rise to the shift-invariant positive definite kernel \begin{align} \label{equation:Bochner1} K(x,t) = k(x-t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n} \exp(-i \langle \omega,x-t\rangle)d\mu(\omega). \end{align} Similar to the scalar case, using the property {$K(x,t) = K(t,x)^{}$} and the symmetry of $\mu$, we obtain \begin{align} \label{equation:K-expression1} K(x,t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\cos(\langle \omega, x-t\rangle)d\mu(\omega). \end{align} In order to generalize the random Fourier feature approach to the operator-valued kernel {$K(x,t)$} we need to construct a probability measure $\rho$ on {$\mathbb{R}^n$} such that {$K(x,t)$} is the expectation of an operator-valued random variable with respect to $\rho$. Equivalently, we need to factorize the density $\mu(\omega)$ as \begin{align} \label{equation:factorize} \mu(\omega) = \tilde{\mu}(\omega)\rho(\omega), \end{align} where $\tilde{\mu}(\omega)$ is a finite {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued function on {$\mathbb{R}^n$} and $\rho(\omega)$ is the density function of the probability measure $\rho$. \begin{remark} Throughout the rest of the paper, we assume that $k$ satisfies the assumptions of Proposition \ref{proposition:mu-inversion}. We then identify the measures $\mu$ and $\rho$ by their density functions $\mu(\omega)$ and $\rho(\omega)$, respectively, with respect to the Lebesgue measure. \end{remark} {\bf Key differences between the scalar and operator-valued settings}. Before proceeding with the probability measure and feature map construction, we point out {\it two key differences} between the scalar and operator-valued settings. \begin{enumerate} \item In the scalar setting, with normalization, $\mu$ is a probability measure {\it uniquely determined} via $\hat{\mu} = k$. In the operator-valued setting, the operator-valued measure $\mu$ is also uniquely determined by $k$, as stated in Proposition \ref{proposition:mu-inversion}. However, the probability measure $\rho$ in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}) needs to be {\it explicitly} constructed, that is it is {\it not} automatically determined by $k$. We present a general formula for computing $\rho$ in Section \ref{section:probability-construction}. \item The factorization stated in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}) is generally {\it non-unique}. As we show below, in general, there are many (in fact, potentially infinitely many) pairs {$(\tilde{\mu}, \rho)$} such that Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}) holds. Thus there are generally (infinitely) many operator-valued feature maps corresponding to the operator-valued version of Bochner's Theorem. We illustrate this property via examples in Sections \ref{section:feature-construction} and \ref{section:probability-construction} below. \end{enumerate} \subsection{Formal Construction of Approximate Fourier Feature Maps} \label{section:feature-construction} Assuming for the moment that we have a pair $(\tilde{\mu}, \rho)$ satisfying the factorization in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}), then Eq.~(\ref{equation:K-expression1}) takes the form { \begin{align} K(x,t) &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\cos(\langle \omega, x-t\rangle) \tilde{\mu}(\omega)d\rho(\omega) = \mathbb{E}_{\rho}[\cos(\langle \omega, x-t\rangle)\tilde{\mu}(\omega)]. \end{align} } Let {$\{\omega_j\}_{j=1}^D$}, {$D \in \mathbb{N}$}, be $D$ points in $\mathbb{R}^n$ randomly sampled independently from {$\rho$}. Then {$K(x,t)$} can be approximated by by the empirical sum { \begin{align} \label{equation:KD} \hat{K}_D(x,t) &= \hat{k}_D(x-t) = \frac{1}{D}\sum_{l=1}^D\cos(\langle \omega_l, x-t\rangle)\tilde{\mu}(\omega_l) \nonumber \\ & = \frac{1}{D}\sum_{l=1}^D[\cos(\langle \omega_l, x\rangle)\cos(\langle \omega_l, t)]\tilde{\mu}(\omega_l) + \frac{1}{D}\sum_{l=1}^D\sin(\langle \omega_l, x\rangle)\sin(\langle \omega_l, t\rangle)]\tilde{\mu}(\omega_l). \end{align} } Let {$\mathcal{F}$} be a separable Hilbert space and {$\psi:\mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \L(\H,\mathcal{F})$} be such that \begin{align} \label{equation:mu-decomp} \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \psi(\omega)^{}\psi(\omega), \;\;\;\; \psi(\omega): \H \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F} \end{align} Such a pair {$(\psi, \mathcal{F})$} always exists, with one example being {$\mathcal{F} = \H$} and {$\psi(\omega) = \sqrt{\tilde{\mu}(\omega)}$}. \begin{remark} As we demonstrate via the examples below, the decomposition $\tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \psi(\omega)^{}\psi(\omega)$ is also generally non-unique, which is another reason for the non-uniqueness of the approximate feature maps. \end{remark} {\bf Operator-valued Fourier feature map}. The decompositions for {$\hat{K}_D$} in Eqs.~(\ref{equation:KD}) and (\ref{equation:mu-decomp}) immediately give us the following approximate feature map \begin{align} \label{equation:feature-general} \hat{\Phi}_D(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{D}} \begin{pmatrix} \cos(\langle \omega_1, x\rangle)\psi(\omega_1)\\ \sin(\langle \omega_1, x\rangle)\psi(\omega_1)\\ \cdots\\ \cos(\langle \omega_D, x\rangle)\psi(\omega_D)\\ \sin(\langle \omega_D, x\rangle)\psi(\omega_D) \end{pmatrix} :\H \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}^{2D}. \end{align} with \begin{align} K_D(x,t) = [\hat{\Phi}_D(x)]^{}[\hat{\Phi}_D(t)]. \end{align} {\bf Special cases}. For $\H=\mathbb{R}$, we have $\tilde{\mu} = 1$ (assuming normalization) and $\rho = \mu$, and we thus recover the Fourier features in the scalar setting. For $\H = \mathbb{R}^d$, for some $d \in \mathbb{N}$, we obtain the feature map in \citep{Romain:2016}. \subsection{Probability Measure and Feature Map Construction in Some Special Cases} \label{section:special-construction} We first consider several examples of operator-valued kernels arising from scalar-valued kernels. For these examples, both the ${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$-valued measure $\mu$ and the probability measure $\rho$ can be derived from the corresponding probability measure for the scalar kernels. These examples have also been considered by \citep{Romain:2016}, however we treat them in greater depth here, particularly the curl-free and div-free kernels (see detail below). One important aspect that we note is that the approach for computing the probability measure $\rho$ in this section is specific for each kernel and does not generalize to a general kernel. We return to these examples in the general setting of Section \ref{section:probability-construction}, where we present a general formula for computing $\rho$ for a general kernel $k$. \begin{example}[\textbf{Separable kernels}] \end{example} Consider the simplest case, where the operator-valued positive definite function $k$ has the form \begin{align} k(x) = g(x)A, \end{align} where {$A \in {\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$} and {$g:\mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}$} is a scalar-valued positive definite function. Let $\rho_0$ be the probability measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ such that {$g(x) = \mathbb{E}_{\rho_0}[e^{- i \langle \omega, x\rangle}]$}. It follows immediately that \begin{align} k(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle}d\mu(\omega) \;\;\; \text{where}\;\;\; \mu(\omega) = A \rho_0(\omega). \end{align} Thus we can set \begin{align} \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = A, \;\;\; \rho = \rho_0. \end{align} For the operator {$\psi(\omega)$} in Eq.~(\ref{equation:mu-decomp}), we can set either \begin{align} \psi(\omega) = \sqrt{A}, \end{align} or, if {$A$} is a symmetric positive definite matrix, we can also compute {$\psi$} via the Cholesky decomposition of {$A$} by setting \begin{align} \psi(\omega) = U, \;\;\; \text{where}\;\;\; A = U^TU, \end{align} with $U$ being an upper triangular matrix. Thus in this case, with the probability measure $\rho = \rho_0$, there are {\it at least two choices} for the feature map $\hat{\Phi}_D$, each resulting from one choice of $\psi(\omega)$ as discussed above. In practice, a particular $\psi$ should be chosen based on its computational complexity, which in turn depends on the structure of $A$ itself. \begin{example}[\textbf{Curl-free and divergence-free kernels}] \end{example} Consider next the matrix-valued curl-free and divergence kernels in \citep{Fuselier2006}. In \citep{Romain:2016}, the authors present what we call the {\it unbounded feature maps} below for these kernels, without, however, the analytical expression for the feature map of the div-free kernel. We now present the analytical expressions for the feature maps for both these kernels. More importantly, we show that, apart from the unbounded feature maps, there are generally {\it infinitely many bounded feature maps} associated with these kernels. Let {$\phi$} be a scalar-valued twice-differentiable positive definite function on {$\mathbb{R}^n$}. Let {$\nabla$} denote the {$n \times 1$} gradient operator and {$\Delta = \nabla^T \nabla$} denote the Laplacian operator. Define { \begin{equation} k_{{\rm div}} = (-\Delta I_n + \nabla \nabla^T)\phi,\;\;\;k_{{\rm curl}} = - \nabla \nabla^T \phi. \end{equation} } Then {$k_{{\rm div}}$} and {$k_{{\rm curl}}$} are {$n \times n$} matrices, whose columns are divergence-free and curl-free functions, respectively. The functions {$k_{{\rm curl}}$} and {$k_{{\rm div}}$} give rise to the corresponding positive definite kernels \begin{align} K_{{\rm curl}}(x,t) = k_{{\rm curl}}(x-t),\;\;\; \text{and}\;\;\; K_{{\rm div}}(x,t) = k_{{\rm div}}(x-t). \end{align} For the Gaussian case {$\phi(x) = \exp(-\frac{\|\|x\|\|^2}{\sigma^2})$}, the functions $k_{{\rm curl}}$ and $k_{{\rm div}}$ are given by \begin{align} \label{equation:curl-div-k} k_{{\rm curl}}(x) &= \frac{2}{\sigma^2}\exp(-\frac{\|\|x\|\|^2}{\sigma^2})[I_n - \frac{2}{\sigma^2}xx^T]. \\ k_{{\rm div}}(x) &= \frac{2}{\sigma^2}\exp(-\frac{\|\|x\|\|^2}{\sigma^2}) [((n-1) - \frac{2}{\sigma^2}\|\|x\|\|^2)I_n + \frac{2}{\sigma^2}xx^T]. \end{align} \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:curl-div} Let $\rho_0$ be the probability measure on {$\mathbb{R}^n$} such that {$\phi(x) = \mathbb{E}_{\rho_0}[e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle}] = \hat{\rho_0}(x)$}. Then, under the condition {$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2d\rho_0(\omega) < \infty$}, we have \begin{align} k_{{\rm curl}}(x) &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle}\omega\omega^T\rho_0(\omega)d\omega = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle} (\mu_{{\rm curl}})(\omega)d\omega. \\ k_{{\rm div}}(x) &= \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle}[\|\|\omega\|\|^2I_n - \omega\omega^T]\rho_0(\omega)d\omega = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle} (\mu_{{\rm div}})(\omega)d\omega, \end{align} where {$\mu_{{\rm curl}}(\omega) = \omega\omega^T\rho_0(\omega)$} and {$\mu_{{\rm div}}(\omega) = [\|\|\omega\|\|^2I_n - \omega\omega^T]\rho_0(\omega)$}. \end{lemma} The condition {$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2d\rho_0(\omega) < \infty$} in Lemma \ref{lemma:curl-div} guarantees that $\phi$ is twice-differentiable, which is the underlying assumption for curl-free and divergence-free kernels. {\bf Unbounded feature maps}. Consider first the curl-free kernel. From the expression {$\mu_{{\rm curl}}(\omega) = \omega\omega^T\rho_0(\omega)$}, we immediately see that for the factorization in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}), we can set { \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm curl}}(\omega) = \tilde{\mu}(\omega) \rho(\omega), \;\;\; \text{with} \;\;\; \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \omega\omega^T, \rho = \rho_0. \end{align} } For the Gaussian case, {$\rho_0(\omega) = \frac{(\sigma \sqrt{\pi})^n}{(2\pi)^n} e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{4}} \sim\mathcal{N}(0, \frac{2}{\sigma^2}I_n)$}. In Eq.~(\ref{equation:mu-decomp}), we can set { \begin{align} \label{equation:curl-unbounded} \psi(\omega) = \omega^T, \;\;\;\text{so that}\;\;\; \hat{\Phi}_D(x) \text{\;\;is a matrix of size\;\;} 2D \times n. \end{align} } We can also set \begin{align} \label{equation:curl-unbounded-2} \psi(\omega) = \sqrt{\omega \omega^T} = \frac{\omega \omega^T}{\|\|\omega\|\|},\;\;\;\text{so that} \;\;\; \hat{\Phi}_D(x) \text{\;\;is a matrix of size\;\;} 2Dn \times n. \end{align} Clearly the choice for {$\psi(\omega)$} in Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-unbounded}) is preferable computationally to that in Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-unbounded-2}). One thing that can be observed immediately is that both {$\mu_{{\rm curl}}$} and {$\psi$} are {\it unbounded} functions of {$\omega$}, which complicates the convergence analysis of the corresponding kernel approximation (see Section \ref{section:convergence} for further discussion). {\bf Bounded feature maps}. The unbounded feature maps above correspond to one particular choice of the probability measure $\rho$, namely $\rho = \rho_0$. However, this is not the only valid choice for $\rho$. We now exhibit another choice for $\rho$ that results in a bounded feature map, whose convergence behavior is much simpler to analyze. Consider the Gaussian case, with {$\rho_0$} as given above. Clearly, we can choose for another factorization of {$\mu_{{\rm curl}}$} the factors { \begin{align} \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \omega\omega^T e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{8}}2^{n/2},\;\;\; \rho(\omega) = \frac{1}{2^{n/2}}\frac{(\sigma \sqrt{\pi})^n}{(2\pi)^n}e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{8}} \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \frac{4}{\sigma^2}I_n). \end{align} } Then {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega)$} is a bounded function of {$\omega$}, with the corresponding bounded map \begin{align} \label{equation:curl-bounded} \psi(\omega) = \omega^T e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{16}}2^{n/4}. \end{align} For the divergence-free kernel, we have {$\sqrt{\|\|\omega\|\|^2I_n - \omega\omega^T} = \|\|\omega\|\|I_n - \frac{\omega\omega^T}{\|\|\omega\|\|}$}, giving the corresponding maps \begin{align} \label{equation:div-feature} \psi(\omega) &=(\|\|\omega\|\|I_n - \frac{\omega\omega^T}{\|\|\omega\|\|}) & \;\;\text{(unbounded feature map)},\;\; \\ \psi(\omega) &=(\|\|\omega\|\|I_n - \frac{\omega\omega^T}{\|\|\omega\|\|})e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{16}}2^{n/4} & \;\; \text{(bounded feature map)}. \end{align} Since there are infinitely many ways to split the Gaussian function {$e^{-\frac{\sigma^2\|\|\omega\|\|^2}{4}}$} into a product of two Gaussian functions, it follows that there are {\it infinitely many bounded Fourier feature maps} associated with both the curl-free and div-free kernels induced by the Gaussian kernel. We show below that, under appropriate conditions on $k$, bounded feature maps always exist. \begin{comment} \begin{proof} [\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:curl-div}}] We make use of the following property of the Fourier transform (see e.g \citep{Jones:Lebesgue}). Assume that $f$ and $\|\|x\|\|f$ are both integrable on $\mathbb{R}^n$, then the Fourier transform $\hat{f}$ is differentiable and \begin{align} \frac{\partial \hat{f}}{\partial \omega_j}(\omega) = - \widehat{i x_j f}(\omega), \;\;\; 1 \leq j \leq n. \end{align} Assume further that $\|\|x\|\|^2f$ is integrable on $\mathbb{R}^n$, then this rule can be applied twice to give \begin{align} \frac{\partial^2 \hat{f}}{\partial \omega_j \partial \omega_k}(\omega) = \frac{\partial}{\partial \omega_j}\left(\frac{\partial \hat{f}}{\partial \omega_k}\right) = - \frac{\partial}{\partial \omega_j}[\widehat{i x_k f}] = -\widehat{x_j x_kf}. \end{align} For the curl-free kernel, we have $\phi(x) = \hat{\rho_0}(x)$ and consequently, under the assumption that $\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega) < \infty$, we have \begin{align} [k_{{\rm curl}}(x)]_{jk} = - \frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial x_j \partial x_k}(x) = -\frac{\partial^2\hat{\rho_0}}{\partial x_j \partial x_k}(x) = \widehat{\omega_j \omega_k \rho_0}(x),\;\;\; 1 \leq j,k \leq n. \end{align} In other words, \begin{align} [k_{{\rm curl}}(x)]_{jk} = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle} \omega_j \omega_k \rho_0(\omega)d\omega. \end{align} It thus follows that \begin{align} k_{{\rm curl}}(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle }\omega \omega^T \rho_0(\omega)d\omega = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}e^{-i \langle \omega, x\rangle }\mu(\omega)d\omega, \end{align} where $\mu(\omega) = \omega \omega^T \rho_0(\omega)$. The proof for $k_{{\rm div}}$ is entirely similar. \end{proof} \end{comment} \subsection{First Main Result: Probability Measure Construction in the General Case} \label{section:probability-construction} For the separable and curl-free and div-free kernels, we obtain a probability measure {$\rho$} directly from the corresponding scalar-valued kernels. We now show how to construct {$\rho$} given a general {$k$}, under appropriate assumptions on {$k$}. Furthermore, we show that the corresponding feature map is {\it bounded}, in the sense that {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega)$} is a bounded function of {$\omega$} (see the precise statement in Corollary \ref{corollary:measure-trace}). \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:Bochner-projection} Let {$K:\mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \L(\H)$} be an ultraweakly continuous shift-invariant positive definite kernel. Let $\mu$ be the unique finite {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure satisfying Eq.~(\ref{equation:Bochner1}). Then {$\forall \a\in \H$}, {$\a \neq 0$}, the scalar-valued kernel defined by {$K_{\a}(x,t) = \langle \a, K(x,t)\a\rangle$} is positive definite. Furthermore, there exists a unique finite positive Borel measure {$\mu_{\a}$} on {$\mathbb{R}^n$} such that $K_{\a}$ is the Fourier transform of $\mu_{\a}$, that is \begin{align} K_{\a}(x,t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\exp(-i \langle \omega,x-t\rangle)d\mu_{\a}(\omega). \end{align} The measure $\mu_{\a}$ is given by \begin{align} \mu_{\a}(\omega) = \langle \a, \mu(\omega)\a\rangle,\;\;\; \omega \in \mathbb{R}^n. \end{align} \end{proposition} Let {$\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty}$} be any orthonormal basis for {$\H$}. By Proposition \ref{proposition:Bochner-projection}, $\forall j \in \mathbb{N}$, the scalar-valued kernel \begin{align} K_{jj}(x,t) = K_{\mathbf{e}_j}(x,t) = \langle \mathbf{e}_j, K(x,t)\mathbf{e}_j\rangle \end{align} is positive definite and is the Fourier transform of the finite positive Borel measure \begin{align} \mu_{jj}(\omega) = \langle \mathbf{e}_j, \mu(\omega)\mathbf{e}_j\rangle, \;\;\; \omega \in \mathbb{R}^n. \end{align} \begin{comment} \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:measure-normalize} If $k$ is normalized so that $k(0) = I$, the identity operator on $\H$, then $\mu_{jj}$ is a probability measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ $\forall j \in \mathbb{N}$. In general, if $k(0)$ is invertible, then the following measure \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm norm}}(\omega) = k(0)^{-1/2}\mu(\omega)k(0)^{-1/2} \end{align} is a finite ${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$-valued measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$, and $(\mu_{{\rm norm}})_{jj}(\omega) = \langle \mathbf{e}_j, (\mu_{{\rm norm}})(\omega) \mathbf{e}_j\rangle$ is a probability measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ $\forall j \in \mathbb{N}$. \end{proposition} Under the hypothesis of Proposition \ref{proposition:measure-normalize}, we assume further that there exists at least one $k \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $(\mu_{{\rm norm}})_{kk}(\omega) > 0$ $\forall \omega \in \mathbb{R}^n$. Then in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}), we set \begin{align} \label{equation:constructionI} \rho(\omega) = (\mu_{{\rm norm}})_{kk}(\omega),\;\;\; \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \frac{\mu(\omega)}{(\mu_{{\rm norm}})_{kk}(\omega)}. \end{align} This construction of $\rho$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ obviously depends on the choice of the orthonormal basis $\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty}$. \end{comment} The measures {$\mu_{jj}$, $j \in \mathbb{N}$}, which depend on the choice of orthonormal basis {$\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j\in \mathbb{N}}$}, collectively give rise to the following measure, which is independent of {$\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j\in \mathbb{N}}$}. \begin{theorem} [\textbf{Probability Measure Construction}] \label{theorem:measure-trace} Assume that the positive definite function $k$ in Bochner's Theorem satisfies: (i) {$k(x) \in {\rm Tr}(\H)$ $\forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$}, and (ii) {$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|{\rm tr}[k(x)]\|dx < \infty$}. Then its corresponding finite {${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$}-valued measure $\mu$ satisfies \begin{align} \mu(\omega) \in {\rm Tr}(\H) \;\;\;\forall \omega \in \mathbb{R}^n,\;\;\; {\rm tr}[\mu(\omega)] \leq \frac{1}{(2\pi)^n}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|{\rm tr}[k(x)]\|dx. \end{align} The following is a finite positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$ \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) &= {\rm tr}(\mu(\omega)) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\mu_{jj}(\omega) = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^n}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\exp(i \langle \omega, x\rangle){\rm tr}[k(x)]dx. \end{align} The normalized measure { $\frac{\mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega)}{{\rm tr}[k(0)]}$ } is a probability measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$. \end{theorem} {\bf Special case}. For $\H = \mathbb{R}$, we obtain \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^n}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\exp(i \langle \omega, x\rangle)k(x)dx = \mu(\omega), \end{align} so that the scalar-setting is a special case of Theorem \ref{theorem:measure-trace}, as expected. \begin{corollary} \label{corollary:measure-trace} Under the hypothesis of Theorem \ref{theorem:measure-trace}, in Eq.~(\ref{equation:factorize}) we can set \begin{align} \label{equation:constructionII} \rho(\omega) = \frac{\mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega)}{{\rm tr}[k(0)]}, \;\;\; \tilde{\mu}(\omega) = \left\{ \begin{matrix} {\rm tr}[k(0)]\frac{\mu(\omega)}{\mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega)}, & \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) > 0\\ 0, & \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) = 0. \end{matrix} \right. \end{align} The function $\tilde{\mu}$ in Eq.~(\ref{equation:constructionII}) satisfies {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega) \in {\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$} and has bounded trace, i.e. { \begin{align} \|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm tr}} = {\rm tr}[\tilde{\mu}(\omega)] \leq {\rm tr}[k(0)] \;\;\;\forall \omega \in \mathbb{R}^n. \end{align} } \end{corollary} Let us now illustrate Theorem \ref{theorem:measure-trace} and \ref{corollary:measure-trace} on the separable kernels and curl-free and div-free kernels. We note that for the separable kernels, we obtain the same probability measure $\rho$ as in Section \ref{section:special-construction}. However, for the curl-free and div-free kernels, we obtain a different probability measure compared to Section \ref{section:special-construction}, which illustrates the non-uniqueness of $\rho$. \begin{example}[\textbf{Separable kernels}] \end{example} For the {\it separable kernels} of the form $k(x) = g(x)A$, with {$A \in {\rm Sym}^{+}(\H) \cap {\rm Tr}(\H)$} and $g \in L^1(\mathbb{R}^n)$, we have \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) = {\rm tr}(A)\frac{1}{(2\pi)^n}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\exp(i \langle \omega, x\rangle)g(x)dx = {\rm tr}(A)\rho_0(\omega). \end{align} Since {${\rm tr}[k(0)] = {\rm tr}(A)$}, we recover $\rho(\omega) = \rho_0(\omega)$. Here {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega) = A$} and {$\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm tr}} = {\rm tr}(A) < \infty$}. \begin{example}[\textbf{Curl-free and div-free kernels}] \end{example} For the {\it curl-free kernel}, we have {$\mu(\omega) = \omega\omega^T\rho_0(\omega)$} and thus \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) = \|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega), \end{align} which is a finite measure by the assumption {$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2d\rho_0(\omega) < \infty$}. For the Gaussian case, since {${\rm tr}[k(0)] = \frac{2n}{\sigma^2}$}, the corresponding probability measure is \begin{align} \rho(\omega) = \frac{\sigma^2}{2n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega). \end{align} Similarly, for the {\it div-free kernel}, we have {$\mu(\omega) = [\|\|\omega\|\|^2I_n - \omega\omega^T]\rho_0(\omega)$} and thus \begin{align} \mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega) = (n-1)\|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega). \end{align} For the Gaussian case, since {${\rm tr}[k(0)] = \frac{2n(n-1)}{\sigma^2}$}, the corresponding probability measure is \begin{align} \rho(\omega) = \frac{\sigma^2}{2n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega). \end{align} Clearly, for both the curl-free and div-free kernels, the probability measure {$\rho$} is {\it non-unique}. We can, for example, obtain {$\rho$} by normalizing the measure \begin{align} (1+\|\|\omega\|\|^2)\rho_0(\omega) \end{align} and the corresponding {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega)$} still has bounded trace. \begin{example}[\textbf{Sum of kernels}] \end{example} Consider now the probability measure and feature maps corresponding to the sum of two kernels, which is readily generalizable to any finite sum of kernels. Let $k_1$, $k_2$ be two positive definite functions satisfying the assumptions of Theorem \ref{theorem:measure-trace}, which are the Fourier transforms of two ${\rm Sym}^{+}(\H)$-valued measures $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$, respectively. Then their sum $k = k_1 + k_2$ is clearly the Fourier transform of $\mu = \mu_1 + \mu_2$. Then the probability measure $\rho$ and the function $\tilde{\mu}$ corresponding to $k$ is given by \begin{align} \rho(\omega) &= \frac{\mu_{{\rm tr}}(\omega)}{{\rm tr}[k(0)]} = \frac{\mu_{1,{\rm tr}}(\omega) + \mu_{2,{\rm tr}}(\omega)}{{\rm tr}[k_1(0)] + {\rm tr}[k_2(0)]}, \\ \tilde{\mu}(\omega) &= \left\{ \begin{matrix} ({\rm tr}[k_1(0)] + {\rm tr}[k_2(0)])\frac{\mu_1(\omega) + \mu_2(\omega)}{\mu_{1,{\rm tr}}(\omega) + \mu_{2,{\rm tr}}(\omega)}, & \mu_{1,{\rm tr}}(\omega) + \mu_{2,{\rm tr}}(\omega) > 0,\\ 0, & \mu_{1,{\rm tr}}(\omega) + \mu_{2, {\rm tr}}(\omega) = 0. \end{matrix} \right. \end{align} We the obtain the Fourier feature map for the kernel $K(x,t) = k(x-t)$ using Eqs.~(\ref{equation:mu-decomp}) and (\ref{equation:feature-general}). We contrast this approach with the following concatenation approach. Let $(\Phi_{K_j}, \mathcal{F}_{K_j})$ be the feature maps associated with $K_j(x,t) = k_j(x-t)$, $j =1,2$. Let $\mathcal{F}_K$ be the direct Hilbert sum of $\mathcal{F}_{K_1}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{K_2}$. Consider the map $\Phi_K:\mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}(\H,\mathcal{F}_K)$, $\mathcal{F}_K = \mathcal{F}_{K_1} \oplus \mathcal{F}_{K_2}$, defined by \begin{align} \Phi_K(x) = \left( \begin{matrix} \Phi_{K_1}(x) \\ \Phi_{K_2}(x) \end{matrix} \right),\;\;\; \Phi_K(x)w = \left( \begin{matrix} \Phi_{K_1}(x)w \\ \Phi_{K_2}(x)w \end{matrix} \right),\;\;\; w\in \H, \end{align} which essentially stacks to the two maps $\Phi_{K_1}$, $\Phi_{K_2}$ on top of each other. Then clearly \begin{align} \Phi_K(x)^{}\Phi_K(t) = \Phi_{K_1}(x)^{}\Phi_{K_1}(t) + \Phi_{K_2}(x)^{}\Phi_{K_2}(t) = K_1(x,t) + K_2(x,t) = K(x,t), \end{align} so that $(\Phi_K, \mathcal{F}_K)$ is a feature map representation for $K = K_1 + K_2$. If $\dim(\mathcal{F}_{K_j}) < \infty$, then we have $\dim({\mathcal{F}_K}) = \dim(\mathcal{F}_{K_1}) + \dim(F_{K_2})$. Thus, from a practical viewpoint, this approach can be computationally expensive, since the dimension of the feature map for the sum kernel can be very large, especially if we have a sum of many kernels. \subsection{Second Main Result: Uniform Convergence Analysis} \label{section:convergence} Having computed the approximate version {$\hat{K}_D$} for {$K$}, we need to show that this approximation is consistent, that is {$\hat{K}_D$} approaches {$K$} in some sense, as {$D \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \infty$}. Since {$K(x,t) = k(x-t)$} it suffices for us to consider the convergence of {$\hat{k}_D$} towards {$k$}. Recall the Hilbert space of Hilbert-Schmidt operators ${\rm HS}(\H)$, that is of bounded operators on $\H$ satisfying \begin{align} \|\|A\|\|^2_{{\rm HS}} = {\rm tr}(A^{}A) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\|\|A\mathbf{e}_j\|\|^2 < \infty, \end{align} for any orthonormal basis $\{\mathbf{e}_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty}$ in $\H$. Here $\|\|\;\|\|_{{\rm HS}}$ denotes the Hilbert-Schmidt norm, which is induced by the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product \begin{align} \langle A, B\rangle_{{\rm HS}} = {\rm tr}(A^{}B) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\langle A\mathbf{e}_j, B\mathbf{e}_j\rangle,\;\;\; A,B \in {\rm HS}(\H). \end{align} In the following, we assume that {$k(x)\in {\rm HS}(\H)$}. Since we have shown that, under appropriate assumptions, bounded feature maps always exist, we focus exclusively on analyzing the convergence associated with them. Specifically, we show that for bounded feature maps, for any compact set {$\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n$}, we have \begin{align} \sup_{x \in \Omega}\|\|\hat{k}_D(x) - k(x)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} 0 \;\;\;\text{as}\;\;\; D \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \infty, \end{align} with high probability. This generalizes the convergence of {$\sup_{x \in \Omega}\|\hat{k}_D(x) - k(x)\|$} in the scalar setting. If {$\dim(\H) < \infty$}, then this is convergence in the Frobenius norm {$\|\|\;\|\|_F$}. \begin{theorem} [{\bf Pointwise Convergence}] \label{theorem:convergence-pointwise} Assume that {$\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \leq M$} almost surely and that {$\sigma^2(\tilde{\mu}(\omega)) = \mathbb{E}_{\rho}[\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|^2_{{\rm HS}}] < \infty$}. Then for any fixed {$x \in \mathbb{R}^n$}, \begin{align} \mathbb{P}[\|\|\hat{k}_D(x) - k(x)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \geq \epsilon] \leq 2 \exp\left(-\frac{D\epsilon}{2M}\log\left[1+\frac{M\epsilon}{\sigma^2(\tilde{\mu}(\omega))}\right]\right) \;\;\;\forall \epsilon > 0. \end{align} \end{theorem} {\bf Assumption 1}. Our uniform convergence analysis requires the following condition \begin{align} \mathbf{m}_1 = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|\;\|\|\mu(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}}d(\omega) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|\;\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}}d\rho(\omega) < \infty. \end{align} In the scalar setting, we have {$\tilde{\mu}(\omega) = 1$}, and Assumption 1 becomes { $\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|d\rho(\omega) < \infty$, } so that {$k$} is differentiable. This is {\it weaker} than the assumptions in \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007,Fourier:UAI2015,Fourier:NIPS2015}, which all require that { $\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2d\rho(\omega) < \infty$}, that is $k$ is twice-differentiable. \begin{theorem} [{\bf Uniform Convergence}] \label{theorem:convergence-uniform} Let {$\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n$} be compact with diameter {${\rm diam}(\Omega)$}. Assume that {$\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \leq M$} almost surely and that {$\sigma^2(\tilde{\mu}(\omega)) = \mathbb{E}_{\rho}[\|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|^2_{{\rm HS}}] < \infty$}. Then for any $\epsilon > 0$, \begin{align} \mathbb{P}\left(\sup_{x \in \Omega}\|\|\hat{k}_D(x) - k(x)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \geq \epsilon\right) \leq & a(n)\left(\frac{\mathbf{m}_1{\rm diam}(\Omega)}{\epsilon}\right)^{\frac{n}{n+1}} \nonumber \\ & \times \exp\left(-\frac{D\epsilon}{4(n+1)M}\log\left[1+\frac{M\epsilon}{2\sigma^2(\tilde{\mu}(\omega))}\right]\right), \end{align} where {$a(n) = 2^{\frac{3n+1}{n+1}}\left(n^{\frac{1}{n+1}} + n^{-\frac{n}{n+1}}\right)$}. \end{theorem} \begin{example}[\textbf{Separable kernels}] \end{example} For the {\it separable kernel}, Assumption 1 becomes {$\|\|A\|\|_{{\rm HS}} < \infty$}, in which case we have uniform convergence with {$M= \|\|A\|\|_{{\rm HS}}$} and {$\sigma^2(\tilde{\mu}) = \|\|A\|\|_{{\rm HS}}^2$}. \begin{example}[\textbf{Curl-free and div-free kernels}] \end{example} For the {\it curl-free kernel}, we have {$\|\|\mu(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} = \|\|\omega\|\|^2\rho_0(\omega)$}, thus Assumption 1 becomes \begin{align} \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^3d\rho_0(\omega) < \infty, \end{align} which, being stronger than the assumption {$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\|\|\omega\|\|^2d\rho_0(\omega) < \infty$} in Section ~\ref{section:probability-construction}, guarantees that a bounded feature map can be constructed, with \begin{align} \|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm HS}} \leq \|\|\tilde{\mu}(\omega)\|\|_{{\rm tr}}\leq {\rm tr}[k(0)]\;\;\ \text{and}\;\; \sigma^2[\tilde{\mu}(\omega)] \leq ({\rm tr}[k(0)])^2. \end{align} The case of the {\it div-free kernel} is entirely similar. {\bf Comparison with the convergence analysis in \citep{Romain:2016}}. In \citep{Romain:2016}, the authors carried out convergence analysis in the spectral norm for matrix-valued kernels. Our results are for the more general setting of operator-valued kernels, which induce RKHS of functions with values in a Hilbert space. In this setting, convergence in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm is {\it strictly stronger} than convergence in the spectral norm. Furthermore, as with previous results in the scalar setting \citep{Fourier:NIPS2007,Fourier:UAI2015,Fourier:NIPS2015}, the convergence in \citep{Romain:2016} also requires twice-differentiable kernels, whereas we require the {\it weaker assumption} of $C^1$-differentiability. \section{Vector-Valued Learning with Operator-Valued Feature Maps} \label{section:learning} Having discussed operator-valued feature maps and their random approximations, we now show how they can be applied in the context of learning in RKHS of vector-valued functions. Let {$\mathcal{W},\mathcal{Y}$} be two Hilbert spaces, {$C:\mathcal{W} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{Y}$} a bounded operator, {$K:\mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^n \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \L(\mathcal{W})$} be a positive definite definite kernel with the corresponding RKHS $\H_K$ of $\mathcal{W}$-valued functions, and {$V$} be a convex loss function. Consider the following general learning problem from \citep{Minh:JMLR2016} \begin{align} \label{equation:general} f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma} = {\rm argmin}_{f \in \H_K} &\frac{1}{l}\sum_{i=1}^lV(y_i, Cf(x_i)) + \gamma_A \|\|f\|\|^2_{\H_K} + \gamma_I \langle \mathbf{f}, M\mathbf{f}\rangle_{\mathcal{W}^{u+l}}. \end{align} Here {$\mathbf{z} = (\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = \{(x_i,y_i)\}_{i=1}^l\cup\{x_i\}_{i=l+1}^{u+l}$,} {$u, l \in \mathbb{N}$}, with $u,l$ denoting unlabeled and labeled data points, respectively, {$\mathbf{f} = (f(x_j))_{j=1}^{u+l}\in \mathcal{W}^{u+l}$}, {$M:\mathcal{W}^{u+l}\ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{W}^{u+l}$} a positive operator, and {$\gamma_A > 0, \gamma_I > 0$}. In \citep{Minh:JMLR2016}, it is shown that the optimization problem (\ref{equation:general}) represents a general learning formulation in RKHS that encompasses supervised and semi-supervised learning via manifold regularization, multi-view learning, and multi-class classification. For the case $V$ is the least square and SVM loss, both binary and multiclass, the solution of (\ref{equation:general}) has been obtained in dual form, that is in terms of kernel matrices. We now present the solution of problem (\ref{equation:general}) in terms of feature map representation, that is in primal form. Let {$(\Phi_K, \mathcal{F}_K)$} be any feature map for {$K$}. On the set $\mathbf{x}$, we define the following operator \begin{align} \Phi_K(\mathbf{x}) :\mathcal{W}^{u+l} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K, \;\;\; \Phi_K(\mathbf{x})\mathbf{w} = \sum_{j=1}^{u+l}\Phi_K(x_j)w_j. \end{align} We also view $\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})$ as a (potentially infinite) matrix \begin{align} \Phi_K(\mathbf{x}) = [\Phi_K(x_1), \ldots, \Phi_K(x_{u+l})]: \mathcal{W}^{u+l} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K, \end{align} with the $j$th column being $\Phi_K(x_j)$. The following is the corresponding version of the Representer Theorem in \citep{Minh:JMLR2016} in feature map representation. \begin{theorem} [\textbf{Representer Theorem}] \label{theorem:representer} The optimization problem (\ref{equation:general}) has a unique solution {$f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{u+l}K(x,x_i)a_i$ for $a_i \in \mathcal{W}$}, {$i=1,\ldots, u+l$}. In terms of feature maps, {$f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(x) = \Phi_K(x)^{}\mathbf{h}$}, where { \begin{equation}\label{equation:dual-to-primal} \mathbf{h} = \sum_{i=1}^{u+l}\Phi_K(x_i)a_i = \Phi_K(\mathbf{x})\a \in \mathcal{F}_K, \;\;\;\; \a = (a_j)_{j=1}^{u+l} \in \mathcal{W}^{u+l}. \end{equation} } \end{theorem} In the case $V$ is the least square loss, the optimization problem (\ref{equation:general}) has a closed-form solution, which is expressed explicitly in terms of the operator-valued feature map $\Phi_K$. In the following, let {$I_{(u+l) \times l} = [I_l, 0_{l\times u}]^T$} and $J^{u+l}_l= I_{(u+l) \times l}I_{(u+l) \times l}^T$, which is a $(u+l) \times (u+l)$ diagonal matrix, with the first $l$ entries on the main diagonal equal to $1$ and the rest being zero. The following is the corresponding version of Theorem 4 in \citep{Minh:JMLR2016} in feature map representation. \begin{theorem} [\textbf{Vector-Valued Least Square Algorithm}] \label{theorem:leastsquare-K} In the case {$V$} is the least square loss, that is {$V(y,f(x)) = \|\|y-Cf(x)\|\|^2_{\mathcal{Y}}$}, the solution of the optimization problem (\ref{equation:general}) is {$f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(x) = \Phi_K(x)^{}\mathbf{h}$}, with {$\mathbf{h}\in \mathcal{F}_K$} given by \begin{align} \label{equation:leastsquare-h} \mathbf{h} = \left(\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})[(J^{u+l}_l \otimes C^{}C) + l\gamma_I M]\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})^{} + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_K}\right)^{-1} \Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_{(u+l) \times l} \otimes C^{})\mathbf{y}. \end{align} \end{theorem} {\bf Comparison with the dual formulation}. In Theorem 4 in \citep{Minh:JMLR2016}, the solution of the least square problem above is equivalently given by $f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(x) = \sum_{j=1}^{u+l}K(x,x_j)a_j$, where $\a = (a_j)_{j=1}^{u+l} \in \mathcal{W}^{u+l}$ is given by \begin{equation}\label{equation:linear-matrix} (\mathbf{C^{}C}J^{\mathcal{W}, u+l}_l K[\mathbf{x}] + l \gamma_I MK[\mathbf{x}] + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{W}^{u+l}})\a = \mathbf{C^{}}{\mathbf{y}}, \end{equation} where $\mathbf{C^{}} = I_{(u+l) \times l} \otimes C^{}$ and $K[\mathbf{x}]$ is the $(u+l) \times (u+l)$ operator-valued matrix with the $(i,j)$ entry being $K(x_i,x_j)$. For concreteness, consider the case $\mathcal{W} = \mathbb{R}^d$ for some $d \in \mathbb{N}$. Then Eq.~(\ref{equation:linear-matrix}) is a system of linear equations of size $d(u+l) \times d(u+l)$, which depends only on the dimension $d$ of the output space and the number of data points $(u+l)$. If the feature space $\mathcal{F}_K$ is infinite-dimensional, then Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-h}) is an infinite-dimensional system of linear equations. {\bf Approximate feature map vector-valued least square regression}. Consider now the approximate finite-dimensional feature map $\hat{\Phi}_D(x):\mathbb{R}^d \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{2Dr}$, for some $r$, $1 \leq r \leq d$. Here $r$ depends on the decomposition $\tilde{\mu} = \psi(\omega)^{}\psi(\omega)$ in Eq.~(\ref{equation:mu-decomp}), with $r =d$ corresponding to e.g. $\psi(\omega) = \sqrt{\tilde{\mu}(\omega)}$. Then instead of the operator $\Phi_K(\mathbf{x}):\mathbb{R}^{d(u+l)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K$, we consider its approximation \begin{align} \hat{\Phi}_D(\mathbf{x}) = [\hat{\Phi}_D(x_1), \ldots, \hat{\Phi}_D(x_{u+l})]: \mathbb{R}^{d(u+l)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{2Dr}, \end{align} which is a matrix of size {$2Dr \times d(u+l)$}. This gives rise to the following system of linear equations, which approximates Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-h}) \begin{align} \label{equation:leastsquare-h-approx} \hat{\mathbf{h}}_D = \left(\hat{\Phi}_D(\mathbf{x})[(J^{u+l}_l \otimes C^{}C) + l\gamma_I M]\hat{\Phi}_D(\mathbf{x})^{} + l \gamma_A I_{2Dk}\right)^{-1} \hat{\Phi}_D(\mathbf{x})(I_{(u+l) \times l} \otimes C^{})\mathbf{y}. \end{align} Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-h-approx}) is a system of linear equations of size $2Dr \times 2Dr$, which is independent of the number of data points $(u+l)$. This system is more efficient to solve than Eq.~(\ref{equation:linear-matrix}) when \begin{align} 2Dr < d(u+l). \end{align} \section{Numerical Experiments} \label{section:experiments} We report in this section several experiments to illustrate the numerical properties of the feature maps just constructed. Since the properties of the feature maps for separable kernels follow directly from those of the corresponding scalar kernels, we focus here on the curl-free and div-free kernels. {\bf Approximate kernel computation}. We first checked the quality of the approximation of the kernel values using matrix-valued Fourier feature maps. Using the standard normal distribution, we generated a set of {$100$} points in {$\mathbb{R}^3$}, which are normalized to lie in the cube {$[-1,1]^3$}. On this set, we first computed the curl-free and div-free kernels induced by the Gaussian kernel, based on Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-div-k}), with {$\sigma=1$}. We computed the feature maps given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:feature-general}). For the curl-free kernel, in the unbounded map, {$\psi(\omega)$} is given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-unbounded}), with {$\rho(\omega) \sim \mathcal{N}(0, (2/\sigma^2)I_3)$}, and in the bounded map, {$\psi(\omega)$} is given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-bounded}), with {$\rho(\omega) \sim \mathcal{N}(0, (4/\sigma^2)I_3)$}. Similarly, for the div-free kernel, the {$\psi(\omega)$} maps, bounded and unbounded, are given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:div-feature}). We then computed the relative error {$\|\|\hat{K}_D(x,y) - K(x,y)\|\|_F/\|\|K(x,y)\|\|_F$}, with $F$ denoting the Frobenius norm, using {$D=100, 500, 1000$}. The results are reported on Table \ref{table:kernel-error}. \begin{table}[t] \caption{Kernel approximation by feature maps. The numbers shown are the relative errors measured using the Frobenius norm, averaged over $10$ runs, along with the standard deviations.} \label{table:kernel-error} \centering \begin{tabular}{llll} \toprule { Kernel} & {\small$D= 100$} & {\small$D =500$} & {\small$D = 1000$}\\ \midrule {\small curl-free (bounded)} & {\small$0.2811$ $(0.0606)$} & {\small$0.1011$ $(0.0216)$}& {\small$0.0906$ $(0.0172)$} \\ {\small curl-free (unbounded)} & {\small$0.3315$ $(0.0638)$} & {\small$0.1363$ $(0.0227)$} & {\small$0.0984$ $(0.0207)$} \\ {\small div-free (bounded)} & {\small$0.2223$ $(0.0605)$} & {\small$0.1006$ $(0.0221)$}& {\small$0.0680$ $(0.0114)$}\\ {\small div-free (unbounded)} & {\small$0.2826$ $(0.0567)$} & {\small$0.1386$ $(0.0388)$} & {\small$0.0842$ $(0.0167)$}\\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table} \begin{table}[t] \caption{Curl-free vector field reconstruction by least square regression using the exact kernel least square regression according to Eq.~(\ref{equation:linear-matrix}) and approximate feature maps according to Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-h-approx}). The RMSEs, averaged over $10$ runs, are shown with standard deviations.} \label{table:field-error} \centering \begin{tabular}{llll} \toprule {\small$D$} & {\small Exact} & {\small Bounded} & {\small Unbounded} \\ \midrule {\small$D=50$} & {\small$0.0020$} & {\small$0.0079$ $(0.0076)$} & {\small$0.0254$ $(0.0118)$}\\ {\small$D=100$} & {\small$0.0024$} & {\small$0.0032$ $(0.0024)$} & {\small$0.0118$ $(0.0098)$} \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table} {\bf Vector field reconstruction by approximate feature maps}. Next, we tested the reconstruction of the following curl-free vector field in {$\mathbb{R}^2$}, {$F(x,y) = \sin(4\pi x)\sin^2(2\pi y) \ibf + \sin^2(2\pi x) \sin(4\pi y)\jbf$} on the rectangle {$[-1, -0.4765] \times [-1, -0.4765]$}, sampled on a regular grid consisting of {$1600$} points. The reconstruction is done using {$5\%$} of the points on the grid as training data. We first performed the reconstruction with exact kernel least square regression according to Eq.~(\ref{equation:linear-matrix}), using the curl-free kernel induced by the Gaussian kernel, based on Eq.~(\ref{equation:curl-div-k}), with {$\sigma = 0.2$}. With the same kernel, we then performed the approximate feature map least square regression according to Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-h-approx} ({$\mathcal{W}=\mathcal{Y}=\mathbb{R}^2, C=I_2, \gamma_I = 0, \gamma_A = 10^{-9}$}), with {$D=50, 100$}. The results are reported on Table \ref{table:field-error}. {\bf Discussion of numerical results}. As we can see from Tables \ref{table:kernel-error} and \ref{table:field-error}, the matrix-valued Fourier feature maps can be used both for approximating the kernel values as well as directly in a learning algorithm, with increasing accuracy as the feature dimension increases. Furthermore, while all feature maps associated with a given kernel are essentially equivalent as in Lemma \ref{lemma:f-feature}, we observe that numerically, on average, the bounded feature maps tend to outperform the unbounded maps. \section{Conclusion and Future Work} We have presented a framework for constructing random operator-valued feature maps for operator-valued kernels, using the operator-valued version of Bochner's Theorem. We have shown that, due to the non-uniqueness of the probability measure in this setting, in general many feature maps can be computed, which can be unbounded or bounded. Under certain conditions, which are satisfied for many common kernels such as curl-free and div-free kernels, bounded feature maps can always be computed. We then showed the uniform convergence, with the bounded maps, of the approximate kernel in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm, strengthening previous results in the scalar setting. Finally, we showed how a general vector-valued learning formulation can be expressed in terms of feature maps and demonstrated it experimentally. An extensive empirical evaluation of the proposed formulation is left to future work. \begin{comment} \section{} For $u = 0$, $\gamma_I = 0$, we have { \begin{align} \mathbf{h} = \left[\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes C^{}C)\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})^{} + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_K}\right]^{-1}\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes C^{})\mathbf{y}. \end{align} } \begin{align} \left[\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes C^{}C)\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})^{} + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_K}\right]\mathbf{h} = \Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes C^{})\mathbf{y}. \end{align} For $\mathcal{W} = \mathcal{Y} = \mathbb{R}^p$ and $C = I_p$, { \begin{align} \mathbf{h} = \left[\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes)\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})^{} + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_K}\right]^{-1}\Phi_K(\mathbf{x})(I_l \otimes C^{})\mathbf{y}. \end{align} } \section{Scalar-valued learning with feature maps} To motivate operator-valued feature maps for vector-valued learning, we first recall the role played by feature maps in scalar-valued learning in a simple scenario. Let $\mathcal{X}$ be an arbitrary non-empty set, $\mathcal{Y} \subset \mathbb{R}$, and $K:\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}$ be a scalar-valued positive definite kernel, with corresponding RKHS $\H_K$. Let $\mathbf{z} = (\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = (x_i, y_i)_{i=1}^l$ be a set of data points randomly sampled from $\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}$, according to some unknown probability distribution. Consider the well-known problem of supervised least square learning \begin{align}\label{equation:leastsquare-scalar} f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma} = {\rm argmin}_{f \in \H_K} \frac{1}{l}\sum_{i=1}^l(f(x_i) - y_i)^2 + \gamma\|\|f\|\|^2_{\H_K} \end{align} where $\gamma > 0$. Consider the sampling operator $S_{\mathbf{x},l}: \H_K \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{l}$ and its adjoint $S_{\mathbf{x}, l}^{}: \mathbb{R}^{l} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \H_K$, defined by $S_{\mathbf{x}, l}f = (f(x_i))_{i=1}^l = (\langle K_{x_i},f\rangle_{\H_K})_{i=1}^{l}$, $f \in \H_K$, $S_{\mathbf{x}, l}^{}\b = \sum_{i=1}^{l}K_{x_i}b_i$, $\b \in \mathbb{R}^l$, respectively. Using $S_{\mathbf{x},l}$, problem (\ref{equation:leastsquare-scalar}) becomes \begin{align} f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma} = {\rm argmin}_{f \in \H_K}\frac{1}{l}\|\|S_{\mathbf{x},l}f - \mathbf{y}\|\|^2_{\mathbb{R}^l} + \gamma \|\|f\|\|^2_{\H_K}. \end{align} Differentiating with respect to $f$ and setting to zero gives \begin{align} (S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}S_{\mathbf{x},l} + l\gamma I_{\H_K})f = S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}\mathbf{y}, \end{align} which is equivalent to \begin{equation}\label{equation:leastsquare-1} f = (S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}S_{\mathbf{x},l} + l\gamma I_{\H_K})^{-1}S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}\mathbf{y}. \end{equation} This expression is also equivalent to \begin{align} \label{equation:leastsquare-2} f &= S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}(S_{\mathbf{x},l}S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{} + l\gamma I_{\mathbb{R}^l})^{-1}\mathbf{y}. \end{align} While the two expressions (\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}) and (\ref{equation:leastsquare-2}) are mathematically equivalent, they are in general different computationally. In Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-2}), the operator $S_{\mathbf{x},l}S_{\mathbf{x}, l}^{}: \mathbb{R}^l \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^l$ is given by $S_{\mathbf{x},l}S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{} = K[\mathbf{x}]$, where $K[\mathbf{x}]$ denotes the Gram matrix of $K$ on $\mathbf{x}$, with $(K[\mathbf{x}])_{ij} = [K(x_i,x_j)]_{i,j=1}^l$. The solution given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-2}) is then $f = S_{\mathbf{x},l}^{}\a = \sum_{i=1}^lK_{x_i}a_i$, with \begin{equation} \a = (K[\mathbf{x}] + l\gamma I_{\mathbb{R}^l})^{-1}\mathbf{y}. \end{equation} This solution thus requires solving a system of linear equations of size $l \times l$, which, while independent of $\dim(\H_K)$, comes at the cost of the complexity $O(l^3)$, which becomes prohibitively expensive when $l$ is very large. On the other hand, in the equivalent solution given by Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}), the operator $S_{\mathbf{x}, l}^{}S_{\mathbf{x}, l} = \H_K\ensuremath{\rightarrow} \H_K$ is generally high (often infinite) dimensional and Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}) involves solving a system of linear equations of size $\dim(\H_K) \times \dim(\H_K)$. The case in which Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}) is more efficient computationally compared to Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-2}) is when $\dim(\H_K) < l$, i.e. when the training data is large and $\dim(\H_K)$ is low. {\bf Feature map interpretation and formulation}. Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}) is closely linked to feature maps induced by $K$, as follows. Let $\Phi: \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K$ be a feature map induced by $K$, where $\mathcal{F}_K$ is a separable Hilbert space, so that $K(x,t) = \langle \Phi(x), \Phi(t)\rangle_{\mathcal{F}_K}$ $\forall(x,t) \in \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X}$. For each $x\in \mathcal{X}$, $\Phi(x)$ can be viewed as an operator $\Phi(x): \mathbb{R} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K$, with $\Phi(x)a = a\Phi(x)$ $\forall a \in \mathbb{R}$, with the adjoint operator $\Phi(x)^{}: \mathcal{F}_K \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}$ defined by $\Phi(x)^{}\mathbf{w} = \langle \mathbf{w} , \Phi(x)\rangle_{\mathcal{F}_K}$ $\forall \mathbf{w} \in \mathcal{F}_K$. With this interpretation, we have the following. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:leastsquare-scalar} The solution of Eq.~(\ref{equation:leastsquare-1}) is $f(x) = \langle \mathbf{w}, \Phi(x)\rangle_{\mathcal{F}_K}$, where $\mathbf{w}\in \mathcal{F}_K$ is given by \begin{equation} \mathbf{w} = (\sum_{i=1}^l\Phi(x_i)\Phi(x_i)^{} + l\gamma I_{\mathcal{F}_K})^{-1}[\sum_{i=1}^ly_i\Phi(x_i)]. \end{equation} Equivalently, with the operator $\Phi(x):\mathbb{R}^l \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_K$ defined by $\Phi(\mathbf{x})\b = \sum_{i=1}^lb_i\Phi(x_i)$, $\b \in \mathbb{R}^l$, we have \begin{equation} \mathbf{w} = \left(\Phi(\mathbf{x})\Phi(\mathbf{x})^{} + l\gamma I_{\mathcal{F}_K}\right)^{-1}\Phi(\mathbf{x})\mathbf{y} \in \mathcal{F}_K. \end{equation} Informally, $\Phi(\mathbf{x})$ can be viewed as the matrix $\Phi(\mathbf{x}) = [\Phi(x_1), \ldots, \Phi(x_l)]$ of size $\dim(\mathcal{F}_K) \times l$. \end{lemma} \section{Vector-valued multi-view learning} Assume that $\mathcal{W} = \mathcal{Y}^m$, $m \in \mathbb{N}$, and that $\mathcal{Y}$ is a separable Hilbert space. In the following, we identify the direct sum of Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{Y}^m = \oplus_{i=1}^m\mathcal{Y}$ under the inner product \begin{align} \langle (y_1, \ldots, y_m), (z_1, \ldots, z_m)\rangle_{\mathcal{Y}^m} = \sum_{i=1}^m\langle y_i, z_i\rangle_{\mathcal{Y}}, \;\;\; y_i, z_i \in \mathcal{Y}, \end{align} with the tensor product of Hilbert spaces $\mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y}$ under the inner product \begin{align} \langle \a \otimes y, \b \otimes z\rangle = \langle \a, \b\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^m}\langle y,z\rangle_{\mathcal{Y}}, \;\;\; \a, \b \in \mathbb{R}^m,\;\; y,z\in \mathcal{Y}, \end{align} via the mappings \begin{align} (y_1, \ldots, y_m) \in \mathcal{Y}^m &\ensuremath{\rightarrow} \sum_{i=1}^m \mathbf{e}_i \otimes y_i \in \mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y}, \;\;\; y_i \in \mathcal{Y}, \\ \a \otimes y \in \mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y} &\ensuremath{\rightarrow} (a_1y, \ldots, a_my) \in \mathcal{Y}^m,\;\;\; y \in \mathcal{Y}. \end{align} With this identification of $\mathcal{Y}^m$ and $\mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y}$, we consider the kernel $K(x,t): \mathcal{W} = \mathcal{Y}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{W} = \mathcal{Y}^m$ of the form \begin{equation} \label{equation:Kdef} K(x,t) = G(x,t) \otimes R, \end{equation} where $G(x,t): \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^m$ is a positive definite matrix-valued kernel and $R: \mathcal{Y} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{Y}$ is a self-adjoint, positive operator. The operator $K(x,t): \mathcal{Y}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{Y}^m$ can be viewed as an operator-valued block matrix of size $m \times m$, with block $(i,j)$ given by \begin{equation} [K(x,t)]_{ij} = [G(x,t)]_{ij}R. \end{equation} Let us now show how a feature map representation for $G$ gives rise to the corresponding feature map representation for $K$. Let $\mathcal{F}_G$ be a separable Hilbert space and $\Phi_G: \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}(\mathbb{R}^m, \mathcal{F}_G)$ be a feature map representation for $G$, so that $\Phi_G(x): \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G$ is a bounded linear operator and \begin{equation} \label{equation:Gdef} G(x,t) = \Phi_G(x)^{}\Phi_G(t): \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^m. \end{equation} \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:Kfeature} Consider the kernel $K$ as defined in (\ref{equation:Kdef}). The following is a feature map representation for $K$ \begin{align} \Phi_K: \mathcal{X} &\ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}^m = \mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y}, \mathcal{F}_G \otimes \mathcal{Y}) \\ \Phi_K(x) &= \Phi_G(x) \otimes \sqrt{R}: \mathcal{Y}^m = \mathbb{R}^m \otimes \mathcal{Y} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G \otimes \mathcal{Y}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof}[\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:Kfeature}}] \begin{equation} \Phi_K(x)^{}\Phi_K(t) = \Phi_G(x)^{}\Phi_G(t) \otimes R = G(x,t) \otimes R = K(x,t). \end{equation} \end{proof} As an operator, $\Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) = [\Phi_G(x_1), \ldots, \Phi_G(x_{u+l})]: \mathbb{R}^{m(u+l)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G$, and \begin{equation} \Phi_K(\mathbf{x}) = \Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) \otimes \sqrt{R}. \end{equation} \begin{theorem}\label{theorem:leastsquare-G} Let $H$ be the matrix of size $\dim(\mathcal{F}_G) \times \dim(\mathcal{Y})$ such that ${\rm vec}(H^T) = \mathbf{h}$ and $Y$ be the matrix of size $l \times \dim(\mathcal{Y})$, such that $\mathbf{y} = {\rm vec}(Y^T)$. Then $H$ is the solution of the Sylvester equation \begin{equation}\label{equation:HR} BHR + l \gamma_A H = \Phi_G(\mathbf{x})(I_{(u+l)\times l} \otimes \c)Y\sqrt{R}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation}\label{equation:G} B = \Phi_G(\mathbf{x})(J^{u+l}_l \otimes \c\c^T + l\gamma_W L + l\gamma_B I_{u+l} \otimes M_m)\Phi_G(\mathbf{x})^{}. \end{equation} In particular, for $R = I_{\mathcal{Y}}$, we have \begin{equation}\label{equation:H} H = (B + l \gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_G})^{-1}\Phi_G(\mathbf{x})(I_{(u+l)\times l} \otimes \c)Y. \end{equation} \end{theorem} {\bf Special case: Feature maps induced by separable kernels}. As a special case of the above formulation, for $m=1$, we recover the feature map associated with separable kernels as given in \citep{Caponnetto08}. Let $A:\mathcal{Y} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{Y}$ be a self-adjoint positive operator and $k: \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X}$ be a scalar-valued positive definite kernel. \begin{align} G(x,t) = k(x,t)A \end{align} Let $\Phi_k:\mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_k$ be a feature map associated with $k$, then \begin{align} \Phi_G(x) = \Phi_k(x) \otimes \sqrt{A}: \mathcal{Y} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_k \otimes \mathcal{Y} \end{align} Let $A$ be a symmetric, positive semi-definite matrix of size $N \times N$, with strictly positive eigenvalues $\{\lambda_j\}_{j=1}^r$ and corresponding normalized eigenvectors $\{\u_j\}_{j=1}^N$, where $r$ denotes the rank of $A$. Consider the spectral decomposition \begin{align} A = \sum_{j=1}^r\lambda_j \u_j\u_j^T. \end{align} Consider the direct sum of Hilbert spaces \begin{align} F_k^r = \oplus_{j=1}^rF_k. \end{align} Then the following is a feature map for $G$ \begin{align} \Phi_G(x) = \begin{pmatrix} \Phi_k(x) \otimes \sqrt{\lambda_1}\u_1^T \\ \cdots \\ \Phi_k(x) \otimes \sqrt{\lambda_r}\u_j^T \end{pmatrix}: \mathbb{R}^N \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_k^r \end{align} \subsection{Concrete implementation} Assume that the input has the form $x = (x^1, \ldots, x^m)$, with $x^i \in \mathcal{X}^i$. Consider the following definition of the kernel $G$: \begin{equation} G(x,t) = \sum_{i=1}^mk^i(x^i,t^i)\mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T: \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^m, \end{equation} where $k^i$ is a scalar-valued kernel defined on view $i$. Let $\Phi_{k^i}:\mathcal{X}^i \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_{k^i}$ be the feature map associated with the kernel $k^i$, where $F_{k^i}$ is a separable Hilbert space. Then \begin{equation} G(x,t) = \sum_{i=1}^m\langle \Phi_{k^i}(x^i), \Phi_{k^i}(t^i)\rangle_{\mathcal{F}_{k^i}} \mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T = \sum_{i=1}^m (\Phi_{k^i}(x^i))^{*}\Phi_{k^i}(t^i) \mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T. \end{equation} Consider the direct sum of Hilbert spaces \begin{equation} \mathcal{F}_G = \oplus_{i=1}^m\mathcal{F}_{k^i}. \end{equation} Consider the following two feature maps induced by $G$. {\bf First feature map}. Each map $\Phi_{k^i}$ gives rise to the following map \begin{align} \Phi_{k^i}(x^i) \otimes \mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T: \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_{k^i} \otimes \mathbb{R}^m. \end{align} The following is then a feature map for $G$: \begin{align} &\Phi_G(x) : \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G \otimes \mathbb{R}^m, \\ &\Phi_G(x) = \left( \begin{array}{c} \Phi_{k^1}(x^1) \otimes \mathbf{e}_1\mathbf{e}_1^T\\ \vdots\\ \Phi_{k^m}(x^m) \otimes \mathbf{e}_m\mathbf{e}_m^T, \end{array} \right) : \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G \otimes \mathbb{R}^m. \nonumber \end{align} This can be viewed as a matrix of size $m\dim(\mathcal{F}_G) \times m$. The matrix of feature vectors $\Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) = (\Phi_G(x_1), \ldots, \Phi_G(x_{u+l}))$ can be expressed as \begin{equation} \Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) = \left( \begin{array}{c} \Phi_{k^1}(\mathbf{x}^1) \otimes \mathbf{e}_1\mathbf{e}_1^T\\ \vdots\\ \Phi_{k^m}(\mathbf{x}^m) \otimes \mathbf{e}_m\mathbf{e}_m^T, \end{array} \right) \end{equation} and can be viewed as a matrix of size $m\dim(\mathcal{F}_G) \times m(u+l)$. {\bf Second feature map}. The following is then a feature map for $G$: \begin{align} &\Phi_G(x) : \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G, \\ &\Phi_G(x) = \left( \begin{array}{c} \Phi_{k^1}(x^1) \otimes \mathbf{e}_1^T\\ \vdots\\ \Phi_{k^m}(x^m) \otimes \mathbf{e}_m^T, \end{array} \right): \mathbb{R}^m \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathcal{F}_G. \nonumber \end{align} This can be viewed as a matrix of size $\dim(\mathcal{F}_G) \times m$. The matrix of feature vectors $\Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) = (\Phi_G(x_1), \ldots, \Phi_G(x_{u+l}))$ can be expressed as \begin{equation} \Phi_G(\mathbf{x}) = \left( \begin{array}{c} \Phi_{k^1}(\mathbf{x}^1) \otimes \mathbf{e}_1^T\\ \vdots\\ \Phi_{k^m}(\mathbf{x}^m) \otimes \mathbf{e}_m^T, \end{array} \right) \end{equation} and can be viewed as a matrix of size $\dim(\mathcal{F}_G) \times m(u+l)$. {\bf Comparison of the two feature maps}. \begin{proposition}[\textbf{Training phase}]\label{proposition:training} Let $R = I_{\mathcal{Y}}$, $L = \sum_{i=1}^mL^i \otimes \mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T$ and $G(x,t) = \sum_{i=1}^mk^i(x^i, t^i)\mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T$. Then in Theorem \ref{theorem:leastsquare-G}, the matrix $B$ is given by \begin{equation} B = \left( \Phi_{k^i}(\mathbf{x}^i)[c_ic_jJ^{u+l}_l + l\gamma_W \delta_{ij}L^i + l\gamma_B (M_m)_{ij}I_{u+l}]\Phi_{k^j}(\mathbf{x}^j)^T \right)_{i,j=1}^m. \end{equation} The matrix $H$ is given by \begin{equation} H = (B + l\gamma_A I_{\mathcal{F}_G})^{-1} \left( \begin{array}{c} c_1\Phi_{k^1}(\mathbf{x}^1_{1:l})\\ \vdots\\ c_m\Phi_{k^m}(\mathbf{x}^m_{1:l}) \end{array} \right)Y, \end{equation} where $\mathbf{x}_{1:l} = (x_1, \ldots, x_l)$ is the set of labeled training data. \end{proposition} \begin{proposition}[\textbf{Evaluation phase}]\label{proposition:evaluation} Assume the hypothesis of Proposition \ref{proposition:training}. Then for any $v \in \mathcal{X}$, \begin{equation} f_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(v) = {\rm vec}(H^T\Phi_G(v)). \end{equation} The combined function $g_{\mathbf{z}, \gamma}(v) = Cf_{\mathbf{z},\gamma}(v)$ is \begin{equation} g_{\mathbf{z}, \gamma}(v) = H^T\left( \begin{array}{c} c_1\Phi_{k^1}(v^1)\\ \vdots\\ c_m\Phi_{k^m}(v^m) \end{array} \right). \end{equation} On a set $\v = \{v_1, \ldots, v_t\}_{i=1}^t$, \begin{equation} g(\v) = H^T\left( \begin{array}{c} c_1\Phi_{k^1}(\v^1)\\ \vdots\\ c_m\Phi_{k^m}(\v^m) \end{array} \right) \end{equation} as a matrix of size $\dim(\mathcal{Y}) \times t$. \end{proposition} \subsubsection{Special case} Consider the special case $u=0$, $\gamma_W = \gamma_B = 0$, and $G(x,t) = \sum_{i=1}^mk^i(x^i, t^i)\mathbf{e}_i\mathbf{e}_i^T$, that is purely supervised learning without between-view interaction. In this case, in Proposition \ref{proposition:training}, \begin{equation} B = (c_ic_j\Phi_{k^i}(\mathbf{x}^i)\Phi_{k^j}(\mathbf{x}_j)^T)_{i,j=1}^m. \end{equation} This is equivalent to supervised least square regression, where the feature vector is the concatenation of the {\it weighted} feature vectors from all the views. \begin{equation} \Phi_k(x) = \left( \begin{array}{c} c_1\Phi_{k^1}(x^1)\\ \vdots\\ c_m\Phi_{k^m}(x^m) \end{array} \right). \end{equation} In the dual optimization setting, it is equivalent to supervised least square regression with the combined kernel $k(x,t) = \sum_{i=1}^mc_i^2k^i(x^i, t^i)$. {\bf Special case: Feature maps with linear kernels}. Consider the case where $x^i \in \mathbb{R}^{d^i}$, $d = \sum_{i=1}^md^i$, and the kernels $k^i$ are linear, with the form $$ k^i(x^i,t^i) = 1+\langle x^i, t^i\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^{d^i}}. $$ The feature map induced by the kernel $k^i$ is $\Phi_{k^i}:\mathcal{X}^i \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{d^i +1}$, defined by $$ \Phi_{k^i}(x^i) = (1, x^i) \in \mathbb{R}^{d^i+1} = \mathcal{F}_{k^i}. $$ In this case, the kernel $G:\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X} \ensuremath{\rightarrow} \mathbb{R}^{m \times m}$ is a matrix-valued function which is linear in each of its two arguments. For each $x$, $\Phi_G(x)$ is a matrix of size $(d+m) \times m$ and for the sample set $\mathbf{x}$, $\Phi_G(\mathbf{x})$ is a matrix of size $(d+m) \times m(u+l)$. \end{comment}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction} Small solar system bodies, such as asteroids and comets, are of significant interest to the scientific community; these small bodies offer great insight into the early formation of the solar system. This insight offers additional detail into the formation of the Earth and also the probable formation of other planetary bodies. Of particular interest are those near-Earth asteroids (NEA) which inhabit heliocentric orbits in vicinity of the Earth. These easily accessible bodies provide attractive targets to support space industrialization, mining operations, and scientific missions. NEAs potentially contain many materials such as those useful for propulsion, construction, or for use in semiconductors. Also, many bodies contain highly profitable materials, such as precious or strategic metals~\cite{ross2001}. In addition, these NEAs are also of concern for their potential to impact the Earth. Asteroids and comets are the greatest threat to future civilizations and as a result there is a focused effort to mitigate these risks~\cite{wie2008}. In spite of the great interest in asteroids, the operation of spacecraft in their vicinity is a challenging problem. While there has been significant study of interplanetary transfer trajectories, relatively less analysis has been conducted on operations in the vicinity of asteroids. The dynamic environment around asteroids is strongly perturbed and challenging for analysis and mission operation~\cite{scheeres1994,scheeres2000}. Due to their low mass, which results in a low gravitational attraction, asteroids may have irregular shapes and potentially chaotic spin states. Furthermore, since the magnitude of the gravitational attraction is relatively small, non-gravitational effects, such as solar radiation pressure or third-body effects, become much more significant. As a result, the orbital environment is generally quite complex and it is difficult to generate analytical insights. An accurate gravitational potential model is necessary for the operation of spacecraft about asteroids. Additionally, a detailed shape model of the asteroid is needed for trajectories passing close to the body. The classic approach is to expand the gravitational potential into a harmonic series and compute the series coefficients. Radio tracking data of an orbiting spacecraft allows one to estimate the series coefficients. The harmonic representation is guaranteed to converge outside of the circumscribing sphere and can be truncated at a finite order based on accuracy requirements~\cite{scheeres2012a}. However, the harmonic expansion is always an approximation as a result of the infinite order series used in the representation. Additionally, the harmonic model used outside of the circumscribing sphere is not guaranteed to converge inside the sphere. A popular approach to deal with this divergence is to use a different gravitational model within the circumscribing sphere. For example, Reference~\citenum{scheeres2000} uses both a polyhedron field and a spherical harmonic expansion to represent the full gravitational field of the body. The spherical harmonic coefficients are computed from the polyhedron shape model using a constant density assumption~\cite{werner1997}. This model is applied close to the body while the harmonic expansion is applied when outside the circumscribing sphere. Similarly, Reference~\citenum{herrera2014} uses two different harmonic expansion models to represent the gravitational field inside and outside of the circumscribing sphere. In this case, the coefficients must be carefully chosen to ensure continuity of the gravitational field at the circumscribing sphere. In both cases, this type of approach results in a cumbersome gravity field expression that requires additional constraints to ensure continuity and validity at the radius of the circumscribing sphere. Any integration software will need to incorporate a switching mechanism between the models when crossing the circumscribing sphere. Instead, we use a different approach and model the asteroid as a constant-density polyhedron. The polyhedron model results in an exact closed form expression of the gravitational potential field~\cite{werner1994,werner1996}. This type of model results in the exact potential up to the accuracy of the shape model and a constant density assumption. However, the calculation of the potential, or the acceleration, requires a summation over every face of the polyhedron. As a result, it typically requires a large amount of computation in contrast to the harmonic expansion models. However, the formulation is well suited to parallelization and improvements with efficient coding practices. Finally, the polyhedron method is well suited to trajectories passing close to the body and offers a simple metric to determine if a particle is inside the asteroid. The use of the polyhedron model results in a single expression of the gravitational field that is valid everywhere around the body. The application of optimal control methods for orbital trajectory design is nontrivial. Frequently, insight into the problem or intuition on the part of the designer is required to determine initial conditions that will converge to the optimal solution. However, the asteroid system dynamics are nonlinear and exhibit chaotic behaviors. This makes solving the optimization problem highly dependent on the initial condition. Similar to the three-body problem, there is an insufficient number of analytical constants to derive an analytical solution in general. As a result, accurate numerical methods are required to determine optimal solutions. These methods are critically dependent on an accurate initial guess in order to allow for convergence. We model the motion of particles around asteroids using the restricted full two-body problem. The dynamics of a spacecraft about small bodies is very similar to that of the three-body problem. This model has many similarities with the restricted three body problem, and much of the theory developed for the three-body problem is also applicable~\cite{mondelo2010,herrera2014}. In addition, there has been a large amount of work on the optimal control of spacecraft orbital transfers in the three-body problem~\cite{mingotti2011,grebow2011}. Typically, the optimal control problem is solved via direct methods, which approximate the continuous time problem as a parameter optimization problem. The state and control trajectories are discretly parameterized and solved in the form of a nonlinear optimization problem. Alternatively, indirect methods apply calculus of variations to derive the necessary conditions for optimality. This yields a lower dimensioned problem as compared to the direct approach. In addition, satisfication of the necessary conditions guarantee local optimality in contrast to direct methods which result in sub-optimal solutions. In this paper, we extend the design method previously developed in the three-body problem to motion about asteroids~\cite{kulumani2015}. Our systematic approach avoids the difficulties in selecting an appropriate initial guess for optimization. We instead utilize the concept of the reachability set to enable a simple methodology of selecting initial conditions to achieve general orbital transfers. This method allows the spacecraft to depart from fixed periodic solutions through the use of a low-thrust propulsion system. In addition, we utilize a polyhedron gravitational model which is accurate and is globally applicable about the asteroid. We formulate an optimal control problem to calculate the reachability set on a lower dimensional Poincar\'e section. Given an initial condition and fixed time horizon, the reachable set is the set of states attainable, subject to the operational constraints of the spacecraft. The generation of the reachable set allows for a more systematic method of determining initial conditions and eases the burden on the designer. The Poincar\'e section reduces the dimensionality of the system dynamics to the study of a related discrete update map. This allows for the design of complex transfer trajectories on a lower dimensional space. Rather than relying on intuition or insight into the problem, trajectories are chosen which minimize a distance metric toward a desired target on the Poincar\'e section. This simple methodology allows for extended transfer trajectories which iteratively approach a desired target orbit. In short, the authors present a systematic method of generating optimal transfer orbits about asteroids. Typically, optimal transfers are generated using a direct optimization method which results in a sub-optimal solution. This paper present an indirect optimal control formulation to generate the reachability set on a Poincar\'e section. Using the reachability set on the Poincar\'e section allows for a simple method of choosing trajectories which approach a target. In addition, the reachability set gives an indication of the regions of the phase space accessible to the spacecraft. This method allows us to avoid the difficulties inherent in choosing valid initial conditions for the computation of optimal transfer trajectories. We develop the optimal control formulation and apply this method to a transfer about asteroid 4769 Castalia. \section{Asteroid Model}\label{sec:asteroid_model} In this analysis we consider transfers about the asteroid 4769 Castalia. Castalia has an accurate shape model and is also considered a potentially hazardous asteroid with a possibility of Earth impact~\cite{hudson1994}. We model the gravitational potential field of Castalia using a polyhedron gravity model instead of using a spherical harmonic expansion. The spherical harmonic expansion is a popular method of representing the gravity field~\cite{scheeres1996}. Approximations are possible by truncating the infinite order series to fixed set of coefficients, with the most important terms corresponding to the second order and degree~\cite{scheeres1994}. However, when evaluated close to the body the series expansion will diverge and is no longer accurate. Therefore, the spherical harmonic representation is not ideal for landing trajectories or those passing close to the surface. A polyhedral model of the surface of an asteroid can be determined from remote optical or radar sensors. The faces of the polyhedron can be large or small and allow for fine detail such as depression, craters, ridges, or interior voids. In addition, there is no requirement for the body to be modeled at a uniformly high resolution so small details can be incorporated with minimal cost. From the shape model, an analytical, closed form expression for the gravitational potential can be derived. The polyhedral approach provides an accurate gravitational model consistent with the resolution of the shape and the chosen discretization. Furthermore, the polyhedron model is an exact solution up to the surface of the body. Therefore, this model is ideal for missions traversing large regions both close and far from the asteroid. \subsection{Polyhedron Gravity Model}\label{sec:polyhedron_model} We represent the gravitational potential of the asteroid using a polyhedron gravitation model. This model is composed of a polyhedron, which is a three-dimensional solid body, that is defined by a series of vectors in the body-fixed frame. The vectors define vertices in the body-fixed frame as well as planar faces which compose the surface of the asteroid. We assume that each face is a triangle composed of three vertices and three edges. As a result, only two faces meet at each edge while three faces meet at each vertex. Only the body-fixed vectors, and their associated topology, is required to define the exterior gravitational model. References~\citenum{werner1994} and~\citenum{werner1996} give a detailed derivation of the polyhedron model. Here, we summarize the key developments and equations required for implementation. Consider three vectors $ \vecbf{v}_1, \vecbf{v}_2, \vecbf{v}_3 \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1} $, assumed to be ordered in a counterclockwise direction, which define a face. It is easy to define the three edges of each face as \begin{align}\label{eq:edges} \vecbf{e}_{i+1,i} = \vecbf{v}_{i+1} - \vecbf{v}_i \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1 }, \end{align} where the index $ i \in \parenth{1,2,3} $ is used to permute all edges of each face. Since each edge is a member of two faces, there exist two edges which are defined in opposite directions between the same vertices. We can also define the outward normal vector to face $ f$ as \begin{align}\label{eq:face_normal} \hat{\vecbf{n}}_f &= \parenth{\vecbf{v}_{2} - \vecbf{v}_1} \times \parenth{\vecbf{v}_{3} - \vecbf{v}_2} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1}, \end{align} and the outward facing normal vector to each edge as \begin{align}\label{eq:edge_normal} \hat{\vecbf{n}}_{i+1,i}^f &= \parenth{\vecbf{v}_{i+1} - \vecbf{v}_i} \times \hat{\vecbf{n}}_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1}. \end{align} For each face we define the face dyad $ \vecbf{F}_f $ as \begin{align}\label{eq:face_dyad} \vecbf{F}_f &= \hat{\vecbf{n}}_f \hat{\vecbf{n}}_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 3}. \end{align} Each edge is a member of two faces and has an outward pointing edge normal vector, given in~\cref{eq:edge_normal}, perpendicular to both the edge and the face normal. For the edge connecting the vectors $ \vecbf{v}_1 $ and $ \vecbf{v}_2 $, which are shared between the faces $A$ and $ B$, the per edge dyad is given by \begin{align}\label{eq:edge_dyad} \vecbf{E}_{12} = \hat{\vecbf{n}}_A \hat{\vecbf{n}}_{12}^A + \hat{\vecbf{n}}_B \hat{\vecbf{n}}_{21}^B \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 3}. \end{align} The edge dyad $ \vecbf{E}_e $, is defined for each edge and is a function of the two adjacent faces meeting at that edge. The face dyad $ \vecbf{F}_f $, is defined for each face and is a function of the face normal vectors. Let $ \vecbf{r}_i \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1} $ be the vector from the spacecraft to the vertex $ \vecbf{v}_i $ and it's length is given by $ r_i = \norm{\vecbf{r}_i} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{1} $. The per-edge factor $ L_e \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{1}$, for the edge connecting vertices $ \vecbf{v}_i $ and $ \vecbf{v}_j $, with a constant length $ e_{ij} = \norm{\vecbf{e}_{ij}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^1$ is \begin{align}\label{eq:edge_factor} L_e &= \ln \frac{r_i + r_j + e_{ij}}{r_i + r_j - e_{ij}}. \end{align} For the face defined by the vertices $ \vecbf{v}_i, \vecbf{v}_j, \vecbf{v}_k $ the per-face factor $ \omega_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{1} $ is \begin{align}\label{eq:face_factor} \omega_f &= 2 \arctan \frac{\vecbf{r}_i \cdot \vecbf{r}_j \times \vecbf{r}_k}{r_i r_j r_k + r_i \parenth{\vecbf{r}_j \cdot \vecbf{r}_k} + r_j \parenth{\vecbf{r}_k \cdot \vecbf{r}_i} + r_k \parenth{\vecbf{r}_i \cdot \vecbf{r}_j}} . \end{align} The gravitational potential due to a constant density polyhedron is given as \begin{align}\label{eq:potential} U(\vecbf{r}) &= \frac{1}{2} G \sigma \sum_{e \in \text{edges}} \vecbf{r}_e \cdot \vecbf{E}_e \cdot \vecbf{r}_e \cdot L_e - \frac{1}{2}G \sigma \sum_{f \in \text{faces}} \vecbf{r}_f \cdot \vecbf{F}_f \cdot \vecbf{r}_f \cdot \omega_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^1, \end{align} where $ \vecbf{r}_e$ and $\vecbf{r}_f $ are the vectors from the spacecraft to any point on the respective edge or face, $ G$ is the universal gravitational constant, and $ \sigma $ is the constant density of the asteroid. Furthermore we can use these definitions to define the attraction, gravity gradient matrix, and Laplacian as \begin{align} \nabla U ( \vecbf{r} ) &= -G \sigma \sum_{e \in \text{edges}} \vecbf{E}_e \cdot \vecbf{r}_e \cdot L_e + G \sigma \sum_{f \in \text{faces}} \vecbf{F}_f \cdot \vecbf{r}_f \cdot \omega_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1} , \label{eq:attraction}\\ \nabla \nabla U ( \vecbf{r} ) &= G \sigma \sum_{e \in \text{edges}} \vecbf{E}_e \cdot L_e - G \sigma \sum_{f \in \text{faces}} \vecbf{F}_f \cdot \omega_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 3}, \label{eq:gradient_matrix}\\ \nabla^2 U &= -G \sigma \sum_{f \in \text{faces}} \omega_f \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^1 .\label{eq:laplacian} \end{align} One interesting thing to note is that both~\cref{eq:face_dyad,eq:edge_dyad} can be precomputed without knowledge of the position of the satellite. They are both solely functions of the vertices and edges of the polyhedral shape model and are computed once and stored. Once a position vector $ \vecbf{r} $ is defined, the scalars given in~\cref{eq:edge_factor,eq:face_factor} can be computed for each face and edge. Finally,~\cref{eq:potential} is used to compute the gravitational potential on the spacecraft. The Laplacian, defined in~\cref{eq:laplacian}, gives a simple method to determine if the spacecraft has collided with the body~\cite{werner1996}. In this work, we consider trajectories about asteroid 4769 Castalia. Doppler radar images, obtained at the Arecibo Observatory in 1989, are used to determine a shape model of Castalia~\cite{hudson1994,neese2004}. We use the estimated rotation period of \SI{4.07}{\hour} with a nominal density of \SI{2.1}{\gram\per\centi\meter\cubed}~\cite{scheeres1996}. The shape model is composed of \num{4092} triangular faces and a rendering of the asteroid is provided in~\cref{fig:castalia_3d}. In addition, we show a contour plot of the radius of Castlia in~\cref{fig:radius_contour}. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{castalia} \caption{3D Shape Model of Castalia} \label{fig:castalia_3d} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{radius_contour} \caption{Radius contours of Castalia} \label{fig:radius_contour} \end{subfigure} ~ \caption{Polyhedron Shape Model of 4769 Castalia} \label{fig:castalia} \end{figure} \subsection{Spacecraft Equations of Motion}\label{sec:sc_eoms} The motion of a massless particle, or spacecraft, about an asteroid shares many similarities with that of the three-body problem. As is typical in the three-body problem, the equations of motion are usually represented in a uniformly rotating frame aligned with the two primaries. Similarly, the equations of motion about an asteroid are also defined in a body-fixed frame with uniform rotation. In this reference frame, the gravitational potential field is time invariant and only a function of the position of the particle. In addition, since the rotational rate of the asteroid is constant, the equations of motion are time invariant. Finally, the use of the rotating reference frame allows for much greater insight into the dynamic structure of the behavior around the asteroid. We define a reference frame originating at the center of mass of the asteroid. The body-fixed reference frame is composed of the unit vectors $ \hat{\vecbf{x}} , \hat{\vecbf{y}}, \hat{\vecbf{z}} $, which are aligned along the principal axes of smallest, intermediate, and largest moment of inertia, respectively. The body-fixed equations of motion of a massless particle about an arbitrarily rotating asteroid are given by \begin{align}\label{eq:body_eoms} \ddot{\vecbf{r}} + 2 \vecbf{\Omega} \times \dot{\vecbf{r}} + \vecbf{\Omega} \times \parenth{ \vecbf{\Omega} \times \vecbf{r} } + \dot{\vecbf{\Omega}} \times \vecbf{r} = \nabla U(\vecbf{r}) , \end{align} where $ \vecbf{\Omega} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3 \times 1}$ is the instantaneous angular velocity vector of the asteroid represented in the body-fixed frame, $ \vecbf{r} $ is the position of the particle in the body-fixed frame, and $ \nabla U(\vecbf{r}) $ is the gradient of the gravitational potential~\cite{scheeres2012a}. We assume that the asteroid rotates at a uniform rate, $ \norm{\vecbf{\Omega}} = \omega \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^1 $, about the axis of the maximum moment of inertia, i.e.\ $ \vecbf{\Omega} = \omega \hat{\vecbf{z} }$. As a result, we can represent the equations of motion in scalar form as \begin{align} \label{eq:eoms} \begin{split} \ddot{x} - 2 \omega \dot{y} - \omega^2 y &= U_x , \\ \ddot{y} + 2 \omega \dot{x} - \omega^2 x &= U_y , \\ \ddot{z} &= U_z . \end{split} \end{align} In this situation, the state is defined as $ \vecbf{x} = \bracket{\vecbf{r}~\>\vecbf{v}}^T \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{6 \times 1}$ with $\vecbf{r} = \bracket{x~\>y~\>z}^T \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3\times1}$ and $\vecbf{v}= \bracket{ \dot{x}~\>\dot{y}~\>\dot{z} }^T \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3\times1}$ representing the position and velocity with respect to the body-fixed frame, respectively. We further assume that our spacecraft is capable of exerting a translational acceleration, $ \vecbf{u} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{3\times1} $, in any direction, while subject to a maximum magnitude constraint, $ \norm{\vecbf{u}} \leq u_m $. This is typical of many spacecraft which offer full rotational freedom and can direct a potentially varying force or acceleration in any direction. The equations of motion may be rewritten in state space form as \begin{align}\label{eq:state_space_eoms} \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\vecbf{r}} \\ \dot{\vecbf{v}} \end{bmatrix} &= \begin{bmatrix}\vecbf{v} \\ \vecbf{g} \parenth{\vecbf{r}} + \vecbf{h}\parenth{\vecbf{v}} + \vecbf{u} \end{bmatrix} , \end{align} where the terms $\vecbf{g} \parenth{\vecbf{r}} $ and $ \vecbf{h}\parenth{\vecbf{v}} $ are given by \begin{align}\label{eq:state_space_terms} \vecbf{g}\parenth{\vecbf{r}} = \begin{bmatrix} U_x + \omega^2 x \\ U_y + \omega^2 y \\ U_z \end{bmatrix} ,\quad \vecbf{h}\parenth{\vecbf{r}} = \begin{bmatrix} 2 \omega \dot{y} \\ -2 \omega \dot{x} \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} . \end{align} Since Castalia is a uniformly rotating asteroid, the equations of motion are time invariant when represented in the body-fixed frame. In addition, there exists an integral of motion, or a conserved quantity, that is constant for all motion of a particle. The Jacobi constant, $ J (\vecbf{r} , \vecbf{v} ) $, is given by \begin{align}\label{eq:jacobi} J \parenth{\vecbf{r}, \vecbf{v}} = \frac{1}{2} \omega^2 \parenth{x^2 + y^2} + U(\vecbf{r}) - \frac{1}{2} \parenth{\dot{x}^2 + \dot{y}^2 + \dot{z}^2} . \end{align} The Jacobi constant functions in a similar manner as used in three-body problem~\cite{szebehely1967}. We can define zero-velocity surfaces using the Jacobi constant by fixing the value to a desired constant. The zero-velocity surfaces are the locus of points where the kinetic energy and hence velocity vanishes. Just as in the three-body problem, the Jacobi constant in~\cref{eq:jacobi} divides the phase space into distinct realms of possible motion. Similarly, there exist, in general, four equilibrium points and also their associated stable and unstable manifolds~\cite{scheeres1996,scheeres1994}. The properties of these manifolds play a critical role in the dynamics of trajectories in their vicinity. \section{Reachability Set on a Poincar\'e Section}\label{sec:reachability} Typical optimal control methods, including both indirect and direct based methods, are highly dependent on an accurate initial guess. For indirect optimization, which is based on the calculus of variations, this results in the well-known two-point boundary value problem. Insight into the problem or insight by the designer is usually required to determine appropriate initial costates that will converge to the optimal solution and satisfy the desired constraints. To avoid this issue, we utilize the concept of the reachability set on a lower dimensional Poincar\'e section. By repeatedly constructing the reachability set, we can achieve general transfers by determining set intersections on the Poincar\'e section. This alleviates the need to determine an accurate initial guess while offering some insight into the dynamics of neighboring trajectories The reachable set contains all possible trajectories that are achievable over a fixed time horizon from a defined initial condition, subject to the constraints of the system. Reachability theory has been applied to collision avoidance and safety planning in aerospace systems~\cite{holzinger2009,holzinger2011b}. The theory supporting reachability analysis is directly derivable from optimal control theory~\cite{varaiya2000,lygeros2004}. Analytic computation of reachability sets is only possible for a small class of potential systems. Here, we use numerical methods to solve a related optimal control problem, which approximates a single solution that lies on the reachable set. \begin{figure} \centering \begin{scaletikzpicturetowidth}{0.3\textwidth} \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=\tikzscale] \coordinate [label=left:\textcolor{black}{\large $\vecbf{x}_0$}] (x0) at (-1,-2); \coordinate [label=below:\textcolor{black}{\large $\vecbf{x}_n$}] (xn) at (1,1); \coordinate [label=left:\textcolor{black}{\large $\Sigma$}] (sigma) at (-4,3); \coordinate [label=right:\textcolor{black}{}] (f1) at (5,-2); \coordinate [label=below:\textcolor{black}{\large $\psi(t,\vecbf{x}_0)$}] (f2) at (2,-5); \coordinate [label=right:\textcolor{black}{}] (f3) at (-4,-4); \coordinate [label=right:\textcolor{black}{}] (f4) at (-4,-1); \filldraw [black] (x0) circle [radius=3pt]; \filldraw [black] (xn) circle [radius=3pt]; \draw [ultra thick,black,->-](x0) to[out=20,in=90,distance=2cm] (f1) to[out=-90,in=0,distance=2cm] (f2) to[out=180,in=-45,distance=2cm] (f3) to[out=135,in=-135,distance=2cm] (f4) ; \draw [ultra thick, black,dashed,->] (f4) to[out=45,in=180,distance=1cm] ($(xn)-(2,0)$); \draw [ultra thick] plot [smooth cycle, tension=0.1, rotate=5] coordinates { (-4,-3) (4,-3) (4,3) (-4,3) }; \draw [thick,dashed] (xn) circle [radius=2cm]; \draw [thick,->] (xn) -- ($(xn) + (2.5,0)$); \draw [thick,rotate=45,->] (xn) -- ($(xn) + (2.5,0)$); \draw ($(xn) + (1,0)$) arc [start angle=0,end angle=45, radius=1]; \node [draw=none] at (2.4,1.5) {\Large $\phi_d$}; \draw [decorate,decoration={brace,amplitude=5pt},rotate=45] (xn) -- ($(xn) + (2,0)$); \node [draw=none] at ($ (xn) + (0,1) $) {\Large $ J $}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{scaletikzpicturetowidth} \caption{Reachability set on a Poincar\'e section\label{fig:reachability_set}} \end{figure} We seek to approximate the reachability set on a Poincar\'e section by solving an optimal control problem. The Poincar\'e section is chosen in a manner similar to the previous work in both the three-body problem as well analysis performed around asteroids to determine periodic orbits. Typically, analysis for the three-body problem relies heavily on symmetries in the force fields. However, in our system model, the gravitational potential, given by~\cref{eq:potential}, has no symmetries. In spite of this, it is still possible to determine periodic solutions through the application of a Poincar\'e map with the surface of section chosen normal to a surface in the phase space~\cite{scheeres2000}. For a periodic orbit, the trajectories will intersect the Poincar\'e section at two distinct points every half orbit. With the addition of a low thrust control input, we are able to expand the reachable set from a distinct point to a larger area on the Poincar\'e section. \Cref{fig:reachability_set} illustrates this methodology. Without any control input, the trajectories will follow the system dynamics, $ \psi(t, \vecbf{x}_0 ) $ and intersect the Poincar\'e section at $ \vecbf{x}_n$. The addition of a control input allows the spacecraft to depart from the natural dynamics and intersect the section at another location denoted by the dashed circle. We use the cost function $ J $ to define a distance metric on the Poincar\'e section. Maximization of $ J $, or the minimization of $ -J $, along various directions, which are parameterized using $ \phi_d $, on the Poincar\'e section allows us to generate the largest reachability set under the bounded control input. We define the Poincar\'e section as the surface normal to $ y = 0 $. Following convention, the Poincar\'e map is defined as the map from one transversal crossing of the surface $ y = 0$ to the next. Using the method of Reference~\citenum{scheeres2000}, we remove $ y $ and $ \dot{y} $ from consideration and create a four-dimensional map. The Poincar\'e section, represented by $ \Sigma $, then becomes \begin{align}\label{eq:poincare_section} \Sigma = \braces{\parenth{x, \dot{x}, z, \dot{z}} \| y(t_f) = 0 }. \end{align} We use this section to compute periodic orbits that serve as the initial and target states of our transfer. In addition, this section serves as a lower dimensional space upon which we approximate the reachability set. An optimal control problem is defined by the cost function \begin{align}\label{eq:cost} J = -\frac{1}{2} \left( \vecbf{x}(t_f) - \vecbf{x}_{n}(t_f)\right)^T Q \left( \vecbf{x}(t_f) - \vecbf{x}_{n}(t_f)\right) , \end{align} where $ \vecbf{x}_n(t_f) $ is the final state of a control-free trajectory, while the term $ \vecbf{x}(t_f)$ is the final state of a trajectory under the influence of the control input. We use the matrix $ Q = \text{diag} \bracket{1~\>0~\> 1~\> 1~\>0~\>1 } \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{6 \times 6}$ to represent the mapping onto $ \Sigma $. Maximization of the distance between $ \vecbf{x}_n $ and $\vecbf{x} $, on the Poincar\'e section defined in~\cref{eq:poincare_section}, is equivalent to the minimization of $ J $ defined in~\cref{eq:cost}. We ensure that the trajectories intersect the Poincar\'e section through the use of terminal constraints. In addition, we use the terminal constraints to define a specific direction along which we seek to minimize the cost~\cref{eq:cost}. Since the Poincar\'e section is four-dimensional, we parameterize a direction in $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^4 $ using three angles $ \phi_1, \phi_2 , \phi_3 $. The terminal constraints are given in terms of these angles as \begin{align}\label{eq:terminal_constraints} \begin{split} m_1 &= y = 0 , \\ m_2 &= \parenth{\sin \phi_{1_{d}}} \parenth{ x_1^2 + x_2^2 + x_3^2 + x_4^2} - x_1^2 = 0, \\ m_3 &= \parenth{\sin \phi_{2_{d}}} \parenth{ x_2^2 + x_3^2 + x_4^2} - x_2^2 = 0, \\ m_4 &= \parenth{\sin \phi_{3_{d}}} \parenth{ 2 x_3^2 + 2 x_3 \sqrt{x_4^2 + 2 x_4^2}} - x_3 - \sqrt{x_4^2 + x_3^2} = 0 , \end{split} \end{align} where we make use of the difference states $ \parenth{x_1, x_2 ,x_3, x_4 }$ defined as \begin{align}\label{eq:diff_states} \begin{split} x_1 &= x(t_f) - x_n(t_f) , \\ x_2 &= z(t_f) - z_n(t_f) , \\ x_3 &= \dot{x}(t_f) - \dot{x}_n(t_f) , \\ x_4 &= \dot{z}(t_f) - \dot{z}_n(t_f) . \\ \end{split} \end{align} We select the terminal time, $ t_f $, from the time required for the uncontrolled trajectory to return back to the Poincar\'e section. The constraint $ m_1 = 0 $ ensures that the terminal state lies on the Poincar\'e section. The constraints $ m_2, m_3, m_4 $ are used to define a direction on the Poincar\'e section. \Cref{eq:diff_states} represents the difference between our controlled and uncontrolled trajectory on the Poincar\'e section. We approximate the entire reachable set by discretization over the space of angles $\phi_1, \phi_2, \phi_3 $. By convention we assume that the angles lie in the following range \begin{align} \phi_1, \phi_2 &\in [ 0, \pi ) ,\\ \phi_3 &\in [ 0 , 2 \pi ) , \end{align} such that we parameterize all directions on the three sphere, $\S^3$. Finally, we also incorporate the control acceleration magnitude constraint as \begin{align}\label{eq:control_constraint} c(\vecbf{u}) = \vecbf{u}^T \vecbf{u} - u_m^2 \leq 0 , \end{align} where $ u_m $ is the maximum acceleration possible by the propulsion system. This constraint assumes that the control acceleration may be orientated in any direction yet the acceleration magnitude is variable but bounded. The goal is to determine the control history $ \vecbf{u}(t) $ such that the cost function~\cref{eq:cost} is minimized while subject to the equations of motion~\cref{eq:body_eoms} and the constraints~\cref{eq:control_constraint,eq:terminal_constraints}. We apply a standard calculus of variations approach to solve our optimal control problem~\cite{bryson1975}. Using the Euler-Lagrange equations we arrive at the necessary conditions for optimality \begin{align}\label{eq:necc_conditions} \begin{split} \dot{\vecbf{x}} ^T &= \deriv{H}{\vecbf{\lambda}} ,\\ \dot{\vecbf{\lambda}}^T &= \deriv{H}{\vecbf{x}} , \\ 0 &= \deriv{\phi}{x}^T + \deriv{\vecbf{m}}{x}^T \vecbf{\beta} - \vecbf{\lambda}^T(t_f) , \\ 0 &= \deriv{H}{\vecbf{u}} + \mu^T \deriv{c}{\vecbf{u}} , \end{split} \end{align} where the Hamiltonian, $ H$, is defined as \begin{align}\label{eq:hamiltonian} H = \vecbf{\lambda}_r^T \vecbf{v} + \vecbf{\lambda}_v^T \parenth{\vecbf{g}(\vecbf{r}) + \vecbf{h}(\vecbf{v}) + \vecbf{u}}. \end{align} The costate is given by $ \vecbf{\lambda} = \bracket{ \vecbf{\lambda}_r~\> \vecbf{\lambda}_v }^T \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{6 \times 1}$. The vector $ \vecbf{\beta} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^{4 \times 1} $ are the additional Lagrange multiplers associated with the terminal constraints in~\cref{eq:terminal_constraints}, and $ \mu $ is a Lagrange multipler associated with the control constraint in~\cref{eq:control_constraint}. We can redefine the optimal control in terms of the costate by rewriting the necessary condition as \begin{align} \vecbf{u} = - \frac{u_m^2}{2 \mu} \vecbf{\lambda}_v . \end{align} We use this along with the control constraint to solve for the Lagrange multiplier $ \mu $ \begin{align} \mu = \pm \frac{u_m}{2} \norm{\vecbf{\lambda}_v} . \end{align} Finally, we use the second-order necessary condition to determine the correct sign of $ \mu $ and find the optimal control input for the reachable set as \begin{align}\label{eq:optimal_control} \vecbf{u} = - u_m \frac{\vecbf{\lambda_{\vecbf{v}}}}{\norm{\vecbf{\lambda_{\vecbf{v}}}}} . \end{align} This optimal control formulation results in a two point boundary value problem. We use a shooting method to determine the initial costates, $ \vecbf{\lambda}(t_0)$, such that the terminal constraints are satisfied. In addition, we implement a multiple shooting method which sub-divides the the entire trajectory into small sub-intervals~\cite{stoer2013}. The multiple shooting method reduces the sensitivity of the terminal states to the initial conditions. Using a shorter time interval alleviates many of the issues of single shooting approaches, which suffer from convergence difficulties near the optimal solution. To ensure a continuous trajectory we incorporate additional constraints \begin{align}\label{sec:interior_constraints} \begin{split} \vecbf{x}(t_{m-1}^{-}) &= \vecbf{x}(t_{m}^{+}) , \\ \vecbf{\lambda}(t_{m-1}^{-}) &= \vecbf{\lambda}(t_{m}^{+}), \end{split} \end{align} which ensure that both the state and costate are continuous at the patch point between segment $ m-1 $ and $ m$. \section{Numerical Simulation}\label{sec:simulation} We present an example transfer of a spacecraft about the asteroid 4769 Castalia. Our equations of motion, given by~\cref{eq:eoms}, are an idealized version of the dynamics of a spacecraft. For example, the model does not include the effect of mass transfer from propellant usage. We instead model the control input as a generic acceleration vector in the body-fixed asteroid frame. The acceleration magnitude constraint in~\cref{eq:control_constraint} is chosen to emulate a physically realizable thruster system. In this analysis, we assume $ u_m = \SI{0.1}{\milli\meter\per\second\squared}$ which is equivalent to a thrust of approximately \SI{100}{\milli\newton} for a \SI{1000}{\kilo\gram} spacecraft. This amount of thrust is typical of many current ion or hall effect thrusters~\cite{goebel2008 ,choueiri2009}. The objective is to transfer the spacecraft between two periodic equatorial orbits about Castalia. The initial and target orbits are periodic solutions about Castlia computed using the method introduced by Reference~\citenum{scheeres2003}. The initial conditions for both orbits are defined in the body-fixed frame as \begin{align}\label{sec:initial_transfer} \vecbf{x}_i = \begin{bmatrix} 1.4973 \\ 0 \\ 0.0061 \\ 0\\ -0.0009 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} , \quad \vecbf{x}_t = \begin{bmatrix} 6.1175 \\ 0 \\ 0.0001 \\ 0\\ -0.0025 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} . \end{align} \Cref{fig:initial_transfer} shows the initial, $ \vecbf{x}_i $, and target, $ \vecbf{x}_t$, periodic orbits which lie in the equatorial plane of Castalia. Our goal is to transfer from a lower altitude to a higher altitude while remaining in the equatorial plane of the asteroid. This type of scenario would occur frequently during mapping and observation missions to asteroids. \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{initial_transfer} \caption{Equatorial View} \label{fig:eq_initial_transfer} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{initial_transfer_3d} \caption{3D view} \label{fig:initial_transfer_3d} \end{subfigure} ~ \caption{Initial and target periodic orbits} \label{fig:initial_transfer} \end{figure} In this transfer example we also have used a reduced model of Castalia. Rather than using the full \num{4092} face model we reduce the number of faces to \num{1024} using the Matlab function \verb+reducepatch+. This greatly speeds up the computation with only a small difference in the gravitational field. We first compute the reachability set originating from the initial periodic orbit at $ \vecbf{x}_i$ for a fixed time of flight and bounded control magnitude as defined previously. The reachability set is computed by solving the two-point boundary value problem using a multiple shooting algorithm to satisfy the necessary conditions in~\cref{eq:necc_conditions}. The reachability set is generated on the lower dimensional Poincar\'e section and is composed of the terminal states in the $ \parenth{x,z,\dot{x},\dot{z} } $ space. We approximate the reachability set by discretization of each of the angles $ \phi_1, \phi_2 , \phi_3 $ into ten discrete steps. This results in a total of $10^3$ trajectories which approximate the reachability set on the Poincar\'e section. We visualize the section using the two figures in~\cref{fig:poincare_section}. \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{poincare_xvsxdot.pdf} \caption{$ x $ vs. $ \dot{x} $ Poincar\'e section} \label{fig:poincare_xvsxdot} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{poincare_zvszdot.pdf} \caption{$ z $ vs. $ \dot{z} $ Poincar\'e section} \label{fig:poincare_zvszdot} \end{subfigure} \caption{Poincar\'e section visualization \label{fig:poincare_section}} \end{figure} These two-dimensional sections allow us to visualize the four-dimensional Poincar\'e section defined by~\cref{eq:poincare_section}. The first stage of the transfer is represented by the magenta markers in~\cref{fig:poincare_section}. From~\cref{fig:poincare_xvsxdot}, we can see that the reachability set has grown in the $ \dot{x} $ dimension but has not been enlarged much in the $ x $ direction. Similarly,~\cref{fig:poincare_zvszdot} shows an increase in the $ \dot{z} $ component. From the reachability set, we chose a trajectory and terminal state which minimizes a distance metric $ d(\vecbf{x}_f,\vecbf{x}_t) $ to the desired target \begin{align}\label{eq:reach_dist} d = \sqrt{k_x \parenth{x_f - x_t }^2 + k_z \parenth{z_f - z_t }^2 + k_{\dot{x}}\parenth{\dot{x}_f - \dot{x}_t }^2 + k_{\dot{z}}\parenth{\dot{z}_f - \dot{z}_t }^2} , \end{align} where $ k_x, k_z, k_{\dot{x}}, k_{\dot{z}} $ are used to weight the relative importance of each of the components of the Poincar\'e section. \Cref{fig:phi_distance} shows the distance to the target for the chosen discretization of $ \phi_i $. \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.3\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phi1.pdf} \caption{ $ \phi_1 $} \label{fig:phi1} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.3\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phi2.pdf} \caption{$ \phi_2 $} \label{fig:phi2} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.3\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phi3.pdf} \caption{$ \phi_3 $} \label{fig:phi3} \end{subfigure} \caption{Variation of $d(\vecbf{x}_f,\vecbf{x}_t)$ due to $ \phi_i$} \label{fig:phi_distance} \end{figure} The trajectory which minimizes $ d $ is indicated by the red marker in~\cref{fig:poincare_section,fig:phi_distance}. Since the first reachability set does not include the target we use the minimum state from the first stage to initialize another reachability computation. Once again we compute the reachability set by discretization of the angles $ \phi_i $ on the Poincar\'e section. This second stage, represented by the cyan markers in~\cref{fig:poincare_section,fig:phi_distance}, further increases the $ x, z$ components but does not reach the target orbit. As a result, a third and forth stage are generated in a similar manner and shown by the green and blue markers in~\cref{fig:poincare_section,fig:phi_distance}, respectively. We can see in~\cref{fig:poincare_section} that the reachability set of the forth stage includes both the $ x $ and $ z$ components of the target periodic orbit. At the same time there is a relatively large difference between the $ \dot{x} $, $ \dot{z} $, and $ z $ components of the forth stage and the target orbit. In practice this is not a large concern as we have direct control over the spacecraft velocity via the control input and the equatorial plane still remains within the reachability set of the transfer. With the reachability set encompassing the target orbit, we can generate a final transfer to the target. We use the minimum state calculated from the final stage to serve as the initial condition of the transfer. A final optimal transfer is computed to satisfy the fixed terminal state $ \vecbf{x}(t_f) = \vecbf{x}_t $ and the bounded control magnitude constraint. \Cref{fig:trajectory} shows the entire transfer trajectory, from the four reachable set trajectories as well as the final transfer to the target. \begin{figure}[htbp] \centering \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{trajectory.pdf} \caption{Equatorial view of transfer} \label{fig:trajectory_up} \end{subfigure}~ \begin{subfigure}[htbp]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{trajectory_3d.pdf} \caption{Out of plane view} \label{fig:trajectory_3d} \end{subfigure}~ \caption{Complete transfer trajectory} \label{fig:trajectory} \end{figure} It is interesting to note that while both the initial and target periodic orbit lie in the equatorial plane, the reachability trajectories show a relatively large out of plane component during the transfers. In spite of this out of plane movement, the reachability set approaches and meets the target orbit. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{control.pdf} \caption{Control history \label{fig:control}} \end{figure} \Cref{fig:control} shows the control input required during the maneuver. We can see that the control constraint in~\cref{eq:control_constraint} is satisfied over the entire trajectory. \section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions} In this paper, an optimal transfer process, which combines the concepts of reachability sets on a Poincar\'e section, is used to generate a transfer between periodic orbits about the asteroid 4769 Castalia. We have linked several computations of the reachability set on a Poincar\'e section in order to design a transfer trajectory. The use of the Poincar\'e section allows for trajectory design on a lower dimensional space and is an extension of its well-known use in the analysis of periodic orbits. We use an indirect optimal control formulation to incorporate a control magnitude constraint and several terminal state constraints. Utilizing the reachability set alleviates the need to determine accurate initial conditions that allow for convergence of the optimal solution. In addition, the use of the polyhedron gravitational model gives simple method of extending this work to any small body that also possesses a defined shape model. \section*{Acknowledgments}\label{sec:acknowledgments} This research has been supported in part by NSF under the grants CMMI-1243000, CMMI-1335008, and CNS-1337722. \bibliographystyle{aiaa}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} The formation of zonal flows (ZFs) is a problem of fundamental interest in many contexts, including physics of planetary atmospheres, astrophysics, and fusion science \cite{Gurcan:2015jy, Vasavada:2005gs, Johansen:2009jf, Kunz:2013jp, Diamond:2005br, Fujisawa:2009jc, EUROfusionConsortium:2016bk}. In particular, the interaction of ZFs and drift-wave (DW) turbulence in laboratory plasmas significantly affects the transport of energy, momentum, and particles, so understanding it is critical to improving plasma confinement. But modeling the underlying physics remains a difficult problem. The workhorse approach to describing the DW-ZF coupling is the wave kinetic equation (WKE) \cite{Diamond:2005br, Trines:2005in}, but it is limited to the ray approximation \cite{foot:ray} and, in fact, is oversimplified even as a geometrical-optics (GO) model \cite{Tracy:2014to}. That leads to missing essential physics, as was recently pointed out in \Ref{foot:Parker} and will be elaborated below. These issues can be fixed by using the more accurate quasilinear approach known as the second-order cumulant expansion, or CE2 \cite{Farrell:2003dm, Farrell:2007fq, Marston:2008gx, Srinivasan:2012im, AitChaalal:2016jx}, whose applications to DW-ZF physics were pursued in \Refs{Farrell:2009ke,Parker:2013hy,Parker:2014fc, Parker:2014tb}. However, the CE2 is less intuitive than the WKE, and its robustness with respect to further approximations remains obscure. Having an approach as accurate as the CE2 and as intuitive as the WKE would be more advantageous. Here, we propose such an approach for a DW turbulence model based on the generalized Hasegawa--Mima equation (gHME) \cite{Krommes:2000ec,Smolyakov:1999jk}. The idea is as follows. We start by splitting the gHME into two coupled equations that describe ZFs and fluctuations, respectively, and then linearize the equation for fluctuations, like in the CE2 approach. We notice then that this linearized equation is similar to that describing a quantum particle that is governed by a generalized (non-Hermitian) Hamiltonian. By drawing on this analogy, we then formulate an \textit{exact} (modulo quasilinear approximation) kinetic equation for such particle, which is akin to the so-called Wigner--Moyal equation in quantum mechanics \cite{Moyal:1949gj, Groenewold:1946kp,foot:Mendonca}. Compared to the CE2, the Wigner--Moyal formulation is arguably more intuitive, namely, for two reasons: (i)~like the traditional WKE (hereafter denoted by tWKE), it permits viewing DW quanta (``driftons'') as particles, except now driftons are \textit{quantumlike} particles, {i.e.,\/}\xspace have nonzero wavelengths; and (ii) the separation between Hamiltonian effects and dissipation remains transparent and unambiguous even beyond the GO approximation. Compared to the tWKE, the new approach is also more accurate because (i)~it captures effects beyond the GO limit, and (ii)~\textit{even in the GO limit}, it predicts corrections to the tWKE that emerge from the newly found corrections to the drifton dispersion. (In this aspect, our paper can be understood as an expansion of the GO approximation introduced in \Ref{foot:Parker}.) These corrections are essential as they allow DW-ZF enstrophy exchange, which is not included in the tWKE. By deriving the GO limit from first principles, we eliminate this discrepancy and obtain a formulation that exactly conserves the total enstrophy (as opposed to the DW enstrophy conservation predicted by the tWKE) and the total energy, in precise agreement with the underlying gHME. We also illustrate the substantial difference between the GO limit of our formulation and the tWKE using numerical simulations. The paper is organized as follows. In \Sec{sec:basic} we introduce the gHME and its quasilinear approximation. In \Sec{sec:Wigner_Moyal} we derive the Wigner--Moyal formulation. In \Sec{sec:growth} we rederive the dispersion relation for the linear growth rate of ZFs. In \Sec{sec:WKE} we derive a corrected WKE that, in contrast to the tWKE, conserves both the total enstrophy and energy. Numerical simulations are presented to compare the new WKE with the tWKE. In \Sec{sec:conclusions} we summarize our main results. Auxiliary calculations are presented in Appendices. This includes a brief introduction to the Weyl calculus that we extensively use in our paper (\App{app:Weyl}), a spectral representation of our formulation (\App{app:spectral}), and proofs of the conservation properties of our models (\App{app:cons}). \section{Basic model} \label{sec:basic} Our formulation is based on the gHME \cite{Krommes:2000ec,Smolyakov:1999jk}, \begin{gather}\label{eq:hm} \partial_t w + \vec{v}\cdot \vec{\nabla} w + \beta\, \partial_x \psi = Q, \end{gather} which is widely used to describe electrostatic two-dimensional (2-D) turbulent flows both in a magnetized plasma with a density gradient and in an atmospheric fluid on a rotating planet, where the role of DWs is played by Rossby waves \cite{Gurcan:2015jy, Parker:2014tb}. Both contexts will be described on the same footing, so our results are applicable to DWs and Rossby waves equally. We assume the usual geophysical coordinate system, where $\vec{x} = (x, y)$ is a 2-D coordinate, the $x$-axis is the ZF direction, and the $y$-axis is the direction of the local gradient of the plasma density or of the Coriolis parameter. (In the context of fusion plasmas, a different choice of coordinates is usually preferred in literature, where $x$ and $y$ are swapped.) The constant $\beta$ is a measure of this gradient. The function $\psi(\vec{x}, t)$ is the electric potential or the stream function, $\vec{v} = \vec{e}_z \times \vec{\nabla} \psi$ is the fluid velocity on the $\vec{x}$ plane, and $\vec{e}_z$ is a unit vector normal to this plane. The function $w(\vec{x}, t)$ is the generalized vorticity given by $\smash{w \doteq (\nabla^2 - L_{\rm D}^{-2} \op{\alpha})\psi}$, where $\op{\alpha}$ is an operator such that $\op{\alpha} = 1$ in parts of the spectrum corresponding to DWs and $\op{\alpha} = 0$ in those corresponding to ZFs. (The symbol $\doteq$ denotes definitions.) Also, $L_{\rm D}$ is the plasma sound radius or the deformation radius. (For plasmas, one can take $L_{\rm D} = 1$ in normalized units \cite{Krommes:2000ec}. Also, the barotropic model used in geophysics is recovered in the limit $L_{\rm D} \to \infty$ \cite{Farrell:2003dm,Farrell:2007fq,Marston:2008gx,Srinivasan:2012im}.) The term $Q(\vec{x}, t)$ describes external forces and dissipation. Systems with $Q = 0$ will be called isolated. Let us decompose the fields into their zonal-averaged and fluctuating components, denoted with bars and tildes, respectively. (For any $g$, its zonal average is $\smash{\bar{g} \doteq \int \mathrm{d}x \, g /L_x}$, where $L_x$, henceforth assumed equal to one, is the system length along $x$ axis.) In particular, $w = \bar{w} + \widetilde{w}$, where the two components of the generalized vorticity are related to $\psi$ as \cite{Parker:2013hy} \begin{gather} \bar{w} = \nabla^2 \bar{\psi}, \quad \widetilde{w} = \nabla_{\rm D}^2 \widetilde{\psi}, \end{gather} and $\nabla_{\rm D}^2 \doteq \nabla^2 - L_{\rm D}^{-2}$. Equations for $\widetilde{w}$ and $\bar{w}$ are obtained by taking the zonal-average and fluctuating parts of \Eq{eq:hm}. This gives \begin{subequations} \label{eq:QL1} \begin{gather} \partial_t \widetilde{w} + \widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \bar{w} + \bar{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w} + \beta\,\partial_x \widetilde{\psi} + f_{\rm NL}= \widetilde{Q}, \label{eq:w1}\\ \partial_t \bar{w} + \overline{\widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w}} = \bar{Q}, \label{eq:q1} \end{gather} \end{subequations} where $\smash{f_{\rm NL} \doteq \widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w} - \overline{\widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w}}}$ is a term nonlinear with respect to fluctuations. As discussed in \Ref{Srinivasan:2012im}, this term represents ``eddy-eddy" interactions and is responsible for the Batchelor--Kraichnan inverse-energy cascade; however, it is inessential for the formation of ZFs. Since the main scope of this paper is to specifically study the interaction between eddies and ZFs, we ignore eddy-eddy interactions so $f_{\rm NL}$ will be neglected. Hence, \begin{subequations} \label{eq:QL2} \begin{gather} \partial_t \widetilde{w} + \widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \bar{w} + \bar{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w} + \beta\,\partial_x \widetilde{\psi} = \widetilde{Q}, \label{eq:w2}\\ \partial_t \bar{w} + \overline{\widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w}} = \bar{Q}. \label{eq:q2} \end{gather} \end{subequations} Equations \eq{eq:QL2} compose the well-known quasilinear model \cite{Farrell:2003dm}. In isolated systems, both sets of equations conserve the enstrophy $\mc{Z}$ and the energy $\mc{E}$ (strictly speaking, free energy), which are defined as \begin{gather}\label{eq:ZE} \mc{Z} \doteq \frac{1}{2}\int \mathrm{d}^2x \, w^2 , \quad \mc{E} \doteq - \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d}^2x \, w \psi . \end{gather} It is convenient to rewrite \Eqs{eq:QL2} in terms of the ZF velocity $\bar{\vec{v}} = \vec{e}_x U$, whose only component $U(y, t)$ is $U = - \partial_y \bar{\psi}$. Specifically, one has $\smash{\widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \bar{w} = -(\partial_x \widetilde{\psi})(\partial^2_y U)}$, $\smash{\bar{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w}} = U \partial_x \widetilde{w}$, and $\smash{\overline{\widetilde{\vec{v}} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \widetilde{w}} = - \partial_y^2\, \overline{\widetilde{v}_x \widetilde{v}_y}}$. We will also assume $\widetilde{Q} = \widetilde{\xi} - \mu_{\rm dw} \widetilde{w}$ and $\smash{\bar{Q} = - \mu_{\rm zf} \bar{w}}$. Here, $\widetilde{\xi}$ is some external force with zero zonal average (eventually, we will assume it to be a white noise), and the constant coefficients $\mu_{\rm dw}$ and $\mu_{\rm zf}$ are intended to emulate the dissipation of DWs and ZFs caused by the external environment. Then, \Eqs{eq:QL2} become \begin{subequations} \label{eq:QL3} \begin{gather} \partial_t \widetilde{w} + U \partial_x \widetilde{w} + [\beta - (\partial_y^2 U)] \partial_x \widetilde{\psi} = \widetilde{\xi} - \mu_{\rm dw} \widetilde{w}, \label{eq:w3}\\ \partial_t U + \mu_{\rm zf} U + \partial_y \overline{\widetilde{v}_x \widetilde{v}_y} = 0. \label{eq:q3} \end{gather} \end{subequations} Equations \eq{eq:QL3} are the same model as the one that underlies the CE2. Although not exact, this model is useful because it captures key aspects of ZF dynamics, such as formation and merging of zonal jets \cite{Srinivasan:2012im, Parker:2014tb, Constantinou:2014fh}. Below, we use it to derive a formulation of DW-ZF interactions alternative to the CE2. \section{Wigner--Moyal formulation} \label{sec:Wigner_Moyal} \subsection{State vector} Consider a family of all reversible linear transformations of $\widetilde{w}(\vec{x}, t)$ of the form $\smash{\int \mathrm{d}^2x' \, K(\vec{x}, \vec{x}', t) \widetilde{w}(\vec{x}', t)}$. These transformations map $\widetilde{w}(\vec{x}, t)$ into some family of image functions. Since these functions are mutually equivalent up to an isomorphism, the resulting family can be viewed as a single object, a time-dependent ``state vector'' $\ket{\widetilde{w}}$. (Analogous definitions will be assumed also for $\smash{\ket{\widetilde{\psi}}}$ and $\smash{\ket{\widetilde{\xi}}}$.) The original function $\widetilde{w}(\vec{x},t)$ is then understood as a projection of $\ket{\widetilde{w}}$, namely, as its ``coordinate representation'' given by $\widetilde{w}(\vec{x}, t) = \braket{\vec{x} \| \widetilde{w}}$. Here, $\ket{\vec{x}}$ are the eigenstates of the position operator $\op{\vec{x}}$ normalized such that $\braket{ \vec{x}' \|\op{\vec{x}} \| \vec{x}}= \vec{x} \braket{\vec{x}'\|\vec{x}}= \vec{x}\, \delta(\vec{x}' - \vec{x})$. This definition of a field is similar to that used in quantum mechanics for describing probability amplitudes \cite{foot:qm}. Hence, it is convenient to describe the dynamics of $\ket{\widetilde{w}}$ using a quantumlike formalism. This is done as follows. In addition to the coordinate operator $\op{\vec{x}}$, we introduce a momentum (wave-vector) operator $\op{\vec{p}}$ such that, in the coordinate representation, $\op{\vec{p}} \doteq - i\vec{\nabla}$. Accordingly, $\ket{\widetilde{w}} = - \op{p}_{\rm D}^2 \ket{\widetilde{\psi}}$, where \begin{gather} \op{p}_{\rm D}^2 \doteq \op{p}^2 + L_{\rm D}^{-2}, \quad \op{p}^2 \doteq \op{\vec{p}} \cdot \op{\vec{p}}. \label{eq:pbar} \end{gather} Hence, \Eq{eq:w3} can be represented in the following form: \begin{gather} i \partial_t \ket{\widetilde{w}} = \op{H} \ket{\widetilde{w}} + i \ket{\widetilde{\xi}}. \label{eq:omega} \end{gather} The operator $\op{H}$ is given by \begin{gather}\label{eq:H} \op{H} \doteq - \beta \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} + \op{U} \op{p}_x + \op{U}'' \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} - i \mu_{\rm dw}. \end{gather} Also, $\smash{\op{U} \doteq U(\op{y},t)}$, and the prime above $U$ henceforth denotes $\partial_y$; in particular, $\smash{\op{U}'' \doteq \partial_y^2 \, U(\op{y},t)}$. \subsection{Generalized von Neumann equation} Let us express \Eq{eq:H} as $\smash{\op{H} = \op{H}_H + i \op{H}_A}$, where $\smash{\op{H}_H \doteq (\op{H} + \op{H}^\dag)/2}$ and $\smash{\op{H}_A \doteq (\op{H} - \op{H}^\dag)/(2i)}$ are the Hermitian and anti-Hermitian parts of $\op{H}$, correspondingly. Explicitly, these operators can be written as \begin{subequations} \begin{gather} \op{H}_H = - \beta \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} + \op{U} \op{p}_x + [\op{U}'' , \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} ]_+/2, \label{eq:D_H} \\ \op{H}_A = [\op{U}'' , \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} ]_- / (2i) - \mu_{\rm dw}, \label{eq:D_A} \end{gather} \end{subequations} where $[\cdot, \cdot ]_-$ denotes the commutator given by $\smash{[\hat{A},\hat{B}]_-= \hat{A} \hat{B} - \hat{B}\hat{A}}$ and $[\cdot, \cdot ]_+$ denotes the anti-commutator given by $\smash{[\hat{A},\hat{B}]_+= \hat{A} \hat{B} + \hat{B}\hat{A}}$. Let us also introduce a Hermitian operator $\smash{\op{W} \doteq \ket{\widetilde{w}}\bra{\widetilde{w}}}$, which, by analogy with quantum mechanics, is interpreted as the ``fluctuating-vorticity density'' operator. It is seen from \Eq{eq:omega} that $\op{W}$ satisfies \begin{gather} i\partial_t \op{W} = [\op{H}_H, \op{W}]_- + i[\op{H}_A, \op{W}]_+ + i\op{F}, \label{eq:Neumann} \end{gather} where $\smash{\op{F} \doteq \ket{\widetilde{\xi}} \bra{\widetilde{w}} + \ket{\widetilde{w}} \bra{\widetilde{\xi}}}$. In particular, taking the trace of this equation also gives an equation for the ``total number of DW quanta,'' $N \doteq \text{Tr}\,\op{W} = \int \mathrm{d}^2 x \, \braket{ \vec{x} \| \hat{W} \| \vec{x} } = \int \mathrm{d}^2 x \, \widetilde{w}^2 = \braket{\widetilde{w} \| \widetilde{w}} $; namely, \begin{gather} \dot{N} = 2\text{Tr}\,(\op{H}_A \op{W}) + \text{Tr}\,\op{F}. \end{gather} This indicates that $\op{H}_A$ determines the loss of quanta, or dissipation of DWs. [In particular, the term $\mu_{\rm dw}$ in \Eq{eq:D_A} is responsible for DW dissipation to the external environment, whereas the term $[\op{U}'' , \op{p}_x \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} ]_- / (2i) $ destroys DW quanta while conserving the total enstrophy, as will be discussed in \Sec{sec:maineq}.] Also, $\op{H}_H$ determines conservative dynamics of DWs and thus can be understood as the \textit{drifton Hamiltonian}. (The non-Hermitian operator $\op{H}$ will be attributed as the generalized Hamiltonian.) Notice that the distinction between dissipation and Hamiltonian effects remains unambiguous even beyond the GO approximation. Equation \eq{eq:Neumann} can be understood as a generalized von~Neumann equation akin to the one that commonly emerges in quantum mechanics. A standard approach to such equation is to project it on the phase space using the Weyl transform. Hence, we proceed as follows. (Readers who are not familiar with the Weyl calculus are encouraged to read \App{app:Weyl} before continuing further.) \subsection{Wigner--Moyal equation} \label{sec:wm} Let us introduce $W$ as the Weyl symbol of $\op{W}$, {i.e.,\/}\xspace \begin{gather} W(\vec{x}, \vec{p}, t) \doteq \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}} \braket{\vec{x} + \vec{s}/2\| \op{W} \| \vec{x} - \vec{s}/2}, \end{gather} which is real because $\op{W}$ is Hermitian. In quantum mechanics, a similar construct is known as the Wigner function \cite{Wigner:1932cz}, so one can readily identify the physical meaning of $W$. Specifically, in the regime when the ray approximation applies and dissipation is negligible, $W/(2\pi)^2$ represents the phase-space probability density of driftons [the numerical coefficient $(2\pi)^2$ comes from \Eq{eq:trace}], while beyond the GO limit it can be considered as a \textit{generalization} of this probability density \cite{foot:quasi}. Using the fact that $\widetilde{w}(\vec{x}, t)$ is real, one can also cast $W$ as \begin{gather}\label{eq:auxW} W(\vec{x}, \vec{p}, t) \doteq \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}}\, \widetilde{w}\!\left(\vec{x} + \frac{\vec{s}}{2}, t\right) \widetilde{w}\!\left(\vec{x} - \frac{\vec{s}}{2}, t\right), \end{gather} which also implies \begin{gather}\label{eq:rW} W(\vec{x}, \vec{p}, t) = W(\vec{x}, -\vec{p}, t). \end{gather} One can interpret the right-hand side of \Eq{eq:auxW} as the local spatial spectrum of the correlation function of $w$. Hence, $W$ will be called the \textit{DW spectral function}. By applying the Weyl transform to \Eq{eq:Neumann}, one obtains the following pseudo-differential equation \cite{foot:pseudo}: \begin{gather}\label{eq:aux1} \partial_t W = \moysin{H_H,W} + \moycos{H_A, W} + F. \end{gather} Here $\moysin{\cdot,\cdot}$ and $\moycos{\cdot, \cdot}$ are Moyal's ``sine bracket'' [\Eq{eq:sine_bracket}] and ``cosine bracket'' [\Eq{eq:cosine_bracket}]. The functions $H_H(y,\vec{p},t)$, $H_A(y,\vec{p},t)$, and $F(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$ are the Weyl symbols of $\op{H}_H$, $\op{H}_A$, and $\op{F}$, respectively. In particular, using \Eq{eq:Moyal} and the fact that $U$ is independent of $x$, one obtains \begin{gather} H_H = - \beta p_x/p_{\rm D}^2 + p_x U + \moycos{ U'' , p_x / p_{\rm D}^2}/2, \\ H_A = \moysin{ U'', p_x / p_{\rm D}^2} /2 - \mu_{\rm dw}, \end{gather} where $p_{\rm D}^2 \doteq p^2 + L_{\rm D}^{-2}$. By analogy with quantum mechanics, we call \Eq{eq:aux1} a Wigner--Moyal equation. Next, let us consider the zonal average of this equation, \begin{gather} \partial_t \xbar{W} = \moysin{H_H, \xbar{W} } + \moycos{H_A, \xbar{W} } + \xbarlong{F}, \label{eq:aux2} \end{gather} where $\xbar{W} = \xbar{W}(y, \vec{p}, t)$. We adopt the ergodic assumption, namely, that the zonal average is equivalent to the ensemble average [denoted $\smash{\eavr{\ldots}}$] over realizations of the random force $\widetilde{\xi}$ ({e.g.,\/}\xspace as done in \Ref{Parker:2013hy}). To calculate $\smash{\xbarlong{F} = \eavr{F}}$, consider integrating \Eq{eq:omega} on a time interval $(t_0, t)$. The result can be written as $\smash{ \ket{\widetilde{w}_t} = \ket{\widetilde{w}_{t_0}} + \ket{\delta \widetilde{w}_t} + \int_{t_0}^t \mathrm{d} t' \ket{\widetilde{\xi}_{t'}}, }$ where the indexes denote the times at which functions are evaluated, and $\smash{\ket{\delta \widetilde{w}_t} \doteq - i \int_{t_0}^t \mathrm{d} t' \op{H} \ket{\widetilde{w}_{t'}}}$. We assume \begin{gather} \eavr{ \widetilde{\xi}(\vec{x},t) \widetilde{\xi}(\vec{x}',t')} = \delta(t-t')\,\,\Xi \boldsymbol{(} (y + y')/2, \vec{x}-\vec{x}' \boldsymbol{)}, \end{gather} where $\Xi$ is a correlation function that is homogeneous in $x$ but not necessarily in $y$ \cite{Srinivasan:2012im,Parker:2014tb}. Since $\smash{\ket{\delta \widetilde{w}_t}}$ can be affected by $\ket{\widetilde{\xi}_{t'}}$ only if $t > t'$, one has $\smash{\eavr{\ket{\widetilde{\xi}_t}\bra{\delta \widetilde{w}_t}}} = 0$. Hence, \begin{align} \xbarlong{F}(y, \vec{p}) = & \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}} \eavr{ \bra{\vec{x}+\frac{\vec{s}}{2} } ( \ket{ \tilde{\xi}_t} \bra{ \tilde{w}_t } + \text{h.c.} ) \ket{ \vec{x}-\frac{\vec{s}}{2} } } \notag \\ = & \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}} \int_{t_0}^t \mathrm{d}t' \, \delta(t-t') \left[ \Xi(y, \vec{s}) + \Xi(y, -\vec{s}) \right] \notag \\ = & \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}} \left[ \Xi(y, \vec{s}) + \Xi(y, -\vec{s}) \right] \notag \\ = & \int \mathrm{d}^2 s \, \, \Xi(y, \vec{s}) \cos(\vec{p} \cdot \vec{s}), \end{align} where `$\text{h.c.}$' denotes ``Hermitian conjugate.'' In other words, once the correlation function $\Xi$ of $\widetilde{\xi}$ is specified, $\xbarlong{F}$ can be readily calculated as the Fourier image of $\Xi$. This concludes the calculation of the functions that determine the evolution of $\xbar{W}$ through \Eq{eq:aux2}. However, these functions generally depend on $U$, so an additional equation for $U$ is needed to make the theory self-consistent. This equation is derived as follows. \subsection{Equation for the zonal-flow velocity} Returning to \Eq{eq:q3}, we rewrite the nonlinear term~as \begin{align} \widetilde{v}_x \widetilde{v}_y & = - (\partial_y \widetilde{\psi}) (\partial_x \widetilde{\psi}) \notag\\ & = - \bra{ \vec{x}} \op{p}_y \ket{\widetilde{\psi}} \bra{ \widetilde{\psi}} \op{p}_x \ket{ \vec{x} } \notag \\ & = - \braket{ \vec{x} \| \op{p}_y \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} \op{W} \op{p}_{\rm D}^{-2} \op{p}_x \| \vec{x} } \notag \\ & = - \int \frac{d^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}\, \frac{p_y}{ p_{\rm D}^2} \star W \star \frac{p_x}{ p_{\rm D}^2}, \end{align} where we used \Eq{eq:weyl_x_rep2} in the last step. After introducing the averaged vorticity density $\xbar{W}$, \Eq{eq:q3} becomes \begin{equation} \partial_t U + \mu_{\rm zf} U = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}\, \frac{p_y}{p_{\rm D}^2} \star \xbar{W} \star \frac{p_x}{ p_{\rm D}^2} . \label{eq:auxU} \end{equation} Since $\xbar{W}$ is independent of $x$ and satisfies the condition \eq{eq:rW}, \Eq{eq:auxU} can also be written as \begin{equation} \partial_t U + \mu_{\rm zf} U = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}\, \frac{1}{p_{\rm D}^2} \star p_x p_y \xbar{W} \star \frac{1}{ p_{\rm D}^2} . \label{eq:auxU2} \end{equation} The combination of \Eqs{eq:aux2} and \eq{eq:auxU2} forms a closed set of equations that can be used to calculate the dynamics of $\xbar{W}$ and $U$ self-consistently. \subsection{Main equations and conservation laws} \label{sec:maineq} Let us slightly change the notation and summarize the above equations in the following form: \begin{subequations} \label{eq:phase_space} \begin{gather} \partial_t \xbar{W} = \moysin{ \mc{H}, \xbar{W}} + \moycos{ \Gamma, \xbar{W} } + \xbarlong{F} - 2\mu_{\rm dw} \xbar{W}, \label{eq:Moyal_Liouville} \\ \partial_t U+ \mu_{\rm zf} U = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{1}{ p_{\rm D}^2} \star p_x p_y \xbar{W} \star \frac{1}{ p_{\rm D}^2} \label{eq:flow}. \end{gather} \end{subequations} As a reminder, $\xbar{W}(y, \vec{p}, t)$ is the zonal-averaged spectral (or Wigner) function that describes DW turbulence, and $U(y, t)$ is the ZF velocity. Also, $\smash{\xbarlong{F} = \xbarlong{F}(y, \vec{p})}$ is determined by the correlation function of the external noise $\smash{\widetilde{\xi}}$ (\Sec{sec:wm}). We have also introduced $\mc{H} \doteq H_H$ and $\Gamma \doteq H_A + \mu_{\rm dw}$, or, explicitly, \begin{subequations} \label{eq:coefficients} \begin{gather} \mc{H}(y,\vec{p},t) = -\beta p_x / p_{\rm D}^2 + p_x U + \moycos{ U'' , p_x / p_{\rm D}^2} /2, \label{eq:Hamiltonian} \\ \Gamma(y, \vec{p},t) = \moysin{ U'', p_x / p_{\rm D}^2}/2 . \label{eq:Damping} \end{gather} \end{subequations} In \App{app:spectral}, we also present a spectral representation of these equations that can be used for a numerical implementation of the Wigner--Moyal formulation. The function $\mc{H}$ can be understood as the Weyl symbol of the drifton Hamiltonian, whereas $\Gamma$ determines dissipation of DW quanta that is caused specifically by DW interaction with ZFs. This is explained as follows. Since \Eqs{eq:phase_space} are \textit{exact} within the quasilinear approximation (modulo the ergodic assumption), they inherit the same conservation laws as the original quasilinear model given by \Eqs{eq:QL3}. Specifically, for isolated systems ($\xbarlong{F} = 0$ and $\mu_{\rm dw, zf} = 0$), \Eqs{eq:phase_space} and \eq{eq:coefficients} exactly conserve the \textit{total} enstrophy and energy [\Eqs{eq:ZE}] \begin{gather}\label{eq:invariants} \mc{Z} = \mc{Z}_{\rm dw} + \mc{Z}_{\rm zf}, \quad \mc{E} = \mc{E}_{\rm dw} + \mc{E}_{\rm zf} \end{gather} rather than their DW and ZF components. (A direct proof is given in \App{app:ee3}.) For completeness, we present expressions for these components: \begin{subequations} \label{eq:invariants_II} \begin{align} \mc{Z}_{\rm dw} & \doteq \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d}^2 x \, \widetilde{w}^2 = \frac{1}{2} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2 \pi)^2} \,\mathrm{d} y \, \xbar{W}, \label{eq:Zdw}\\ \mc{Z}_{\rm zf} & \doteq \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d} y \, \bar{w}^2 = \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d} y \, (U')^2, \label{eq:Zzf}\\ \mc{E}_{\rm dw} & \doteq - \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d}^2 x \, \widetilde{w} \widetilde{\psi} = \frac{1}{2} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2 \pi)^2}\,\mathrm{d} y \, \frac{\xbar{W}}{p_{\rm D}^2},\\ \mc{E}_{\rm zf} & \doteq - \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d} y \, \bar{w} \bar{\psi} = \frac{1}{2} \int \mathrm{d} y \, U^2, \end{align} \end{subequations} where we used \Eqs{eq:trace} and \eq{eq:int_everywhere} to derive the second set of equalities. According to \Eqs{eq:Zdw} and \eq{eq:trace}, note that the DW enstrophy $\mc{Z}_{\rm dw}$ and the total number of DW quanta $\smash{N \doteq \text{Tr}\,\op{W}}$ are the same up to a constant factor. The conservative equations \eq{eq:phase_space} and \eq{eq:coefficients}, which we attribute as the Wigner--Moyal formulation of DW-ZF interactions, constitute the main result of our work. This formulation can be understood as an alternative phase-space representation of the CE2 since it is derived from the same quasilinear model. However, the Wigner--Moyal formulation is arguably more intuitive than the CE2, namely, for two reasons: (i) Like in the tWKE, driftons are treated as particles, except now they are \textit{quantumlike} particles, {i.e.,\/}\xspace have nonzero wavelengths; hence, one is not constrained to the GO limit. (ii) Also, the separation between Hamiltonian effects and dissipation remains transparent and unambiguous even beyond the GO approximation. The Wigner--Moyal formulation elucidates the link between the WKE formalism and the CE2 and also helps make approximations rigorous by making them systematic. Below, these and other applications are discussed in further detail. \section{Growth rate of zonal flows} \label{sec:growth} \subsection{Basic equations} To demonstrate the convenience of the Wigner-Moyal formulation, let us apply it to rederive the rate of the linear zonostropic instability, {i.e.,\/}\xspace the growth rate of weak ZFs. Suppose a homogeneous equilibrium with zero ZF velocity and some DW spectral function $\mcu{W}(\vec{p})$. [As pointed out in \Sec{sec:wm}, the corresponding $\mcu{W}(\vec{p})/(2\pi)^2$ represents the phase-space probability distribution of driftons.] Consider small perturbations to this equilibrium; namely, \begin{align} U = \delta U(y,\vec{p},t), & \quad \delta U = \text{Re}\,(U_q e^{iqy + \gamma t}),\notag \\ \xbar{W} = \mcu{W}(\vec{p}) + \delta \xbar{W}(y,\vec{p},t), & \quad \delta \xbar{W} = \text{Re}\,[\xbar{W}_q(\vec{p}) e^{iqy + \gamma t}].\notag \end{align} Here, the constant $q$ serves as the modulation wave number, and the constant $\gamma$ is the instability rate to be found. The linearization of \Eq{eq:Moyal_Liouville} leads to \begin{multline} (\partial_t + 2\mu_{\rm dw}) \delta\xbar{W} +\moysin{ \beta p_x / p_{\rm D}^2 , \delta\xbar{W} \,} \\ = \moysin{ p_x \delta U , \mcu{W}} + \moysin{ \moycos{ \delta U'', p_x/ p_{\rm D}^2}/2 , \mcu{W}} \\ + \moycos{ \moysin{ \delta U'', p_x / p_{\rm D}^2}/2 , \mcu{W} } , \end{multline} where we substituted \Eqs{eq:coefficients}. The brackets can be calculated using \Eqs{app:brackets_exp}. Hence, we obtain \begin{multline} \left[ i (\gamma + 2 \mu_{\rm dw}) + \beta p_x \left(\frac{1}{ p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2} - \frac{1}{ p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} \right) \right] \xbar{W}_q \\ = (\mcu{W}_{+q} - \mcu{W}_{-q}) \left[ \frac{p_x q^2}{2} \left(\frac{1}{ p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2} + \frac{1}{ p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} \right) - p_x \right] U_q \\ + \frac{ p_x q^2}{2}(\mcu{W}_{+q} + \mcu{W}_{-q}) \left(\frac{1}{p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2} - \frac{1}{p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} \right) U_q, \end{multline} where we assume the notation $\smash{A_{\pm q} \doteq A(\vec{p} \pm \vec{e}_y q/2)}$ for any $A$. Solving for $\xbar{W}_q$ in terms of $U_q$ leads to \begin{multline} \xbar{W}_q = \frac{ i p_x p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2 p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} { (\gamma + 2 \mu_{\rm dw})p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2 p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2 + 2 i \beta q p_x p_y} \\ \times \left[\mcu{W}_{+q} \left(1- \frac{q^2}{ p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2} \right) - \mcu{W}_{-q} \left(1 - \frac{q^2}{ p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} \right) \right] U_q . \end{multline} Then, \Eq{eq:flow} yields \begin{gather} (\gamma + \mu_{\rm zf}) e^{iqy} U_q = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{1}{ p_{\rm D}^2} \star p_x p _y e^{i q y} \xbar{W}_q \star \frac{1}{ p_{\rm D}^2}. \end{gather} Due to \Eq{app:moyal_exp}, this can be simplified as follows: \begin{gather} \label{eq:flow_perturbation} (\gamma + \mu_{\rm zf}) U_q = i q \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{p_x p_y}{ p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2 p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2}\, \xbar{W}_q. \end{gather} After substituting the expression for $\xbar{W}_q$, one gets \begin{multline} \gamma + \mu_{\rm zf} = \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}\, \frac{ q p_x^2 p_y} { (\gamma + 2 \mu_{\rm dw})p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2 p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2 + 2 i \beta q p_x p_y} \\ \times \left[ \mcu{W}_{-q} \left(1 - \frac{q^2}{ p_{\mathrm{D},-q}^2} \right) - \mcu{W}_{+q}\left(1- \frac{q^2}{ p_{\mathrm{D},+q}^2} \right) \right]. \label{eq:dispersion} \end{multline} As expected, this dispersion relation coincides with that obtained using the CE2 formalism \cite{Srinivasan:2012im}. Notably, the dependence of the integrand on $\mcu{W}_{\pm q}$ makes the expression similar to dispersion relations that emerge in quantum mechanics; for instance, cf. Ref.~\cite[Sec.~40]{Lifshitz:1981ui}. \subsection{Zonal flows with nonzero group velocity} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.56]{fig_solutions} \caption{Numerical solutions of the dispersion relation \eq{eq:disp_rel} for different $k_y$ with fixed $k_x = 1$, $q=0.1$, $\beta=1$, $L_{\rm D}=1$, $\mu_{\rm dw, zf}=0$, and $\mcu{N}=1$. The solutions shown in subfigures (a)-(d) correspond to $k_y=0.3$, $k_y=0.5$, $k_y=0.9$, and $k_y=2.0$, respectively. In the interval $0.33 \lesssim \|k_y\| \lesssim 0.82 $, the solutions $\gamma$ can be complex-valued. With the same forcing and same fixed parameters, similar regimes can also be observed in the barotropic limit $(L_{\rm D} \to \infty )$ or in the case of nonzero dissipation. } \label{fig:solutions} \end{figure} As a side note, it is commonly thought that ZFs only grow in situ; {i.e.,\/}\xspace $\text{Re}\,\gamma > 0$ with $\text{Im}\, \gamma = 0$. There have been questions over whether it is possible to have unstable zonal modes at nonzero $\text{Im}\,\gamma$, which implies nonzero group velocity \cite{Bakas:2015iy}. Here we show, by presenting an example, that the answer is yes. Let us consider the following steady state: \begin{multline} \mcu{W} = (2\pi)^2 \mcu{N} [ \delta( p_x- k_x)\delta( p_y- k_y) + \delta( p_x+ k_x)\delta( p_y + k_y) \\ + \delta( p_x+ k_x)\delta( p_y- k_y) + \delta( p_x- k_x)\delta( p_y+ k_y) ]/4. \end{multline} After integrating, \Eq{eq:dispersion} can be cast as follows: \begin{multline} 0 =\gamma +\mu_{\rm zf} - \frac{ X \mcu{N} k_x^2 }{v_{gy} k_{\mathrm{D}}^4 } \left(1- \frac{q^2}{ k_{\mathrm{D}}^2 } \right) \\ \times \sum_{ n = -1,1 } \frac{ n( k_y+nq/2 ) k_{\mathrm{D},+2nq}^2 / k_{\mathrm{D}}^2 } { X^2 k_{\mathrm{D},+2nq}^4 / k_{\mathrm{D}}^4 + (k_y+nq/2)^2/k_y^2 }, \label{eq:disp_rel} \end{multline} where $v_{gy} \doteq 2 \beta k_x k_y / k^4_{\rm D }$ is the DW group velocity in the absence of ZFs, $k_{\mathrm{D},\pm q}^2 \doteq k_x^2 + (k_y \pm q/2)^2 + L_{\rm D}^{-2}$, and $X \doteq (\gamma+2 \mu_{\rm dw}) / (q v_{gy})$. Numerical solutions of \Eq{eq:disp_rel} are presented in \Fig{fig:solutions}. As shown, solutions for $\gamma$ are complex over some interval of $k_y$. This counterexample shows the existence of ``traveling" unstable ZF modes. Additional insights on this phenomenon can be obtained by considering the limit, where $\mu_{\rm dw, zf} \ll \|\gamma\|$ and $q \ll k_y$. In this case, \Eq{eq:disp_rel} simplifies to \begin{equation} 0 = X \left[ 1-8\sigma \frac{X^2-1}{(X^2+1)^2} \right] + \mc{O}(q^2), \label{eq:disp_X} \end{equation} where \begin{equation} \sigma \doteq \frac{\mcu{N} k_x^2 }{8 v^2_{gy} k_{\mathrm{D}}^4 } \left(1- \frac{4 k_y^2}{ k_{\mathrm{D}}^2 } \right). \label{eq:disp_GO} \end{equation} One may consider this as the GO limit of \Eq{eq:disp_rel}. Equation \eq{eq:disp_X} predicts four nontrivial solutions for $X$, which are given by $X^2 = -1+4 \sigma \pm 4 [\sigma(\sigma-1)]^{1/2}$. Different regimes for the solutions can be deduced. When $\sigma \geq 1$, the solutions $\gamma$ are purely real. For the parameters in \Fig{fig:solutions}, this regime corresponds to $ \|k_y\| \lesssim 0.33 $. In the interval $0 < \sigma < 1$ corresponding to $0.33 \lesssim \|k_y\| \lesssim 0.82 $, $\gamma$ is complex-valued. In the interval $-1/8 \leq \sigma \leq 0$, which corresponds to $0.82 \lesssim \|k_y\| \lesssim 1.07$, the solutions are purely imaginary. Finally, in the interval $\sigma < -1/8$ corresponding to $ \|k_y\| \gtrsim 1.07 $, two solutions $\gamma$ are purely imaginary, and two other solutions are purely real. The different regimes identified by solving \Eq{eq:disp_X} are consistent with the observed numerical solutions of the exact dispersion relation \eq{eq:disp_rel}. In the next section, we will explore the GO limit of the DW-ZF interactions in more detail. \section{Geometrical-optics limit and the wave kinetic equation} \label{sec:WKE} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{fig_U} \caption{The ZF velocity $U(y, t)$ obtained by numerically integrating the WKE \eq{eq:WKE} for $\mc{H}$ and $\Gamma$ of two types: (a) our model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_II}]; (b) the tWKE model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_III}]. Both simulations used the same parameters and initial conditions. Small initial values for $\xbar{W}$ and $U$ were randomly assigned such that \Eq{eq:rW} was satisfied. The parameters used are: $\beta = 1$, $ L_{\rm D} = 1$, $\mu_{\rm dw,zf} = 0.1$, and $\smash{\xbarlong{F} = 4 \pi\delta(\|\vec{p}\|-1)}$. Equation \eq{eq:WKE_drift} was discretized in a $[-39,39] \times [-2,2] \times [-4,4]$ phase space using a discontinuous-Galerkin (DG) method \cite{Liu:2000ee} on a uniformly-spaced Cartesian grid with $80 \times 24 \times 48$ cells while \Eq{eq:WKE_zonal} was discretized on a subset of this grid. Time advancement was done using an explicit third-order strong-stability-preserving Runge-Kutta algorithm \cite{Gottlieb:2001iy}. The solution was expanded locally in each cell as a sum of piecewise polynomials of degree one. At cell interfaces, an upwind numerical flux was used in \Eq{eq:WKE_drift} and a centered numerical flux was used in \Eq{eq:WKE_zonal}. Higher-order spatial derivatives such as $U''$ and $U'''$ were computed using the Recovery-based DG method \cite{vanLeer:2007tc}. For numerical stability, small hyperviscosity was added into the simulations, {e.g.,\/}\xspace as done in \Ref{Parker:2014fc}. Specifically, the terms $\smash{-2\nu (p_x^2+p_y^2) \xbar{W}+(\nu/2) \partial_y^2 \xbar{W} }$ and $\smash{-\nu \partial_y^4 U}$ with $\nu= 0.001$ were added to the right-hand side of \Eqs{eq:WKE_drift} and \eq{eq:WKE_zonal}, respectively \cite{foot:hyperviscosity}. } \label{fig:plotU} \end{figure} Let us assume that the characteristic wavelengths for ZFs and DWs are $\lambda_{\rm zf}$ and $\lambda_{\rm dw}$, respectively, and \begin{gather} \epsilon \doteq \mathrm{max} \left( \frac{\lambda_{\rm dw}}{\lambda_{\rm zf}}, \frac{L_{\rm D}}{\lambda_{\rm zf}} \right) \ll 1. \label{eq:GO_condition_1} \end{gather} Hence, the following estimates will be adopted: \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \partial_y \xbar{W} \backsim \lambda_{\rm zf}^{-1} \xbar{W}, & \quad \partial_{\vec{p}} \xbar{W} \backsim \lambda_{\rm dw} \xbar{W}, \\ \partial_y H \backsim \lambda_{\rm zf}^{-1} H, & \quad \partial_{\vec{p}} H \backsim L_{\rm D} H, \end{aligned} \end{equation} where $H$ denotes both $\mc{H}$ and $\Gamma$. (The latter estimate is given for the \textit{maximum} of $\partial_{\vec{p}}H$, which is realized at $p \sim L_D^{-1}$ \cite{foot:barotropic}.) This gives \begin{gather} \frac{\partial^n H}{\partial y^n}\,\frac{\partial^n \xbar{W}}{\partial p_y^n} \backsim \left(\frac{\lambda_{\rm dw}}{\lambda_{\rm zf}}\right)^n \!\!H\xbar{W} \, \lesssim \epsilon^n H\xbar{W},\\ \frac{\partial^n H}{\partial p_y^n}\,\frac{\partial^n \xbar{W}}{\partial y^n} \backsim \left(\frac{L_{\rm D}}{\lambda_{\rm zf}}\right)^n \!\!H\xbar{W} \, \lesssim \epsilon^n H\xbar{W}. \end{gather} Then, using the lowest-order approximations of the Moyal products (\App{app:Weyl}), \Eqs{eq:phase_space} reduce to \begin{subequations} \label{eq:WKE} \begin{gather} \partial_t \xbar{W} = \{ \mc{H}, \xbar{W} \} + 2 \Gamma \xbar{W} + \xbarlong{F} - 2 \mu_{\rm dw} \xbar{W}, \label{eq:WKE_drift} \\ \partial_t U+ \mu_{\rm zf} \, U = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 p}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{p_x p_y \xbar{W}}{ p_{\rm D}^4}, \label{eq:WKE_zonal} \end{gather} \end{subequations} where $\{ \cdot, \cdot \}$ is the canonical Poisson bracket \eq{eq:Poisson_bracket} and \begin{subequations} \label{eq:WKE_II} \begin{gather} \mc{H} \simeq -\beta p_x / p_{\rm D}^2 + p_x U + p_x U'' / p_{\rm D}^2, \label{eq:WKE_Hamiltonian} \\ \Gamma \simeq \{ U'', p_x/p_{\rm D}^2\}/2 = - p_x p_y U'''/ p_{\rm D}^4. \label{eq:WKE_Damping} \end{gather} \end{subequations} One may recognize \Eq{eq:WKE_drift} as a variation of the WKE, so we attribute \Eqs{eq:WKE} and \eq{eq:WKE_II} as the \textit{WKE limit} of the Wigner-Moyal formulation. Clearly, $\mc{H}$ acts as the drifton ray Hamiltonian while $\Gamma$ acts as the corresponding dissipation rate. [The factors of two in \Eq{eq:WKE_drift} are due to the fact that $\xbar{W}$ is quadratic in the DW amplitude.] In other words, $\omega(y, \vec{p}, t) \doteq \mc{H} + i\Gamma-i\mu_{\rm dw}$ can be viewed as the local complex frequency of DWs with given wave vector~$\vec{p}$. Notice that our WKE differs from the tWKE, which assumes a simpler dispersion of DWs; namely, \begin{subequations} \label{eq:WKE_III} \begin{gather} \mc{H} = - \beta p_x/p_{\rm D}^2 + p_x U, \\ \Gamma = 0. \end{gather} \end{subequations} Although the difference is only in the high-order derivatives of $U$, these terms remain important for various reasons. For example, in the Hamiltonian $\mc{H}$, $U''$ can be comparable to $\beta$ (as is sometimes the case in geophysics \cite{Vasavada:2005gs}). Also, consider the following. In isolated systems, the tWKE is $\partial_t \xbar{W} = \{\mc{H}, \xbar{W}\,\}$, so it conserves DW quanta, or, in other words, the DW enstrophy $\mc{Z}_{\rm dw}$ [\Eq{eq:Zdw}]. At the same time, the ZF enstrophy $\mc{Z}_{\rm zf}$ [\Eq{eq:Zzf}] generally evolves, so the total enstrophy $\mc{Z} = \mc{Z}_{\rm dw} + \mc{Z}_{\rm zf}$ does too. This is in contradiction with the gHME, which conserves $\mc{Z}$, and can lead to overestimating the ZF velocity and shear generated by DW turbulence \cite{foot:N}. In contrast to the tWKE, our formulation is free from such issues because \Eqs{eq:WKE} and \eq{eq:WKE_II} exactly conserve both $\mc{Z}$ and $\mc{E}$ (\App{app:ee4}). Note that, in order to retain this conservation property, it is necessary to keep both $U'''$ and $U''$ in \Eqs{eq:WKE_II}. In this sense, \textit{\Eqs{eq:WKE} and \eq{eq:WKE_II} represent the simplest GO model that is physically meaningful in the nonlinear regime}. This is in agreement with \Ref{foot:Parker}, where a similar conclusion was made based on comparing the linear zonostrophic instability rate predicted by the CE2. (As a note on terminology, \Ref{foot:Parker} refers to the tWKE [\Eqs{eq:WKE} and \eq{eq:WKE_III}] as the ``Asymptotic WKE," {i.e.,\/}\xspace the limit obtained when one assumes the ZFs are asymptotically large scale. Also, \Ref{foot:Parker} refers to \Eqs{eq:WKE} and \eq{eq:WKE_II} as ``CE2-GO.") The numerical results presented in Figs.~\ref{fig:plotU}-\ref{fig:energy} illustrate the importance of the difference between our WKE and the tWKE [subfigures (a) and (b), respectively]. As seen in \Fig{fig:plotU}, while our WKE model predicts ZFs with a particular $\lambda_{\rm zf}$, the scale of ZFs predicted by tWKE is determined by nothing but the grid size that is used in simulations. This is because the tWKE predicts that the rate of the zonostrophic instability $\gamma$ (\Sec{sec:growth}) scales linearly with the ZF wave number $q$, so ZFs are produced at the largest $q$ that is allowed (cf. \Ref{foot:Parker}). \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{fig_enstrophy} \caption{The total, DW, and ZF enstrophies obtained by numerically integrating the WKE \eq{eq:WKE} for $\mc{H}$ and $\Gamma$ of two types: (a) our model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_II}]; (b) the tWKE model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_III}]. The yellow lines show the total enstrophy that one would get due to the external force $\xbarlong{F}$ at $\mu_{\rm dw, zf} = 0$. The initial conditions and simulation parameters are the same as in \Fig{fig:plotU}.} \label{fig:enstrophy} \end{figure} \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{fig_energy} \caption{The total, DW, and ZF energies obtained by numerically integrating the WKE \eq{eq:WKE} for $\mc{H}$ and $\Gamma$ of two types: (a) our model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_II}]; (b) the tWKE model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_III}]. The yellow lines show the total energy that one would get due to the external force $\xbarlong{F}$ at $\mu_{\rm dw, zf} = 0$. The initial conditions and simulation parameters are the same as in \Fig{fig:plotU}.} \label{fig:energy} \end{figure} Consider also the enstrophy plots in \Fig{fig:enstrophy}. To aid our discussion, we added plots of the enstrophy $\mc{Z}_{\rm ext}$ that the external forcing $\smash{\xbarlong{F}}$ injects into the DW-ZF system; namely, $\smash{\mc{Z}_{\rm ext} = (t/2) (2\pi)^{-2} \int \mathrm{d}y \, \mathrm{d}^2p \, \xbarlong{F}}$. Within our model, the total enstrophy $\mc{Z}$ remains always smaller than $\mc{Z}_{\rm ext}$, which is natural, since the simulation is done for $\mu_{\rm dw, zf} > 0$. In contrast, the tWKE model predicts that $\mc{Z}$ can surpass $\mc{Z}_{\rm ext}$, which is unphysical. In addition, the values of the ZF and total enstrophies predicted by the tWKE are several times larger than those predicted by our model. For the sake of completeness, \Fig{fig:energy} also presents the corresponding energies and the energy $\mc{E}_{\rm ext}$ introduced by the external force, $\smash{\mc{E}_{\rm ext} = (t/2)} \smash{(2\pi)^{-2} \int \mathrm{d}y \, \mathrm{d}^2p} \, \smash{\xbarlong{F} /p_{\rm D}^2}$. In both cases, $\mc{E}(t) \leq \mc{E}_{\rm ext}(t)$, which is in agreement with the fact that both models conserve the total energy of an isolated system. Still, the tWKE predicts very different results quantitatively even though the tWKE model [\Eqs{eq:WKE_III}] is seemingly close to ours [\Eqs{eq:WKE_II}]. \section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusions} The goal of this paper is to propose a new formulation of DW-ZF interactions that is more accurate than the tWKE and, simultaneously, more intuitive than the CE2. We adopt the same model [\Eqs{eq:QL3}] that was previously applied to derive the CE2. Then, we manipulate it using the Weyl calculus to produce a phase-space formulation of DW-ZF interactions. The resulting formulation [\Eqs{eq:phase_space} and \eq{eq:coefficients}] is akin to a quantum kinetic theory and involves a pseudodifferential Wigner--Moyal equation. To facilitate its numerical implementation in the future, we also present an integral representation of our main equations (\App{app:spectral}). On one hand, this Wigner--Moyal formulation can be understood as an alternative representation to the CE2 since both models use the same assumptions. For example, we show that it leads to the same linear growth rate of weak ZFs as that obtained from the CE2 (\Sec{sec:growth}). On the other hand, the Wigner--Moyal formulation is arguably more intuitive than the CE2 for two reasons: (i) it permits treating driftons as particles ({i.e.,\/}\xspace as objects traveling in phase space), except now they are \textit{quantumlike} particles with nonzero wavelengths; and (ii) the separation between Hamiltonian effects and dissipation remains unambiguous even beyond the GO limit. Compared to the tWKE, the new approach is also more precise because (i)~it captures effects beyond the GO limit and (ii)~even in the GO limit, it predicts corrections to the tWKE that emerge from the newly found corrections to the drifton dispersion (\Sec{sec:WKE}). These corrections are essential as they allow DW-ZF enstrophy exchange, which is not included in the tWKE. By deriving the GO limit from first principles, we eliminate this discrepancy and arrive at a model that exactly conserves the total enstrophy (as opposed to the DW enstrophy conservation predicted by the tWKE) and the total energy, in agreement with the underlying gHME. We also illustrate the substantial difference between the GO limit of our WKE model and the tWKE using numerical simulations. This work can be expanded at least in two directions. First, the difference between the Wigner--Moyal formulation and the newly proposed WKE can be assessed quantitatively using numerical simulations. Second, the analytic methods we proposed here can be extended to other turbulence models, such as those in \Refs{Anderson:2002ks, Anderson:2006cf}. The anticipated benefit is that more accurate equations would be derived that would respect fundamental conservation laws that existing theories may be missing otherwise. The authors thank J.~A. Krommes for valuable discussions. This work was supported by the U.S. DOE through Contract Nos. DE-AC02-09CH11466 and DE-AC52-07NA27344, by the NNSA SSAA Program through DOE Research Grant No. DE-NA0002948, and by the U.S. DOD NDSEG Fellowship through Contract No. 32-CFR-168a.
\section{Introduction} \label{sec.intro} The quantum description of physical and chemical processes customarily pivots around the determination of the eigenenergies and eigenfunctions of the system. Except in the particular case of separable Hamiltonians, one has to resort to numerical computation for this important task, and numerous procedures have been designed for this end~\cite{Berezin91, Marchildon02, Corey93}. Moreover, this problem is particularly demanding in the classical limit, i.e.~$\hbar \rightarrow 0$, where the density of states is high, and also in realistic systems, which usually exhibit a classically chaotic dynamical behavior even for modest values of the excitation energy. When this happens in time--reversal systems, most eigenfunctions present a very complex nodal pattern, that can only be adequately described by using large basis sets, usually making computations extremely time--consuming. In this respect, semiclassical methods \cite{Brack97} can be very helpful, both at the computational level and also providing valuable help in the understanding of the correspondence between classical and quantum mechanics. These methods are based on the classical underlying properties of the system, and constitute a cornerstone in the study of classically chaotic systems. In the presence of chaos, the traditional Wentzel--Kramers--Brillouin~(WKB) or Einstein--Brillouin--Keller~(EBK) approximations cannot be applied due to the absence of the invariant tori~\cite{Brack97, Gutzwiller90} that provide the support for the corresponding wave functions. Nevertheless, classical periodic orbits (POs) have a profound impact on the (quantum) density of states of the system, as shown by Gutzwiller in 1971 with his celebrated (semiclassical) trace formula~\cite{Gutzwiller90}. Unfortunately, the application of this expression to the calculation of highly excited states is very limited, due to the exponential proliferation in the number of POs as energy increases. The importance of unstable POs for some individual eigenfunctions of classically chaotic systems is clear after the seminal work of Heller on \textit{scarring}~\cite{Heller84}. In that paper, the author coined the term \textit{scar} to refer to an enhanced localization (over the statistically expected value~\cite{Shnirelman74}) of the quantum probability in some eigenfunctions along periodic trajectories. Actually, scars are associated with Bohr--Sommerfeld (BS) quantized short POs. However, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition for their appearance which, as a consequence, cannot be predicted. Scars have been studied theoretically in quantum billiards \cite{Kwon11}, anharmonic molecular potentials~\cite{Bacic86, Tennyson86, Farantos87, Ezra89, Henderson90, Arranz97,Arranz98, Arranz10, Borondo06, Benitez13, Parraga13, Revuelta15, Henderson92}, or quantum maps~\cite{Casati95}. Also, they have been observed in the laboratory in different microwave~\cite{Nockel97, Stockmann06}, optical fibers~\cite{Michel07}, microcavities \cite{Lee02,Kwak15}, solid state devices~\cite{Wilkinson96}, graphene \cite{Huang09,Xu13} or ultracold atoms experiments~\cite{lar13}. Several important results on scarring have been reported in the literature. For example, Bogomolny demonstrated how scars are in general `distributed' among groups of individual eigenfunctions, and scarred functions can also be produced in the semiclassical limit by averaging of a number of neighbor eigenfunctions around the BS quantized energies~\cite{Bogomolny88} (see also Ref.~\onlinecite{Polavieja94}). Later, Berry~\cite{Berry89} demonstrated by using Wigner functions that this localization does not only take place in configuration space but also in phase space. Prado and Keating~\cite{Prado01} showed that the scarring localization is enhanced in the presence of bifurcations in systems with mixed dynamics, giving rise to the so called \textit{superscars}. Going beyond the influence of POs in the quantum mechanics of chaotic systems, the effect of the recurrences over homoclinic and heteroclinic quantized circuits has also been reported in the literature~\cite{Tomsovic93, Tomsovic97,Wisniacki01,Wisniacki04,Wisniacki05,Wisniacki06}. Finally, scarring in open systems has been described in the literature~\cite{Wisniacki08,Novaes09}. Several methods have been proposed to construct localized wave functions over unstable POs, usually known as ``scar functions''. For example, Polavieja \textit{et al.} averaged groups of eigenfunctions by performing a short--time quantum evolution~\cite{Polavieja94}, and Vergini and coworkers~\cite{Vergini00a,Vergini00b} combined PO resonances by minimizing energy dispersion, including then the semiclassical dynamics around the scarring PO up to the Ehrenfest time~\cite{Vergini01}. More recently, Sibert \textit{et al.}~\cite{Sibert08} and Revuelta \textit{et al.}~\cite{Revuelta12, Revuelta15} applied these ideas to systems with smooth potentials, and Vagov \textit{et al.}~\cite{Vagov09} extended the asymptotic boundary layer method to calculate stable microresonator localized modes over unstable POs. Scar functions have a very interesting and useful property, aside from their spatial localization: they also present a very low dispersion in energy. We have recently used this fact to construct an extremely efficient basis set for the diagonalization of the Hamiltonian matrix in a coupled quartic oscillator with a high degree of chaoticity. As demonstrated in Ref.~\onlinecite{Revuelta13}, the system eigenfunctions can be obtained from a very small number of scar functions, i.e. POs, thus getting around somehow the exponential growth fate of Gutzwiller theory. This is based in the replacement of the longer POs by the interaction of the shorter ones. This reduces dramatically the basis size, which in our method only increases linearly with the number of accurately calculated eigenfunctions. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the feasibility of extending the method reported in Ref.~\onlinecite{Revuelta13} to systems of chemical interest with a mixed phase space, where trajectories with regular and irregular motions coexist at the same energy. For this purpose, we show how to construct an efficient semiclassical basis set formed by localized wave functions, using the method originally reported in Refs.~\onlinecite{Revuelta12,Revuelta15} that is used to compute the vibrational eigenstates of the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing system. The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec.system}, we introduce the system under study. In Sec.~\ref{sec.method} we describe the method that we have developed for the computation of the eigenenergies and eigenfunctions of a system presenting coexisting regions of regular and irregular motion, using a basis set of scar wave functions localized along stable (the so called ``tube'' functions) and unstable POs (``scar'' functions). Then, in Sec.~\ref{sec.results} we present the results that have been obtained and the corresponding discussion. Finally, in Sec.~\ref{sec.concl} we summarize the main conclusions of this work and the outlook for further research. \section{System}\label{sec.system} In this section we briefly describe the characteristics of the dynamical system that we have chosen to study, i.e.~the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing molecule, that are relevant for this work. We first discuss the effective vibrational Hamiltonian and the potential energy surface of the system in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.hamil}. Then, Subsec.~\ref{subsec.chaos} is devoted to the discussion of the dynamical characteristics of the vibrations of this molecule. In particular, we examine the chaoticity of the system as a function of the energy using Poincar\'e surfaces of section (SOS). Finally, we conclude the section by presenting in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.bd} the bifurcation-continuation diagram of the most relevant POs of the system taking the excitation energy as parameter. These POs will be used later in the construction of a semiclassical basis set for the computation of the vibrational eigenstates of the molecule (see discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec.results} below). \subsection{Hamiltonian}\label{subsec.hamil} The system under study is the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing molecule which has been extensively studied in the past, especially in connection with quantum chaos \cite{Bacic86, Tennyson86, Ezra89, Henderson90, Arranz97,Arranz98, Arranz10, Borondo06, GM08, Murgida10, Benitez13, GM14, Murgida15, Revuelta15}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_01.pdf} \caption{Potential energy surface for the LiNC/LiCN molecular system represented as black contour lines separated~1000~cm$^{-1}$ in the Jacobi coordinates defined in the inset at the bottom-left corner. It presents two wells associated to the two existing stable linear isomers, LiNC and LiCN. Their positions are indicated with black squares, and their geometries sketched in the insets at the top. The minimum energy path connecting these two wells passing through the saddle point, represented as a black triangle, has been plotted superimposed in dashed red line. } \label{fig.1} \end{figure} This system exhibits a very floppy motion in the angular coordinate and, as a consequence, chaos sets in at very moderate values of the excitation energy. The corresponding vibrational motion can be adequately modeled with the following rotationless ($J=0$) Hamiltonian \begin{equation} {\cal H}=\frac{P_R^2}{2\mu_1}+\frac{P_r^2}{2\mu_2}+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\mu_1 R^2} + \frac{1}{\mu_2 r^2} \right) P_\vartheta^2 + {\cal V}(R,r,\vartheta) \label{eq.0} \end{equation} in Jacobi coordinates, where $R$ and $\vartheta$ describe the Li--CN stretching and Li--C--N bending motions, respectively, as sketched in the bottom--left corner of Fig.~\ref{fig.1}, while~$r$ accounts for the C--N motion. The associated reduced masses are~$\mu_1~=~m_{\rm Li} m_{\rm CN}/m_{\rm LiCN}$ and~$\mu_2=m_{\rm C} m_{\rm N}/m_{\rm CN}$, with~$m_{\rm LiCN}=m_{\rm Li}+m_{\rm C}+m_{\rm N}$ and~$m_{\rm CN}=m_{\rm C}+m_{\rm N}$. For all practical purposes, the motion in the~$r$ coordinate plays no role due to the strength of the C--N triple bound, as reported by some of us elsewhere~\cite{GM14}. Thus, one can keep frozen the~$r$ coordinate at its equilibrium value, $r_e=2.186$~a.u., since the associated frequency is very high, and then decouples very effectively from the rest of the modes in the molecule~\cite{GM14}. Consequently, we can use the following equivalent two--degrees--of--freedom Hamiltonian \begin{equation} {\cal H}=\frac{P_R^2}{2\mu_1}+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\mu_1 R^2} + \frac{1}{\mu_2 r_e^2} \right) P_\vartheta^2 + V(R,\vartheta) , \label{eq.1} \end{equation} which still is able to retain all the complexity of the molecule under study, thus yielding at the same time results that are not only qualitative but also quantitative similar~\cite{GM14}. The two--dimensional potential energy surface, $V (R, \vartheta)$, has been taken from the literature~\cite{Essers82}, and it is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.1} as a contours plot. Here, we have plotted for simplicity only the fundamental domain~$\vartheta \in (0,\pi)$ rad which results from the rotational symmetry. As can be seen, the potential presents two wells at~$\vartheta=0$ and $\pi$ rad, respectively. They correspond to the two stable linear isomers, LiCN and LiNC, existing for the molecule; their geometries are sketched at the top of the figure. These two isomers are separated by a modest energy barrier of only~$E_{\rm SP}~\sim$~3454.0~cm$^{-1}$ at the saddle point of the potential energy surface, where~$(R,\vartheta)_{\rm SP}= (4.22 \mbox{ a.u.}, 0.918 \mbox{ rad})$. The equilibrium point at the top of this barrier generates at higher energies an unstable PO that obviously plays a central role for the reactivity of the system~\cite{Revuelta15}. Finally, the minimum energy path (MEP) connecting the two potential minima has been plotted superimposed in the figure as a dashed red line. \subsection{Chaos in the LiNC/LiCN system}\label{subsec.chaos} The dynamics of our model for the vibrations of the LiNC/LiCN molecule can be efficiently monitored by using Poincar\'e SOS, taking the MEP, $R_e(\vartheta)$, as the sectioning surface~\cite{Ezra89}. This choice maximizes the dynamical information obtained for the motion in the angular coordinate. However, this does not define an area preserving map satisfying the Louiville theorem~\cite{LL10}. This inconvenience can be easily overcome by making the following canonical transformation \begin{eqnarray} \rho =&R-R_e(\vartheta), &\quad \psi=\vartheta, \nonumber \\ P_\rho =&P_R, &\quad P_\psi=P_\vartheta+ P_R[dR_e(\vartheta)/d\vartheta]. \label{eq.PSOS} \end{eqnarray} Some representative results, computed by numerically solving the equations of motion derived from Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq.1}, using the Shampine and Gordon algorithm~\cite{Shampine75}, for different values of the excitation energy, $E$, are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.2}. As can be seen, the chaoticity of the system increases with the energy. At low energies, for example $E$=1000 cm$^{-1}$ as chosen in Fig.~\ref{fig.2}~(a), the vibrational motion takes place in the LiNC well and it is regular, being then confined in invariant tori. As higher energies are considered, e.g. panels (b) and (c), the invariant tori progressively start to break down, this paving the road for widespread chaotic motion, as dictated by the celebrated Kolmogorov--Arnold--Moser (KAM) theorem~\cite{Arnold78}. Comparison of results in panels~(b) and~(c) clearly indicates that the dynamics in the LiNC well gets increasingly more chaotic as the excitation energy grows. In panel (c), which corresponds to an energy above the level of the less stable LiCN minimum well, motion also takes place in that region of the phase space. Also, a conspicuous accumulation of points next to the LiNC regular regions is observed. This is due to the existence a cantorus, as thoughrouly discussed in Refs.~\onlinecite{Zembekov95,Zembekov96,Zembekov97}. At even higher energies, we end up being above the PES saddle energy, i.e.~panel~(d), the two isomer wells are then connected, this allowing classical isomerization dynamics. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_02.pdf} \caption{Composite Poincar\'e surface of sections for the LiNC/LiCN vibrational dynamics computed along the minimum energy path shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.1}, i.e.~$\rho=0$ [see Eq.~\eqref{eq.PSOS} at different values of the excitation energy: (a)~1000~cm$^{-1}$, (b)~2000~cm$^{-1}$, (c)~3000~cm$^{-1}$, and (d)~4000~cm$^{-1}$.} \label{fig.2} \end{figure} \subsection{Periodic orbits for LiNC/LiCN and the bifurcation--continuation diagram}\label{subsec.bd} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.97\columnwidth]{Fig_03.pdf} \caption{Bifurcation--continuation diagram of periodic orbits (POs) for the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing system.\\ Panels (a)--(c): Bifurcation--continuation diagrams for: (a) POs in the LiNC isomer well, (b) same for LiCN, and (c) POs ``born'' both in the saddle--node bifurcation discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Zembekov95,Zembekov96,Zembekov97} (lower double red--blue line), and in the potential energy surface saddle (upper single red line). \\ From top to bottom at the highest represented energy of $E$=4300 cm$^{-1}$, and in the notation used in Fig.~\ref{fig.3} and throughout the text:\\ (a)~1A$_{\pi-0}$, 2AB$_{\pi-0}$, 3A$_{\pi-0}$, 4AB$_{\pi-0}$, 5A$_{\pi-0}$, 1AB$_{\pi-1}$, 1BA$_{\pi-1}$, 6A$_{\pi-0}$, 7AB$_{\pi-0}$, 8AB$_{\pi-0}$, 0$_{\pi-0}$, 8AB$_{\pi-0}$, 1A$_{\pi-3}$, 2AB$_{\pi-3}$, 1B$_{\pi-3}$, 2AB$_{\pi-3}$, , 2AB$_{\pi-2}$, 2AB$_{\pi-2}$ 7AB$_{\pi-0}$, 9AB$_{\pi-0}$, 6B$_{\pi-0}$, 9AB$_{\pi-0}$, 6B$_{\pi-0}$, 9AB$_{\pi-0}$, 1BA$_{\pi-1}$, 1AB$_{\pi-1}$, 5B$_{\pi-0}$, 4AB$_{\pi-0}$, 3B$_{\pi-0}$, 2AB$_{\pi-0}$, and 1B$_{\pi-0}$,\\ (b) 1A$_{0-0}$, 2AB$_{0-0}$, 0$_{0-0}$, 2AB$_{0-0}$, and 1B$_{0-0}$, and \\ (c) TS$^u$, SN$^u$, and SN$^s$. \\ Thin blue lines indicate stable POs, while unstable POs are referenced by thick red lines. The saddle point has been marked in black triangle, the two potential minima in black squares, and the lowest--lying bifurcation point of other important families of POs in yellow squares. The empty green circles represent the Bohr--Sommerfeld quantized energies determined by Eq.~\eqref{eq.4}. The energies of the localized states selected for the construction of the basis set have been highlighted in filled circles (see discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec.results}. \\ Panel (d): Quantum eigenenergies for the LiNC/LiCN system. } \label{fig.3} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig.3} shows the bifurcation--continuation diagram with the most relevant POs in the LiNC~[panel (a)] and LiCN~[panel (b)] wells, the transition state (TS) at the PES saddle, and also those ``born'' in the saddle--node or tangent bifurcation discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Zembekov95,Zembekov96,Zembekov97}~[panel (c)]. The POs are characterized in this plots by the initial values of their strecht coordinate~$R$ as a function of the energy. Thin blue and thick red lines indicate, respectively, the stability and instability of the corresponding orbits. As can be seen, the number of POs increases with energy due to the different biffurcations taking place. In panels~(a)--(c) only the POs that are symmetryic with respect to the $\vartheta=\pi$ and 0 rad lines, i.e.~isomers LiNC and LiCN, are considered. We have also highlighted in the figure with empty green circles the position of the quantized trajectories, i.e. the POs that fullfill the BS rule discussed below in Sec.~\ref{subsec.tube}. Moreover, those that will be used in our construction of a basis set for the system have been indicated with filled green circles (see Subsec.~\ref{subsec.GS} below). Notice also how the density of the states of the system increases with the excitation energy, as emphasized in the plot in the bottom panel~(d), where the quantum energies of the system are represented. The POs in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}~(a) and~(b) have been labeled as ``N X$_{\textnormal{Y-Z}}^\textnormal{W}$'', ~N being an integer identifying the bifurcation at which they first appear (in all orbits considered N=1, 2, 3). Letter~X identifies the branch in the bifurcation diagram, being for librations or time--reversal POs X=A associated with the upper branch and X=B with the lower one; the rotations, i.e. POs that have no time--reversal symmetry, and then correspond to both (upper and lower) branches, are labeled as X=AB/BA. The~Y subindex indicates the well where the PO is located: Y=0 for POs associated with the LiCN isomer, and Y=$\pi$ for POs of the LiNC isomer. Subindex Z=$0, 1, 2, \ldots$ is an integer indicating the bifurcation where the first PO appears. The stable/unstable charater of the PO is indicated by~W=s/u (for stable or unstable, respectively). The POs of panel (c) have been labelled as ``TS'' in the case of the trajectory located in the neighborhood of the TS or activated complex at the PES saddle point, and as ``SN$^{s}$'' (``SN$^{u}$'') for the case of the stable (unstable) POs ``born'' in the tangent bifurcation~\cite{Zembekov95,Zembekov96,Zembekov97}. All trajectories introduced in Fig.~\ref{fig.3} are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig.4} at a particular value of the energy, actually $E=$3500~cm$^{-1}$. In this figure, we have also included the POs corresponding to the stretch modes associated to purely vibrational motion of~$R$ in both wells, which are always stable. We have labeled them as~S$_\textnormal{Y}$'', where the subindex Y indicates again the well where the PO is localized (Y=0 for LiCN and $\pi$ for LiNC). \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.96 \columnwidth]{Fig_04.pdf} \caption{Periodic orbits (black thick lines) of LiNC/LiCN molecular system included in the bifurcation--continuation diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig.3}. The minimum energy path and the equipotential lines at~3500~cm$^{-1}$ have been superimposed in dashed red and continuous blue lines, respectively. } \label{fig.4} \end{figure} \section{Method}\label{sec.method} In this section we describe the method that we have developed for the construction of an efficient semiclassical basis set. The section is divided in two parts. First, we describe in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.tubescar} how to compute localized wave functions along POs. Second, in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.GS} we discuss how the previous localized wave functions are selected for the construction of our basis set. \subsection{Computation of localized wave functions} \label{subsec.tubescar} In this subsection, we briefly describe the method to construct localized wave functions along POs. For this purpouse, we distinguish between two different kinds of states depending on whether the PO is stable or unstable: for stable POs we will use the so called ``tube'' wave functions described in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.tube}, while for unstable POs we will construct the ``scar'' wave functions that are presented in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.scar}. More details can be found in Refs.~\onlinecite{Revuelta12,Revuelta13,Revuelta15}. \subsubsection{The ``tube'' wave functions} \label{subsec.tube} Our ``tube'' wave functions are defined as \begin{equation} \psi^{\rm{tube}}_n (R,\vartheta) = \int_0^T \; dt \; e^{-iE_n t/\hbar} \phi(R,\vartheta,t), \label{eq.2} \end{equation} where $T$ is the period of the PO, and $E_n$ the corresponding BS quantized energy (see discussion below). As can be seen, it consists of a time average of a suitably defined wave packet $\phi(R,\vartheta,t)$, whose dynamics is forced to stay in the neighborhood of the ``scarring'' PO. This dynamics, given at time~$t$ by the phase space point $(R_t,\vartheta_t,P_{R,t},P_{\vartheta,t})$, is assumed to be that of a frozen Gaussian~\cite{Heller76, Littlejohn86} centered on the trajectory as \begin{equation} \begin{array}{rcl} \phi(R,\vartheta,t) & = & \exp \{-\alpha_R(R-R_t)^2-\alpha_\vartheta (\vartheta-\vartheta_t)^2 + \\ \displaystyle & & \frac{i}{\hbar} \left[P_{R,t} (R-R_t)+ P_{\vartheta,t} (\vartheta-\vartheta_t)\right] + i \gamma_t \} . \end{array} \label{eq.3} \end{equation} Here, we take $\alpha_R=16.114$ a.u.$^{-2}$ and $\alpha_\vartheta=14.123$~rad$^{-2}$ that approximately coincide with the ``width'' in configuration space of the LiNC quantum ground state. The time function $\gamma_t=S_t/\hbar - \mu_t \pi/2$ is the phase accumulated during the propagation, which is actually the sum of two terms, a first one of dynamical origin given by $S_t/\hbar=\int_0^t d\tau \; (P_{R,\tau} \dot{R}_{\tau} + P_{\vartheta,\tau} \dot{\vartheta_{\tau}})/\hbar$, and a second contribution proportional to~$\mu_t$, which equals the number of half turns that the neighbouring trajectories describe around the scarring PO. This second term, which is always more complicated to compute, can be evaluated by using a set of \emph{local} coordinates along the PO and studying the time evolution of the corresponding transversal stability matrix~\cite{Eckhardt91}. It should be noticed that $\mu_t$ is not a canonical invariant, and as a result its magnitude depends on the definition chosen for the angle swept by the manifolds. Very often, only the value of this magnitude after a full period of the PO, $\mu_T$, usually known as the \emph{winding number} is needed. In this case, the function is canonically invariant and is equal, for unstable POs, to the Maslov~\cite{Maslov91} index appearing in Gutzwiller's trace formula~\cite{Creagh90, Robbins91}. More importantly, the required phase becomes much easier to calculate, since it is simply equal to $\pi/2$ times the number of turning points plus self-conjugated points in the PO. \label{subsec.bs} In order to maximize the localization along the PO, the tube functions are defined at the energies, $E_n$, fullfilling the BS quantization rule \begin{equation} \gamma = \frac{S(E_n)}{\hbar}-\mu \frac{\pi}{2} = 2\pi n, \qquad n=0,1,2,\ldots, \label{eq.4} \end{equation} where $n$ is an integer number giving the number of nodes in the wave function along the PO, and $\gamma, S$, and $\mu$ being defined over one period of the PO, i.e. $\gamma=\gamma_T, S=S_T$, and $\mu=\mu_T$. Notice that many orbits of Fig.~\ref{fig.4} are symmetric respect to $\vartheta =0$ or $\vartheta= \pi$ rad, while the considered wave functions are symmetric with respect to these values. This means that the tube functions associated with symmetric POs have an even number of excitations, i.~e.~$n$ is even. Thus, in order to simplify notation, the~$n$ number used to identify these tube functions equals half the number of excitations. \subsubsection{The ``scar'' wave functions}\label{subsec.scar} The tube functions introduced in Eq.~\eqref{eq.2} can be constructed both over stable or unstable POs. However, in the latter case it is convenient to introduce an improvement by defining what we call ``scar'' functions which incorporate short time dynamical information on the homoclinic structure of the PO invariant manifolds~\cite{Vergini00a,Vergini00b}. These scar functions are computed by first propagating the corresponding tube wave functions and then performing a finite--time Fourier transformation at the BS quantized energies, in the following way \begin{eqnarray} \psi^{\rm scar}_n (R,\vartheta) = \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \nonumber& \\ \int_{-T_E}^{+T_E} dt\; \cos \left(\frac{\pi t}{2T_E} \right) \; e^{-i (\hat{\cal H}-E_n)t/\hbar} \; \psi^{\rm tube}_n(R,\vartheta), \quad & \label{eq.5} \end{eqnarray} where \begin{equation} T_E=\frac{1}{2\lambda} \ln \left( \frac{A}{\hbar} \right) \label{eq.Te} \end{equation} is the so--called Ehrenfest time, which can be only defined for unstable POs and depends on two parameters: the stability exponent of the PO~\cite{LL10},~$\lambda$, and the area of a characteristic SOS,~$A$. This time can be (semiclassically) understood as the lapse of time that a Gaussian wave packet needs to spread over this characteristic Poincar\'e SOS area of the system. Also, a cosine window is used in the definition (\ref{eq.5}) in order to minimize the dispersion in energy of the scar functions~\cite{Vergini08}. Among other methods, wavelets provide an efficient method to perform the time evolution appearing in Eq.~\eqref{eq.5}, with a precision of at least six decimal places~\cite{Sparks06}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_05} \caption{Some examples of scar functions~\eqref{eq.3} for LiNC/LiCN. The unstable periodic orbit 3A$^u$ (think black line), the minimum energy path (dashed red line), and the contour plots of the potential energy surface have been plotted superimposed. The number in the center of each panel gives the integer appearing in Bohr--Sommerfeld quantization rule~\eqref{eq.4}. } \label{fig.5} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig.5} shows some examples of very highly excited scar functions along the quantized unstable POs 3A$^u$ of Fig.~\ref{fig.4}, corresponding the quantum numbers $n=14-19$ and BS energies between~3091.48~cm$^{-1}$ and~3982.40~cm$^{-1}$. In all examples shown in the figure the characteristic area, $A$, appearing in Eq.~\eqref{eq.Te} has been estimated as the integral $\int dR \; P_R$ computed along the line $\vartheta=\pi$~rad at the quantized excitation energy, since the PO lives in the vicinity of that region. All these functions, as well as any other throughout the paper, have been computed by setting~$\hbar~=~1$~a.u. As can be seen, the probability density is not well localized over the PO because of the complex topology of the trajectory, this somehow reducing the scarring phenomenon due to the quantum dynamics implied by finite~$\hbar$. Also, notice that these functions are both excited in the in the~$R$ and~$\vartheta$ directions, and seem to have a rather simple pattern~\cite{Revuelta15}. Consequently, one can easily adscribe quantum numbers accounting for the number of excitations (or nodes) in each direction. For example, the scar functions shown at the top row of Fig.~\ref{fig.5}, labeled as~14 and~15, correspond to states with~3 excitations in each direction, and then~$(n_R, n_\vartheta) = (3, 3)$. The two scar functions presented in the middle row have different quantum numbers: while the one on the left (labeled as 16) has~$(n_R, n_\vartheta) = (4, 3)$, the one on the right (17) corresponds to~$(n_R, n_\vartheta) = (2, 4)$. Finally, the scar functions (18 and 19) shown in the bottom row are associated with~$(n_R, n_\vartheta) = (2, 4)$ and~$(n_R, n_\vartheta) = (3, 4)$, respectively. Nevertheless, it is simpler to label this functions as we have done by counting the number of nodes that they have along the (desymmetrized) PO. This number~$n = 14 - 19$, which has also been shown in each panel, equals the integer fullfilling the BS rule~\eqref{eq.4}, for~$\mu=16$. \subsection{Selective Gram-Schmidt method for the construction of the basis set} \label{subsec.GS} As energy increases, the exponential proliferation of classical POs in floppy molecules leads to a dramatic increment in the number of quantized POs over which our localized wave functions can be defined. Thus, a selective procedure for the best suited localized states must be developed in order to construct an efficient basis set for the computation of vibrational states of this kind of systems that keeps the eigenvalue problem at moderate sizes. Afterwrads, the Hamiltonian matrix associated with Eq.~\eqref{eq.1} can be computed, and then diagonalized using standard procedures. This subsection is divided in two parts. First, Subsec.~\ref{subsec.basisset} describes the algorithm developed for the construction of our basis set, which is called \emph{selective Gram-Schmidt method (SGSM)}. Second, we discuss in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.local} the procedure that we have developed for presenting our results in a way that provides a clear physical insight into them. \subsubsection{Definition of the basis set} \label{subsec.basisset} To define our basis set, we have generalized the usual Gram-Schmidt method (GSM)~\cite{Lang02}, and developed a new \emph{selective} Gram-Schmidt method (SGSM). This SGSM is the second pillar of our method, and it is able to choose a basis set of linearly independent functions in a vectorial space from a larger (overcomplete) set of functions, that can be used to efficiently compute the chaotic eigenfunctions of our system~\cite{Revuelta13}. The SGSM starts from an initial set of $N$ localized (tube and scar) functions,~$\vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle$, from which the procedure selects the minimum number of them, $N_b \le N$, necessary to adequately describe the Hilbert space defined by the eigenfunctions whose energies are contained in a given energy window, that is, the SGSM defines a basis set in that window. The elements of this basis set~$\vert \psi_{j_i}^{(0)} \rangle$, where subindex $i$ orders the elements according to their semiclassical relevance (see discussion below), are automatically selected with the aid of the conventional GSM. Thus, associated with the basis~$\vert \psi_{j_i}^{(0)} \rangle$, we construct an auxiliary basis~$\vert \varphi_{i} \rangle$, formed by the orthogonalization of~$\vert \psi_{j_i}^{(0)} \rangle$. For example, if we set $$\vert \varphi_1 \rangle = \vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle$$ then, a second auxiliary function $\vert \varphi_2 \rangle$ is given by $$\vert \varphi_2 \rangle = \frac{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \rangle}{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \vert},$$ where $j_2 \ne j_1$ and $$\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \rangle = \vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle - \langle \varphi_1 \vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle \vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle,$$ and so on. In our SGSM method, the selection procedure of the basis functions with a given symmetry for the calculation of the eigenenergies, $E$, up to a given energy \begin{equation} E < E_\text{ref}, \label{eq.6} \end{equation} is done automatically by using a definite set of rules, which are based on a \emph{selection parameter},~$\eta$. For a given localized function~$\eta$ is defined as \begin{equation} \eta_j = \rho_j [\sigma_j^2+(\delta E_j)^2]^{1/2} . \label{eq.7} \end{equation} This parameter depends on three terms. First, it depends on the density of states,~$\rho_j$, at the quantization BS energy~$E_j$, which is only relevant when the energy window is large. Second, it also depends on the tube/scar function's dispersion, given by \begin{equation} \label{eq.sigmaj} \sigma_j = \sqrt{ \langle \psi_j^{(0)} \vert {\cal \hat H}^2 \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle - \langle \psi_j^{(0)} \vert {\cal \hat H} \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle }, \end{equation} where~${\cal \hat H}$ is the quantum version of the classical Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq.1}. Third,~$\eta$ depends on a new parameter, $\delta E_j$, defined as \begin{equation} \delta E_j=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0, & {\rm if} \; E_j \le E_\text{ref} \\ E_j - E_\text{ref}, & {\rm if} \; E_j > E_\text{ref} \end{array} \right. . \end{equation} The function~$\delta E_j$ is included in Eq.~\eqref{eq.7} in order to improve the numerical accuracy by reducing boundary effects. When large energy windows are considered, $\delta E_j$ has a small influence on the results, and then it can even be neglected. It is thus clear, that the parameter~$\eta$ introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq.7}) can be also defined using other criteria, that account for example for the stability or the period of the POs~\cite{Revuelta13}. In this work, however, all these coefficients have been dropped out for simplicity. On the other hand, this has been done because we want to use a single selection parameter for all orbits, no matter if they are stable or unstable. Recall that the stability exponent is complex for stable POs, and then~$\eta$ would no longer be real. On the other hand, the inclusion of the period in Eq.~(\ref{eq.7}), as done in the Ref.~\onlinecite{Revuelta13}, renders less accurate results. This last result is a consequence of the barriers existing in the LiNC/LiCN system, which confine the POs in certain regions of phase space. At low energies, this confinement is caused by the invariant tori. At higher energies, the dynamical barrier close to $\vartheta=0.611$ rad [see accumulation of points next to the LiNC regular region in Fig.~\ref{fig.2} (b)] acts as an effective quantum separatrix in phase space~\cite{Revuelta15}. Furthermore, we also have the PES barrier separating the two isomers. On the contrary, in generic highly chaotic systems the unstable POs densely cover the system phase space. The SGSM is then defined, in an algorithmic way, as follows: \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{0.} With the method described in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.tubescar}, we compute all the localized states, $\vert \psi_j^{(0)}\rangle$, whose BS quantized energies, $E_j$, fullfill Eq.~\eqref{eq.4} for the POs shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}(c), and Eq.~\eqref{eq.4} for the POs in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}(a) and~(b) (cf. also~Fig.~\ref{fig.4}), and are contained at the same time in the enlarged energy window defined by \begin{equation} E_j < E_\text{ref} + 2 \sigma_j, \label{eq.9} \end{equation} where $\sigma_j$ is given by Eq.~\eqref{eq.sigmaj}. For the stable POs, normalized tube functions are computed, whereas for the unstable ones the scar functions are constructed. This is the most time demanding step of our procedure. It should be remarked here that for the system under study, similar results would be obtained using solely the tube wave functions. Moveover, they are also adequate for systems with a higher degree of chaoticity~\cite{Revuelta13}. However, we have decided to use the scar wave functions over the unstable POs as they have a lower dispersion in energy, rendering thus slightly better results. Let us finally remark that it can be \emph{a priori} expected that the overlap of the tube and scar functions outside the enlarged window~\eqref{eq.9} with the desired system eigenfunctions is negligible, due to the fact that they were constructed minimizing their energy dispersion. \item \textbf{1.} From the initial set of localized functions, $\vert \psi_{j}^{(0)} \rangle$, we select a smaller number of them, $N_b \le N$, forming a basis set that is \emph{optimal} for our purposes, as the number of accurately computed eigefunctions scales linearly with~$N_b$. Notice that the number of tube and scar functions calculated for this purpose, $N$, should always be greater or equal to \begin{equation} N_b = N_{\rm sc}(E_{ref} +2 \sigma_{\rm sc}) + c_b \sigma_{\rm sc} \rho, \label{eq.10} \end{equation} where, $N_{\rm sc}(E)$,~$\sigma_{\rm sc}$ are, respectivelly, semiclassical approximations to the number of states with an energy smaller than~$E$ and to the scar function dispersion~\cite{Vergini08}, and the term $c_b \sigma_{\rm sc} \rho$, that enlarges the window size, is introduced to reduce border effects. If this is not the case, more (longer) POs, and consequently more localized functions, must be included in the basis at this step, as described in step~0. The first element of our basis set is the tube or scar function with the smallest~$\eta_j$ value \begin{equation} \qquad \quad \vert \varphi_1 \rangle = \vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle, \qquad \textnormal{with} \; \frac{1}{\eta_{j_1}}=\max\left\{\frac{1}{\eta_j}\right\}. \end{equation} According to Eq.~\eqref{eq.7}, this choice gives priority to the wave functions which are more localized in energy. \item \textbf{2.a} The remaining localized functions are then orthogonalized to $\vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle$ as \begin{equation} \vert \psi_j^{(1)} \rangle = \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle - \langle \varphi_1 \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle \vert \varphi_1 \rangle, \quad j \neq j_1 . \label{eq.12} \end{equation} \item \textbf{2.b} The second element of the basis set is $\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle$, where the index $j_2$ ($j_2 \ne j_1$) satisfies \begin{eqnarray} \frac{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \vert^2}{\eta_{j_2}} = \max \left\{ \frac{\vert \psi_j^{(1)} \vert^2}{\eta_j} \right\}_{j \neq j_1}, \label{eq.13} \end{eqnarray} where the norm in the numerator has been introduced in order to make the basis set elements as different as possible between them. Indeed, notice that after the orthogonalization of Eq.~\eqref{eq.12} the more similar $\vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle_{j \neq j_1}$ is to $\vert \varphi_1 \rangle$, the smaller the norm of function $\vert \psi_j^{(1)} \vert_{j \neq j_1}$ is. Then the auxiliary function $\|\varphi_2\rangle$ is computed as \begin{eqnarray} \vert \varphi_2 \rangle = \frac{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \rangle} {\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \vert}. \label{eq.14} \end{eqnarray} The previous steps, 2.a and 2.b, are repeated for all the remaining elements in the initial basis set of localized (tube and scar) functions, in such a way that the $n^\text{th}$ step in the procedure is defined as: \item \textbf{n.a} New functions are obtained by orthogonalization to the auxiliary function in the previous step,~$\vert \varphi_{n-1} \rangle$, \begin{eqnarray} \vert \psi_j^{(n-1)} \rangle = \vert \psi_j^{(n-2)} \rangle - \langle \varphi_{n-1} \vert \psi_j^{(n-2)} \rangle \vert \varphi_{n-1} \rangle, \nonumber \\ j \neq j_1, j_2, ..., j_{n-1}. \label{eq.15} \end{eqnarray} \item \textbf{n.b} The $n$--th basis element is $\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(0)} \rangle$, where the~$j_n$ index satisfies \begin{eqnarray} \frac{\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(n-1)} \vert^2}{\eta_{j_n}} = \max \left\{ \frac{\vert \psi_j^{(n-1)} \vert^2}{\eta_j} \right\}_{j \neq j_1, j_2,..., j_{n-1}}, \label{eq.16} \end{eqnarray} and the next auxiliary function is constructed according to \begin{eqnarray} \vert \varphi_n \rangle = \frac{\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(n-1)} \rangle} {\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(n-1)} \vert}. \label{eq.17} \end{eqnarray} \item The procedure finishes when the number of selected elements in the basis set equals~$N_b$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq.10}). \end{itemize} Afterwards, the corresponding Hamiltonian matrix is computed in the basis set of localized functions, or alternatively in the equivalent basis set of auxiliary functions. Diagonalization using standard routines~\cite{NR96} finally renders~$N_b$ eigenstates in the energy window defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq.6}. \subsubsection{\emph{Local} representation} \label{subsec.local} To get a useful representation of the results obtained in our localized basis set construction procedure, a \emph{local} representation should be used, in which each single eigenfunction is reconstructed as \begin{equation} \label{eq.N} \vert N \rangle = \sum_{j=1}^{N_b} C_{Nj} \vert \varphi_j^{\rm loc} \rangle , \end{equation} being~$C_{Nj} = \langle \varphi_j^{\rm loc} \vert N \rangle$. The procedure to compute the functions~$\varphi_j^{\rm loc}$ is also based on the GSM, but in this case we give priority to those localized (tube/scar) wave functions with larger localization intensities, i.~e. with a larger overlap with the eigenfunction~$\vert N \rangle$. For this purpouse, we proceed as follows: \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{1.} The first element of the \emph{local} representation is taken as the localized state,~$\vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle$, with the largest localization intensity, which is defined as \begin{equation} \label{eq.xn} x_j^{(n)} = \vert \langle \psi_j^{(n)} \vert N \rangle \vert ^2. \end{equation} Then, \begin{equation} \vert \varphi_1^{\rm loc} \rangle = \vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle, \end{equation} being~$x_1 \equiv x_{j_1}^{(0)} = \max \{ x_j^{(0)} \}$ the largest localization intensity. This intensity provides valuable information on the localization of the~$\vert N \rangle$ eigenfunction over the quantized orbit associated with~$\vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle$. \item \textbf{2.a} For the identification of the second largest localization intensity,~$x_2$, one must first orthogonalize the remaining localized states~$\vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle$ to~$\vert \varphi_1^{\rm loc} \rangle$ in the following way \begin{equation} \vert \psi_j^{(1)} \rangle = \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle - \langle \varphi_1^{\rm loc} \vert \psi_j^{(0)} \rangle \vert \varphi_j^{\rm loc} \rangle, \quad j \ne j_1 . \end{equation} \item \textbf{2.b} The second element of the local representation is defined as \begin{equation} \label{eq.ortho} \vert \varphi_2^{\rm loc} \rangle = \frac{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \rangle}{\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(1)} \vert }, \end{equation} with~$x_2 \equiv x_{j_2}^{(1)} = \max \{ x_j^{(1)}, j \ne j_1 \}$. Due to the orthogonalization in~\eqref{eq.ortho}, the intensity~$x_2$ cannot be directly related to the localization of the~$\vert N \rangle$ eigenfunction over the PO, along which~$\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle$ is constructed. Nonetheless, the sum~$x_1 + x_2$ is the square of the modulus of the the projection of~$\vert N \rangle$ onto the subspace defined by~$\vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle$ and~$\vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle$. The previous steps~2.a and~2.b are repeated until all~$N_b$ auxiliary functions are computed, in such a way that the~$n$--th step is defined as: \item \textbf{n.a} The remaining functions,~$\vert \psi_j^{(n-2)} \rangle$, are orthogonalized to the last element of the \emph{local} representation computed,~$\vert \varphi_{n-1}^{\rm loc} \rangle$, as \begin{eqnarray} \vert \psi_j^{(n-1)} \rangle & = & \vert \psi_j^{(n-2)} \rangle - \langle \varphi_{n-1}^{\rm loc} \vert \psi_j^{(n-2)} \rangle \vert \varphi_{n-1}^{\rm loc} \rangle, \nonumber \\ j & \ne & j_1, j_2, \ldots, j_{n-1} . \end{eqnarray} \item \textbf{n.b} The $n$--th element of the \emph{local} representation is given by \begin{equation} \vert \varphi_n^{\rm loc} \rangle = \frac{\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(n-1)} \rangle}{\vert \psi_{j_n}^{(n-1)} \vert }, \end{equation} with~$x_n \equiv x_{j_n}^{(n-1)} = \max \{ x_j^{(n-1)}, j \ne j_1, j_2, \ldots, j_{n-1} \}$. \end{itemize} Recall here that the sum~$x_1 + x_2 + \ldots + x_n$ is related to the projection of~$\vert N \rangle$ onto the subspace defined by the localized functions~$\vert \psi_{j_1}^{(0)} \rangle, \vert \psi_{j_2}^{(0)} \rangle, \ldots, , \vert \psi_{j_{n-1}}^{(0)} \rangle$. \section{Results and discussion}\label{sec.results} In this section we present some results for the vibrational eigenstates of the floppy LiNC/LiCN molecule obtained with our basis set of (semiclassical) functions localized on POs plus the corresponding discussion. The section is divided in four parts. First, in Subsect.~\ref{subsec.spec}, we give full details of our computational procedure, and demonstrate that each individual eigenfunction can be essentially reconstructed using a very small number of basis elements. Second, we present in Subsect.~\ref{subsec.x1x2} the localization intensities of the system eigenfunctions. Third, in Subsect.~\ref{subsec.PR}, we demonstrate the efficiency of our basis basis set by comparison with other standard approximations through the computation of the participation ratios. Finally, we conclude by presenting estimations of the error in the eigenenergies and the corresponding eigenfunctions in Subsect.~\ref{subsec.errors}. \subsection{Spectrum of the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions in a basis set of functions localized along periodic orbits} \label{subsec.spec} Using the method reported in the Sec.~\ref{sec.method} we have constructed a basis set formed by solely~90 elements that is able to accurately describe the 66 low--lying eigenfunctions of the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing system. The structure of all these eigenfunctions in our localized basis set is discussed in detail in the Supplemental Material. The construction of our localized basis set is performed in the following three steps. First, we set in Eq~\eqref{eq.10} the values of~$E_\text{ref}=4100$~cm$^{-1}$ and~$c_b=6$. Second, we calculate the quantization energies of each PO, which are shown with empty green circles in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}. Finally, we construct the tube functions for all these POs in the case they are stable, and scar functions for the unstable ones. This procedure renders a total number of~508 localized wave functions. From this whole set, our method has defined our final basis set by selecting the~90 best suited, being~19 of them tube functions and the remaining~71 scar functions. The BS energies of the selected states have been highlighted with filled green circles in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}. As it can be seen, the number of selected states increases with energy at a similar rate as the density of eigenfunctions. This can be clearly understood by comparing the number of states contained in a given energy window for panels~(a) and~(d). For example, if we take an energy window of 200~cm$^{-1}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig.3}(d), we can see that it only includes one state if the energy is smaller than 1000~cm$^{-1}$ (the level spacing for the three low--lying eigenenergies is~$\sim 230$~a.u.),~2 if the energy is~$\sim 1200$~cm$^{-1}$,~3 in the range~$\sim 1500$~cm$^{-1}$, or~4 for energies~$\sim 2000$~cm$^{-1}$ (see Supplemental Material for further information). Thus, as energy increases, the density of states increases accordingly. In Fig.~\ref{fig.3}(a) we can see that the BS energies of the localized functions that form our localized basis set follow a similar pattern: the number of selected states (filled green points) is very low at small energies and are quite separated, while they get closer and closer for higher energies. Likewise, a more detailed analysis of Fig.~\ref{fig.3}(a) shows that the number of selected BS energies included in a window of~$200$~a.u. equals the number of eigenenergies just discussed. As already stated in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.tubescar}, the tube/scar functions have a very low dispersion in energy~\cite{Polavieja94, Vergini00a,*Vergini00b, Vergini01, Revuelta12, Revuelta15}. One can then ask whether there is a similar relationship for the eigenfunctions computed in a basis set formed by these localized wave functions. The answer to this question is afirmative, as shown by the results in Fig.~\ref{fig.6}, where the spectra of some representative eigenfunctions are presented. In the picture, we have also indicated the most contributing localized states, via their quantized POs, to the reconstruction of the eigenfunctions~$\vert 53 \rangle$ and~$\vert 65 \rangle$ (red spectra). This will be discussed in more detail below (cf.~Subsec.~\ref{subsec.PR}). As it can be seen, the spectrum of each eigenfunction is mainly concentrated around the corresponding eigenenergy, which is taken as the origin of the horizontal axis. Notice that the spectrum has been represented as a function of the difference between eigenenergy and BS quantized energy measured in units of the mean level spacing,~$1/\rho$, since it provides a meaningful scaling. As already discussed in the previous paragraph, the density of states increases with the energy, and, as a consequence, the energy difference,~i.~e. the level spacing, between the eigenfunctions decreases. Thus, a comparison between two \emph{bare} eigenenergies is not really very meaningfull: one must also take into account the density of states in order to compare enery diffferences. For example, an energy difference of~10~cm$^{-1}$ might be very small for the low--lying states, which have a mean level spacing of~$\sim 230$~a.u., but being rather large for very excited states, where the number of eigenergies included in an window of~10~cm$^{-1}$ is dramatically large. However, when the energy difference is measured in mean level spacing units by multipliying it by the density of states, it is very simple to say whether this \emph{relative} energy difference is large or small: if it is larger than one, it must always be considered large, while it can be considered small if it is smaller than, at least, one half of the mean level spacing ($\le 0.5$). \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_06.pdf}m \caption{Spectra of some representative LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions in our set of localized basis function. The horizontal axis used consists of the energy difference between the computed eigenenergy,~$E_N$, and the Bohr--Sommerfeld quantized energy,~$E_{BS,j}$, measured in units of the mean level spacing,~$1/\rho$. In the case of the eigenfunctions~$\vert 53 \rangle$ and $\vert 65 \rangle$ (red) discussed in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.PR}, we have indicated which are the sticks associated with the tube/scar functions contributing the most, ($\vert$6B$^u_{\pi-0}$,21$\rangle$, $\vert$7AB$^u_{\pi-0}$,39$\rangle$, and $\vert$8AB$^u_{\pi-0}$,37$\rangle$ for~$\vert 53 \rangle$; $\vert$TS$^u\rangle$, $\vert$2AB$^u_{\pi-3}$,38$\rangle$, and $\vert$6AB$^u_{0-0}$,6$\rangle$ for~$\vert 65 \rangle$) to the reconstruction (further details, see also Figs.~\ref{fig.10} and~\ref{fig.11}, and SM). } \label{fig.6} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig.7} shows (with empty red circles) the relative spectral dispersion of all computed LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions,~$\sigma_r$, defined as \begin{equation} \label{eq.sigmar} \sigma_r=\sigma_N \rho, \end{equation} where $\sigma_N$ is the dispersion of eigenfunction~$\vert N \rangle$ in our semiclassical basis set. Then $\sigma_r$ measures the dispersion of eigenfunction~$\vert N \rangle$ in mean level spacing units. In order to better identify the behaviour shown by this magnitude, we have also plotted superimposed its average value (filled red triangles), computed as a mobile mean of step~5. As can be seen, the average value of the dispersion increases with the energy; this being an indication of the necessity of more basis elements for the reconstruction of the more excited eigenfunctions. Still, it should be remarked that the obtained values for dispersion of our basis set remain small compared to other standard methods. In order to demonstrate this assesment, we have superimposed in Fig.~\ref{fig.7} the relative dispersion for a basis set formed by~345 basis elements defined by a combination of the Discrete Variable Representation (DVR) for the~$\vartheta$ coordinate and a function representation of distributed Gaussian basis (DGB) in the radial coordinate~$R$~\cite{Bacic86}. Recall that this kind of DGB--DVR basis sets have been extensively applied to the study of triatomic molecules such as HCP~\cite{Arranz10b}, HNC/HCN~\cite{Bacic91}, H$_2$O~\cite{Bacic88}, H$_3^+$~\cite{Bramley94}, KNC/KCN~\cite{Henderson92}, SO$_2$~\cite{Ma99}, HO$_2$~\cite{Arranz10}, or the system under study, LiNC/LiCN~\cite{Bacic86, Bacic91}. We have used~345 DGB---DVR basis elements which render computed eigenenergies with a precision of~0.1~cm$^{-1}$. Notice that the DGB--DVR results have been divided over~15 in order that they are defined in the same range as our semiclassical calculations. Recall that the larger the DGB--DVR basis set, the larger the dispersion and the corresponding participation ratios (see discussion in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.PR}). As can be seen, both the \emph{bare} relative dispersion (empty blue squares) and its average value (filled blue triangles) are between~15 and~30 times larger than the ones rendered by our localized basis set. Furthermore, as will be see below in Subsec.~\ref{subsec.errors}, this low dispersion of the eigenstates in our localized basis set, which is always smaller than~12 level spacing units, also reflects in a small value of the participation ratio, this fact further demonstrating the efficiency of our method. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_07.pdf} \caption{Relative spectral dispersion~\eqref{eq.sigmar} for the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions obtained with our basis set of localized function as a function of the energy (red empty circles) and with a DGB--DVR basis set as defined in Ref.~\onlinecite{Bacic86} (blue empty squares). In both cases, the average values, computed as a mobile mean of step 5, has been also been plotted superimposed (red filled triangles and blue filled stars, respectively). The DGB--DVR results have been divided by~15 in order that they are defined in the same range as our semiclassical results. } \label{fig.7} \end{figure} \subsection{Localization intensities of the eigenfunctions} \label{subsec.x1x2} In Fig.~\ref{fig.8} we present, with empty red circles and empty blue squares respectively, the two largest localization intensities~$x_1$ and~$x_2$ of the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions computed with our semiclassical basis set, as defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq.xn}. As can be seen, the fluctuation of both quantities is relatively large. Accordingly, in order to better identify their behaviours, we have also plotted superimposed in the figure the corresponding average values (full red triangles and full blue stars, respectively), computed as a mobile mean of step~5. For the low--lying eigenfunctions, the intensity~$x_1$ has a value close to~1, thus indicating that those eigenfunctions are strongly concentrated over one single PO. Notice that the eigenfunctions that are highly localized over unstable POs, i.e.~scar basis functions, correspond to ``scars'' of the system~\cite{Heller84}. When this happens,~$x_2$ is smaller than its mean value, as~$\Sigma_{j=1}^{N_b} x_j = 1$. The average value of~$x_1$, computed again as a mobile mean, decreases more or less monotonically with the energy. Meanwhile, the average value of~$x_2$ increases up to~$\sim 1400$~cm$^{-1}$, and then remains more or less constant and equal to~$\bar{x}_2 \approx 0.1$. Let us remark, nevertheless, that~$x_2$ is by definition always smaller than~$x_1$, and then it must also decrease for larger values of the energy, although this is not noticeable in Fig.~\ref{fig.8}~\cite{Vergini04}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[ width=\columnwidth]{Fig_08.pdf} \caption{Largest localization intensities $x_1$ (red empty circles) and $x_2$ (bottom blue empty squares) for the eigenfunctions of the LiNC/LiCN system in our basis set of localized functions. The average, computed as a mobile mean of step~5, is plotted superimposed with red full triangles and blue full stars, respectively.} \label{fig.8} \end{figure} \subsection{Participation ratios and \emph{local} representation of the eigenfunctions} \label{subsec.PR} In order to have a more quantitative analysis of the quality of our basis set, we have also considered participation ratios, $R_N$, of the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions,~$\vert N \rangle$, defined as [cf.~Eq.~\eqref{eq.N}] \begin{equation} \label{eq.pr} R_N=\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{N_b} C_{Nj}^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{N_b} C_{Nj}^4}. \end{equation} When examining this magnitude, one has to take into account that the participation ratios defined in this way are bounded by two limiting cases. On the one hand, the optimal basis set is always formed by the eigenfunctions system. In this case, all coefficients $C_{Nj}$ appearing in Eq.~\eqref{eq.pr} except one would vanish and, consequently,~$R_\text{min}=1$. On the other hand, the most ill--suited basis set would be one where all the the coefficients $C_{Nj}$ were equal; in this case $R_\text{max}=N_b$. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[angle=0, width=\columnwidth]{Fig_09.pdf} \caption{ Participation ratios for the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions obtained with our basis set of localized function as a function of the energy (red empty circles) and with a DGB--DVR basis set as defined in Ref.~\onlinecite{Bacic86} (blue empty squares). In both cases, the average values, computed as a mobile mean of step 5, has been also been plotted superimposed (red filled triangles and blue filled stars, respectively). The DGB--DVR results have been divided by~5 in order to be defined in the same range as our semiclassical results. } \label{fig.9} \end{figure} We present in Fig.~\ref{fig.9} the participation ratios, $R_N$, for the LiNC/LiCN eigenfunctions computed with the basis set constructed with our procedure (red empty circles). As can be seen, most of the low--lying states have a value of the participation ratio close to (the optimal) one. This results is a consequence of the strong localization of these eigenfunctions along the POs considered for the basis construction. Thus, the overlap between our semiclassical basis elements and the eigenfunctions of the system becomes very large. As energy increases, more basis elements are necessary for the computation of the system eigenfunctions, and then the participation ratios increase accordingly. Although $R_N$ is seen to present large fluctuations with energy, specially for~$E \gtrsim 3000$~cm$^{-1}$, the results in Fig.~\ref{fig.9} show that its average value increases quite smoothly. The dramatic increment of the participation ratio for~$E \gtrsim 3800$~cm$^{-1}$ demonstrates the necessity of more basis elements, i.e.~that more POs are required. For a better observation of the tendency of the participation ratios, we have also plotted superimposed in the figure with red triangles their average values, computed again as a mobile mean of step~5. Let us remark that the participation ratios in our localized basis are much smaller than those obtained using other standard methods, like, for example, the results shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.9} in empty blue squares, as well as than their average values presented in blue filled stars, which corresponds to the computation of the LiNC/LiCN eigenstates using a DGB--DVR basis set. Notice that these DGB--DVR results have been divided by~5 in order to be defined in the same range as the results rendered by the computations of our localized basis set. Let us finally conclude this section by presenting two examples of the structure of the eigenfunctions obtained with our basis set. For this purpose we have selected the eigenstates~$\vert 53 \rangle$ and $\vert 65 \rangle$ highlighted in red in Fig.~\ref{fig.8}. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[angle=0, width=\columnwidth]{Fig_10.pdf} \caption{Reconstruction of eigenfunction~$\vert 53 \rangle$ of the LiNC/LiCN system [shown in panel (a)]. The local representation is performed using the basis functions $\vert\textnormal{6B}^{u}_{\pi-0}, 21\rangle$ (b), $\vert\textnormal{7AB}^{u}_{\pi-0}, 39\rangle$ (c), and $\vert\textnormal{8AB}^{u}_{\pi-0}, 37\rangle$ (d). Using the wave function (b) one reconstructs the $65.9\%$ of the exact eigenfunction (e); combining (b) and (c), one reconstructs $82.5\%$ of it (f), and using (b), (c) and (d) $88.5\%$ (g).} \label{fig.10} \end{figure} We present in Fig.~\ref{fig.10} the results corresponding to the first case. Eigenfunction~$\vert 53 \rangle$ has a participation ratio~$R_{53}=2.16$, which implies that it can be essentially reconstructed by using only 2 or at most 3 basis elements. Moreover, it has a very irregular nodal pattern, something characteristic of classically chaotic systems, as shown to be the case here in the Fig.~\ref{fig.10} (a). The most important contribution to this eigenfunction is given by the basis scar function $\vert$6B$^{u}_{\pi-0}$, 21$\rangle$, which is shown in panel~(b) of Fig.~\ref{fig.10}. Just by using this single basis function $65.9\%$ of the (exact) eigenfunction~$\vert 53 \rangle$ can be reconstructed, as shown in panel~(e). When the scar function $\vert$7AB$^{u}_{\pi-0}$, 39$\rangle$ [see panel~(c)] is added as a second element to the basis, $82.5\%$ of the eigenfunction is reconstructed, see panel~(f). Finally, augmenting the basis set with the scar function $\vert$8AB$^{u}_{\pi-0}$, 37$\rangle$ [see panel~(d)] as the third element, $88.5\%$ of the exact eigenfunction is recovered. We believe that this result, namely that by using only the~3 localized functions depicted in panels~(b)--(d) one can obtain the state shown in panel~(g), which cannot be ascribed to any of the POs shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.4}, it is quite impressive, this giving a clear idea of the quality and performance of our basis set construction method. One last point is worth emphasizing in this discussion on the reconstruction of the eigenfunction~$\vert 53 \rangle$ of LiNC/LiCN. The quantized energies corresponding to the basis elements which we have considered, i.e.~those shown in panels (b)--(d), lie quite close to the eigenenergy $E_{53}=3507.24$~cm$^{-1}$, as can also be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig.6}. Obviously, when increasing the number of basis elements this eigenfunction is more accuratelly reconstrated. For example, by including~6 basis elements,~$95.1 \%$ of the exact eigenfunction is obtained; using~13, 99.1$\%$; with~28, 99.9$\%$, and using~39 basis elements an impressive accuracy of~$99.99\%$ of the exact eigenfunction, with an error of~0.66~cm$^{-1}$ in the corresponding eigenenergy is obtained. In general, the accuracy of~$99.9 \%$ in the reconstruction of the eigenfunctions is achieved by combination of less than~5 basis elements in the case of most of the low--lying states and around~25 of the~90 total basis elements for the most excited ones. Recall that the localized states selected in the reconstruction of these eigenfunctions are those with the BS quantized energies that lie closer to the considered eigenenergy. Let us recall here that we consider \emph{exact} the results obtained with the~345 elements basis set needed in the Ba{\u c}i\'{c} and Light calculation~\cite{Bacic86}. Let us remark that in Fig.~\ref{fig.10}, the squared wave functions shown in panels (a)--(d) have been normalized such that their maximum value equals one. Contrary, the partially reconstructed eigenfunctions represented in panels (e)--(g) have been normalized in such a way that the maximum value of the computed squared eigenfunction using the whole basis set of our localized wave functions equals one. As a consequence, the maximum value of the partially reconstructed eigenfunctions shown in panels (e)--(g) is always smaller than~1. We have decided to present the results with these two different normalization criteria because then it is in general easier to visualize the contribution of each basis element to the eigenfunction reconstruction (cf.~Fig.~\ref{fig.11}). Finally, notice that the scar function presented in panel (b) equals the reconstructed eigenfunction shown below in panel (e), being the only difference between them the normalization used. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_11.pdf} \caption{Reconstruction of eigenfunction~$\vert 65 \rangle$ of the LiNC/LiCN system [shown in panel (a)]. The local representation is performed using $\vert\textnormal{TS}^{u}, 0\rangle$ (b), $\vert\textnormal{2AB}^{u}_{\pi-3}, 38\rangle$ (c), and $\vert\textnormal{2AB}^{s}_{0-0}, 6\rangle$ (d), $\vert\textnormal{1A}^{u}_{0-0}, 3\rangle$ (h), $\vert\textnormal{2AB}^{s}_{0-0}, 8\rangle$ (i), $\vert\textnormal{2AB}^{u}_{\pi-0}, 39\rangle$ (j). The reconstruction process is shown in the remaining panels, where $50.7\%$ (e), $70.6\%$ (f), $78.9\%$ (g), $82.2\%$ (k), $84.7\%$ (l) $87.0\%$ (m) of the exact result is obtained.} \label{fig.11} \end{figure} In Fig.~\ref{fig.11} we show the results of a similar analysis performed for the structure of eigenfunction~$\vert 65 \rangle$, which is the first isomerizing state of the system, i.e.~that having a significant proportion of the quantum density simultaneously localized in both isomer wells. This eigenfunction is shown in panel (a). It has a participation ratio equal to~$R_{65}=$4.60, and the corresponding computed eigenenergy of~$3826.84$~cm$^{-1}$ is~3.08~cm$^{-1}$ smaller than in the DGB--DVR calculation taken as reference. Again, the eigenfunction is mostly reconstructed using a very small number of basis elements. Indeed, by just considering the scar function~$\vert\textnormal{TS}^{u}, 0\rangle$ (b), $50.7\%$ of the reference eigenfunction is recovered [see result in~panel~(e)]. Considering the scar functions in panels~(b) and~(c), one reconstructs~$70.6\%$ of the reference eigenfunction, as seen in~panel~(f). Finally, combining all basis functions shown in panels~(b)--(d) and~(h)--(j) one gets the wave function shown in the panel (m), which is very similar to the exact eigenfunction of panel (a), despite de fact that it has been calculated using functions that are localized over nonisomerizing POs. Actually, the overlap between the exact eigenfunction and the approximate one computed using this, six elements, basis set equals an excellent~$87.0\%$. By using~12 basis elements, 95.3\% of the exact eigenfunction is reconstructed, and by combination of~38 basis elements, 99.0\%. Recall that the localized (tube and scar) wave functions and the partially reconstructed eigenfunctions shown in Fig.~\ref{fig.11} have been normalized using different criteria (see discussion on Fig.~\ref{fig.10} above). For further information on the structure of all the~66 accurately computed eigenfunctions obtained with our localized basis set, see the Supplemental Material. \subsection{Errors in the eigenenergies and the eigenfunctions} \label{subsec.errors} Fig.~\ref{fig.12} shows the error in the eigenenergies measured in mean level spacing units, $\Delta E_r=\vert E-E'\vert \; \rho$, (top red circles), and in the corresponding eigenfunctions, $1-\langle N' \vert N \rangle^2$, (bottom blue asterisks), respectively, computed using our localized basis set as a function of the relative dispersion,~$\sigma_r$, given by Eq.~\eqref{eq.sigmar}. As can be inferred from the figure and \emph{a priori} expected, both errors increase with the relative dispersion. The black lines in Fig.~\ref{fig.12} correspond to the upper bound for the errors in the energies and eigenfunctions of our vibrational states calculation given by \begin{equation} \Delta E_r \le \frac{4}{3}\sigma_r^{3/4}, \qquad 1-\langle N' \vert N \rangle^2 \le \sigma_r, \label{eq.errors} \end{equation} which indicates that the error in the eigenenergies scales as~$\sigma_r^{3/4}$ with the relative dispersion, while that in the eigenfunctions does it linearly. Let us remark that the Eqns.~\eqref{eq.errors} have been obtained \emph{heuristically}, so one could equally well define other (in general more complicated) functions to estimate the upper bounds. However, we have decided to use these expressions as they extremelly simple, and similar to those previously used by some of us in the study of other classically chaotic systems~\cite{Vergini08, Revuelta13}. Let us finally remark the usefullness of Eqns.~\eqref{eq.errors} as one can use them to know \emph{a priori} the errors expected in the calculation of highly excitated states~\cite{Vergini08, Revuelta13} by simply measuring the relative dispersion, which is a very easy to calculate parameter. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig_12.pdf} \caption{Error in the eigenenergies (top red cicles) and eigenfunctions (bottom blue asteriscs) of the eigenstates using our localized basis set, estimated as described in Sec.~\ref{subsec.errors}, as a function of the relative dispersion~\eqref{eq.sigmar}. The solid lines indicate the upper error bounds given by Eq.~\eqref{eq.errors}.} \label{fig.12} \end{figure} \section{Conclusions and outlook}\label{sec.concl} Summarizing, we have presented a method to efficiently compute the vibrational eigenstates of floppy molecular systems, in which the classical phase space contains regios of regular and irregular motion at the same energy. The method uses the so--called tube and scar wave functions, respectively localized over stable and unstable POs, which then semiclassically account of these underlying classical structures of the system, this including short pieces of the invariant manifolds originated in the fixed point in the latter case. This method was originally introduced in the Ref.~\onlinecite{Revuelta13}, where it was applied to a highly chaotic system consisting of a homogeneous quartic coupled potential function. In this paper, we have extended that work by applying it to the study of a floppy molecule described by a realistic potential, namely the LiNC/LiCN isomerizing system. Using a basis set formed by~90 localized elements, we have accurately computed the~66 low--lying eigenenergies and the corresponding eigenfunctions of the system. More importantly, we have demonstrated that each eigenfunction is essentially reconstructed by a small number of basis elements, usually less than~5 in the energy range considered. Likewise, in order to demonstrate the efficiency of the method, a detailed discussion on the results has been performed, including an analysis of the structure of the eigenfunctions in terms of our efficient basis set, localization intensities, participation ratios, and also the errors of our computations, taking as reference the corresponding values as rendered by the DGB--DVR method of Ba{\u c}i\'{c} and Light~\cite{Bacic86}. Finally, let us remark that the extension of our approach to the full three--degrees--of--freedom calculations of LiNC/LiCN is straightforward, since it simply consists of making a direct product basis of the current functions and functions describing the third degree of freedom, $r$. However, the results reported by some of us in Ref.~\citenum{GM14} indicate that significant changes in the conclusions of the present work should not be expected. \section{Acknowledgements} We acknowledge financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) under Contracts No. MTM2012-39101 and MTM2015-63914-P and by ICMAT Severo Ochoa under Contract SEV-2015-0554. We also thank Prof. \`A.~Jorba for having provided us the Shampine--Gordon routines used in our classical calculations. \bibliographystyle{apsrev}
\section{Introduction} Competing exchange interactions produce complex magnetic states with a wide range of interesting behavior found in spin glass [\onlinecite{binder86}], spin ice [\onlinecite{harris97}], and magnetic skyrmions [\onlinecite{muhl11}]. In multiferroic materials, complex spin states can exibit a spin-induced electric polarization ${\bf P} $ due to either the spin current, $p$-$d$ orbital hybridization, or magnetostriction [\onlinecite{khomskii06, cheong07}]. Because the coupling between the electrical and magnetic properties in multiferroic materials is both scientifically and technologically important, the effects of competing exchange interactions have been investigated in a wide range of multiferroic materials such as $R$MnO$_3$ [\onlinecite{sushkov07}], CoCrO$_4$ [\onlinecite{yama06}], CuCrO$_2$ [\onlinecite{soda10}], CuFeO$_2$ [\onlinecite{seki10}], and MnWO$_4$ [\onlinecite{taniguchi09}]. While the first four materials [\onlinecite{sushkov07, yama06, soda10, seki10}] are geometrically frustrated due to competing interactions on a triangular lattice, MnWO$_4$ [\onlinecite{taniguchi09}] exhibits long-range competing interactions [\onlinecite{ye2011}] on a highly-distorted monoclinic lattice. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=8cm]{Fig1.eps} \caption{(Color online) (a) and (b) The predicted spin configuration for layers 1 and 2 in zero field. Spins 1 and 5 lie on a triangular layer above the first kagome layer in (a); spins 1$^{\prime }$ and 5$^{\prime }$ lie on a triangular layer above the second kagome layer in (b). Layers are arranged so that spins 1$^{\prime }$ and 5$^{\prime }$ lie directly above spins 1 and 5. } \end{figure} Compounds in the ``114" swedenborgite family [\onlinecite{rav12}] $R$Ba$M$$_4$O$_7$ ($M$= Co or Fe) contain alternating triangular and kagome layers, both of which are geometrically frustrated when undistorted. The ``114" cobaltites [\onlinecite{val02, tsipis05, bych05}] were initially studied to find charge ordering among the Co$^{2+}$ and Co$^{3+}$ ions. An important member of this family, YBaCo$_4$O$_7$ exhibits antiferromagnetic ordering [\onlinecite{chap06, khal11}] below 110 K and diffuse scattering [\onlinecite{val02, tsipis05}] indicative of spin disorder below 60 K. The magnetic state between 110 K and 60 K is stabilized by a structural transition [\onlinecite{bera13}] that relieves the geometric frustration. Both structural and magnetic transitions are quite sensitive to excess oxygen and no magnetic order [\onlinecite{maig06, avci13}] appears in YBaCo$_4$O$_{7+\delta }$ for $\delta \ge 0.12$. Another family member, YbBaCo$_4$O$_7$ undergoes a structural transition at 175 K that stabilizes an antiferromagnetic state below 80 K [\onlinecite{huq06}]. A particularly interesting ``114" cobaltite, {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} undergoes an orthorhombic distortion [\onlinecite{caig10, panja16}] that relieves the geometric magnetic frustration on both the kagome and triangular layers sketched in Fig.~1 above the magnetic transition temperature $T_c = 70$ K. Below $T_c$, {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} develops a very large spin-induced polarization $\sim 1700$ nC/cm$^2$ [\onlinecite{caig13}], second only to the conjectured [\onlinecite{jun15}] spin-induced polarization $\sim 3000$ nC/cm$^2$ of BiFeO$_3$. Also unusual, {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} displays a substantial ferrimagnetic moment of about 0.9 $\mu_{\rm B} $ per formula unit (f.u.) [\onlinecite{caig09}], which could allow magnetic control of the electric polarization. Although its ferroelectric transition is inaccessible and its permanent electric polarization is not switchable [\onlinecite{john14}], applications of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} might utilize the large spin-induced polarization produced by a magnetic field just below $T_c$ [\onlinecite{caig13}]. This paper examines the magnetic properties of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} based on a Heisenberg model with 12 nearest neighbor interactions and associated anisotropies. The magnetic state of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} can be described as a triangular array of ferrimagnetically aligned, bitetrahedral $c$-axis chains with net moment along ${\bf b} $. Competing interactions within each chain produce a non-collinear spin state. The strong electric polarization of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} below $T_c$ is induced by the displacement of oxygen atoms surrounding bonds that couple those chains. This paper has six sections. Section II proposes a microscopic model for {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$}. New magnetization and optical measurements are presented in Section III. Fitting results are discussed in Section IV. In Section V, we predict the spin-induced electric polarization. Section VI contains a conclusion. \section{Microscopic Model} Each magnetic unit cell of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} contains 16 Co ions on two kagome and two triangular layers with orthorhombic lattice constants $a=6.3$ \AA , $b=11.0$ \AA , and $c=10.2$ \AA . Four crystallographically distinct Co ions have three different valences [\onlinecite{caig10, chat11}]. Triangular layers contain mixed-valent Co$^{3+}$/Co$^{2+}\underline{L}$ (${\underline L}$ is a ligand hole) spins 1, 5, 9, and 13 with moments $M_1=2.9\,\mu_{\rm B} $. Kagome layers contain Co$^{2+}$ spins 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, and 15 with moments $M_2=M_3=2\,\mu_{\rm B} $ and mixed-valent Co$^{3+}$/Co$^{2+}\underline{L}$ spins 4, 8, 12, and 16 with $M_4=2.4\,\mu_{\rm B} $. Because adjacent kagome or triangular layers are related by symmetry, ${\bf S}_{i^{\prime }}={\bf S}_{i+8}$ on layer two is identical to ${\bf S}_i$ on layer one. With ${\bf S}_i = S_i (\cos \phi_i ,\sin \phi_i , 0)$ constrained to the $ab$ plane, the ferrimagnetic moment lies along ${\bf b}$ if $\phi_{i+4} = \pi -\phi_i$ ($i=1,\ldots, 4$). The 12 different nearest-neighbor exchange couplings $J_i$ are drawn in Figs.~1(a-b) and 2. Six of these ($J_1$ through $J_6$) couple the kagome and triangular layers as shown in Fig.~2; the other six ($J_7$ through $J_{12}$) couple the spins within a kagome layer as shown in Figs.~1(a) and (b). The dominance of nearest-neighbor exchange over next-nearest neighbor exchange [\onlinecite{john14}] justifies setting the exchange interactions between spins on the triangular layers to zero. Our model also includes easy-plane anisotropies $D$, easy-axis anisotropies $C$ within both kagome and triangular layers, and hexagonal anisotropy $A$ on the triangular layers. With magnetic field ${\bf B} $ along ${\bf m} $, the Hamiltonian is \begin{eqnarray} {\cal H}&=&-\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle }J_{ij} {\bf S}_i \cdot {\bf S}_j +D^{\rm tri} \sum_{i, {\rm tri}} {S_{ic}}^2 + D^{\rm kag} \sum_{i, {\rm kag}} {S_{ic}}^2 \nonumber \\ &-& C^{\rm kag} \sum_{i, {\rm kag}} ({\bf o}_i \cdot {\bf S}_i )^2 -C^{\rm tri} \sum_{i, {\rm tri}} ({\bf n}_i \cdot {\bf S}_i )^2 \nonumber \\ &-& A^{\rm tri} \,{\rm{Re}} \sum_{i, {\rm tri}} \bigl(S_{ia}+iS_{ib}\bigr)^6 - g\mu_{\rm B} B \sum_i {\bf m} \cdot {\bf S}_i, \end{eqnarray} where ${\bf S}_i$ is a spin $S$ operator on site $i$. For simplicity, we set $g=2$ for all spins. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=8cm]{Fig2.eps} \caption{(Color online) A sideways view of the zero-field spin configuration showing bitetrahedral $c$-axis chains $\alpha $ and $\beta $. } \end{figure} The easy-axis anisotropy terms proportional to $C^{\rm kag} $ and $C^{\rm tri} $ involve unit vectors ${\bf o}_i$ along the ``bowtie" directions $\phi_i = \pi /2 $ (spins 2 and 6), $5\pi /6$ (spins 3 and 8) and $7\pi /6$ (spins 4 and 7) for the kagome layers and ${\bf n}_i$ along the $\phi_i= \pi/6$ (spin 1) and $-\pi/6 $ (spin 5) directions for the triangular layers. The hexagonal anisotropy on the triangular layers has expectation value \begin{equation} -A^{\rm tri} {S_1}^6 \sum_{i ,{\rm tri}} \sin^6 \theta_i \cos 6\phi_i .\nonumber \end{equation} All anisotropy terms may act to constrain the spins to the $ab$ plane. Spin amplitudes $S_n$ are fixed at their observed values $M_n/2\mu_{\rm B} $ after performing a $1/S$ expansion about the classical limit. Alternatively, the spins $S_n$ could all have been taken as 3/2 but with different $g$-factors for different sets of spins. As discussed below, that would reduce the estimated exchange coupling $J_{ij}$ by a factor of $4S_iS_j/9$. Static properties are obtained by minimizing the classical energy $\langle {\cal H}\rangle $ (the zeroth-order term in this expansion) with respect to the 16 spin angles. The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a $32 \times 32$ equations-of-motion matrix [\onlinecite{fishman13}] produced by the second-order term in the $1/S$ expansion give the optical mode frequencies and absorptions, respectively. \section{Magnetization and optical measurements} Perhaps due to excess or deficient oxygen [\onlinecite{seikh14}] or different domain populations (see below), previous magnetization measurements [\onlinecite{caig09, caig10, qu11, iwamoto12, seikh12}] on {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} are rather scattered. Consequently, new magnetization measurements were performed at 4 K on hexagonally-twinned crystals with a common ${\bf c} ={\bf z} =[0,0,1]$ axis. In domain I, ${\bf a} $ lies along the laboratory direction ${\bf x} = [1,0,0]$ and ${\bf b} $ lies along ${\bf y} = [0,1,0]$; in domain II, ${\bf a} = [-1/2,\sqrt{3}/2, 0]$ and ${\bf b} = [-\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2,0]$; and in domain III, ${\bf a} = [-1/2,-\sqrt{3}/2, 0]$ and ${\bf b} = [\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2,0]$. If $p_l$ are the domain populations, then the magnetizations $M_x$ and $M_y$ measured with fields along ${\bf x} $ and ${\bf y} $ only depend on $p_1$ and $p_2 + p_3 = 1-p_1$. Of course, $M_z$ measured with field along ${\bf z} $ is independent of $p_l$. Fig.~3 indicates that all three magnetizations increase monotonically up to at least 32 T. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{Fig3.eps} \caption{(Color online) The measured (circles and squares) and predicted (solid curves) magnetizations for field along $[1,0,0]$, $[0,1,0]$, or $[0,0,1]$. } \end{figure} Previous optical measurements [\onlinecite{bord15}] at the ordering wavevector ${\bf Q} $ found two conventional spin-wave modes that couple to the ground state through the magnetization operator ${\bf M} =2\mu_{\rm B} \sum_i {\bf S}_i$. These magnetic-resonance (MR) modes are degenerate in zero field with a frequency of 1.07 THz and split almost linearly with increasing field along ${\bf y} $, as shown in Fig.~4. For ${\bf m}= {\bf y} $, the MR modes are excited in two geometries: ($i$) with THz fields ${\bf E}_{\omega } \|\| {\bf x} $ and ${\bf B}_{\omega } \|\| {\bf z} $ and ($ii$) with ${\bf E}_{\omega } \|\| {\bf z} $ and ${\bf B}_{\omega } \|\| {\bf x} $. Those measurements also found an electromagnon (EM) that couples to the ground state through the polarization operator ${\bf P} $. The EM with zero-field frequency 1.41 THz is only excited in geometry $ii$. \begin{table} \caption{Exchange and anisotropy parameters in meV.} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccccc} & $p_1$ & $J_1=J_5$ & $J_2=J_4$ & $J_3=J_6$ & $J_7$ & $J_8$ & $J_9$ & $J_{10}$ & $J_{11}=J_{12}$ & $D^{\rm kag} $ & $D^{\rm tri} $ & $C^{\rm kag} $ & $C^{\rm tri} $ & ${S_1}^4A^{\rm tri} $ \\ \hline & 0.185 & $-91.5$ & $-10.8$ & $41.4$ & $-29.9$ & $187.8$ & $7.9$ & $108.0$ & $-6.7$ & $-0.67$ & $-1.24$ & $3.70$ & $0.77$ & $0.0064$ \\ error & $\pm 0.071 $ & $\pm 3.6$ & $\pm 0.5$ & $\pm 0.7$ & $\pm 1.9$ & $\pm 7.5$ & $\pm 0.1$ & $\pm 4.5$ & $\pm 0.1$ & $\pm 0.06$ & $\pm 0.03$ & $\pm 0.15$ & $\pm 0.09$ & $\pm 0.0004$ \\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \label{all} \end{table} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=8cm]{Fig4.eps} \caption{(Color online) The predicted MR (solid) and EM (dashed) modes for domain I (thick) and domains II and III (thin). Measured modes are indicated by solid points. } \end{figure} Because the exchange couplings already break every degeneracy in the unit cell, the 16 predicted modes for a single domain are non-degenerate. Therefore, the split MR modes must come from different domains. This was verified by measuring [\onlinecite{experiment}] the MR mode frequencies as a function of the rotation angle $\theta $ for field ${\bf B} =B(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta ,0)=B({\bf x} \cos \theta + {\bf y} \sin \theta )$ in the laboratory reference frame. In practice, this is accomplished by rotating the sample about ${\bf c} $ while keeping the field fixed along ${\bf x} $. As shown in Fig.~5 for 12 and 15 T, each hexagonal domain then contributes one MR branch with a period of $\pi $. With field ${\bf B}_{{\rm loc}} = B (\cos \psi , \sin \psi, 0)= B({\bf a} \cos \psi + {\bf b} \sin \psi )$ in the domain reference frame, the upper MR mode in Fig.~4 corresponds to the $\psi = \pi /2$ mode for domain I while the lower MR mode corresponds to the degenerate $\psi = \pm \pi /6$ modes for domains II and III. Previously measured MR frequencies plotted in Fig.~4 at 12 T correspond to the diamond and triangular points in Fig.~5(b) at $\theta = \pi/2$. Cusps in the MR curves for each domain at $\psi = 0$ and $\pi $ are caused by flipping the $b$ component of the magnetization (see inset to Fig.~5(b)). \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=8.3cm]{Fig5.eps} \caption{(Color online) The measured (solid circles) and predicted (blue, red, and green curves for domains I, II, and III, respectively) angular dependence of the MR mode frequencies for 12 and 15 T. The inset to (a) sketches the angular dependence of ${\bf B}_{\rm SF}$ (dashed curve), which separates low-field (LF) and high-field (HF) states. The inset to (b) shows the net magnetization of any domain for angles $\psi $ on either side of 0. Flips of the $b$-axis spin at $\psi =0$ and $\pi $ produce cusps in the mode frequencies.} \end{figure} \section{Fitting results} Fits for the coupling parameters utilize the field dependence of ${\bf M} $, the zero-field powder-diffraction data [\onlinecite{caig10}], the field dependence of the MR and EM modes at $\theta = \pi/2$ [\onlinecite{bord15}], and the MR mode frequencies at $\theta =0 $ and $\pi /3$ for 7, 12 and 15 T. The resulting exchange and anisotropy constants are provided in Table I and the corresponding zero-field spin state is plotted in Figs.~1(a-b). In contrast to the previously proposed [\onlinecite{caig10}] spin state with zig-zag chains in the $ab$ plane containing spins 2, 3, 6, and 7, our spin state can be better described as an array of $c$-axis chains or connected bitetrahedra [\onlinecite{valldor04, chap06}] containing spins $\{1,2,3,4\}$ (chain $\alpha $) or $\{5,6,7,8\}$ (chain $\beta $) as sketched in Fig.~2. Chains are coupled by exchanges $J_9$, $J_{10}$, and $J_{12}$ in the $ab$ plane. What explains the wide range of $J_i$ values? An orthorhombic distortion [\onlinecite{caig10, panja16}] with $b/(a\sqrt{3})-1 \rightarrow 0.018$ as $T\rightarrow 0$ breaks the hexagonal symmetry of the $ab$ plane and explains the difference between the pairs $\{ J_1 ,J_2\}$, $\{ J_8, J_{11}\}$, and $\{J_{10}, J_{12}\}$. The difference between couplings like $\{J_7 ,J_8\}$ is caused by charge ordering: whereas $J_7$ couples moments 2 and 3 with $M_2=M_3$, $J_8$ couples moments 2 and 4 with $M_2\ne M_4$. Charge ordering also explains the difference between the pairs $\{J_2, J_3\}$ and $\{J_9 ,J_{10}\}$. Although not demanded by symmetry, we set $J_1=J_5$, $J_2=J_4$, $J_3=J_6$, and $J_{11}=J_{12}$ because the spin state and excitations at ${\bf Q} $ only depend on their averages [\onlinecite{average}]. \begin{table} \caption{Ratios of powder-diffraction peak intensities} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc} & $I(002)/I(101)$ & $I(012)/I(101)$ & $I(111)/I(101)$ & $I(112)/I(101)$ & $I(121)/I(101)$ & $I(122)/I(101)$ & $M_b (\mu_{\rm B}$/f.u.) & $\chi^2 $ \\ \hline experimental [\onlinecite{caig10}] & 0.344 & 0.326 & 0.322 & 0.477 & 0.262 & 0.404 & & \\ previous [\onlinecite{caig10}] & 0.286 & 0.414 & 0.384 & 0.411 & 0.232 & 0.427 & 0.88 & 0.021 \\ currrent & 0.360 & 0.380 & 0.378 & 0.286 & 0.313 & 0.449 & 1.33 & 0.047 \\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \label{alf} \end{table} Given other conditions, our fit chooses the spin state that matches the powder-diffraction data [\onlinecite{caig10}] as closely as possible. At zero field, the predicted spin state has angles $\phi_1= -0.83 \pi $, $\phi_2= 0.40\pi$, $\phi_3= -0.23\pi $, and $\phi_4= 0.62\pi $. Based exclusively on powder-diffraction data and symmetry constraints, the previously proposed spin state [\onlinecite{caig10}] had $\phi_1=-0.24 \pi $, $\phi_2 = \phi_3 =0.67\pi $, and $\phi_4=-0.44\pi $. In both cases, $\phi_{i+4} = \pi -\phi_i$ ($i=1,\ldots, 4$) so that the moment $M_b$ lies along the $b$ axis. As shown in Table II, our spin state does not satisfy the powder diffraction data quite as well as the earlier state, primarily because it underestimates the powder diffraction peak $I(112)$. For the previous spin state, $\chi^2$ is minimized by Lorentzian form factors with $Q_1/4\pi = 0.088$ \AA$^{-1}$, $Q_2/4\pi = Q_3/4\pi = 0.095$ \AA$^{-1}$, and $Q_4/4\pi = 0.088$ \AA$^{-1}$ for spins $S_n$. For the new spin state, $Q_1/4\pi = 0.052$ \AA$^{-1}$, $Q_2/4\pi = Q_3/4\pi = 0.224$ \AA$^{-1}$, and $Q_4/4\pi = 0.102$ \AA$^{-1}$. All are smaller than the scale $Q_0/4\pi \approx 0.3 \,\AA^{-1}$ measured by Khan and Erickson [\onlinecite{khan70}] for Co$^{2+}$ in CoO. Our results indicate that the exchange coupling $J_8\approx 188$ meV between moments 2 (Co$^{2+}$, $S_2 = 1$) and 4 (Co$^{3+}$/Co$^{2+}\underline{L}$, $S_4 = 1.2$) is strongly ferromagnetic and larger in magnitude even than the 155 meV antiferromagnetic coupling found in the cuprate Nd$_2$CuO$_4$ [\onlinecite{bourges97}]. The strength of this coupling might be explained by the double-exchange mediated hopping of ligand holes $\underline{L}$ [\onlinecite{maig06}] from site 4 to 2. Bear in mind, however, that the estimated exchange parameters would be significantly reduced if the fits were performed with $S=3/2$ for all Co spins. In particular, $J_8$ would then fall from 188 to 100 meV. Except for $J_{10}$, the five largest exchange couplings $J_1= J_5\approx -92$ meV, $J_3=J_6\approx 41$ meV, and $J_8\approx 188$ meV lie within connected bitetrahedral, $c$-axis chains. Inside each chain, competing interactions between spins 1, 2, and 4 produce a non-collinear spin state. Although occupying a triangular lattice, chains $\alpha $ and $\beta $ are magnetically ordered with moments ${\bf M}^{\rm ch}= (\pm 1.18,1.33,0)\mu_{\rm B} $/f.u.. These chains are primarily coupled by the strongly ferromagnetic interaction $J_{10} \approx 108$ meV between nearly parallel spins $\{4, 6\}$ ($\phi_4=0.62\pi$, $\phi_6=0.60\pi $) and $\{2,8\}$ ($\phi_2 = 0.40\pi $, $\phi_8=0.38\pi $). Above $T_c=70$ K, the short-range order within each chain may be responsible for the large, negative Curie-Weiss temperature $\Theta_{\rm CW} \approx -1720$ [\onlinecite{caig09}] or $-890$ K [\onlinecite{qu11}], the larger than expected Curie constant [\onlinecite{caig09}], and the susceptibility anomaly [\onlinecite{qu11}] at 360 K suggestive of short-range magnetic order far above $T_c$. Comparison between the theoretical and experimental results for the magnetization in Fig.~3 suggests that roughly 20\% of the sample is in domain I. Different domain populations or even orthorhombic twinning in other samples may explain the discrepancies between the reported magnetization measurements [\onlinecite{caig09, caig10, qu11, iwamoto12, seikh12}]. Easy-axis anisotropies $A$ and $C$ favor ferrimagnetic alignment along ${\bf b} $ rather than ${\bf a} $. The spin-flop (SF) field required to flip the spins towards the ${\bf a} $ direction must increase as the field along ${\bf b} $ increases [\onlinecite{trans}]. As shown in the inset to Fig.~5(a), $B_{\rm SF}(\psi )$ then increases with $\psi $. If $B_{\rm SF}(\psi = 0) < 15$ T, then the MR spectrum for 15 T would show a discontinuity at the transition from a low-field (LF) to a high-field (HF) state below some critical value of $\psi $. Since the MR mode frequencies in Fig.~5(a) do not exhibit any discontinuities as a function of $\psi $, we conclude that $B_{\rm SF}(\psi = 0)$ exceeds 15 T and probably, based on the smooth dependence of the magnetizations on field, exceeds 32 T as well. The apparent small size of $B_{\rm SF}$ [\onlinecite{pralong11, caig13}] must reflect the net magnetization of all three domains. Predicted modes below 5 THz are plotted in Fig.~4. The Goldstone modes for all three domains are lifted by in-plane anisotropies to become the MR modes with zero-field frequencies of 1.07 THz. As remarked earlier, the lower MR mode comes from domains II and III while the upper MR mode comes from domain I. Below 3.5 THz, one EM mode is produced in domain I and another in domains II and III. The degenerate EM modes from domains II and III dominate the optical absorption. The predicted field dependence of the upper MR mode is quite close to the observed dependence. But the predicted curvatures of the lower MR mode and the EM mode, both from domains II and III, is not observed. \section{Spin-Induced Electric Polarization} Below the ferrimagnetic transition, {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} is reported [\onlinecite{caig13}] to develop a very large spin-induced polarization $\sim 1700$ nC/cm$^2$, which is surpassed in type I multiferroics only by the conjectured [\onlinecite{jun15}] spin-induced polarization $\sim 3000$ nC/cm$^2$ of BiFeO$_3$. Other measurements indicate that the spin-induced polarization of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} ranges from 320 nC/cm$^2$ [\onlinecite{iwamoto12}] to 900 nC/cm$^2$ [\onlinecite{kocsis}]. The electric-field dependence of any interaction term in the spin Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$ can induce an electric polarization below $T_c$. However, the electric-field dependence of the easy-plane anisotropy $D$ cannot explain the spin-induced polarization along ${\bf c} $ because the expectation value of $P_i = \kappa {S_{ic}}^2$ with $\kappa = -\partial D/\partial E_c$ would vanish in zero magnetic field when all the spins lie in the $ab$ plane. Easy-axis anisotropy $A$ or $C$ in the $ab$ plane could produce a spin-induced electric polarization perpendicular to ${\bf c} $. But the EM mode would then become observable for a THz electric field in the $ab$ plane, contrary to measurements. As conjectured previously [\onlinecite{caig13}], the spin-induced polarization in {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$} must then be generated by the dependence of the exchange interactions $J_{ij}$ on an electric field, called magnetostriction. Coupling constant $\lambda_{ij}= \partial J_{ij} /\partial E_c$ for bond $\{ i,j \}$ is associated with a spin-induced polarization [\onlinecite{PP}] per site of $P_c^{ij} = \lambda_{ij}\, {\bf S}_i\cdot {\bf S}_j /4$, which accounts for the four equivalent bonds per unit cell. Expanding in the electric field $E_c$ yields an interaction term $-E_c\, \lambda_{ij}\, {\bf S}_i \cdot {\bf S}_j$, linear in the electric field and quadratic in the spin operators. Taking $\vert 0\rangle $ as the ground state and $\vert n\rangle $ as the excited spin-wave state, the MR matrix element $\langle n \vert M_a \vert 0\rangle $ mixes with the EM matrix element $\langle n \vert P^{ij}_c \vert 0\rangle $ for domains II and III but not for domain I. Therefore, our model can explain the strong asymmetry [\onlinecite{miyahara11}] $\sim {\rm Re} \bigl\{ \langle n \vert {\bf M}\cdot {\bf B}_{\omega} \vert 0\rangle \langle 0 \vert {\bf P} \cdot {\bf E}_{\omega} \vert n\rangle \bigr\}$ in the absorption of counter-propagating light waves [\onlinecite{bord15}] for the lower observed MR mode in geometry $ii$ with ${\bf E}_{\omega } \|\| {\bf c} $. But it cannot explain the observed asymmetry of this mode in geometry $i$ with ${\bf E}_{\omega } \perp {\bf c} $ if only $\langle 0 \vert P_c\vert n \rangle $ is significant. How can we estimate the coupling constants $\lambda_{ij}$ and the spin-induced electric polarization? The optical absorption of any mode in domain $l$ is proportional to ${p_l}^2$ because each matrix element is separately proportional to $p_l$. At nonzero field, the EM mode absorption is proportional to ${p_2}^2+{p_3}^2$ while the upper MR mode absorption is proportional to ${p_1}^2$. At zero field, all domains have the same mode spectrum so that both the MR and EM mode absorptions are proportional to ${p_1}^2+{p_2}^2+{p_3}^2$. Experimentally, the ratio $r$ of the absorption of the EM mode to the absorption of the upper MR mode rises from $r=7.5$ at 0 T to $r=35$ at 10 T. This growth is explained by the $B > 0$ ratio $({p_2}^2+{p_3}^2)/{p_1}^2 \approx 10 \pm 5$ for $p_1=0.185\pm 0.071$ and $p_2=p_3=(1-p_1)/2$. At both 0 and 10 T, the only sets of bonds that generate spin-induced polarizations of the right magnitude are $\{2,7\}$ and $\{3,4\}$. Each of those bonds couples adjacent $c$-axis chains through pairs of spins that are almost anti-parallel. From the relative absorptions $r$ at 0 or 10 T, we estimate that $\langle P^{27}_c \rangle \approx 2350$ or 1960 nC/cm$^2$ and $\langle P^{34}_c \rangle \approx 2110$ or 1730 nC/cm$^2$. Results for both sets of bonds are consistent with the recently observed [\onlinecite{caig13}] polarization of 1700 nC/cm$^2$. By contrast, density-functional theory [\onlinecite{john14}] predicts that the spin-induced polarization along ${\bf c} $ is 460 nC/cm$^2$. The spin-induced polarization should remain fairly constant with applied magnetic field, decreasing by about 1\% for a 10 T field along ${\bf b} $. \section{Conclusion} We have presented a nearly complete solution for the magnetization, spin state, and mode frequencies of the swedenborgite {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$}. An orthorhombic distortion above $T_c$ partially relieves the geometric frustration on the kagome and triangular layers and allows ferrimagnetism and ferroelectricity to coexist below $T_c$. Although occupying a triangular lattice, bitetrahedral $c$-axis chains are ferrimagnetically ordered in the $ab$ plane. Competing interactions within each chain produce non-collinear spin states. Sets of bonds coupling those chains are responsible for the large spin-induced polarization of {\rm CaBaCo$_4$O$_7$}. Despite its fixed permanent electric polarization, this swedenborgite may yet have important technological applications utilizing the large changes [\onlinecite{caig13}] in the spin-induced polarization when a modest magnetic field $< 1$ T is applied along ${\bf b} $ just below $T_c$. A big jump in the polarization should also be produced just below $T_c$ by rotating a fixed magnetic field about the $c$ axis. Above all, our work illuminates a pathway to develop other functional materials with sizeable magnetic moments and electrical polarizations. \acknowledgements Research sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Sciences and Engineering Division (RF), by the Hungarian Research Funds OTKA K 108918, OTKA PD 111756, and Bolyai 00565/14/11 (SB, VK, and IK), and by the institutional research funding IUT23-3 of the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research and the European Regional Development Fund project TK134 (TR and UN).
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} Complex-valued functions invariant under the action of wallpaper groups have been considered by Farris and coauthors, in a number of articles \cite{Farris:1998bh,Farris:2002dq} and recently, a semi-popular book \cite{Farris:2015qf}. The functions considered in these studies are essentially all solutions to the wave equation on the Euclidean plane $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^2 $. However, since we may also take the plane to be the complex plane $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} $, a natural alternative to this idea is to consider \emph{meromorphic} functions which are invariant under the action of the wallpaper groups. It is clear that they shall all be elliptic (see \autoref{thm:wallell} below), and hence we can expect to classify them completely using the decomposition in terms of Weierstrass elliptic functions. This is the aim of this paper. The first investigations in this area appear to be those posted as answers to two questions \cite{35671,36737} posed on \texttt{math.stackexchange}, where a number of examples of elliptic functions invariant under particular wallpaper symmetries are given (in particular, those corresponding to the wallpaper groups containing only sense-preserving transformations). We shall verify the conclusions therein, and provide what appears to be the natural extension to the other wallpaper groups, which include reflexions, by specifying that reflexions $R$ in the group act by conjugation in both the domain and the range: this acts to keep the function meromorphic, while still allowing for extra structure to manifest itself. In the remainder of this section, we outline the facts that we require from the theory of elliptic functions, and of the wallpaper groups. In \autoref{sec:meromorphic-wallpaper-funct}, we consider the functions invariant under the groups which do not contain reflexions, and then in \autoref{sec:gener-refl-groups}, we consider a way of generalising the idea to the rest of the wallpaper groups. In the last section, we suggest a number of ways in which the investigation could be extended to other groups and geometries. \subsection{Elliptic functions} \label{sec:elliptic-functions} The facts in this section may be found in any standard text which discusses elliptic functions.\footnote{For example, \cite{Jones:1987ly}, Ch.~3 or \cite{WhittakerWatson:1927ve}, Ch.~XX.} \begin{definition} An \emph{elliptic function} is a meromorphic function $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} \to \mathbb{CP}^1 $ with two nonparallel periods: that is, there are nonzero complex $\omega_1 $ and $ \omega_2 $, $ \omega_1/\omega_2 \notin \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}} $, with $ f(z)=f(z+\omega_1)=f(z+\omega_2)$. The set $ \Lambda = \ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}} \omega_1 + \ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}} \omega_2$ is called the \emph{period lattice} of $f$. \end{definition} We recall that the Weierstrass elliptic function associated with the lattice $\Lambda$ is \begin{equation} \label{eq:1} \wp{(z;\Lambda)} := \frac{1}{z^2} + \sideset{}{'}\sum_{\omega \in \Lambda} \frac{1}{(z-\omega)^2} - \frac{1}{\omega^2}, \end{equation} where $\sum' $ conventionally means that the term $\omega=0$ is omitted. This has the following basic properties: \begin{enumerate} \item $ \wp $ is even. \item It has a pole of order two at each point of $ \Lambda $, and is elsewhere analytic. \item It satisfies the differential equation \begin{equation} \label{eq:2} \wp'^2 = 4\wp^3 - g_2 \wp - g_3, \end{equation} where $g_2,g_3$ are the Eisenstein series $g_2=60\sum' \omega^{-4}$ and $ g_3 = 140\sum' \omega^{-6}$. \item Thus, it is the inverse of the integral \begin{equation} \label{eq:3} u = \int_{\wp}^{\infty} \frac{ds}{\sqrt{4s^3-g_2 s-g_3}}. \end{equation} \item Most importantly for our purposes, any elliptic function with period lattice $\Lambda$ can be written uniquely in the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:4} f(z) = R(\wp(z))+S(\wp(z))\wp'(z), \end{equation} where $R,S$ are rational functions. \item Later we shall have reason to use the addition formula for the Weierstrass elliptic function in the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:38} \wp(z+w) = \frac{1}{4}\left( \frac{\wp'(z)-\wp'(w)}{\wp(z)-\wp(w)} \right)^2 -\wp(z)-\wp(w) \end{equation} \end{enumerate} \subsection{Wallpaper groups} \label{sec:wallpaper-groups} \begin{definition} A \emph{wallpaper group} is a group of rigid motions of the plane, containing two non-parallel translations. \end{definition} It is well-known\footnote{One reference is \cite{Coxeter:1980ve}, which also contains presentations for each of the wallpaper groups; these differ slightly from ours primarily because the action of complex transformations on elliptic functions is most efficiently chosen to have as few reflexions as possible.} that there are precisely 17 wallpaper groups (up to isomorphism, of course). The wallpaper groups induce an obvious group action on the complex plane, via: \begin{equation} \label{eq:5} g.z = az+b \end{equation} if $g$ is sense-preserving, and \begin{equation} \label{eq:6} g.z = a\bar{z}+b, \end{equation} if $ g$ is sense-reversing (i.e. decomposes to an odd number of reflexions). Since the conjugate would force the transformed function to be antimeromorphic, restricting to meromorphic functions requires that the group can contain no reflexions or glide reflexions: in particular, this excludes pg, pm, cm, pgg, pmg, pmm, cmm, p3m1, p31m, p4g, p4m and p6m. We are left with the 5 \emph{sensible groups},\footnote{so-called since they preserve \emph{sense}, or orientation.} p1, p2, p4, p3 and p6. \section{Meromorphic wallpaper functions} \label{sec:meromorphic-wallpaper-funct} Let $ G $ be a wallpaper group. We call $f$ a \emph{wallpaper function} if for every complex number $z$, $ f(g.z)=f(z) $ for every $g \in G$: i.e. $f$ is $ G$-invariant. As remarked above, considering meromorphic wallpaper functions forces us to restrict to the sensible wallpaper groups. We have the following immediate \begin{result} \label{thm:wallell} Every meromorphic wallpaper function is elliptic. \end{result} \begin{proof} $G$ contains two nonparallel translations, which may be represented by $ z \mapsto z+ \omega_1 $, $ z \mapsto z + \omega_2 $, with $ \omega_1/\omega_2 \notin \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}$. Since $f$ is $G$-invariant, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:7} f(z) = f(z+\omega_1)=f(z+\omega_2), \end{equation} which is exactly the condition that $ f$ is elliptic. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} Every meromorphic wallpaper function is of the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:8} f(z) = R(\wp(z)) + S(\wp(z)) \wp'(z), \end{equation} where $R,S$ are rational functions. \end{corollary} It is fairly clear how we must proceed now: we shall determine the restrictions on $R,S$ for each of the sensible wallpaper groups. Since each of these is generated by the translations and a single rotation, it is sufficient to examine the transformation of \eqref{eq:8} under the rotation. \subsection{p1} \label{sec:p1} The lattice cell for the group p1 is in general a parallelogram. This group possesses no isometries extra to the translations, and so no further restriction is imposed: we conclude that \emph{any} elliptic function is p1-invariant. \subsection{p2} \label{sec:p2} Here again the translation lattice cell is in general a parallelogram. Now, however, we have also a rotation by $\pi$, i.e. an idempotent map $ r $, $r^2 = 1 $ that satisfies \begin{equation} \label{eq:9} ar=a^{-1}, \quad br=b^{-1}. \end{equation} An obvious realisation of this isometry is the map $ z \mapsto -z $: hence we require \begin{equation} \label{eq:10} f(z) = f(r.z) = f(-z), \end{equation} i.e. that $ f $ is even. Since $ \wp(z) $ is an even function, the decomposition (\ref{eq:8}) gives that $ R \circ \wp $ is an even function and $ \wp' \cdot S \circ \wp $ is odd, and hence the meromorphic p2-invariant functions are those of the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:11} f(z) = R(\wp(z)) \end{equation} for $ R $ a rational function. \subsection{p4} \label{sec:p4} This group has a square lattice cell; hence we are forced into the \emph{lemniscate case}, where the period ratio is $ \omega_2/\omega_1 = i $, say. It is the group generated by the translations, and a rotation by $ \pi/2 $, $r^4=1$. An obvious representation of this rotation is multiplication by $i$. Since restricting to the subgroup generated by $a,b$ and $ r^2 $ gives a p2, we already know that p4-invariant functions have to be even, and hence they are certainly of the form $ f(z) = R(\wp(z)) $. Therefore, we now have to understand what $r$ does to $\wp$. \begin{lemma} Under the action of $r$, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:12} \wp(r.z) = -\wp(z). \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} There are a number of ways of proving this. One possible way is to consider the series definition, or the expression of $\wp$ as a power series used in deriving the differential equation. We shall do it using our decomposition: $ \wp(iz) = R_i (\wp(z))+S_i (\wp(z))\wp'(z) $. It is apparent by considering the principal part of the Laurent series at zero, $ z^{-2} $, that $ \wp $ does not map to itself under $z \mapsto iz$. Clearly since $ \wp(z) $ is even, $ \wp(iz) $ is also even. Now, because $ \omega_2=i\omega_1 $, $ \wp(iz) $ has the same poles as $ \wp(z) $, with the same orders as those of $\wp(z) $. Therefore $ \wp(iz) = R_i (\wp(z)) $. Moreover, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:13} \wp(z)=\wp(-z) = \wp(i(iz)) = R_i(\wp(iz)) = R_i(R_i(\wp(z))), \end{equation} so $ R_i $ is a rational function with $ R_i(R_i(w))=w $ for any complex $w$. Since the poles are preserved, $ R_i: \infty \mapsto \infty $, and hence $R_i$ is an automorphism of $\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}}$: $ R_i(w) = aw+b $. The only functions of this form that have order 2 are those with $a=-1$. $ b=0$ because the constant term in the Laurent series expansion of $ \wp(z) $ at $z=0$ is unaffected by applying $ r $. \end{proof} Having obtained this result, it is clear that we need \begin{equation} \label{eq:14} f(z) = f(iz)= R(\wp(iz)) = R(-\wp(z)) = R(\wp(z)), \end{equation} so $R$ is an even rational function, i.e. a function of $ R(z)=T(z^2) $ for some rational function $T$. Then $f(z) = R(\wp(z)) = T(\wp(z)^2)$ is invariant under the action of the generators of p4, and hence under the whole group action. \subsection{p3} \label{sec:p3} By now the process should be clear: we consider the action of the stabiliser group of a lattice point on the basic functions $\wp,\wp' $, then obtain the relation that the rational functions $R,S$ must satisfy. Here, we have a hexagonal lattice. The group is generated by the translations, and the rotation of order 3, which we shall again call $r$. This time, $r$ may be represented by multiplication by $\omega$, where $\omega$ is a nontrivial cube root of unity. We show: \begin{lemma} Under the action of $ r $, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:15} \wp(r.z) = \wp(\omega z) = \omega \wp(z), \quad \wp'(\omega z) = \wp'(z). \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Since the lattice is hexagonal, the given transformation maps poles to poles; by the same argument as p2, we conclude that the automorphism of the Riemann sphere which $r$ induces descends to an automorphism of $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} $ that cubes to the identity: in particular, they are affine transformations. We now check this automorphism is the one given in the Lemma. Clearly $ \wp(z)-z^{-2} $ and $ \wp'(z)+2z^{-3} $ are analytic at $z=0$; since this must clearly remain true if we just replace $ z $ by $\omega z$, the given multiplications are the only ones possible. Considering the constant terms in the Laurent expansions at zero implies that the affine transformation can only be a rotation, and hence we obtain the result. \end{proof} Now, of course, we just need to decide what sort of rational functions are invariant under \emph{these} transformations. We obviously have this invariance if and only if $R(w),S(w)$ are invariant under $ w \mapsto \omega w $. What sort of functions are these? Clearly if $ w=\alpha $ is a root of the numerator (or the denominator), so are $ \omega\alpha$ and $ \omega^2\alpha $. Hence the polynomial contains the factor \begin{equation} (w-\alpha)(w-\omega\alpha)(w-\omega^2\alpha) = w^3 - (1+\omega+\omega^2)\alpha w^2 + (1+\omega^2+\omega^4)\alpha^2 w -\omega^3\alpha^3 = w^3-\alpha^3, \end{equation} since the roots of unity sum to zero. Hence $ R,S $ are rational functions in $w^3$. \begin{remark} In fact, this argument allows us to deduce that $ g_2=0 $ for the hexagonal lattice (this is then a scaling of the \emph{equianharmonic case}): otherwise, the equation \begin{equation} \label{eq:16} \wp'^2 = 4\wp^3-g_2 \wp -g_3 \end{equation} would be inconsistent on sending $ z \mapsto \omega z$, since the first two terms are invariant, but the third is not. A similar argument applies to the previous case and shows that $ g_3=0 $ for a square lattice. \end{remark} Given that $ g_2=0$, there is a simpler way to express this: since $ \wp^3=\wp'^2+g_3 $, we immediately have \begin{corollary} The invariant meromorphic functions for p3 are precisely rational functions of $ \wp'(z) $, $ R(\wp'(z)) $. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} This follows immediately from the above remark and the lemma. \end{proof} \begin{remark} For the case of a hexagonal lattice, there is an alternative presentation available in terms of \emph{Dixon's elliptic function} $ \operatorname{cm}(z) $, which may be given by \begin{equation} \label{eq:18} \operatorname{cm}(z) = 1+\frac{2}{3\wp'(z)-1}; \end{equation} it is clear from this expression that any rational function of $\wp'$ is also a rational function of this function. Sadly this does not extend to any other cases. \end{remark} \subsection{p6} \label{sec:p6} Fortunately, we do not need to carry out any further calculation here: p6 is generated by the translations, and two commuting rotations: $r$, of order 2, and $s$, of order 3. But we know what elliptic functions are invariant under each of these separately: those invariant under both are then just the intersection of the two sets. We obtain \begin{proposition} The meromorphic p6-invariant functions are precisely the functions \begin{equation} \label{eq:17} f(z) = U(\wp(z)^3) = V(\wp'(z)^2), \end{equation} where $U,V$ are rational functions. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Since $ f $ is invariant under $ r $, the argument of \autoref{sec:p2} shows that it must be even. Hence $ S\equiv 0 $ in the usual decomposition. The argument for p3 in the previous subsection shows that $ R(w) $ is a function of $ w^3 $, so we can take instead $ U(y) = R(w) $ with $ y=w^3 $, which gives the first equality; the relationship $ \wp^3=\wp'^2-g_3 $ gives the second. \end{proof} \subsection{Summary} \label{sec:summary} We have now classified all meromorphic functions invariant under the action of the sensible groups; we give here a summary of the results obtained in this section. \begin{table}[ht] \centering \begin{tabular}{c\|l} $G$ & form of $ G $-invariant functions \\ \hline p1 & $ R(\wp) + S(\wp) \cdot \wp' $ \\ p2 & $ R(\wp) $\\ p4 & $ R(\wp^2) $ \\ p3 & $ R(\wp') $ \\ p6 & $ R(\wp'^2) $ or $ S(\wp^3) $ \end{tabular} \caption{$G$-invariant meromorphic functions for the sensible wallpaper groups; $R,S$ are arbitrary rational functions.} \label{tab:sensibleinvariants} \end{table} \section{Generalisations to groups containing reflexions} \label{sec:gener-refl-groups} Because a meromorphic function of $ \bar{z}$ is no longer meromorphic, there are no nonconstant meromorphic functions invariant under $ m.z=\bar{z} $. It is therefore necessary to consider an alternative group action to continue producing invariant meromorphic functions. One way to do this is to modify the group action in the case of reflexions, and since we are discussing meromorphic functions, a natural idea is to associate sense-reversing transformations in the domain with sense-reversing transformations in the codomain, i.e., take conjugates in both domain and codomain; this will preserve conformality and hence meromorphicity.\footnote{We discuss some alternatives to this in the last section, but this seems to be the simplest extension.} Concretely, we replace the action of a general (glide-)reflexion $m$, with $ m.z = a\bar{z}+b $ for $ \abs{a}=1 $, by \begin{equation} \label{eq:39} \bar{m}.f(z) = \overline{f(m.z)} = \overline{f(a\bar{z}+b)}, \end{equation} which acts on both sides of $f$, and retains the meromorphicity of $ f $ as desired. There are essentially three different cases to consider: in increasing order of complexity, we have: \begin{enumerate} \item Eight groups that can be generated by adding one reflexion in the real axis to the sensible groups, as follows: \begin{enumerate} \item pm, p2mm, p4mm, p31m, and p6mm can be obtained from the sensible groups by taking one translation parallel to the real axis, and adding reflexion in the real axis (a ``rectiform basis''). \item cm, c2mm and p3m1 can be obtained from the sensible groups p1, p2 and p3 by choosing the translations to be interchanged by reflexion in the real axis (a ``rhombic basis''). \end{enumerate} \item Two groups which requires a non-axial reflexion, p2mg and p4mg. \item Two groups which require a glide reflexion, pg and p2gg. \end{enumerate} The cases in 1 are much easier to understand than those in 2 and 3. \subsection{Groups containing axial reflexions} \label{sec:groups-cont-refl} We begin with a discussion of general reflexions. The following lemma is standard: \begin{lemma} Let $m$ act by complex conjugation, $ m.z=\bar{z} $. Then $\bar{m}.f(z) = f(z)$ iff $f(z)$ is real for real $z$. \end{lemma} which we recognise as the Schwarz reflexion principle; we recall that the proof examines the meromorphic function $ f(z)-\bar{m}.f(z) $ on the real axis, where it is precisely equal to $ \Im(f(z)) $. \begin{corollary} \label{thm:mirrorcor} Let $ m $ be a reflexion in a line $ L \subset \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} $. Then $\bar{m}.f(z) = f(z)$ iff $f(z)$ is real for $z \in L $. \end{corollary} This has essentially the same proof as the previous lemma. \begin{corollary} The Weierstrass functions $\wp(z),\wp'(z)$ are real for real $z$ iff their lattices are invariant under conjugation. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} This is clear: if not, the function $ f(z)-\bar{m}.f(z) $ from the previous lemma has poles that are not cancelled out. If so, $ f(z)-\bar{m}.f(z) $ has no poles and is elliptic; hence it is constant, and examining the Laurent series at $z=0$ shows that it is zero. \end{proof} The next proposition gives the characterisation we want. \begin{proposition} Let $W$ be a wallpaper group containing reflexions, and define $ \bar{W} $ as the group obtained by replacing $ m \mapsto \bar{m} $ for any reflexion $m \in W$ (it is easy to check that this is consistent). Then $f$ is an elliptic function invariant under $\bar{W}$ if and only if it is \begin{enumerate} \item invariant under the sensible subgroup of $W$, and \item real on the lines invariant under $m$, for every $m \in W$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Every transformation in $ \bar{W} $ can be written as a composition of sensible maps and reflexions: hence $ f $ is invariant if and only if it is invariant under each of these separately. Invariance under sensible transformations is the first condition, and by \autoref{thm:mirrorcor}, the second condition occurs if and only if $ f $ is invariant under $\bar{m}$. \end{proof} As we noted above, if we align the lattice correctly, for most of the wallpaper groups containing reflexions it is sufficient to check the real line. In particular, this is the case for pm, p2mm, p4mm, p31m, and p6mm with rectiform lattices, and cm, c2mm, and p3m1 with rhombic lattices. In these cases, all other reflexions are generated by combining one in the real axis with elements of the sensible subgroup. There is one exception to this, and it is the group p2mg, which uses the reflexion \begin{equation} \label{eq:36} R.z=\bar{z}+\tfrac{1}{2}\beta i, \end{equation} which leaves invariant the ``quarter-translation line'' $\Im(z)=\tfrac{1}{4}\beta$. Since this condition is rather hard to visualise, we shall exploit a different technique to produce a more comprehensible set of functions. \subsection{pg and p2mg} \label{sec:pg-p2mg} From now on, the discussion becomes considerably more technical. Our lattices are all at worst rectangular, with $ \omega_1=\alpha $ and $\omega_2=i\beta$ for real $\alpha$ and $\beta$. We have the following result, from the addition formula: \begin{equation} \label{eq:22} \wp(z+\tfrac{1}{2}\omega_i) = e_i + \frac{(e_i-e_j)(e_i-e_k)}{\wp(z)-e_i}; \end{equation} differentiating this gives \begin{equation} \label{eq:23} \wp'(z+\tfrac{1}{2}\omega_i) = \frac{(e_i-e_j)(e_i-e_k)}{(\wp(z)-e_i)^2}\wp'(z) \end{equation} Therefore, to understand the glide reflexion $ L.z = \bar{z}+\tfrac{1}{2}\alpha $, used in pg and p4mg, we need to find the rational functions such that \begin{equation} \label{eq:24} R(u) = \overline{R\left( a+\frac{b}{u-a} \right)}, \quad S(u) = \frac{b}{(u-a)^2} \overline{S\left(a+\frac{b}{u-a}\right)}, \end{equation} for fixed real constants $a,b$ with $b \neq 0$. In fact, we have the inequalities\footnote{See, for example, \cite{Walker:1996cr} §~8.4.2} \begin{equation} \label{eq:26} e_1 > e_3 > e_2 \end{equation} for a rectangular lattice, so whichever of $ e_1 $ or $e_2$ we choose, we shall end up with $b>0$, and hence we can write $ b=c^2 $ for a unique positive $c$. A sensible thing to do here is change to functions of $w=(u-a)/c$, which gives the equations \begin{equation} \label{eq:25} Q(w)=\overline{Q\left( \frac{1}{w} \right)}, \quad T(w) = \frac{1}{w^2} \overline{T\left( \frac{1}{w}\right)}, \end{equation} where $ Q(w)=R(c(w+a))$ and $ T(w)=S(c(w+a)) $. It is easy to show the following: \begin{proposition} \label{thm:conjinvinvarratfns} The functions $Q$ described above are all of the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:27} Q(w) = C w^p \frac{\prod_k \left((w-a_k)(\bar{a}_kw-1)\right)^{\lambda_k}}{\prod_l \left((w-b_l)(\bar{b}_lw-1)\right)^{\mu_l}}, \end{equation} where $a_k,b_l \neq 0$, $ \sum_l \mu_l = p+\sum_k \lambda_k $, $C$ is real, and any $T(w)$ is given by multiplying a function satisfying the same conditions as $Q(w)$ by $w$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Suppose $a \neq 0$ and $ Q(a)=0 $. Then we must have $ \bar{Q}(1/a)=0 $, and hence $ \bar{a}^{-1} $ is also a root of $Q$. Thus $Q$ has a factor of $ (w-a)(\bar{a}w-1) $ in its numerator. We can repeat this construction to eliminate any zeros and poles of $Q$ away from the origin, leaving us with $ Cw^p $. We now have to obtain the conditions on $C$ and the sums. To find these, we just calculate $ \overline{Q(1/w)} $ explicitly, and find that $ \bar{C}=C$ and we acquire an extra factor of $ w^{-p-2\sum_k \lambda_k+2\sum_l \mu_l} $; hence $C$ is real and \begin{equation} \label{eq:28} \sum_l \mu_l = p+\sum_k \lambda_k, \end{equation} as required. For the second part, observe that $ Q(w)=wT(w)$ satisfies the conditions of the first part of the proposition. \end{proof} Therefore the $\overline{\text{pg}}$-invariant functions are precisely the functions \begin{equation} \label{eq:29} Q((\wp-a)/c)+T((\wp-a)/c)\wp', \end{equation} where $Q,T$ are as in \autoref{thm:conjinvinvarratfns}, and $a=e_1$, $c=\sqrt{(e_1-e_2)(e_1-e_3)}$. $\overline{\text{p2mg}}$ can be presented as $\overline{\text{pg}}$ with a 2-fold rotation, so the $\overline{\text{p2mg}}$-invariant functions are just the $\overline{\text{pg}}$-invariant ones with $ T \equiv 0 $. Alternatively, $\overline{\text{p2mg}}$ is similar to the usual reflective case in p2mm, but the reflexion is given by $ m.z=\bar{z}+\tfrac{1}{2}\beta i $. Now we know about glide reflexions, we can understand this reflexion in much the same way: in particular, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:35} \bar{R}.\wp(z) = \overline{\wp\left(\overline{z-\tfrac{1}{2}\beta i}\right)} = \wp(z-\tfrac{1}{2}\beta i) = e_2 + \frac{(e_2-e_1)(e_2-e_3)}{\wp(z)-e_2}, \end{equation} and we already know all about this transformation. Since p2mg contains a 2-fold rotation, $ T \equiv 0 $, and we have that the $\overline{\text{p2mg}}$-invariant functions are the $Q(w)$ from \autoref{thm:conjinvinvarratfns}, but this time with \begin{equation} \label{eq:37} w = \frac{\wp(z)-e_2}{\sqrt{(e_2-e_1)(e_2-e_3)}}; \end{equation} the two representations are related by exchanging $e_1$ and $e_2$, since the glide reflexion axes are perpendicular to the mirror axes. The final two groups are \subsection{p2gg and p4mg} \label{sec:p2gg-p4mg} This is similar to the last case in complexity, but thankfully we only have to understand the behaviour of the functions $ R(\wp) $ since the group contains a 2-fold rotation, and so has p2 as a subgroup. The required glide reflexion is given by \begin{equation} \label{eq:30} L.z = \overline{z+\tfrac{1}{2}(\alpha+\beta i)}, \end{equation} which is, naturally, not the same as the one we discussed in the previous subsection. We have \begin{equation} \label{eq:31} \overline{\wp(L.z)} = \wp(z+\tfrac{1}{2}(\alpha+\beta i)) = e_3 + \frac{(e_3-e_2)(e_3-e_1)}{\wp(z)-e_3}, \end{equation} which is of the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:32} z \mapsto a-\frac{c^2}{z-a}. \end{equation} It is fairly clear what we should do now: find the rational functions of $z$ invariant under this transformation. Once again the sensible thing to do is set $w=(z-a)/c$; and now we need to establish conditions on $Q$ with \begin{equation} \label{eq:33} Q(w) = \overline{Q\left( -\frac{1}{w} \right)}. \end{equation} The calculation proceeds exactly as before, with some additional minus signs, and we find \begin{proposition} \label{thm:p2gginvars} The rational functions $Q$ in the preceding paragraph are precisely those of the form \begin{equation} \label{eq:34} Q(w) = Cw^p \frac{\prod_k \left((w-a_k)(\bar{a}_kw+1)\right)^{\lambda_k}}{\prod_l \left((w-b_l)(\bar{b}_lw+1)\right)^{\mu_l}}, \end{equation} with the same conditions as in \autoref{thm:conjinvinvarratfns}. \end{proposition} Then the $\overline{\text{p2gg}}$-invariant functions are exactly \begin{equation} \label{eq:36} Q((\wp-a)/c), \end{equation} with $Q$ as in the above proposition, and $ a=e_3 $, $ c=\sqrt{(e_1-e_3)(e_3-e_2)} $. A subset of these are $\overline{\text{p4mg}}$-invariant: the only additional required condition is that the lattice is square and that the rational functions are even, as we showed was required for p4-invariance, so we automatically restrict to $ Q((w-a)/c)=P(w^2) $ as before. \subsection{Summary} \label{sec:summary-1} We summarise the invariant functions for the groups containing reflexions and glide reflexions here. \begin{table}[ht] \centering \begin{tabular}{c\|c\|l\|l} $G$ & Lattice & $G$-invariant functions & Conditions \\ \hline pm & \multirow{2}{}{$ \alpha,\beta i $} & $ R(\wp)+S(\wp) \cdot \wp' $ & \multirow{8}{}{$R(w),S(w)$ real for real $w$} \\ p2mm && $ R(\wp) $ & \\ \cline{1-3} p4mm & $ \alpha,\alpha i $ & $R(\wp^2)$ & \\ \cline{1-3} p3m1 & \multirow{2}{}{$ \alpha,\alpha \omega $} & $R(\wp')$ & \\ p6mm & & $R(\wp'^2)$ or $S(\wp^3)$ & \\ \cline{1-3} cm &\multirow{2}{}{$ \alpha \pm \beta i $} & $ R(\wp)+S(\wp) \cdot \wp' $ & \\ c2mm && $ R(\wp) $ & \\ \cline{1-3} p3m1 & $ \alpha \pm \alpha\sqrt{3}i $ & $R(\wp')$ & \\ \hline pg &\multirow{3}{}{$ \alpha,\beta i $} & $Q((\wp-a)/c)+T((\wp-a)/c) \cdot \wp' $ & \multirow{2}{}{$Q,T,a,c$ as in \autoref{thm:conjinvinvarratfns}} \\ p2mg && $Q((\wp-a)/c)$ & \\ \cline{1-1}\cline{3-4} p2gg && $ Q((\wp-a)/c) $ & \multirow{2}{}{$Q,a,c$ as in \autoref{thm:p2gginvars}} \\ \cline{2-2} p4mg &$ \alpha,\alpha i $ & $ Q((\wp-a)/c) = P(\wp^2) $ & \end{tabular} \caption{Meromorphic functions invariant under the modified action of the wallpaper groups containing reflexions: $ R,S,Q,T,P $ are all rational functions.} \label{tab:modifiedreflexioninvariants} \end{table} \section{Generalisations and extensions} \label{sec:generalisation} The action of all the groups considered respects the multiplicative and additive structure in the field of meromorphic functions $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}_{\tau} \to \mathbb{CP}^1 $, so all the restrictions we have produced give subfields of this field; the author must plead ignorance of any applications of this, however. \subsection{Other geometries} \label{sec:other-geometries} A similar, but rather simpler idea is to consider the meromorphic functions invariant under the \emph{frieze groups}, which contain only one translation: they will form subsets of the space of trigonometrical series, although the noncompactness of the domain as a quotient of $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} $ (\textit{viz.} the cylinder) renders the theory rather less restrictive. One could consider imposing meromorphicity at the cusp, as with automorphic functions, to lessen this issue.\footnote{The basics of this have been discussed in the book \cite{Farris:2015qf} of Farris, although I believe that the general theory is as yet unrealised.} Two other possibilities suggest themselvs: discrete symmetries of the sphere, via stereographic projection, and the hyperbolic plane, using the upper half-plane. For example, it is well-known that \begin{theorem} A discrete sensible symmetry group of the sphere is isomorphic to one of: \begin{enumerate} \item The cyclic group $C_n$ for some $n\geq 1$, \item The dihedral group $D_n$ for some $ n \geq 1 $, \item The rotational symmetries of the regular tetrahedron $T$, octahedron/cube $O$, or icosahedron/dodecahedron $I$, \end{enumerate} and all of these act solely by rotations. \end{theorem} If we include reflexions, the cyclic family splits into four infinite families, and the dihedral into three; these correspond to finite versions of each of the frieze groups. The polyhedral groups increase to seven: one extra nonsensible group for each, with an extra for the tetrahedron since there are two ways of doubling the tetrahedral group by adding a reflexion. These groups act on the complex plane as finite subgroups of the M\"obius group, and complex conjugation for reflexion. Of course, all of these groups will have their own invariant functions, given by meromorphic functions $ \mathbb{CP}^1 \to \mathbb{CP}^1 $, i.e. rational functions. Farris also discusses a subset of these: since the group is finite, one can average over orbits of a point to produce a set of invariant functions. Again, there does not seem to have been a general classification produced, probably due to the complexity of some of the M\"obius transformations involved. Naturally, the other possibility is the hyperbolic plane. Here the list of types of symmetry groups is much longer (indeed, it is infinite); this is intimately related to the large number of tilings of the hyperbolic plane, each with its own symmetry groups. As with the elliptic case, the basic theory is venerable, including the Fuchsian groups and their invariant functions; more recent work has considered the two-dimensional hyperbolic orbifolds, which include both the reflexions, and considerably greater complexity. \subsection{Other possible extensions to the non-sensible groups} \label{sec:other-poss-extens} In the current answer to \cite{36737}, it is suggested that we consider real parts of an elliptic functions that are $G$-invariant for each wallpaper group $G$. This strikes us as a less elegant extension, since taking the real part is not compatible with the complex multiplication, and so it appears that we lose the field structure on the meromorphic functions.\footnote{A more complicated argument shows that $\Re(f \cdot g)$ is invariant if and only if $ \Re(f) $ and $\Re(g)$ are, but one also requires understanding the imaginary part, perhaps contrary to the spirit of this idea.} It also happens that such functions are precisely the real parts of the functions obeying our modified reflexion law $ \bar{m}.f(z) = \overline{f(m.z)} $: note that $ \Re(\overline{w}) = \Re(w) $, so certainly every $ \bar{G}$-invariant function has a $G$-invariant real part. Conversely, suppose $f$ is meromorphic and $ \Re(f) $ is $G$-invariant. Then the Schwarz reflexion principle implies that $ f(m.z) = \overline{f(z)} $, so $f$ is invariant under the action of $ \bar{m} $. (Another way to look at it is that $f(z)$ is conformal, so so is $f(m.z)$ since $m$ is a conformal transformation: it must be anticonformal, and the only way for this to happen if $ \Re(f) $ is invariant is to change $ \Im(f) $ to $-\Im(f)$.) \subsection{Symmetries of the graphs and equivariance} \label{sec:symmetries-graphs} There are two other generalisations that one may consider: suppose that $ G $ is a wallpaper group, $ H $ a group of symmetries of $ \mathbb{CP}^1 $, and $ \phi:G \to H $ is a homomorphism. Then $G$ acts on $\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}}$, and $H$ acts on $ \mathbb{CP}^1 $, so they can be combined to give an action which we continue to call $ \bar{G} $, more general than what we have previously considered, on the space of meromorphic functions $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} \to \mathbb{CP}^1 $: \begin{equation} \label{eq:40} \bar{g}.(f(z)) = (\phi(g).f)(g.z) = (\phi(g) \circ f) (g.z). \end{equation} Composition is given by \begin{align} \bar{g}_1.(\bar{g}_2.(f(z))) &= \bar{g}_1.((\phi(g_2).f)(g_2.z)) \\ &= (\phi(g_1) .(\phi(g_2) .f)) (g_1.(g_2.z)) \\ &= (\phi(g_1g_2).f) ((g_1g_2).z) \\ &= \overline{g_1g_2}.(f(z)), \end{align} where the third inequality uses the $G$- and $H$-actions, and the others are the definition of the $\bar{G}$ action.\footnote{This can be regarded as a quotient of the action of $ (G,\phi(G)) $ on $ X \times Y $ by the relation $ y=f(x) $.} For example, the idea we discussed in the previous section is a special case of this when $H$ is the group generated by complex conjugation $ j $, and $ \phi $ sends sense-preserving transformations to the identity, sense-reversing to $j$. As an example where $H$ is an isometry of $\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}}$, we could consider the action of a lattice group sending $ f(z) $ to $ f(z+m\omega_1+n\omega_2)-2m \eta_1-2n \eta_2 $, for $m,n \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}^2$, where $ \eta_i $ are the eta constants: one function invariant under this transformation is the Weierstrass $\zeta$-function. Yet another example is provided by the the ``colour-turning wallpaper functions'' from \cite{Farris:2002dq}, which satisfy in our notation \begin{equation} f(k.x) = \psi(k) f(x), \end{equation} where $ \psi: G \to H $, and $H$ is a subgroup of the multiplicative group of roots of unity. It is apparent from stereographic projection that $H$ may be a spherical symmetry group, (although the second example above showing that $H$ need not be) but other restrictions appear more subtle. Of course, the orders of the elements of $ \phi(G) $ are divisible by those of $G$: in particular, there are no elements of order $5$, so we can ignore the icosahedral group, and other groups with rotations of order $5$. \begin{remark} This viewpoint also suggests that we should instead be considering the symmetries of the graph of $f$ as a holomorphic section of the projective line bundle $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} \times \mathbb{CP}^1 $, or, if we assume the $\phi$-image of the translation subgroup is the identity, the projective line bundle over the torus, $ \ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}_{\tau} \times \mathbb{CP}^1 $, where $ \tau \in \mathbb{H} $ is the period ratio. Pursuing this even further would lead to considering the symmetries of maps from one Riemann surface to another: given $ \bar{G}=\{(g, \phi(g)) : g \in G \} $ acting on Riemann surfaces $ X \times Y $ by $ \bar{g}.(x,y) = (g.x,\phi(g).y) $ what are the holomorphic $ f:X \to Y $ with $ \bar{g}.(z,f(z)) = (g.z,\phi(g).(f(g.z)))) = (g.z,f(z)) $? \end{remark} \section{Acknowledgements} \label{sec:acknowledgements} I would like to thank Imre Leader and Jack Button for their advice in preparing this paper. \printbibliography \end{document}
\section{Introduction} The goal of this chapter is to provide a brief summary of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and the QCD phase diagram, and to give an introduction to computational methods that are being used to study different aspects of QCD. Quantum Chromodynamics is a remarkable theory in many respects. QCD is an almost parameter free theory. Indeed, in the context of nuclear physics QCD is completely characterized by the masses of the up, down, and strange quark, and a reasonable caricature of nuclear physics emerges in the even simpler case in which the up and down quark are taken to be massless, and the strange quark is infinitely heavy. QCD nevertheless accounts for the incredible richness of the phase diagram of strongly interacting matter. QCD describes finite nuclei, normal and superfluid states of nuclear matter, color superconductors, hadronic gases, quark gluon plasma, and many other states. This rich variety of states is reflected in the large number of computational methods that have been brought to bear on problems in QCD. This includes a large number of methods for the structure and excitations of finite Fermi systems, quantum Monte Carlo methods, and a variety of tools for equilibrium and non-equilibrium statistical mechanics. The bulk of this book is devoted to the study of few and many nucleon systems. Summarizing everything else in one brief chapter is obviously out of the question, both because of limitations of space and because of my limited expertise. I will therefore be very selective, and focus on a number of very simple yet powerful ideas. This reflects, in part, my background, which is not primarily in computational physics. It also reflects my conviction that progress in computational physics is unfortunately often reflected in increasingly complicated codes that obscure the simplicity of the underlying methods. \section{Path integrals and the Metropolis algorithm} \label{sec_qm} Consider a simple quantum mechanical problem, the motion of a particle in a one-dimensional potential. In order to be specific I will focus on the double well potential $V(x)=\lambda(x^2-\eta^2)^2$, where $\eta$ and $\lambda$ are parameters. The Hamiltonian is \be \label{H_dw} H = \frac{p^2}{2m}+\lambda (x^2-\eta^2)^2\, . \ee Using a change of variables I can set $2m=\lambda=1$. This implies that there is only one physical parameter in this problem, the barrier separation $\eta$. The regime $\eta\gg 1$ corresponds to the limit in which the system has two almost degenerate minima that are split by semi-classical tunneling events. The energy eigenstates and wave functions are solutions of the eigenvalue problem $H\|n\rangle = \|n\rangle E_n$. Once the eigenstates are known I can compute all possible correlation functions \be \Pi_n(t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_n) = \langle 0 \|x(t_1) x(t_2) \ldots x(t_n)\|0\rangle \, , \ee by inserting complete sets of states. An alternative to the Hamiltonian formulation of the problem is the Feynman path integral \cite{Feynman}. The path integral for the anharmonic oscillator is given by \be \label{pathint} \langle x_1\| e^{-iHt_f}\|x_0\rangle = \int_{x(0)=x_0}^{x(t_f)=x_1} {\cal D}x\, e^{iS}, \hspace{1cm} S=\int_0^{t_f} dt\, \left( \frac{1}{4}\dot{x}^4-(x^2-\eta^2)^2 \right). \ee This expression contains a rapidly oscillating phase factor $e^{iS}$, which prohibits any direct numerical attempt at computing the path integral. The standard approach is based on analytic continuation to imaginary time $\tau=it$. This is also referred to as Euclidean time, because the Minkowski interval $dx^2-dt^2$ turns into the Euclidean expression $dx^2+d\tau^2$. In the following I will consider the euclidean partition function \be \label{z} Z(T) = \int {\cal D}x\, e^{-S_E}, \hspace{1cm} S_E=\int_0^{\beta} d\tau\, \left( \frac{1}{4}\dot{x}^4+(x^2-\eta^2)^2 \right), \ee where $\beta=1/T$ is the inverse temperature and we assume periodic boundary conditions $x(0)=x(\beta)$. To see that equ.~(\ref{z}) is indeed the partition function we can use equ.~(\ref{pathint}) to express the path integral in terms of the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian, $Z(T)=\sum_n\exp(-E_n/T)$. In the following I will describe numerical simulations using a discretized version of the euclidean action. For this purpose I discretize the euclidean time coordinate $\tau_j=ja,\,i=1,\ldots n$ where $a=\beta/n$ is the length of time interval. The discretized action is given by \be \label{S_disc} S = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\left\{ \frac{1}{4a} (x_i-x_{i-1})^2 + a(x_i^2-\eta^2)^2 \right\}, \ee where $x_i=x(\tau_i)$. I consider periodic boundary conditions $x_0=x_n$. The discretized euclidean path integral is formally equivalent to the partition function of a statistical system of (continuous) ``spins'' $x_i$ arranged on a one-dimensional lattice. This statistical system can be studied using standard Monte-Carlo sampling methods. In the following I will use the Metropolis algorithm \cite{Metropolis:1953am}. Detailed numerical studies of the euclidean path integral can be found in \cite{Creutz:1980gp,Shuryak:1984xr,Shuryak:1987tr,Schafer:2004xa}. The Metropolis method generates an ensemble of configurations $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$ where $i=1,\ldots, n$ labels the lattice points and $k= 1,\ldots,N_{conf}$ labels the configurations. Quantum mechanical averages are computed by averaging observables over many configurations, \be \langle {\cal O} \rangle = \lim_{N_{conf}\to\infty} \frac{1}{N_{conf}}\sum_{k=1}^{N_{conf}} {\cal O}^{(k)} \ee where ${\cal O}^{(k)}$ is the value of the classical observable ${\cal O}$ in the configuration $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$. The configurations are generated using Metropolis updates $\{x_i\}^{(k)}\to \{x_i\}^{(k+1)}$. The update consists of a sweep through the lattice during which a trial update $x_i^{(k+1)}= x_i^{(k)} +\delta x$ is performed for every lattice site. Here, $\delta x$ is a random number. The trial update is accepted with probability \be P\left(x_i^{(k)}\to x_i^{(k+1)}\right)= \min\left\{\exp(-\Delta S),1\right\}, \ee where $\Delta S$ is the change in the action equ.~(\ref{S_disc}). This ensures that the configurations $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$ are distributed according the ``Boltzmann'' distribution $\exp(-S)$. The distribution of $\delta x$ is arbitrary as long as the trial update is micro-reversible, i.~e.~is equally likely to change $x_i^{(k)}$ to $x_i^{(k+1)}$ and back. The initial configuration is arbitrary. In order to study equilibration it is useful to compare an ordered (cold) start with $\{x_i\}^{(0)}= \{\eta\}$ to a disordered (hot) start $\{x_i\}^{(0)}=\{r_i\}$, where $r_i$ is a random variable. The advantage of the Metropolis algorithm is its simplicity and robustness. The only parameter to adjust is the distribution of $\delta x$. A simple choice is to take $\delta x$ to be a Gaussian random number, and choose the width of the distribution so that the average acceptance rate for the trial updates is around $50\%$. Fluctuations of ${\cal O}$ provide an estimate in the error of $\langle {\cal O}\rangle$. The uncertainty is given by \be \Delta \langle {\cal O} \rangle = \sqrt{\frac{\langle {\cal O}^2\rangle -\langle{\cal O}\rangle^2} {N_{conf}}}. \ee This requires some care, because the error estimate is based on the assumption that the configurations are statistically independent. In practice this can be monitored by computing the auto-correlation ``time'' in successive measurements ${\cal O}(\{x_i\}^{(k)})$. I have written a simple fortran code that implements the Metropolis algorithm for euclidean path integrals \cite{Schafer:2004xa}. The most important part of that code is a sweep through the lattice with a Metropolis update on every site $\tau_j$: \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} do j=1,n-1 nhit = nhit+1 xpm = (x(j)-x(j-1))/a xpp = (x(j+1)-x(j))/a t = 1.0/4.0(xpm2+xpp2) v = (x(j)2-f2)*2 sold = a(t+v) xnew = x(j) + delx(2.0ran2(iseed)-1.0) xpm = (xnew-x(j-1))/a xpp = (x(j+1)-xnew)/a t = 1.0/4.0(xpm2+xpp2) v = (xnew2-f2)2 snew = a(t+v) dels = snew-sold p = ran2(iseed) if (exp(-dels) .gt. p) then x(j) = xnew nacc = nacc + 1 endif enddo \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} Here, {\tt sold} is the local action corresponding to the initial value of ${\tt x(j)}$, and {\tt snew} is the action after the trial update. The trial update is accepted if {\tt exp(-dels)} is greater that the random variable ${\tt p}$. The function {\tt ran2()} generates a random number between 0 and 1, and {\tt nacc/nhit} measures the acceptance rate. A typical path is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_path}. An important feature of the paths in the double well potential is the presence of tunneling events. Indeed, in the semi-classical regime $\eta\gg 1$, a typical path can be understood as Gaussian fluctuations superimposed on a series of tunneling events (instantons). \begin{figure}[t] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=9cm]{config1.pdf} \end{center} \caption{\label{fig_path} Typical euclidean path obtained in a Monte Carlo simulation of the discretized euclidean action of the double well potential for $\eta=1.4$. The lattice spacing in the euclidean time direction is $a=0.05$ and the total number of lattice points is $N_\tau=800$. The green curve shows the corresponding smooth path obtained by running 100 cooling sweeps on the original path. } \end{figure} The path integral method does not provide direct access to the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian, but it can be used to compute imaginary time correlation functions \be \label{qm_cor} \Pi_n^E(\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n)=\langle x(\tau_1)\ldots x(\tau_n)\rangle. \ee Note that the average is carried out with respect to the partition function in equ.~(\ref{z}). In the limit $\beta\to\infty$ this corresponds to the ground state expectation value. A very important observable is the two-point function $\Pi^E(\tau)\equiv \Pi^E_2(0,\tau)$. The euclidean correlation functions is related to the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian via a spectral representations. This representation is obtained by inserting a complete set of states into equ.~(\ref{qm_cor}). The result is \be \label{spec} \Pi^E(\tau)= \sum_n \|\langle 0\|x\|n\rangle\|^2 \exp(-(E_n-E_0)\tau), \ee where $E_n$ is the energy of the state $\|n\rangle$. This can be written as \be \Pi^E(\tau)= \int dE\, \rho(E) \exp(-(E-E_0)\tau), \ee where $\rho(E)$ is the spectral function. In the case of the double well potential there are only bound states and the spectral function is a sum of delta-functions. Equ.~(\ref{spec}) shows that the euclidean correlation function is easy to construct once the energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions are known. The inverse problem is well defined in principle, but numerically much more difficult. The excitation energy of the first excited state $\Delta E_1 = E_1-E_0$ is easy to extract from the exponential decay of the two-point functions, but higher states are more difficult to compute. A technique for determining the spectral function from euclidean correlation functions is the maximum entropy image reconstruction method, see \cite{Jarrell:1996rrw,Asakawa:2000tr}. The calculation of correlation functions in a Monte Carlo simulation is very straightforward. All I need to do is multiply the values of $x(\tau_i)$ for a given path, and then average over all paths: \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} do ic=1,nc ncor = ncor + 1 ip0 = int( (n-np)ran2(iseed) ) x0 = x(ip0) do ip=1,np x1 = x(ip0+ip) xcor = x0x1 x2cor= xcor2 xcor_sum(ip) = xcor_sum(ip) + xcor xcor2_sum(ip) = xcor2_sum(ip) + xcor2 enddo enddo \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} The advantages of this method are that it is extremely robust, that it requires no knowledge (or preconceived notion) of what the wave function looks like, and that it can explore a very complicated configuration space. On the other hand, in the case of one-dimensional quantum mechanics, the Metropolis method is very inefficient. Using direct diagonalization in a finite basis it is not difficult to compute the energies of the first several states in the potential in equ.~(\ref{H_dw}) with very high accuracy, $\Delta E/E_0 \sim O(10^{-6})$ or better. On the other hand, using the Monte Carlo method, it is quite difficult to achieve an accuracy of $O(10^{-2})$ for observable other than $(E_1-E_0)/E_0$. The advantage of the Monte Carlo method is that the computational cost scales much more favorably in high dimensional systems, such as quantum mechanics of many particles, or quantum field theory. The Monte Carlo method also does not directly provide the ground state energy, or the partition function and free energy at finite temperature. In quantum mechanics we can compute the ground state energy from the expectation value of the Hamiltonian $\langle H\rangle = \langle T+V \rangle$ in the limit $\beta\to\infty$. The expectation value of the kinetic energy is singular as $a\to 0$, but this problem can be overcome by using the Virial theorem \be \langle H\rangle = \left\langle \frac{x}{2}V'+V \right\rangle\, . \ee There is no simple analog of this method in quantum field theory. A method for computing the free energy which does generalize to quantum field theory is the adiabatic switching technique. The idea is to start from a reference system for which the free energy is known and calculate the free energy difference to the real system using Monte Carlo methods. For this purpose I write the action as \be S_\alpha=S_0+\alpha\Delta S\, , \ee where $S_0$ is the action of the reference system, $\Delta S$ is defined by $\Delta S=S-S_0$ where $S$ is the full action, and $\alpha$ can be viewed as a coupling constant. The action $S_\alpha$ interpolates between the physical system for $\alpha=1$ and the reference system for $\alpha=0$. Integrating the relation $\partial \log Z(\alpha)/(\partial\alpha)= -\langle \Delta S \rangle_\alpha$ I find \be \label{adiab} \log(Z(\alpha\!=\!1))=\log(Z(\alpha\!=\!0)) - \int_0^1 d\alpha'\, \langle \Delta S\rangle_{\alpha'} \;\; , \ee where $\langle .\rangle_\alpha$ is computed using the action $S_\alpha$. In the case of the anharmonic oscillator it is natural to use the harmonic oscillator as a reference system. In that case the reference partition function is \be Z(\alpha\!=\!0) = \sum_n \exp(-\beta E_n^0) = \frac{\exp(-\beta\omega_0/2)}{1-\exp(-\beta\omega_0)}, \ee where $\omega_0$ is the oscillator constant. Note that the free energy $F=T\log(Z)$ of the anharmonic oscillator should be independent of the reference frequency $\omega_0$. The integral over the coupling constant $\alpha$ can be calculated in a Monte Carlo simulation by slowly changing $\alpha$ from 0 to 1 during the simulation. Free energy calculations of this type play an important role in quantum chemistry, and more efficient methods for determining $\Delta F$ have been developed \cite{Jarzynski:1997}. \section{Quantumchromodynamics} \subsection{QCD at zero temperature and density} \label{sec_qcd} The rich phenomenology of strong interacting matter is encoded in a deceptively simple Lagrangian. The fundamental fields in the Lagrangian are quark fields $q_{\alpha\, f}^c$ and gluon fields $A_\mu^a$. Here, $\alpha=1, \ldots,4$ is a Dirac spinor index, $c=1,\ldots,N_c$ with $N_c=3$ is a color index, and $f={\it up}, {\it down},{\it strange}, {\it charm}, {\it bottom}, {\it top}$ is a flavor index. Interactions in QCD are governed by the color degrees of freedom. The gluon field $A_\mu^a$ is a vector field labeled by an index $a=1,\ldots,N_c^2-1$ in the adjoint representation. The $N_c^2-$ multiplet of gluon fields can be used to construct a matrix valued field $A_\mu=A_\mu^a \frac{\lambda^a}{2}$, where $\lambda^a$ is a set of traceless, Hermitian, $N_c\times N_c$ matrices. The QCD Lagrangian is \be \label{l_qcd} {\cal L } = - \frac{1}{4} G_{\mu\nu}^a G_{\mu\nu}^a + \sum_f^{N_f} \bar{q}_f ( i\gamma^\mu D_\mu - m_f) q_f\, , \ee where $G^a_{\mu\nu}$ is the QCD field strength tensor defined by \be G_{\mu\nu}^a = \partial_\mu A_\nu^a - \partial_\nu A_\mu^a + gf^{abc} A_\mu^b A_\nu^c\, , \ee and $f^{abc}=4i\,{\rm Tr}([\lambda^a,\lambda^b]\lambda^c)$ are the $SU(N_c)$ structure constants. The action of the covariant derivative on the quark fields is \be i D_\mu q = \left( i\partial_\mu + g A_\mu^a \frac{\lambda^a}{2}\right) q\, , \ee and $m_f$ is the mass of the quarks. The terms in equ.~(\ref{l_qcd}) describe the interaction between quarks and gluons, as well as nonlinear three and four-gluon interactions. Note that, except for the number of flavors and their masses, the structure of the QCD Lagrangian is completely fixed by the local $SU(N_c)$ color symmetry. A natural starting point for studying the phase diagram of hadronic matter is to consider the light flavors (up, down, and strange) as approximately massless, and the heavy flavors (charm, bottom, top) as infinitely massive. In this limit the QCD Lagrangian is completely characterized by two integer valued parameters, the number of colors $N_c=3$ and flavors $N_f=3$, and a single dimensionless coupling constant $g$. Quantum fluctuations cause the coupling constant to become scale dependent \cite{Gross:1973id,Politzer:1973fx}. At one-loop order the running coupling constant is \be \label{g_1l} g^2(q^2) = \frac{16\pi^2} {b_0\log(q^2/\Lambda_{\it QCD}^2)}\, , \hspace{1cm} b_0=\frac{11}{3}N_c-\frac{2}{3}N_f\, , \ee where $q$ is a characteristic momentum and $N_f$ is the number of active flavors. The scale dependence of the coupling implies that, as a quantum theory, QCD is not governed by a dimensionless coupling but by a dimensionful scale, the QCD scale parameter $\Lambda_{\it QCD}$. This phenomenon is known as dimensional transmutation~\cite{Coleman:1973jx}. A crucial aspect of the scale dependence of the coupling in QCD is that the effective interaction decreases as the energy or momentum scale is increased. This feature of QCD is called asymptotic freedom \cite{Gross:1973id,Politzer:1973fx}. It implies that high energy interactions can be analyzed using perturbative QCD. The flip side of asymptotic freedom is anti-screening, or confinement: The effective interaction between quarks increases with distance, and quarks are permanently confined into hadrons. The absence of colored states in the spectrum implies that the use of perturbation theory is subtle, even at high energy. Quantities that can be computed perturbatively either involve a sum over many hadronic states, or allow for a factorization of perturbative interactions and non-perturbative matrix elements. If quarks are massless then QCD observables are dimensionless ratios like $m_p/\Lambda_{\it QCD}$, where $m_p$ is the mass of the proton. This implies that the QCD scale is not a parameter of the theory, but reflects a choice of units. In the real world QCD is part of the standard model, quarks acquire masses by electroweak symmetry breaking, and the QCD scale is fixed by value of the coupling constant at the weak scale. Experiments determine the value of the QCD fine structure constant $\alpha_s=g^2/(4\pi)$ at the position of the $Z$ boson pole, $\alpha_s (m_z)= 0.1184\pm 0.0007$ \cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}. The numerical value of $\Lambda_{QCD}$ depends on the renormalization scheme used in computing quantum corrections to the coupling constant. Physical observables, as well as the value of $b_0$, are independent of this choice. In the modified minimal subtraction ($\overline{MS}$) scheme the scale parameter is $\Lambda_{QCD}\simeq 200$ MeV \cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}. \begin{figure}[t] \bc\includegraphics[width=0.7 \textwidth]{qcd_ms_high.pdf}\ec \caption{\label{fig_qcd_phase} Schematic phase diagram of QCD as a function of temperature $T$ and baryon chemical potential $\mu$. The quark gluon plasma phase is labeled QGP, and CFL refers to the color superconducting phase that is predicted to occur at asymptotically large chemical potential. The critical endpoints of the chiral and nuclear liquid-gas phase transitions, are denoted by red and black points, respectively. The chiral pseudo-critical line associated with the crossover transition at low temperature is shown as a dashed line. The green arrows indicate the regions of the phase diagram that can be studied by the experimental heavy ion programs at RHIC and the LHC.} \end{figure} A schematic phase diagram of QCD is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_qcd_phase}. In this figure I show the phases of strongly interacting matter as a function of the temperature $T$ and the baryon chemical potential $\mu$. The chemical potential $\mu$ controls the baryon density $\rho$, defined as 1/3 times the number density of quarks minus the number density of anti-quarks. In the following I will explain that the basic structure of the phase diagram is determined by asymptotic freedom and the symmetries of QCD. For more detailed reviews see \cite{Alford:2007xm,Adams:2012th,Braun-Munzinger:2015hba}. At small temperature and chemical potential the interaction between quarks is dominated by large distances and the effective coupling is strong. This implies that quarks and gluons are permanently confined in color singlet hadrons, with masses of order $\Lambda_{QCD}$. The proton, for example, has a mass of $m_p=935$ MeV. A simplistic view of the structure of the proton is that it is a bound state of three constituent quarks with effective masses $m_Q\simeq m_p/3\simeq \Lambda_{QCD}$. These masses should be compared to the bare up and down quark masses which are of the order 10 MeV. As a consequence of strong interactions between virtual quarks and anti-quarks in the QCD ground state a vacuum condensate of $\bar{q}q$ pairs is generated, $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle\simeq-\Lambda^3_{QCD}$ \cite{GellMann:1968rz,Coleman:1980mx,tHooft:1979bh}. This vacuum expectation value spontaneously breaks the approximate chiral $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ flavor symmetry of the QCD Lagrangian down to its diagonal subgroup, the flavor symmetry $SU(3)_V$. Spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking implies the existence of Goldstone bosons, massless modes with the quantum numbers of the generators of the broken axial symmetry $SU(3)_A$. The corresponding excitations in the spectrum of QCD are the $\pi$, $K$ and $\eta$ mesons. The $SU(3)_L\times SU(3)_R$ symmetry is explicitly broken by quark masses, and the mass of the charged pion is $m_\pi=139$ MeV. This scale can be compared to the mass of the lightest non-Goldstone particle, the rho meson, which has a mass $m_\rho=770$ MeV. At low energy Goldstone bosons can be described in terms of an effective field theory in which composite $\pi$, $K$ and $\eta$ particles are treated as fundamental fields. The Goldstone boson field can be parametrized by unitary matrices \be \Sigma = \exp(i\lambda^a\phi^a/f_\pi)\, , \ee where $\lambda^a$ are the Gell-Mann matrices for $SU(3)$ flavor and $f_\pi=93$ MeV is the pion decay constant. For example, $\pi^0=\phi^3$ and $\pi^\pm=(\phi_1\pm i\phi_2)/2$ describe the neutral and charged pion. Other components of $\phi^a$ describe the neutral and charged kaons, as well as the eta. The eta prime, which is the $SU(3)_F$ singlet meson, acquires a large mass because of the axial anomaly, and is not a Goldstone boson. The axial anomaly refers to the fact that the flavor singlet axial current, which is conserved in massless QCD at the classical level, is not conserved if quantum effects are taken into account. The divergence of the axial current $A_\mu=\bar{q}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 q$ is \be \partial_\mu A^\mu = \frac{g^2N_f}{32\pi^2} \epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta} G^a_{\mu\nu}G^a_{\alpha\beta} \, . \ee The right hand side is the topological charge density, which I will discuss in more detail in Sect.~\ref{sec_QCD_vac}. At low energy the effective Lagrangian for the chiral field can be organized as a derivative expansion in gradients of $\Sigma$. Higher derivative terms describe interactions that scale as either the momentum or the energy of the Goldstone boson. Since Goldstone bosons are approximately massless, the energy is of the same order of magnitude as the momentum. We will see that the expansion parameter is $p/(4\pi f_\pi)$. At leading order in $(\partial/f_\pi)$ there is only one possible term which is consistent with chiral symmetry, Lorentz invariance and the discrete symmetries $C,P,T$. This is the Lagrangian of the non-linear sigma model \be \label{l_chpt} {\mathcal L} = \frac{f_\pi^2}{4} {\rm Tr}\left[ \partial_\mu\Sigma\partial^\mu\Sigma^\dagger\right] +\left[ B {\rm Tr}(M\Sigma^\dagger) + h.c. \right] + \ldots. \, , \ee where the term proportional to $B$ takes into account explicit symmetry breaking. Here, $M={\rm diag}(m_u,m_d,m_s)$ is the quark mass matrix and $B$ is a low energy constant that I will fix below. First, I will show that the parameter $f_\pi$ controls the pion decay amplitude. For this purpose I have to gauge the weak $SU(2)_L$ symmetry of the non-linear sigma model. As usual, this is achieved by promoting the derivative to a gauge covariant operator $\nabla_\mu\Sigma = \partial_\mu\Sigma+ig_w W_\mu\Sigma$ where $W_\mu$ is the charged weak gauge boson and $g_w$ is the weak coupling constant. The gauged non-linear sigma model gives a pion-$W$ boson interaction \be {\mathcal L}=g_w f_\pi W^\pm_\mu \partial^\mu \pi^\mp\, . \ee This term contributes to the amplitude ${\cal A}$ for the decay $\pi^\pm\to W^\pm\to e^\pm\nu_e$. I get ${\cal A}=g_wf_\pi q_\mu$, where $q_\mu$ is the momentum of the pion. This result can be compared to the standard definition of $f_\pi$ in terms of the weak axial current matrix element of the pion, $\langle 0\|A_\mu^a\|\pi^b\rangle = f_\pi q_\mu\delta^{ab}$. This comparison shows that the coefficient of the kinetic term in the non-linear sigma model is indeed the weak decay constant of the pion. In the ground state $\Sigma=1$ and the ground state energy is $E_{vac}= -2B{\rm Tr}[M]$. Using the relation $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle = \partial E_{vac}/(\partial m)$ we find $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle=-2B$. Fluctuations around $\Sigma=1$ determine the masses of the Goldstone bosons. The pion mass satisfies the Gell-Mann-Oaks-Renner relation (GMOR) \cite{GellMann:1968rz} \be \label{GMOR} m_\pi^2 f_\pi^2 =-(m_u+m_d)\langle\bar{q}q\rangle \ee and analogous relations exist for the kaon and eta masses. This result shows the characteristic non-analytic dependence of the pion mass on the quark masses, $m_\pi\sim \sqrt{m_q}$. \subsection{QCD at finite temperature} \label{sec_qcd_T} The structured of QCD at high temperature can be analyzed using the assumption that quarks and gluons are approximately free. We will see that this assumption is internally consistent, and that it is confirmed by lattice calculations. If the temperature is large then quarks and gluons have thermal momenta $p\sim T\gg\Lambda_{QCD}$. Asymptotic freedom implies that these particles are weakly interacting, and that they form a plasma of mobile color charges, the quark gluon plasma (QGP)~\cite{Shuryak:1977ut,Shuryak:1978ij}. The pressure of a gas of quarks and gluons is \be P =\frac{\pi^2T^4}{90}\left( 2\left(N_c^2-1\right) + 4N_cN_f \frac{7}{8}\right)\, . \ee This is the Stefan-Boltzmann law, where $2(N_c^2-1)$ is the number of bosonic degrees of freedom, and $4N_cN_F$ is the number of fermions. The factor 7/8 takes into account the difference between Bose and Fermi statistics. The pressure of a QGP is parametrically much bigger than the pressure of a pion gas, indicating that the QGP at high temperature is thermodynamically stable. The argument that the QGP at asymptotically high temperature is weakly coupled is somewhat more subtle than it might appear at first glance. If two quarks or gluons in the plasma interact via large angle scattering then the momentum transfer is large, and asymptotic freedom implies that the effective coupling is weak. However, the color Coulomb interaction is dominated by small angle scattering, and it is not immediately clear why the effective interaction that governs small angle scattering is weak. The basic observation is that in a high temperature plasma there is a large thermal population ($n\sim T^3$) of mobile color charges that screen the interaction at distances beyond the Debye length $r_D\sim 1/(gT)$. We also note that even in the limit $T\gg\Lambda_{QCD}$ the QGP contains a non-perturbative sector of static magnetic color fields \cite{Linde:1980ts}. This sector of the theory, corresponding to energies below the magnetic screening scale $m_M\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} g^2T$, is strongly coupled, but it does not contribute to thermodynamic or transport properties of the plasma in the limit $T\to\infty$. The quark gluon plasma exhibits neither color confinement nor chiral symmetry breaking. This implies that the high temperature phase must be separated from the low temperature hadronic phase by a phase transition. The order of this transition is very sensitive to the values of the quark masses. In QCD with massless $u,d$ and infinitely massive $s,c,b,t$ quarks the transition is second order \cite{Pisarski:1983ms}. In the case of massless (or sufficiently light) $u,d,s$ quarks the transition is first order. Lattice simulations show that for realistic quark masses, $m_u \simeq m_d\simeq 10$ MeV and $m_s\simeq 120$ MeV, the phase transition is a rapid crossover \cite{Aoki:2006we,Bazavov:2011nk}. The transition temperature, defined in terms of the chiral susceptibility, is $T_c\simeq 151\pm 3 \pm 3$ MeV \cite{Aoki:2006br,Aoki:2009sc}, which is consistent with the result $154 \pm 9$ MeV reported in \cite{Bazavov:2011nk,Bazavov:2014pvz}. The phase transition is expected to strengthen as a function of chemical potential, so that there is a critical baryon chemical potential $\mu$ at which the crossover turns into a first order phase transition \cite{Stephanov:2004wx}. This critical point is the endpoint of the chiral phase transition. Because of the fermion sign problem, which I will discuss in Sect.~\ref{sec_lQCD_mu}, it is very difficult to locate the critical endpoint using simulations on the lattice. Model calculations typically predict the existence of a critical point, but do not constrain its location. A number of exploratory lattice calculations have been performed \cite{Fodor:2001pe,Allton:2002zi,Karsch:2003va,Fodor:2004nz,Gavai:2008zr,Datta:2012pj}, but at the time I am writing these notes it has not been demonstrated conclusively that the transition strengthens with increasing baryon chemical potential \cite{deForcrand:2010he}. The critical endpoint is important because, with the exception of the endpoint of the nuclear liquid-gas transition, it is the only thermodynamically stable point in the QCD phase diagram at which the correlation length diverges. This means that the critical endpoint may manifest itself in heavy ion collisions in terms of enhanced fluctuation observables\cite{Stephanov:1998dy}. \subsection{High baryon density QCD} \label{sec_qcd_mu} The origin of the phase diagram, $T=\mu=0$, corresponds to the vacuum state of QCD. If we stay on the $T=0$ line and increase the chemical potential $\mu$ then there is no change initially. At zero temperature the chemical potential $\mu$ is the energy required to add a baryon to the system, and QCD has a large mass gap for baryonic states. The first non-vacuum state we encounter along the $T=0$ axis of the phase diagram is nuclear matter, a strongly correlated superfluid composed of approximately non-relativistic neutrons and protons. Nuclear matter is self-bound, and the baryon density changes discontinuously at the onset transition, from $\rho=0$ to nuclear matter saturation density $\rho=\rho_0 \simeq 0.15\,{\rm fm}^{-3}$. The discontinuity decreases as nuclear matter is heated, and the nuclear-liquid gas phase transition ends in a critical point at $T\simeq 18$ MeV and $\rho\simeq\rho_0/3$ \cite{Sauer:1976zzf,Pochodzalla:1995xy,Elliott:2013pna}. Hot hadronic matter can be described quite accurately as a weakly interacting gas of hadronic resonances. Empirically, the density of states for both mesons and baryons grows exponentially. A system of this type is called a Hagedorn gas, and it is known that a Hagedorn gas has a limiting temperature. It is also known that an exponential density of states can be realized using the string model of hadronic resonances. In the regime $\mu\gg\Lambda_{QCD}$ we can use arguments similar to those in the limit $T\gg\Lambda_{\it QCD}$ to establish that quarks and gluons are weakly coupled. At low temperature non-interacting quarks form a Fermi surface, where all states below the Fermi energy $E_F \simeq \mu/3$ are filled, and all states above the Fermi energy are empty. Interactions take place near the Fermi surface, and the corresponding interaction is weak. The main difference between cold quark matter and the hot QGP is that the large density of states near the quark Fermi surface implies that even weak interactions can cause qualitative changes in the ground state of dense matter. In particular, attractive interactions between pairs of quarks $(\vec{p}_F,-\vec{p}_F)$ on opposite sides of the Fermi surface leads to color superconductivity and the formation of a $\langle qq\rangle$ diquark condensate. Since quarks carry many different quantum numbers, color, flavor, and spin, a variety of superconducting phases are possible. The most symmetric of these, known as the color-flavor locked (CFL) phase, is predicted to exist at asymptotically high density \cite{Alford:1998mk,Schafer:1999fe}. In the CFL phase the diquark order parameter is \be \label{CFL} \langle q^A_{\alpha f} q^B_{\beta g}\rangle = (C\gamma_5)_{\alpha\beta} \epsilon^{ABC}\epsilon_{fgh}\delta^h_C\Phi \, , \ee where $C\gamma_5$ is an anti-symmetric (spin zero) Dirac matrix, and $\Phi$ determines the magnitude of the gap near the Fermi surface. This order parameter has a number of interesting properties. It breaks the $U(1)$ symmetry associated with baryon number, leading to superfluidity, and it breaks the chiral $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ symmetry. Except for Goldstone modes the spectrum is fully gapped. Fermions acquire a BCS-pairing gap, and gauge fields are screened by the color Meissner effect. This implies that the CFL phase, even though it is predicted to occur in a very dense liquid of quarks, exhibits many properties of superfluid nuclear matter. The CFL order parameter describes equal pair-condensates $\langle ud \rangle =\langle us\rangle = \langle ds\rangle$ of all three light quark flavors. As the density is lowered effects of the non-zero strange quark mass become important, and less symmetric phases are predicted to appear \cite{Alford:2007xm}. Phases that have been theoretically explored include Bose condensates of pions and kaons, hyperon matter, states with inhomogeneous quark-anti-quark or diquark condensates, and less symmetric color superconducting phases. The regimes of moderate baryon chemical potential in the phase diagram shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_qcd_phase} is largely conjecture. Empirical evidence shows that at low $\mu$ there is a nuclear matter phase with broken chiral symmetry and zero strangeness, and weak coupling calculations indicate that at high $\mu$ we find the CFL phase with broken chiral symmetry but non-zero strangeness. In principle the two phases could be separated by a single onset transition for strangeness \cite{Schafer:1998ef,Hatsuda:2006ps}, but model calculation support a richer picture in which one or more first order transitions intervene, as indicated in Fig.~\ref{fig_qcd_phase}. \section{Lattice QCD} \label{sec_lqcd} \subsection{The Wilson action} \label{sec_wilson} Symmetry arguments and perturbative calculations can be used to establish general features of the QCD phase diagram, but quantitative results can only be obtained using numerical calculations based on lattice QCD. The same is true for the masses of hadrons, their properties, and interactions. Lattice QCD is based on the euclidean path integral representation of the partition function, see the contribution by Hatsuda and \cite{Creutz:1983,Montvay:1994,Smit:2002,Gattringer:2009,Lin:2014} for introductions. More detailed reviews of the lattice field theory approach to hot and dense QCD can be found in \cite{Fodor:2009ax,Ding:2015ona}. The euclidean partition function for QCD is \be Z(T,\mu,V) = \int {\cal D}A_\mu\, {\cal D}q_f\, {\cal D}\bar{q}_f \; \exp(-S_E) \, , \ee where $S_E$ is the euclidean action \be S_E = -\int_0^\beta d\tau \int_V d^3x\; {\cal L}^E\, , \ee $\beta=T^{-1}$ is the inverse temperature and ${\cal L}^E$ is the euclidean Lagrangian, which is obtained by analytically continuing equ.~(\ref{l_qcd}) to imaginary time $\tau=it$. As in the quantum mechanical example in equ.~(\ref{z}) the temperature enters via the boundary condition on the fields in the imaginary time direction. Gauge fields and fermions obey periodic and anti-periodic boundary conditions, respectively. The chemical potential enters through its coupling to the conserved baryon density \be {\cal L}^E(\mu) = {\cal L}^E(0) + \mu \bar{q}_f\gamma_0 q_f\, . \ee In his pioneering work Wilson proposed to discretize the action on a $N_\tau\times N_\sigma^3$ space-time lattice with lattice spacings $a_\tau$ and $a_\sigma$ \cite{Wilson:1974sk}. In many cases $a_\sigma= a_\tau=a$, but we will encounter an exception in Sect.~\ref{sec_cl_QCD}. when we discuss the Hamiltonian formulation of the theory. At finite temperature we have to ensure that the spatial volume is larger than the inverse temperature, $L>\beta$. Here, $\beta=N_\tau a_\tau$, $L=N_\sigma a_\sigma$, and $V=L^3$ is the volume. Thermodynamic quantities are determined by taking derivatives of the partition function. The energy and baryon density are given by \begin{eqnarray} \label{e_part} {\cal E} &=& -\frac{1}{V} \left.\frac{\partial\log Z}{\partial\beta} \right\|_{\beta\mu}\, , \\ \label{n_part} \rho &=& \;\frac{1}{\beta V} \left.\frac{\partial\log Z}{\partial\mu} \right\|_{\beta}\, . \end{eqnarray} The discretized action for the gauge fields originally suggested by Wilson is given by \be \label{s_wilson} S_W = - \frac{2}{g^2}\sum_n\sum_{\mu<\nu} {\rm Re}\,{\rm Tr} \left[ W_{\mu\nu}(n) -1 \right] \ee where $W_{\mu\nu}(n)$ is the plaquette, the product of gauge links around an elementary loop on the lattice, \be \label{plaq} W_{\mu\nu}(n) = U_\mu(n)U_\nu(n+\hat\mu)U_{-\mu}(n+\hat\mu+\hat\nu) U_{-\nu}(n+\hat{\nu})\, . \ee Here, $n=(n_\tau,n_i)$ labels lattice sites and $\hat\mu$ is a unit vector in the $\mu$-direction. The gauge links $U_\mu(n)$ are $SU(N_c)$ matrices. We can think of the gauge links as line integrals \be \label{link_var} U_\mu(n)=\exp(ia A_\mu(n))\, , \ee and of the plaquettes as fluxes \be W_{\mu\nu}(n))=\exp(ia^2 G_{\mu\nu}(n))\, , \ee but the fundamental variables in the path integral are the (compact) group variables $U_\mu$, not the (non-compact) gauge potentials $A_\mu$. In particular, the path integral in pure gauge QCD takes the form \be \label{Z_Wilson} Z = \int \prod_{n,\mu} dU_\mu(n)\, \exp(-S_W)\, , \ee where $dU$ is the Haar measure on $SU(N_c)$. The Haar measure describes the correct integration measure for the gauge group. Some group integrals are discussed by Hatsuda, but part of the beauty of the Metropolis method is that we never have to explicitly construct $dU_\mu(n)$. Using equ.~(\ref{link_var}) we can check that the Wilson action reduces to continuum pure gauge theory in the limit $a\to 0$. We note that the gauge invariance of QCD is maintained exactly, even on a finite lattice, but that Lorentz invariance is only restored in the continuum limit. We also observe that classical scale invariance implies that the massless QCD action is independent of $a$. The continuum limit is taken by adjusting the bare coupling at the scale of the lattice spacing according to asymptotic freedom, see equ.~(\ref{g_1l}). In practice the lattice spacing is not small enough to ensure the accuracy of this method, and more sophisticated scale setting procedures are used \cite{Fodor:2009ax,Ding:2015ona}. Monte Carlo simulations of the path integral equ.~(\ref{Z_Wilson}) can be performed using the Metropolis algorithm explained in Sect.~\ref{sec_qm}: \begin{itemize} \item Initialize the link variables with random $SU(N_c)$ matrices. A simple algorithm is based on writing $U$ in terms of $N_c$ complex row vectors $\vec{u}_i$. Take each vector to be random unit vector and then use the Gram-Schmidt method to orthogonalize the different vectors, $\vec{u}_i\cdot\vec{u}_j^ =\delta_{ij}$. This ensures that $U$ is unitary and distributed according to the $SU(N_c)$ Haar measure \cite{Mezzadri:2006}. \item Sweep through the lattice and update individual link variables. For this purpose multiply the link variable by a random $SU(N_c)$ matrix, $U_\mu\to R U_\mu$. Compute the change in the Wilson action and accept the update with probability $\exp(-\Delta S_W)$. \item Compute physical observables. The simplest observable is the average plaquette $\langle W_{\mu\nu}\rangle$, which can be related to the equation of state, see equ.~(\ref{e_part}). More complicated observables include the correlation function between plaquettes, and the Wilson loop \be W({\cal C}) = Tr\left[ L({\cal C})\right] \, , \hspace{0.5cm} L({\cal C})= \prod_{(n,\mu)\in{\cal C}} U_\mu(n)\, , \ee where $L({\cal C})$ is the product of link variables around a closed loop. The average Wilson loop is related to the potential between two static charges in the fundamental representation \be V(R) = -\lim_{T\to\infty}\frac{1}{T} \log \left[\langle W({\cal C}) \rangle \right]\, , \ee where $R\times T$ is the area of a rectangular loop ${\cal C}$. \item Tune to the continuum limit $a\to 0$ by adjusting the coupling constant according to the asymptotic freedom formula equ.~(\ref{g_1l}). Note that the Lambda parameter for the lattice regulator is quite small, $\Lambda_{\it lat} = \Lambda_{\bar{MS}}/28.8$ \cite{Hasenfratz:1980kn}. Also observe that we have to increase $N_\sigma,N_\tau$ to keep the physical volume constant as $a\to 0$. Indeed, once the continuum limit $a\to 0$ is reached we have to study the infinite volume (thermodynamic) limit $V\to \infty$. This is more difficult than it appears, because $a\to 0$, corresponding to $g\to 0$, is a critical point of the partition function (\ref{Z_Wilson}), and simulations exhibit critical slowing down. \end{itemize} Metropolis simulations with the pure gauge Wilson action are very simple and robust. As an illustration I provide a simple $Z_2$ lattice gauge theory code written by M.~Creutz in the appendix. Reasonable results for the heavy quark potential can be obtained on fairly coarse lattices, for example an $8^4$ lattice with a spacing $a\simeq 0.25$ fm \cite{Lepage:1998dt}. However, accurate results with controlled error bars require significant computational resources. In practice the perturbative relation between $a$ and $g^2$ is only valid on very fine lattices, and the scale setting has to be done non-perturbatively. Also, determining the spectrum of pure gauge theory is difficult. Purely gluonic states, glueballs, are quite heavy, with masses in the range $m\simeq 1.6$ GeV and higher. This implies that gluonic correlation functions are short range, requiring a resolution $a\simeq 0.1$ fm or better. Finally, simulations on fine lattices are affected by critical slowing down. Indeed, finding an efficient method for updating gauge fields on very fine lattices, analogous to the cluster algorithms for spin models \cite{Wolff:1988uh}, is an important unsolved problem. \subsection{Fermions on the lattice} \label{sec_fermions} The main difficulty in lattice QCD is related to the presence of light fermions. The fermion action is of the form \be S_F= a^4 \sum_{m,n} \bar{q}(m)D_{mn}q(n)\, . \ee Formally, the integration over the fermion fields can be performed exactly, resulting in the determinant of the Dirac operator $\det(D(A_\mu,\mu))$. Several methods exist for discretizing the Dirac operator $D$, and for sampling the determinant. Different discretization schemes differ in the degree to which chiral symmetry is maintained on a finite lattice. The original formulation due to Wilson \cite{Wilson:1974sk} preserves no chiral symmetry, the staggered Fermion scheme \cite{Kogut:1974ag} maintains a subset of the full chiral symmetry, while the domain wall \cite{Kaplan:1992bt} and overlap methods \cite{Neuberger:1997fp} aim to preserve the full chiral symmetry on a discrete lattice. The central difficulty in implementing these methods is that the fermion determinant is a very non-local object. While updating a single gauge link only requires recalculating a small number of plaquettes (6 in $d=4$ dimensions) in the Wilson action, recalculating the fermion action requires computing the determinant of a (very sparse) matrix of size $(N_\tau N_\sigma^3)\times(N_\tau N_\sigma^3)$ or larger. This is clearly impractical. Fermion algorithms rely on a number of tricks. The first is the observation that the Dirac operator has a property called $\gamma_5$-hermiticity, $\gamma_5 D\gamma_5=D^\dagger$, which implies that $\det(D)$ is real. The determinant of a two-flavor theory is then real and positive. This allows us to rewrite the fermion determinant as a path integral over a bosonic field with a non-local but positive action \be \det(D_u)\det(D_d) = \det(DD^\dagger) = \int {\cal D}\phi{\cal D}\phi^\dagger\, \exp(-\phi^\dagger (DD^\dagger)^{-1}\phi) \, . \ee The path integral over the pseudofermion field $\phi$ can be sampled using a combination of deterministic methods like molecular dynamics and stochastic methods such as the Metropolis algorithm. These combined algorithms are known as Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) methods. Codes that implement the HMC algorithm for pseudofermions are significantly more complicated than the Metropolis algorithm for the pure gauge Wilson action discussed above, and I refer the interested reader to the more specialized literature \cite{Luscher:2010ae}. I also note that since these algorithms involve the calculation of $D^{-1}$ the computational cost increases as the quark masses are lowered. The calculation of correlation functions also differs from the bosonic case. Consider, for example, an operator with the quantum numbers of a charged pion, $J_\pi(x)=\bar{u}^a(x)\gamma_5 d^a(x)$. Since the fermion action is quadratic the correlation function in a given gauge configuration can be computed exactly in terms of the fermion propagator. The full correlation function is \be \Pi_\pi(x) = \langle J_\pi(x)J_\pi(0)\rangle = \left\langle {\rm Tr}\left[ S(x,0)\gamma_5 S(0,x)\gamma_5\right] \right\rangle\, , \ee where $S(x,y)=\langle x\|D^{-1}\|y\rangle$ is the fermion propagator, and we have assumed exact isospin symmetry so that the propagator of the up quark is equal to the propagator of the down quark. Note that the interaction between quarks is encoded in the average over all gauge fields. The one-gluon exchange interaction, for example, corresponds to a perturbative fluctuation in the gauge field that modifies the two quark propagators. An operator with the quantum number of the proton is $\eta_\alpha(x) =\epsilon_{abc}(u^a(x)C\gamma_\mu u^b(x))( \gamma^\mu\gamma_5 d^c(x))_\alpha$. The correlation function is \be \Pi_{\alpha\beta}(x) = 2\epsilon_{abc}\epsilon_{a'b'c'} \Big\langle \left(\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 S^{cc'}(0,x)\gamma_\nu\gamma_5\right)_{\alpha\beta} {\rm Tr}\left[\gamma_\mu S^{aa'}(0,x)\gamma_\nu C(S^{bb'}(0,x))^TC\right] \Big\rangle \, . \ee Note that meson correlation function involves one forward and one backward going propagator, whereas the propagators in the baryon correlation function are all forward going. A difficulty arises when we consider flavor singlet $\bar{q}{q}$ currents such as $J_{\eta'}= (\bar{u}^a(x)\gamma_5 u^a(x)+\bar{d}^a(x)\gamma_5 d^a(x))/\sqrt{2}$, which has the quantum numbers of the $\eta'$ meson. We find \be \Pi_{\eta'}(x) = \langle J_{\eta'}(x)J_{\eta'}(0)\rangle = \left\langle {\rm Tr}\left[ S(x,0)\gamma_5 S(0,x)\gamma_5\right] -2{\rm Tr}\left[ S(x,x)\gamma_5\right] {\rm Tr}\left[ S(0,0)\gamma_5\right] \right\rangle\, , \ee which involve propagators $S(x,x)$ that loop back to the same point. These contributions are known as quark-line disconnected diagrams, and difficult to treat numerically, see \cite{Endress:2014qpa} for a recent discussion. \begin{figure}[t] \bc\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{topology.pdf}\ec \caption{\label{fig_top} Topological objects in lattice QCD (figure courtesy of S.~Sharma, see \cite{Dick:2015twa}). This picture shows a slice through a low lying eigenstate of the Dirac operator in lattice QCD. } \end{figure} \subsection{The QCD vacuum} \label{sec_QCD_vac} It is natural to hope that lattice QCD can provide us with an intuitive picture of what the QCD vacuum looks like, similar to the picture of the quantum mechanical ground state shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_path}. This turns out to be more complicated, for a number of reasons. The first is that the field in QCD is a $SU(3)$ matrix, which is hard to visualize. The second, more important, problem is related to quantum fluctuations. In QCD there is no obvious separation of scales that would allow us to clearly separate perturbative fluctuations from large semi-classical fluctuations. This has led to the idea to eliminate short range fluctuations by some kind of filtering or smoothing algorithm. The simplest of these is known as cooling \cite{Teper:1985ek}. In the cooling method we modify the Metropolis algorithm so that only updates that reduce the action are accepted. Since the update algorithm is local, this will tend to eliminate small structures but preserve larger objects. A modern version of cooling is gradient flow \cite{Luscher:2010iy}. In the gradient flow method we continue the gauge fields to a 5th ``time'' dimension. In this direction the fields satisfy a differential equation \be \label{grad_flow} \partial_\tau A_\mu = D^\nu G_{\mu\nu}\, , \ee where $A_\mu(\tau=0)$ is the four-dimensional gauge field and the rhs is computed from the gauge potentials evaluated at the flow time $\tau$. The Lorentz indices remain four-dimensional. The rhs of the flow equations is the classical equation of motion, so that the gradient flow tends to drive gauge fields towards the closest classical solution. The only finite action solutions of the euclidean field equations on $R^4$ are instantons \cite{Belavin:1975fg,Schafer:1996wv}. Instantons and anti-instantons are characterized by integer values $Q_{\it top}=\pm 1$ of the topological charge \be \label{q_top} Q_{\it top} = \int d^4x \, q(x)\, , \hspace{0.5cm} q(x) = \frac{g^2}{64\pi^2} \epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta} G^a_{\mu\nu}G^a_{\alpha\beta}\, . \ee Exact higher charge solutions exist, but the QCD vacuum is dominated by configurations with both instantons and anti-instantons. These gauge field configurations are only approximate solutions of the equations of motion \cite{Schafer:1996wv}. Under cooling or gradient flow instantons and anti-instantons will eventually annihilate and evolve to an exact multi-instantons solution with $Q_{\it top}=N_I-N_A$ , where $N_{I,A}$ are the numbers of (anti)instantons. However, the $N_I+N_A$ topological objects are preserved for flow times that are much longer than the decay time of ordinary quantum fluctuations, and the total number of well separated instantons and anti-instantons can be determined. The average topological charge is zero, but the pure gauge vacuum is characterized by a non-zero topological susceptibility \be \chi_{\it top} = \frac{1}{V} \langle Q_{\it top}^2\rangle \, , \ee where $V$ is the euclidean four-volume. The topological charge can be determined using the naive lattice discretization of equ.~(\ref{q_top}), but this operator is very noisy, and in general not an integer. This problem can be addressed using the cooling or gradient flow algorithms discussed above. Recent lattice calculations based on these methods give $\chi_{\it top} = (190\pm 5\,{\rm MeV})^4$ \cite{DelDebbio:2004ns,Ce:2014sfa}. A simple picture of the QCD vacuum which is consistent with this value is the dilute instanton liquid model, which assumes that the topological susceptibility is determined by Poisson fluctuations in an ensemble of instantons and anti-instantons with an average density $(N_I+N_A)/V\simeq 1 \, {\rm fm}^{-4}$ \cite{Schafer:1996wv}. This is an approximate picture, and more complicated configurations involving monopoles and fractional charges are needed to understand the large $N_c$ limit and the role of confinement \cite{Poppitz:2012nz}. Another important development is the use of fermionic methods to analyze the vacuum structure of QCD. In a given gauge configuration the quark propagator can written as \be S(x,y) = \sum_\lambda \frac{\psi_\lambda(x)\psi^\dagger_\lambda(y)} {\lambda+im}\, , \ee where $\psi_\lambda$ is an eigenvector of the Dirac operator with eigenvalue $\lambda$: $D\psi_\lambda= (\lambda+im)\psi_\lambda$. Note that this is not how propagators are typically determined in lattice QCD, because the calculation of the complete spectrum is numerically very expensive. Gamma five hermiticity implies that eigenvalues come in pairs $\pm \lambda$. The quark condensate is given by \be \langle \bar{q}q \rangle = -i\int d^4x\, \left\langle {\rm Tr}\left[S(x,x)\right]\right\rangle = -\left\langle \sum_{\lambda > 0} \frac{2m}{\lambda^2+m^2} \right\rangle\, . \ee Here, I have ignored the contribution from exact zero modes because the density of zero modes is suppressed by $m^{N_f}$. This factor comes from the determinant in the measure. If we were to ignore the determinant (this is called the quenched approximation), then the quark condensate would diverge as $1/m$. We observe that a finite value of the quark condensate in the chiral limit $m\to 0$ requires an accumulation of eigenvalues near zero. This can be made more explicit by introducing the density of states \be \rho(\nu) = \left\langle \sum_{\lambda\geq 0}\delta(\lambda-\nu) \right\rangle \, . \ee The chiral condensate in the thermodynamic and chiral limits is given by \be \langle\bar{q}q\rangle = - \pi\rho(0)\, . \ee This is known as the Banks-Casher relation \cite{Banks:1979yr}. Note that is is essential to take the thermodynamic $V\to\infty$ limit before the chiral limit $m\to 0$. Exact zero modes of the Dirac operator are related to topology. The Dirac operator has one left handed zero mode in the field of an instanton, and a right handed zero mode in the field of an anti-instanton. This is consistent with the Atiyah-Singer index theorem, which states that the topological charge is equal to the index of the Dirac operator, the difference between the number of left and right handed zero modes, $Q_{\it top}=N_f(n_L-n_R)$. These results suggest that it is possible to give a purely fermionic definition of the topological charge density. On the lattice, this can be achieved for a class of Dirac operators that satisfy the Ginsparg-Wilson relation \cite{Ginsparg:1981bj} \be D\gamma_5 + \gamma_5 D = a D\gamma_5 D \, , \ee where $a$ is the lattice spacing. In the continuum limit we recover the expected relation $ D\gamma_5 + \gamma_5 D =0$ for the massless Dirac operator. The important observation is that the fermionic topological density \be \label{q_ferm} q_f(n) = \frac{1}{2a^3}\, {\rm tr}_{CD}\left[ \gamma_5 D(n,n)\right] \, , \ee where ${\rm tr}_{CD}$ is a color-Dirac trace, satisfies the index theorem \be Q_{\it top}=a^4\sum_n \; q_f(n)\, \ee on a discrete lattice. Fig.~\ref{fig_top} shows the absolute square of $q_f(x)$ constructed from lying eigenmodes of the Dirac operator. We observe that fermionic operators can indeed be used to probe the topological content of the QCD vacuum directly, without the need for filtering or smoothing. The existence of zero mode implies that the topological susceptibility is zero if at least one quark flavor is massless. This is because the path integral measure contains the fermion determinant, which is vanishes if $m=0$ and $Q_{\it top}\neq 0$. We can be more precise using the chiral lagrangian equ.~(\ref{l_chpt}). In order to keep track of topology we add to the QCD action a topological term $S_\theta = i\theta Q_{\it top}$. Then the topological susceptibility is given by the second derivative of the free energy with respect to $\theta$. Since every zero mode in the Dirac operator contributes a factor ${\rm det}(M)$ to the partition function we know that $\theta$ enters the effective lagrangian in the combination $\theta +{\rm arg}(\det(M))$. The vacuum energy is determined by \be \label{v_theta} V =-B {\rm Tr}\left[Me^{i\theta/N_f}\Sigma^\dagger\right] + {\it h.c.} \, , \ee and we observe that the topological susceptibility in QCD with degenerate quark masses is proportional to $m\langle\bar{q}q\rangle$. Note that equ.~(\ref{v_theta}) is consistent with the vanishing of $\chi_{\it top}$ for $m_u=0$. If $m_u=0$ and $m_d\neq 0$ then equ.~(\ref{v_theta}) is minimized by $\Sigma=\exp(i\phi\tau_3)$ with $\phi=\theta/2$, and the vacuum energy is independent of $\theta$. It is tempting to think that exact zero modes, governed by topology, and approximate zero modes, connected to chiral symmetry breaking, are related. This is the basis of the instanton liquid model \cite{Schafer:1996wv}. In the instanton liquid model we consider an ensemble of instantons and anti-instantons with no (or small) net topology. The exact zero modes of individual instantons are lifted, and form a zero mode zone. The density of eigenvalues in the zero mode zone determines the chiral condensate via the Banks-Casher relation. This model predicts the correct order of magnitude of $\langle\bar{q}q \rangle$, but the calculation cannot be systematically improved because chiral symmetry breaking requires strong coupling. Recently, we showed that the connection of chiral symmetry breaking, instantons and monopoles can be made precise in a certain limit of QCD. The idea is to compactify QCD on $R^3\times S_1$, where the size of the circle is much smaller than $\Lambda^{-1}_{\it QCD}$, and the fermions satisfy non-thermal (twisted) boundary conditions \cite{Cherman:2016hcd}. \subsection{Lattice QCD at finite baryon density} \label{sec_lQCD_mu} In section \ref{sec_fermions} I discussed some of the difficulties that appear when we discretize the Dirac operator. A separate, more serious, issue with fermions is that for $\mu\neq 0$ the Dirac operator does not satisfy $\gamma_5$-hermiticity. This implies that the fermion determinant is no longer real, and that standard importance sampling methods fail. This is the ``sign'' problem already mentioned in Sect.~\ref{sec_qcd_T}. To understand the severity of the problem consider a generic expectation value \be \langle {\cal O} \rangle = \frac{\int dU \, \det(D)\,{\cal O}\,e^{-S}} {\int dU \, \det(D)\,e^{-S}}\, . \ee If the determinant is complex I can write this as \be \label{O_pq} \langle {\cal O} \rangle = \frac{\int dU \, \|\det(D)\|\,{\cal O}e^{i\varphi}\,e^{-S}} {\int dU \, \|\det(D)\|\,e^{i\varphi}e^{-S}} \equiv \frac{\langle {\cal O}e^{i\varphi}\rangle_{pq}} {\langle e^{i\varphi}\rangle_{pq}}\, , \ee where $\langle .\rangle_{pq}$ refers to a phase quenched average. This average can be computed using the Metropolis (or HMC) algorithm. The problem is that the average phase $\langle e^{i\varphi}\rangle_{pq}$ is very small. This follows from the fact that the average phase can be expressed as the ratio of two partition functions \be \label{ph_av} \langle e^{i\varphi} \rangle_{pq} = \frac{\int dU \, \det(D)\,\,e^{-S}} {\int dU \, \|\det(D)\|\,e^{-S}} = \frac{Z}{Z_{pq}} = e^{-V\Delta F} \, , \ee where $\Delta F$ is the free energy density difference, and $V$ is the volume of the system. This shows that the phase is exponentially small, and that the ratio equ.~(\ref{O_pq}) is very difficult to compute. As a specific example consider QCD with two degenerate flavors, up and down, and a baryon chemical potential $\mu_u=\mu_d=\mu_B/3$. Then $\det(D)=\det(D_u)\det(D_d)$ and $\|\det(D)\|=\det(D_u)\det(D_d)^$. The phase quenched partition function $Z_{pq}$ can be interpreted as the partition function of QCD with a non-zero isospin chemical potential $\mu_u=-\mu_d=\mu_I/2$. The small $\mu$ behavior of both the isospin and baryon number theories at $T=0$ is easily understood. The isospin theory has a second order phase transition at $\mu_I=m_\pi$ which corresponds to the onset of pion condensation. The baryon theory has a first order transition at $\mu_B=m_p-B$, where $B\simeq 15$ MeV is the binding energy of infinite nuclear matter. This implies that for $\mu>m_\pi$ the partition functions $Z$ and $Z_{pq}$ describe very different physical systems, and the sign problem is severe. The sign problem may manifest itself in different ways. Consider, for example, an attempt to study the correlation function of $A$ nucleons in a QCD ensemble generated at $\mu_B=0$. For large $A$ this correlation function determines the binding energy of nuclear matter. There are two difficulties with this approach. The first is that the operator contains $3A$ quark fields, so that the correlator has up to $(3A)!$ contractions. This is not prohibitive, because the number of contractions can be reduced using symmetries and iterative algorithms. Indeed, correlators for medium mass nuclei have been computed \cite{Lin:2014}. The second, more serious, problem is the signal-to-noise ratio. The variance of the correlator $C$ is \be {\rm var}(C)= \langle CC^\dagger \rangle - \langle C\rangle^2\, . \ee The $A$ nucleon correlator $C$ contains $3A$ forward going quark propagators, and $CC^\dagger$ consists of $3A$ forward and $3A$ backward propagators. This implies that $CC^\dagger$ couples to a state of $3A$ mesons. Since the lightest meson is the pion and the lightest baryon is the proton the signal-to-noise of an $A$ nucleon correlation function is \be \frac{\cal S}{\cal N} \sim \exp(-A(m_p -3m_\pi/2)\tau) \, . \ee In order to resolve the ground state with a given $A$ we have to make $\tau$ sufficiently large so that excited states with the same $A$ are suppressed. For $A=1$ there is a $\pi N$ continuum starting an excitation energy $\Delta E=m_\pi$, and the first resonance at $\Delta E=m_\Delta-m_N\simeq 300$ MeV. This means that we have to consider $\tau\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} 1$ fm. For multi-nucleon states the situation is more complicated, because there are many closely spaced multi-nucleon states in a finite volume. The problem is studied, for example, in \cite{Beane:2003da}. The conclusion is that different bound and scattering states are separated by 10s of MeV, requiring $\tau\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} 4$ fm. It may be possible to improve on this estimate by using variationally improved sources, but even for $\tau\simeq 2$ fm the signal to noise is extremely poor for $A\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} 4$. This shows that in simulations with fixed $A$ the sign problem manifests itself as a noise problem. This is not surprising. One way to think about the sign problem is to view it as an overlap problem. The configurations that contribute to $Z_{pq}$ have poor overlap with those that contribute to $Z$. The same phenomenon is at work here. Configurations generated at $\mu_B=0$ reflect vacuum physics, and the lightest fermionic fluctuation is a pion. Large cancellations are required to explore the physics of multi-baryon states. There are many attempts to find direct solutions to the sign problem, but at this time the only regime in which controlled calculations are feasible is the regime of small $\mu$ and high $T$. In this region the partition function can be expanded in a Taylor series in $\mu/T$. The corresponding expansion coefficients are generalized susceptibilities that can be determined from lattice simulations at zero chemical potential. The susceptibilities not only determine the equation of state at finite baryon density, but also control fluctuations of conserved charges. In addition to methods that are restricted to the regime $\mu \mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} \pi T$, a number of proposals to explore QCD at high baryon density are being pursued. This includes new approaches, like integration over Lefshetz thimbles \cite{Cristoforetti:2012su,Aarts:2014nxa}, as well as novel variants of old approaches, like the complex Langevin method \cite{Aarts:2009uq,Sexty:2013ica}, or the use of dual variables \cite{Kloiber:2013rba}. The ultimate promise of these methods is still unclear, but the central importance of the sign problem to computational physics continues to attract new ideas. \subsection{Real time properties} \label{sec_lQCD_real} The basic trick in lattice QCD is the continuation of the path integral to imaginary time. This makes it possible to calculate the path integral by importance sampling, but it implies that we only have direct access to imaginary time correlation functions. For many observables this is not a serious problem. Thermodynamic observables, for example, are static quantities and no analytic continuation is necessary. The ground state contribution to a hadron correlation function is $\Pi(\tau)\sim e^{-m_H\tau}$ which is trivially continued to $\Pi(t)\sim e^{-im_Ht}$. However, difficulties arise if one studies excited states, in particular resonances, the interaction between hadrons, or the real time response of many body systems at finite temperature and density. Significant progress has been made in studying scattering processes, at least in the elastic regime. This is discussed in some of the later chapters of this book. Here, I will concentrate on the calculation of real time response functions. The prototypical example is the calculation of the shear viscosity of a QCD plasma using the retarded correlation function of the stress tensor $T^{xy}$, \be \label{G_ret} G^{xy,xy}_R(\omega,\vec{k}) = -i\int dt\int d^3x\, e^{i(\omega t-\vec{k}\cdot\vec{x})} \Theta(t) \langle \left[ T^{xy}(\vec{x},t),T^{xy}(0,0)\right]\rangle\, , \ee The associated spectral function is defined by $\rho(\omega,\vec{k}) =-\,{\rm Im}\,G_R(\omega,\vec{k})$. The imaginary part of the retarded correlator is a measure of dissipation. This relation can be made more precise using fluid dynamics, which is an effective theory of the response function in the low energy, small momentum limit \cite{Schafer:2009dj,Schaefer:2014awa}. Linearized fluid dynamics shows that the static response function is determined by the pressure of the fluid, and that the leading energy and momentum dependence is governed by transport coefficients. These relations can be used to derive Kubo formulas, expressions for the transport coefficients in terms of retarded correlation functions. The Kubo relation for the shear viscosity is \be \label{eta_kubo} \eta = \lim_{\omega\to 0} \lim_{k\to 0} \frac{\rho^{xy,xy}(\omega,\vec{k})}{\omega}\, , \ee and similar results hold for the bulk viscosity, the thermal conductivity, and heavy quark diffusion constants. The spectral function contains information about the physical excitations that carry the response. The euclidean path integral does not provide direct access to the retarded correlator or the spectral function. Lattice calculations are based on the relation between the spectral function and the imaginary energy (Matsubara) correlation function \be \label{G_E_w} G_E(i\omega_n)= \int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} \frac{\rho(\omega)} {\omega-i\omega_n}\, , \ee where $\omega_n=2\pi nT$ is the Matsubara frequency. The imaginary time correlation function is \be \label{G_E_tau} G_E(\tau)= \int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} K(\omega,\tau) \rho(\omega) \, , \ee where the kernel $K(\omega,\tau)$ is given by \be \label{Ker} K(\omega,\tau) = \frac{\cosh[\omega(\tau-1/(2T))]}{\sinh[\omega/(2T)]} = \left[1+n_B(\omega)\right] e^{-\omega\tau} + n_B(\omega)e^{\omega\tau}\, , \ee and $n_B(\omega)$ is the Bose distribution function. The imaginary time correlation function equ.~(\ref{G_E_tau}) was studied on the lattice in \cite{Karsch:1986cq,Meyer:2007ic,Meyer:2007dy,Sakai:2007cm}. The basic idea for calculating transport coefficients is to numerically compute $G_E(\tau)$, invert the integral transform in equ.~(\ref{G_E_tau}) to obtain the spectral functions $\rho(\omega)$, and then study the limit $\omega\to 0$. The problem is that $G_E(\tau)$ is computed on a small number of discrete lattice sites, and that the imaginary time correlator at distances on the order of $\beta/2$ is not very sensitive to the slope of the spectral function at low energy. Recent attempts to to address these problems and to obtain numerically stable spectral functions and reliable error estimates are based on Bayesian methods such as the maximum entropy method mentioned in Sect.~\ref{sec_qm}, see \cite{Aarts:2007wj,Aarts:2007va}. It is also possible to optimize the contribution from the transport peak by measuring the correlation functions of conserved charges, such as energy and momentum density, at non-zero spatial momentum \cite{Aarts:2006wt,Meyer:2008gt}. A possible issue with lattice calculations is that effects of poor resolution tend to bias the result towards small values of $\eta/s$, where $s$ is the entropy density. The finite temperature spectral function satisfies the sum rule \cite{Romatschke:2009ng} \be \frac{2}{\pi} \int d\omega\, \left[ \eta(\omega) -\eta_{T\!=\!0}(\omega)\right] = \frac{3}{10}\, sT\, , \ee where $\eta(\omega) = \rho(\omega)/\omega$. On the lattice it is difficult to resolve sharp features in the spectral function. Roughly, the resolution is limited by the lowest Matsubara frequency $\pi T$. I will therefore assume that the $T\neq 0$ spectral function is a Lorentzian with width $\pi T$ \be \eta(\omega) -\eta_{T\!=\!0}(\omega) \simeq \frac{\eta(0)(\pi T)^2}{\omega^2 + (\pi T)^2}\, . \ee Then the integral on the lhs is equal to $\eta(0)\pi T$, and the sum rule predicts $\eta/s\sim 3/(10\pi)$, quite close to $\eta/s=1/(4\pi)$. The lesson is that it is easy to obtain small values of $\eta/s$, and much more difficult to obtain large values of $\eta/s$, predicted by perturbative QCD \cite{Arnold:2000dr}. The first calculation of the shear viscosity on the lattice was performed by Karsch and Wyld \cite{Karsch:1986cq}. More recently, the problem of computing the shear and and bulk viscosity in a pure gauge plasma near $T_c$ was revisited by Meyer \cite{Meyer:2007ic,Meyer:2008gt}. He obtains $\eta/s=0.102(56)$ and $\zeta/s=0.065(17)$ at $T=1.24T_c$. Shear viscosity is only weakly dependent on temperature, but bulk viscosity is strongly peaked near $T_c$. The value of $\eta/s$ is consistent with experimental results, and with the prediction from holographic duality, $\eta/s=1/(4\pi)$ \cite{Kovtun:2004de}. \begin{figure}[t] \bc\includegraphics[width=0.95 \textwidth]{hic_evol_schem.pdf}\ec \caption{\label{fig_hic} Schematic time evolution of a heavy ion collision. Figure courtesy of S.~Bass. CGC refers to the color glass condensate, a semi-classical model of the overpopulated gluon configuration in the initial state of a heavy ion collision. Glasma refers to the non-equilibrium evolution of this state into a locally equilibrated plasma. Hydrodynamics is the theory of the time evolution of a locally equilibrated fireball, and hadronic phase refers to the late time kinetic stage of the collision. } \end{figure} \section{Nonequilibrium QCD} \label{sec_neq_qcd} In the remainder of this chapter I will discuss a number of coarse grained approaches to the non-equilibrium dynamics of QCD. These method are relevant to the study of nuclear collisions, in particular in the ultra-relativistic regime. This regime is explored experimentally at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. A rough time line of a heavy ion collision is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_hic}. Initial nucleon-nucleon collisions release a large number of quarks and gluons. This process is described by the full non-equilibrium quantum field theory, but there are a number of approximate descriptions that may be useful in certain regimes. The first is a classical field theory description in terms of highly occupied classical gluon fields. The second is a kinetic theory in terms of quark and gluon quasi-particles. Finally, there is a new approach, which is a description in terms of a dual gravitational theory. Theories of the initial state demonstrate that there is a tendency towards local equilibration. If local equilibrium is achieved then a simpler theory, fluid dynamics is applicable. Fluid dynamics is very efficient in the sense that it deals with a small number of variables, the conserved densities of particle number, energy and momentum, and that it has very few parameters, an equation of state and a set of transport coefficients. The fluid dynamic stage of a heavy ion collision has a finite duration. Eventually the density becomes too low and local equilibrium can no longer be maintained. At this point kinetic theory is again relevant, now formulated in terms of hadronic quasi-particles. All the theories we have mentioned, fluid dynamics, kinetic theory, classical field theory, and holography, have reached a high degree of sophistication and I will point to text books and review for detailed introductions. Nevertheless, the basic ideas are quite simple, and I will provide some examples in the following sections. \subsection{Fluid Dynamics} \label{sec_hydro} I begin with fluid dynamics, because it is the most general and in some ways the simplest non-equilibrium theory. It is important to remember, however, that fluid dynamics is a very rich framework, both mathematically and in terms of the range of phenomena that one may encounter. In the following I will focus on the non-relativistic theory. There is no fundamental difference between the relativistic and non-relativistic theories, but some simplifications appear in the non-relativistic regime. Non-relativistic fluid dynamics is used in many areas of physics, including the physics of cold atomic Fermi gases and neutron stars. The relativistic theory is relevant to high energy heavy ion collisions and supernova explosions. Introductions to relativistic fluid dynamics can be found in \cite{Romatschke:2009im,Rezzolla:2013,Jeon:2015dfa}. Fluid dynamics reduces the complicated non-equilibrium many-body problem to equations of motion for the conserved charges. The reason that this is possible is the separation of scales between the microscopic collision time $\tau_{\it micro}$, and the relaxation time $\tau_{\it macro}$ of hydrodynamic variables. A generic perturbation of the system decays on a time scale on the order of $\tau_{\it micro}$, irrespective of the typical length scale involved. Here, $\tau_{\it micro}$ is determined by microscopic time scales, such as the typical collision time between quasi-particles. A fluctuation of a conserved charge, on the other hand, cannot decay locally and has to relax by diffusion or propagation. The relevant time scale $\tau_{\it macro}$ increases with the length scale of the perturbation. As a consequence, when we focus on sufficiently large scales we can assume $\tau_{\it macro}\gg \tau_{\it micro}$, and focus on the evolution of conserved charges. In a simple non-relativistic fluid the conserved charges are the mass density $\rho$, the momentum density $\vec{\pi}$, and the energy density ${\cal E}$. The momentum density can be used to define the fluid velocity, $\vec{u}=\vec{\pi}/\rho$. By Galilean invariance the energy density can then be written as the sum of the internal energy density and the kinetic energy density, ${\cal E}={\cal E}_0+\frac{1}{2}\rho u^2$. The conservation laws are \bea \label{hydro1} \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} &=& - \vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{\pi} , \\ \label{hydro2} \frac{\partial \pi_i}{\partial t} &=& - \nabla_j\Pi_{ij}, \\ \label{hydro3} \frac{\partial {\cal E}}{\partial t} &=& - \vec{\nabla} \cdot\vec{j}^{\epsilon} . \eea In order for these equations to close we have to specify constitutive relations for the stress tensor $\Pi_{ij}$ and the energy current $\vec{j}^{\epsilon}$. Since fluid dynamics is an effective long wavelength theory we expect that the currents can be systematically expanded in gradients of the hydrodynamic variables $\rho$, $\vec{u}$ and ${\cal E}_0$. At leading order the stress tensor contains no derivatives and the structure is completely fixed by rotational symmetry and Galilean invariance. We have \be \Pi_{ij} = \rho u_i u_j + P\delta_{ij}+ \delta \Pi_{ij}\, , \ee where $P=P(\rho,{\cal E}_0)$ is the equation of state and $\delta\Pi_{ij}$ contains gradient terms. The approximation $\delta\Pi_{ij}=0$ is called ideal fluid dynamics, and the equation of motion for $\vec\pi$ is known as the Euler equation. Ideal fluid dynamics is time reversal invariant and the entropy is conserved. If gradient terms are included then time reversal invariance is broken and the entropy increases. We will refer to $\delta\Pi_{ij}$ as the dissipative stresses. At first order in the gradient expansion $\delta\Pi_{ij}$ can be written as $\delta\Pi_{ij}=-\eta\sigma_{ij}-\zeta\delta_{ij}\langle \sigma\rangle$ with \be \sigma_{ij} = \nabla_i u_j +\nabla_j u_i -\frac{2}{3}\delta_{ij} \langle\sigma\rangle \, , \hspace{0.1\hsize} \langle\sigma\rangle =\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{u}\, . \ee The dissipative stresses are determined by two transport coefficients, the shear viscosity $\eta$ and the bulk viscosity $\zeta$. The energy current is given by \be \vec{j}^{\;\epsilon} = \vec{u}w+\delta\vec{j}^{\epsilon}\, , \ee where $w=P+{\cal E}$ is the enthalpy. At leading order in the gradient expansion \be \label{j_kappa} \delta j_i^{\epsilon}=u_j\delta\Pi_{ij}-\kappa\nabla_i T\, , \ee where $\kappa$ is the thermal conductivity. The second law of thermodynamics implies that $\eta,\zeta$ and $\kappa$ must be positive. The equation of motion for $\vec{\pi}$ at first order in gradients is known as the Navier-Stokes equation, and equ.~(\ref{j_kappa}) is Fourier's law of heat conduction. It is sometimes useful to rewrite the fluid dynamic equations using the comoving derivatives $D_t=\partial_t +\vec{u}\cdot\vec{\nabla}$. The equations are \bea \label{rho_lag} D_t\rho &=& -\rho \vec{\nabla}\cdot \vec{u}\, , \\ \label{u_lag} D_t u_i & = & - \frac{1}{\rho} \nabla_j\left( \delta_{ij} P + \delta \Pi_{ij} \right) \, , \\ \label{e_lag} D_t \epsilon & = & - \frac{1}{\rho} \nabla_i \left( u_i P + \delta j^{\cal E}_i \right) \, , \eea where $\epsilon={\cal E}/\rho$ is the energy per mass. This is called the Lagrangian form of the equations, in contrast to the Eulerian form given above. The Eulerian form is more naturally implemented on a fixed space-time lattice, whereas the Lagrangian form lends itself to a discretization where the computational cell is dragged along with the fluid. \subsection{Computational fluid dynamics} \label{sec_hydro_num} The fluid dynamic equations form a set of partial differential equations (PDEs) that can be solved in a variety of ways. I will focus here on grid based methods. The main difficulties that a numerical method needs to address are: i) The existence of surfaces of discontinuity (shocks), ii) the need to implement global conservation laws exactly, even on a coarse lattice, iii) the existence of instabilities (turbulence), and the need to deal with solutions that involve many different length scales. In the following I will discuss a numerical scheme that addresses these issues in a fairly efficient way, the PPM algorithm of Collela and Woodward \cite{Colella:1984}, as implemented in the VH1 code by Blondin and Lufkin \cite{Blondin:1993} and extended to viscous fluids in \cite{Schafer:2010dv}. The first observation is that it is sufficient to construct a 1-d algorithm. Higher dimensional methods can be constructed by combining updates in different directions. Note that the coordinate system can be curvilinear, for example 3-d spherical or cylindrical coordinates, or the Milne coordinate system that is used for longitudinally expanding quark gluon plasmas. The basic 1-d algorithm consists of a Lagrangian time step followed by a remap onto an Eulerian grid. I will denote the 1-d velocity by $u$ and write the equation of mass conservation in terms of a mass variable $m$ \be \label{hydro_1_m} \frac{\partial\tau}{\partial t}- \frac{\partial u}{\partial m}=0\, , \ee where $\tau=\rho^{-1}$ and \be \label{m_def} m(r) = \int_{r_0}^{r}dr\, \rho(r)\, . \ee Here, I restrict myself to flat coordinate systems. In curvilinear coordinates equ.~(\ref{hydro_1_m}) and (\ref{m_def}) contain suitable volume factors. Equ.~(\ref{hydro_1_m}) is solved by \be \label{r_lag} \frac{dr}{dt}= u\left(m(r),t\right)\, , \ee which is the equation for the Lagrange coordinate. In terms of the mass coordinate $m(r)$ the momentum and energy equations are \bea \label{hydro_2_m} \frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial P}{\partial m} &=& 0 \, , \\ \label{hydro_3_m} \frac{\partial \epsilon}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial (uP)}{\partial m} &=& 0\, , \eea where I have only written down the ideal contributions to the stress tensor and energy current. To put these equations on a grid I focus on the mass integrated quantities \be U_j^n = \frac{1}{\Delta m_j} \int_{m_{j-1/2}}^{m_{j+1/2}} U(m,t^n) dm \ee where $U$ is any of the hydrodynamic variables $(\tau,u,\epsilon)$, $\Delta m_j$ is the mass contained in the cell $j$, and $m_{j+1/2}= \sum_{k}^{j}\Delta m_k$. We can now integrate the conservation laws (\ref{hydro_2_m},\ref{hydro_1_m}). The result is \bea u_j^{n+1} &=& u_j^n + \frac{\Delta t}{\Delta m_j} \left( \bar{P}_{j-1/2}-\bar{P}_{j+1/2}\right)\, , \\ \epsilon_j^{n+1} &=& \epsilon_j^n + \frac{\Delta t}{\Delta m_j} \left( \bar{u}_{j-1/2}\bar{P}_{j-1/2}-\bar{u}_{j+1/2}\bar{P}_{j+1/2}\right) \, , \eea where I have introduced the cell face averages $\bar{u}_{j\pm 1/2}$ and $\bar{P}_{j\pm 1/2}$. These quantities can be obtained by parabolic interpolation from the cell integrated values. The PPM scheme introduced in \cite{Colella:1984} uses a method for constructing cell face averages which conserves the cell integrated variables. This scheme addresses the second issue mentioned above. The first issue, the existence of shocks, can be taken into account by refining the method for calculating the cell face averages. The observation is that one can make use of exact solution of the equations of fluid dynamics in the case of piecewise constant one-dimensional flows, known as the Riemann problem. We can view $\bar{u}_{j+1/2}$ and $\bar{P}_{j+1/2}$ as the solution of a Riemann problem with left state $u_j,P_j$ and right state $u_{j+1},P_{j+1}$. The PPM code contains a simple iterative Riemann solver described in \cite{Colella:1984}. Using $\bar{u}_{j\pm 1/2}$ and $\bar{P}_{j\pm 1/2}$ the Lagrange step is given by: \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} do n = nmin-3, nmax+3 ! density evolution. lagrangian code, so all we have to do is watch the ! change in the geometry. r(n) = r(n) * ( dvol1(n) / dvol(n) ) r(n) = max(r(n),smallr) ! velocity evolution due to pressure acceleration and forces. uold (n) = u(n) u(n) = u(n) - dtbdm(n)(pmid(n+1)-pmid(n))0.5(amid(n+1)+amid(n)) & + 0.5dt(fict0(n)+fict1(n)) ! total energy evolution e(n) = e(n) - dtbdm(n)(amid(n+1)upmid(n+1) - amid(n)upmid(n)) q(n) = e(n) - 0.5(u(n)2+v(n)2+w(n)2) p(n) = max(r(n)q(n)gamm,smallp) enddo \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} Here, ${\tt r(n)}$ is the density, ${\tt u(n)}$ is the velocity, and ${\tt e(n)}$ is the energy per mass. The transverse components of the velocity are ${\tt v(n),w(n)}$. In cartesian coordinates the volume and area factors ${\tt dvol(n),amid(n)}$ are equal to unity, and the fictitious forces ${\tt fict(n)}$ vanish. After the Lagrange step the hydrodynamic variables have to be remapped onto a fixed Eulerian grid. This can be done using the parabolic interpolation mentioned above. The advantage of the remap step is that it is simple to change the grid resolution in the process. Finally, we have to specify the time step and grid resolution. The grid resolution is determined by the requirement that $(\Delta x)\nabla_x U\ll U$, where $\Delta x$ is the cell size, and $U$ is any of the hydrodynamic variables. Note that there is no need to worry about discontinuities, because shocks are captured by the Riemann solver. Also note that the PPM scheme has at least second order accuracy, so that relatively coarse grids can be used. The time step is determined by the Courant criterion $c\Delta x \leq \Delta t$, where $c$ is the maximum of the speed of sound and the local flow velocity. This criterion ensures that the domain of dependence of any physical variable does not exceed the cell size. In general, modern hydro codes are very fast and efficient. The main difficulty is that $3+1$ dimensional simulations may require a lot of memory, and that some physical phenomena, such as turbulent convection and shock instabilities in supernovae, require very high resolution. One of the frontiers of numerical hydrodynamics is the problem of dealing with systems that transition from fluid dynamics to ballistic behavior at either early or late times, or systems in which the density varies by a very large factor. Problems of this type arise in the early and late time dynamics of heavy ion collisions, the dilute corona of cold atomic gases, and the transition from hydrodynamics to free streaming in the neutrino transport in a supernova explosions. Recent progress in this direction includes the development of the anisotropic hydrodynamics method \cite{Florkowski:2010cf,Martinez:2010sc,Bluhm:2015raa,Bluhm:2015bzi}, and applications of the lattice Boltzmann method to problems in nuclear and atomic physics \cite{Romatschke:2011hm,Brewer:2015hua}. In the relativistic regime recent progress includes the development of stable and causal viscous fluid dynamics codes \cite{Romatschke:2009im,Jeon:2015dfa}. The problem with a naive implementation of the relativistic Navier-Stokes equation derived by Landau is that viscous stresses are determined by the instantaneous value of the shear strain $\nabla_i u_j$. This leads to acausal propagation of shear waves and possible instabilities. This is not a fundamental problem with fluid dynamics. Acausal behavior occurs in the regime of high wave numbers in which fluid dynamics is not expected to be reliable. However, high wave number instabilities prohibit numerical implementations. The solution is to go to next order in the gradient expansion, which includes the finite relaxation time of viscous stresses. In practice, second order fluid dynamics codes are usually based on the idea of transient fluid dynamics. In this method, the shear stresses $\delta\Pi_{ij}$ are promoted to fluid dynamic variables, which satisfy separate fluid dynamic equations, see \cite{Romatschke:2009im,Jeon:2015dfa}. \subsection{Kinetic theory} Fluid dynamics is based on the assumption of local thermal equilibrium and requires the mean free path to be small compared to the characteristic scales of the problem. When this condition is not satisfied a more microscopic approach to the non-equilibrium problem is required. The simplest method of this type is kinetic theory, which is based on the existence of well defined quasi-particles. This implies, in particular, that the width of a quasi-particle has to be small compared to its energy. In this case we can define the phase space density $f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$ of quasi-particles. In general, there can be many different kinds of quasi-particles, labeled by their spin, charge, and other quantum numbers. The phase space distribution determines the conserved densities that enter the hydrodynamic description. For example, the mass density is given by \be \rho(\vec{x},t) = \int d\Gamma\, m f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t) \, , \ee where $d\Gamma=d^3p/(2\pi)^3$. The momentum density is \be \vec{\pi}(\vec{x},t) = \int d\Gamma\, m v_p f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t) \, , \ee where $v_p=\nabla_p E_p$ is the quasi-particle velocity and $E_p$ is the quasi-particle energy. In general, the quasi-particle energy can be a functional of the phase distribution $f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$. This takes into account possible in-medium modifications of particle properties. If $E_p$ is a functional of $f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$ then the total energy of the system is not just given by the integral of $E_p f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$. Instead, we must construct an energy density functional ${\cal E}[f]$ that satisfies \cite{Kadanoff} \be E_p = \frac{\delta {\cal E}}{\delta f_p}\, . \ee The equation of motion for the distribution function is the Boltzmann equation \be \label{be} \left( \partial_t + \vec{v}\cdot\vec{\nabla}_x - \vec{F}\cdot\vec{\nabla}_p \right) f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t) = C[f]\, , \ee where $\vec{F}=-\vec\nabla_x E_p$ is a force, and $C[f_p]$ is the collision term. For dilute systems the collision term is dominated by binary scattering and \be C[f_p] = -\prod_{i=2,3,4}\Big(\int d\Gamma_{i}\Big) w(1,2;3,4) \left( f_1f_2-f_3f_4\right)\, , \ee where $f_i=f(\vec{x},\vec{p}_i,t)$. The transition rate is given by \be w(1,2;3,4) = (2\pi)^4\delta\Big(\sum_i E_i\Big) \delta\Big(\sum_i \vec{p}_i\Big) \,\|{\cal A}\|^2\, , \ee where ${\cal A}$ is the scattering amplitude. For non-relativistic $s$-wave scattering ${\cal A} = 4\pi a/m$, where $a$ is the scattering length. The Boltzmann equation is a 6+1 dimensional partial integro-differential equation, and direct methods of integration, similar to those used in computational fluid dynamics, are impractical. Standard methods for solving the Boltzmann equation rely on sampling phase space using Monte Carlo methods. In nuclear physics the test particle method for solving the Boltzmann equation was popularized by Bertsch and Das Gupta \cite{Bertsch:1988ik}. Below, I will present a simple non-relativistic algorithm described by Lepers et al.~\cite{Lepers:2010be}. The main idea is to represent the distribution as a sum of delta functions \be \label{test_part} f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)= \frac{N}{N_t} \sum_{i=1}^{N_t} (2\pi)^3 \delta(\vec{p}-\vec{p}_i(t))\delta(\vec{x}-\vec{x}_i(t)) \,, \ee where $N$ is the number of particles, the integral of $f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$ over phase space, and $N_t$ is the number of test particles. In typical applications $N_t\gg N$, but if $N$ is already very large it is possible to run simulations with $N_t<N$. Phase space averages can be computed as averages over test particles \be \bar{F} = \frac{1}{N}\int d^3x\int d\Gamma\, f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t) F(\vec{x},\vec{p}) = \frac{1}{N_t}\sum_{i=1}^{N_t} F(\vec{x}_i,\vec{p}_i)\,. \ee In practice this requires some smoothing, and the delta functions are replaced by Gaussian distributions \be \label{gauss_sm} \delta(\vec{p}-\vec{p}_i) \delta(\vec{x}-\vec{x}_i) \to g_{w_p}(\vec{p}-\vec{p}_i)g_{w_x}(\vec{x}-\vec{x}_i)\, , \ee where $g_w(\vec{x})$ is a normalized Gaussian with width $w$. The widths $w_x$ and $w_p$ are chosen such that the delta function singularities are smoothed out, but physical structures of the distribution function $f(\vec{x},\vec{p},t)$ are preserved. If there is no collision term the equation of motion for the distribution function is Hamilton's equation for the test particle positions and momenta \be \frac{d\vec{x}_i}{dt} = \frac{\vec{p}_i}{m} \, , \hspace{1cm} \frac{d\vec{p}_i}{dt} = \vec{F}_i\, . \ee These equations can be solved with high accuracy using a staggered leapfrog algorithm \bea \label{leap_1} \vec{v}_i(t_{n+1/2}) &=& \vec{v}_i(t_n) + \vec{a}_i(t_n) \Delta t/2\, ,\\ \label{leap_2} \vec{r}_i(t_{n+1}) &=& \vec{r}_i(t_n) + \vec{v}_i(t_{n+1/2})\Delta t\, ,\\ \label{leap_3} \vec{v}_i(t_{n+1}) &=& \vec{v}_i(t_{n+1/2}) + \vec{a}_i(t_{n+1})\Delta t/2\, , \eea where $\vec{a}_i=\vec{F}_i/m$ is the acceleration of particle $i$, and $\Delta t = t_{n+1}-t_n$ is the time step of the algorithm. The size of the time step depends on the specific problem, but a good check is provided by monitoring conservation of energy. The collision term is treated stochastically, by allowing the test particles to collide with the scaled cross section $\sigma_t = (N/N_t)\sigma$. To determine whether a collision occurs we go through all pairs of particles and compute the relative distance $\vec{r}_{ij} = \vec{r}_i-\vec{r}_j$ and velocity $\vec{v}_{ij} =\vec{v}_i-\vec{v}_j$. We then determine whether on the current trajectory the time of closest approach will be reached during the next time step. This happens if $t_{\it min} = t_n-\vec{r}_{ij}\cdot \vec{v}_{ij}/\vec{v}_{ij}^2$ satisfies $\|t_{\it min}-t_n\|\leq \Delta t/2$. In that case we compute \be r_{\it min}^2 =\vec{r}_{ij}^2- \frac{(\vec{r}_{ij}\cdot \vec{v}_{ij})^2}{\vec{v}_{ij}^2} \ee and check if $\pi r_{\it min}^2 < \sigma_t$. If this condition is satisfied then the collision is allowed to take place. For an $s$-wave elastic collision we propagate the particles to $t_{\it min}$, randomize their relative velocity $\vec{v}_{ij}$, and then propagate them back to $t_n$. Higher partial wave amplitudes are easy to implement by randomizing $\vec{v}_{ij}$ with suitable probability distributions. After all pairs have been checked we perform the velocity and position update in equ.~(\ref{leap_1}-\ref{leap_3}). There are a number of refinements that can be included. At low temperature Pauli-blocking has to be taken into account. This can be done by computing the phase space densities $f(\vec{r}_i,\vec{p}_i,t)$ for the collision products, and accepting the collision with probability $(1-f_i)(1-f_j)$. At higher energies relativistic effects are important. Relativistic effects in the particle propagation are easy to incorporate, but the treatment of the collision term is more subtle. The problem is that a finite collision cross section, treated geometrically, will lead to instantaneous interactions at a distance. Additional difficulties arise from the treatment of resonances, pair production and annihilation, $n$-body processes, etc. There are a number of codes on the market that address these issues, and that have been tuned against existing data on $pp$, $pA$ and $AA$ interactions in the relativistic regime. Examples include UrQMD \cite{Bass:1998ca}, GiBUU \cite{Buss:2011mx}, HSD \cite{Ehehalt:1996uq}, and others. At high energies the initial $pp$ collisions are very inelastic, and one has to rely on Monte Carlo generators developed in the high energy physics community. A possible alternative is to use a purely partonic kinetic theory that involves scattering between quark and gluon quasi-particles. There are some subtleties with this approach, having to do with the problem of how to include screening and damping of the exchanged gluons, soft gluon radiation, etc. I will not attempt to discuss these issues here, and I refer the reader to the original literature \cite{Geiger:1991nj,Xu:2004mz}. \subsection{Classical field theory} \label{sec_cl_QCD} An interesting simplification occurs if the occupation numbers are large, $f\gg 1$. This is argued to happen for the gluons in the initial state of a heavy ion collision \cite{McLerran:1993ni}. In this limit the classical kinetic theory is equivalent to a classical field theory \cite{Mueller:2002gd}. Indeed, if the occupations numbers are non-perturbative, $f\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$} 1/g$, the kinetic theory no longer applies, and we have to rely on classical field theory. In general the classical action is not known, but in the weak coupling limit the bare QCD action can be used. Classical QCD simulation have been used to study a number of issues, such as particle production from an overpopulated gluon field, and the possible approach to thermal equilibrium. Instabilities in the classical field evolution may play an important role in speeding up the equilibration process. Here, I will briefly describe a method for solving classical evolution equations on a space-time lattice, following the recent review \cite{Mrowczynski:2016etf}. In order to construct a Hamiltonian approach to lattice QCD I start from the Wilson action in Minkowski space with separate coupling constants $\beta_0$ and $\beta_s$ in the temporal and spatial direction \be \label{s_lat_aniso} S[U]=-\frac{\beta_0}{2N_c}\sum_x \sum_{i=1}^3 {\rm Tr}\left( W_{0i}(x) + W^\dagger_{0i}(x) - 2\right) + \frac{\beta_s}{2N_c}\sum_x \sum_{i<j} {\rm Tr}\left( W_{ij}(x)+ W^\dagger_{ij}(x)- 2\right) , \ee In the continuum limit, we expect \be \beta_0 = \frac{2N_c a}{g^2\Delta t}\, , \hspace{0.5cm} \beta_s = \frac{2N_c\Delta t}{g^2a}\, . \ee where $a$ and $\Delta t$ are spatial and temporal lattice spacings. In order to construct a Hamiltonian we have to fix the gauge freedom of the theory. Here, I will use the temporal axial gauge, $A_0=0$. In this case the canonical variables are the spatial gauge potentials and the conjugate momenta are the electric fields. On the lattice the gauge $A_0=0$ corresponds to setting all temporal gauge links to the identity, $U_0(x)=1$. The canonical variables are given by the spatial gauge links $U_j(x)$, and the conjugate momenta are the temporal plaquettes $W_{0j}(x)$. In the continuum limit \bea \label{A_j_latt} A_j^a(x) &=& \frac{2i}{ag} \, {\rm Tr} \big[\lambda^a U_j(x) \big] , \\ \label{E_j_latt} E^a_j(x) &=& \frac{2i}{ag\Delta t} \, {\rm Tr} \big[\lambda^a W_{0j}(x) \big] . \eea Varying the action equ.~(\ref{s_lat_aniso}) with respect to $U_j(x)$ gives an equation of motion for $E_j$ \bea E^a_j(t + \Delta t, {\vec x}) &=& E^a_j(t, {\vec x}) + \frac{i \Delta t}{g a^3} \sum_{k} \left\{ {\rm Tr} \left[\lambda^a U_j(x) U_k (x+\hat{j}) U^{\dagger}_j (x +\hat{k}) U^{\dagger}_k(x) \right] \right. \nonumber \\ \label{E_eom} && \hspace{2cm}\left.\mbox{} + {\rm Tr} \left[\lambda^a U_j(x) U^{\dagger}_{k}(x+\hat{j}-\hat{k}) U^\dagger_{j}(x-\hat{k}) U_{k}( x -\hat{k}) \right] \right\} . \eea We note that $E^a_j(t+\Delta t, {\vec x})$ is determined by the electric fields and the spatial gauge links at time $t$. Using equ.~(\ref{E_j_latt}) and the electric field $E_j^a$ at time $t+\Delta t$ we can compute the temporal plaquette $W_{0j}(x)$ at $t+\Delta t$. This result can be used to evolve the spacelike gauge links \bea \label{U_eom} U_j(t+\Delta t,\vec{x})=W_{0j}(x) U_j(x)\, . \eea Together, equ.~(\ref{E_eom}) and equ.~(\ref{U_eom}) describe a staggered leapfrog algorithm, similar to equ.~(\ref{leap_1}-\ref{leap_3}) above. An important constraint on the numerical evolution is provided by Gauss law. Varying the lattice action with respect to $U_0$ before imposing temporal axial gauge gives \be \label{Gauss_cons} \sum_{j} \left[ E_j^a(x) - U^\dagger_{j}(x-\hat{j}) E_j^a(x-\hat{j}) U_j(x-\hat{j}) \right] = 0 \, . \ee This constraint is preserved by the evolution equations. The classical field equations are exactly scale invariant and there is no dependence on the coupling constant $g$. Physical quantities, like the energy momentum tensor, explicitly depend on $g$. In practice classical field simulations require a model for the initial conditions and the corresponding coupling. The initial conditions are typically an ensemble of gauge fields distributed according to some distribution, for example an anisotropic Gaussian in momentum space. The anisotropy is assumed to be a consequence of the strong longitudinal expansion of the initial state of a heavy ion collision. Physical observables are determined by averages the evolved fields over the initial ensemble. Note that a purely classical field evolution does not thermalize. A thermal ensemble of classical fields would satisfy the equipartition law, and the total energy would be dominated by modes near the lattice cutoff. This is the Rayleigh-Jeans UV catastrophe. However, classical field evolution has interesting non-thermal fixed points \cite{Berges:2008wm}, which may play a role in thermalization. The classical field framework has been extended in a variety of ways. One direction is the inclusion of quantum fluctuations on top of the classical field \cite{Dusling:2010rm}. Another problem is the inclusion of modes that are not highly populated. In the hard thermal loop approximation one can show that hard modes can be described as colored particles interacting with the classical field corresponding to the soft modes \cite{Litim:2001db}. The equations of motion for the colored particles are known as Wong's equations \cite{Wong:1970fu}. Numerical studies can be found in \cite{Hu:1996sf}. \subsection{Nonequilibrium QCD: Holography} \label{sec_ads} A new approach to quantum fields in and out of equilibrium is provided by the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Maldacena:1997re,Son:2007vk,Gubser:2009md,CasalderreySolana:2011us,DeWolfe:2013cua}. The AdS/CFT correspondence is a holographic duality. It asserts that the dynamics of a quantum field theory defined on the boundary of a higher dimensional space is encoded in boundary correlation functions of a gravitational theory in the bulk. The correspondence is simplest if the boundary theory is strongly coupled and contains a large number $N$ of degrees of freedom. In this case the bulk theory is simply classical Einstein gravity. The partition function of the boundary quantum field theory (QFT) is \be Z_{\it QFT}[J_i]=\exp\left(-S\left[\left.\phi_i\right\|_{\partial{\it M}} = J_i\right]\right)\, , \ee where $J_i$ is a set of sources in the field theory, $S$ is the gravitational action, $\phi_i$ is a dual set of fields in the gravitational theory, and $\partial{\it M}$ is the boundary of $AdS_5$. The fields $\phi_i$ satisfy classical equations of motions subject to boundary conditions on $\partial{\it M}$. The original construction involves a black hole in AdS$_5$ and is dual to a relativistic fluid governed by a generalization of QCD known as ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills theory. This theory is considered in the limit of a large number of colors $N_c$. The gravitational theory is Einstein gravity with additional matter fields that are not relevant here. The AdS$_5$ black hole metric is \be \label{bh_son} ds^2 = \frac{(\pi T R_a)^2}{u} \left(-f(u) dt^2 + d\vec{x}^2 \right) + \frac{R_a^2}{4 u^2 f(u)} du^2\, , \ee where $\vec{x},t$ are Minkowski space coordinates, and $u$ is a ``radial'' coordinate where $u=1$ is the location of the black hole horizon and $u=0$ is the boundary. $T$ is the temperature, $R_a$ is the AdS radius, and $f(u)=1-u^2$. It is instructive to check that this metric does indeed provide a solution to the Einstein equations with a negative cosmological constant. This can be done using a simple Mathematica script. I begin by defining the metric and its inverse: \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} ( metric ) ( ------ ) n = 5; coord = {t, x, y, z, u}; f[u_] := 1 - u^2 metric = DiagonalMatrix[{-f[u]/u(PiTRa)^2, (PiTRa)^2/u, (PiTRa)^2/ u, (PiTRa)^2/u, Ra^2/(4u^2f[u])}] inversemetric = Simplify[Inverse[metric]] \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} \noindent From the metric I compute the Christoffel symbols \be \Gamma^\mu_{\alpha\beta} = \frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu} \left( \partial_\alpha g_{\nu\beta} +\partial_\beta g_{\nu\alpha} -\partial_\mu g_{\alpha\beta}\right) \, , \ee the Riemann tensor \be R^\mu_{\;\, \nu\alpha\beta} = \partial_\alpha \Gamma^\mu_{\nu\beta} - \partial_\beta \Gamma^\mu_{\nu\alpha} + \Gamma^\rho_{\nu\beta}\Gamma^\mu_{\rho\alpha} - \Gamma^\rho_{\nu\alpha}\Gamma^\mu_{\rho\beta} \, , \ee the Ricci tensor $R_{\alpha\beta}=R^\mu_{\;\,\alpha\mu\beta}$, and the scalar curvature $R=R^\mu_{\;\,\mu}$. Finally, I compute the Einstein tensor $G_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R$. \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} (* Christoffel Symbols ) ( ------------------- ) affine := affine = Simplify[ Table[(1/2) Sum[(inversemetric[[i, s]])(D[metric[[s, j]], coord[[k]]] + D[metric[[s, k]], coord[[j]]] - D[metric[[j, k]], coord[[s]]]), {s, 1, n}], {i, 1, n}, {j, 1, n}, {k, 1, n}]] ( Riemann Tensor ) ( -------------- ) riemann := riemann = Simplify[Table[ D[affine[[i, j, l]], coord[[k]]] - D[affine[[i, j, k]], coord[[l]]] + Sum[affine[[s, j, l]]affine[[i, k, s]] - affine[[s, j, k]]affine[[i, l, s]], {s, 1, n}], {i, 1, n}, {j, 1, n}, {k, 1, n}, {l, 1, n}]] ( Ricci Tensor ) ( ------------ ) ricci := ricci = Simplify[ Table[Sum[riemann[[i, j, i, l]], {i, 1, n}], {j, 1, n}, {l, 1, n}]] ( scalar curvature ) ( ---------------- ) scalar = Simplify[ Sum[inversemetric[[i, j]]ricci[[i, j]], {i, 1, n}, {j, 1, n}]] (* Einstein tensor ) ( --------------- ) einstein = Simplify[ricci - (1/2)scalarmetric] \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} Now I can check the equation of motion, $G_{\mu\nu}=\frac{\Lambda}{2} g_{\mu\nu}$, where the cosmological constant is determined by the AdS radius $R$. \begin{lstlisting} (* Field equation with cosmological constant ) ( ----------------------------------------- ) lam = 12/Ra^2; Simplify[einstein - lam/2metric] \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} In the boundary theory the metric couples to the stress tensor $\Pi_{\mu\nu}$. Correlation functions of the stress tensor can be found by linearizing the bulk action around the AdS$_5$ solution, $g_{\mu\nu}= g_{\mu\nu}^0+\delta g_{\mu\nu}$. Small oscillations of the off-diagonal strain $\delta g_x^y$ are particularly simple, because the equation of motion for $\phi\equiv g_x^y$ is that of a minimally coupled scalar \be \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\partial_\mu \left( \sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\nu \phi\right) = 0\, . \ee The wave equation can be obtained using the metric coefficients defined above. \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} (* \sqrt{-g} g^{\mu\nu} \partial_{nu} \Phi(t,z,u) ) ( -------------------------------------------- ) SqrtG = Simplify[Sqrt[-Det[metric]], {Ra > 0, T > 0, u > 0}] dnuPhi = Table[D[Phi[t, z, u], coord[[i]]], {i, 1, n}]; DnuPhi = SqrtGinversemetric.dnuPhi; (* Laplacian, up to factor \sqrt{-g} ) ( --------------------------------- ) DPhi = FullSimplify[Sum[D[DnuPhi[[nu]], coord[[nu]]], {nu, 1, n}]] ( harmonic space and time dependence ) ( ---------------------------------- ) DPhiS = DPhi /. { D[Phi[t, z, u], {z, 2}] -> -k^2fp, D[Phi[t, z, u], {t, 2}] -> -w^2fp, D[Phi[t, z, u], {u, 2}] -> fpPP, D[Phi[t, z, u], {u, 1}] -> fpP} \end{lstlisting} \vspace{0.3cm} In the case of harmonic dependence on the Minkowski coordinates $\delta g_x^y =\phi_k(u)e^{ikx-i\omega t}$ the fluctuations are governed by the wave equation \be \label{lingrav} \phi_k''(u) - \frac{1+u^2}{uf(u)} \phi_k'(u) + \frac{\omega^2 -k^2f(u)}{(2\pi T)^2 u f(u)^2} \phi_k(u) = 0\, . \ee This differential equation has two linearly independent solutions. The retarded correlation function corresponds to picking a solution that is purely infalling at the horizon \cite{Son:2007vk}. The retarded correlation function $G_R(\omega,k)$ defined in equ.~(\ref{G_ret}) is determined by inserting the solution into the Einstein-Hilbert action, and then computing the variation with respect to the boundary value of $\delta g_x^y$. \begin{figure}[t!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{AdS5_Schwarz_eta_w_txt.pdf} \includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{AdS5_Schwarz_eta_w_subtr_txt.pdf} \end{center} \caption{\label{fig_ads_spec_fct} Viscosity spectral function in a ${\cal N}=4$ SUSY Yang Mills plasma. The spectral function is computed in the large $N_c$ limit of a strongly coupled plasma using the AdS/CFT correspondence. The figure in the left panel shows $\eta(\omega)/s$ (blue) and the zero temperature counterpart $\eta_{T=0}(\omega)/s$ (red) as a function of $\omega$. The figure in the right panel shows the finite temperature part $[\eta(\omega)-\eta_{T=0} (\omega)]/s$. The figures were generated using the script described below equ.~(\ref{G_R_Action}).} \end{figure} The infalling solution can be expressed as \be \label{phi_k_ans} \phi_k(u) = (1-u) ^{-i\mathfrak{w}/2}F_k(u) \ee where $\mathfrak{w}=\omega/(2\pi T)$ and the first factor describes the near horizon behavior. The function $F_k(u)$ can be obtained as an expansion in $\mathfrak{w}$ and $\mathfrak{k}=k/(2\pi T)$. At second order in $O(\mathfrak{w}$ and $\mathfrak{k}$ the solution is \cite{Policastro:2002se} \be F_k(u) = 1-\frac{i\mathfrak{w}}{2}\log\left(\frac{1+u}{2}\right) +\frac{\mathfrak{w}^2}{8} \left\{ \left[ 8 - \frac{8\mathfrak{k}^2}{\mathfrak{w}^2} + \log\left(\frac{1+u}{2}\right)\right] \log\left(\frac{1+u}{2}\right) - 4{\it Li}_2\left(\frac{1-u}{2}\right)\right\}\, . \ee In the opposite limit, $\mathfrak{w}\gg 1$, the wave equation can be solved using a WKB approximation \cite{Teaney:2006nc}. For $\mathfrak{k}=0$ the result is \be \phi_k(u) = \pi\mathfrak{w}^2\frac{u}{\sqrt{1-u^2}} \left[ iJ_2\left(2\mathfrak{w}\sqrt{u}\right) -Y_2\left(2\mathfrak{w}\sqrt{u}\right)\right]\, . \ee In the intermediate regime the wave equation can be solved numerically. A standard method is to start from the near horizon result given in equ.~(\ref{phi_k_ans}) and integrate outwards towards the boundary. The retarded correlation function is given by the variation of the boundary action with respect to the field. For this purpose we consider the quadratic part of the Einstein-Hilbert action and use the AdS/CFT correspondence to express Newton's constant in terms of gauge theory parameters. We find \be S = -\frac{\pi^2N^2T^4}{8}\int du\int d^4x\, \frac{f(u)}{u} \left(\partial_u\phi\right)^2 + \ldots \, . \ee The boundary action follows after an integration by parts. The retarded Green function is determined by the second variational derivative with respect to the boundary value of the field \cite{Policastro:2002se,Son:2006em}, \be \label{G_R_Action} G_R(\mathfrak{w},\mathfrak{k})= -\frac{\pi^2N^2T^4}{4} \left[ \frac{f(u)\partial_u \phi_k(u)}{u\phi_k(u)} \right]_{u\to 0}\, . \ee Finally, the spectral function is given by $\eta(\omega,k)=-\omega^{-1} {\it Im}\,G_R(\omega,k)$. Below is a short Mathematica script that determines the spectral function numerically. \vspace{0.3cm} \begin{lstlisting} ( equation of motion for minimally coupled scalar ) ( with harmonic space and time dependence ) ( ----------------------------------------------- ) f[u_] := 1 - u^2 EomPhi = phi''[u] - (1 + u^2)/(u f[u]) phi'[u] + (w^2 - q^2 f[u])/(u f[u]^2) phi[u] ( boundary solution ) ( ----------------- ) phiHorizon[u_] := (1-u)^(-Iw/2) (* numerically integrate from Horizon to boundary ) ( ---------------------------------------------- ) SolPhi[omega_, qq_] := Block[{w = omega, q = qq}, NDSolve[ {0 == EomPhi, phi[epsH] == phiHorizon[epsH], phi'[epsH] == phiHorizon'[epsH]}, phi[u], {u, epsB, epsH}]][[1, 1, 2]] ( retarded correlator from boundary action ) ( ---------------------------------------- ) Gret[omega_, qq_] := (f[u]/u D[solPhi[omega, qq], u]/solPhi[omega, qq] ) /. {u -> epsB} \end{lstlisting} \begin{figure}[t!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{EnergyDensity.pdf} \end{center} \caption{\label{fig_coll_shocks} Energy density of colliding shock waves in $AdS_5$ space \cite{Chesler:2010bi}. The figure shows the energy density ${\cal E}/\mu^4$ on the boundary of $AdS_5$ as a function of the time coordinate $v$ and the longitudinal direction $z$. The shocks are infinitely extended in the transverse direction. The parameter $\mu$ sets the overall scale. } \end{figure} \vspace{0.3cm} The spectral function for $k=0$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_ads_spec_fct}. This is an interesting result because it represent a systematic calculation of a real time observable in the strong coupling limit of a quantum field theory. As explained in Sect.~\ref{sec_lQCD_real} the corresponding lattice calculation is very difficult, and existing results are difficult to improve upon. We also note that the result is quite different from expectations at weak coupling. At weak coupling we expect the spectral function to show a narrow transport peak at zero energy \cite{Schaefer:2014awa}. So far we have only considered calculations very close to equilibrium, corresponding to small perturbations of the $AdS_5$ Schwarzschild solution. In order to address the problem of initial state dynamics and thermalization we have to consider initial conditions that mimic colliding nuclei. Recent work focuses on colliding shock waves in asymptotically $AdS_5$ spaces. In the strong coupling limit the evolution of the shock waves is a problem in numerical relativity. Special methods have been developed to deal with problems in $AdS$ space \cite{Chesler:2013lia}. These methods are quite different from the techniques employed in connection with black hole or neutron star mergers in asymptotically flat Minkowski space time. A typical result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_coll_shocks}. The calculations demonstrate fast ``hydrodynamization'', that means a rapid decay of non-hydrodynamic modes. At somewhat longer time scales thermal equilibration is achieved. This corresponds to the formation of an event horizon in the bulk. In general, it was realized that there is a fluid-gravity correspondence, an equivalence between dynamic space times containing a horizon and solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation \cite{Rangamani:2009xk}. This correspondence can be used to study, both analytically and numerically, difficult problems in fluid dynamics. \section{Outlook and acknowledgments} \label{sec_out} I hope this brief review provides a flavor of the breadth of computational problems that are related QCD. This includes many issues that are at the forefront of computational physics, like the sign problem in euclidean QCD at finite baryon density, and the challenge to extract real time correlation functions from the euclidean path integral. It also includes many problems that are of great interest to mathematicians. Both the Yang-Mills existence and mass gap as well as the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problems are among the Clay Millenium Prize problems \cite{Clay-YM,Clay-NS}. Interesting work on the Boltzmann equation was recently recognized with a Fields medal \cite{Villani:2009}, and gradient flow plays an important role in the proof of the Poincare conjecture \cite{Perelman}. \begin{acknowledgement} The euclidean path integral simulation in quantum mechanics is described in \cite{Schafer:2004xa}, and the programs are available at {\tt https://www.physics.ncsu.edu/schaefer/{\allowbreak}physics/}. A simple $Z_2$ lattice gauge code can be found in the Appendix. You should be able to extend this code to $SU(2)$ and $SU(3)$. Modern lattice QCD tools can be found on the chroma website {\tt http://github.com/JeffersonLab/chroma}. The VH1 hydro code is described in \cite{Blondin:1993} and can be downloaded at {\tt http://wonka.{\allowbreak}physics.ncsu.edu/pub/VH-1/}. Dissipative and anisotropic versions are available on request. There are a number of relativistic hydro codes on the web. An example is the VISHNU code \cite{Shen:2014vra} which is available at {\tt https://u.osu.edu/vishnu/}. Both UrQMD {\tt http://urqmd.org/} and GiBUU {\tt https://gibuu.{\allowbreak}hepforge.org/} are also available online. The mathematica notebooks in Sect.~\ref{sec_ads} are adapted from notebooks available on Jim Hartle's website {\tt http://web.{\allowbreak}physics.ucsb.edu/{\textasciitilde}gravitybook/}. Much more sophisticated tensor packages are easily found on the web. The simple script for solving the wave equation in $AdS_5$ is adapted from a notebook written by Matthias Kaminski. A set of lecture notes and mathematica notebooks for solving the Einstein equations numerically on asymptotically $AdS$ spaces can be found on Wilke van der Schee's website {\tt https://sites.google.com/site/{\allowbreak}wilkevanderschee/ads-numerics}. T.~S. work is supported by the US Department of Energy grant DE-FG02-03ER41260. \end{acknowledgement} \section{Appendix: $Z_2$ gauge theory} \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Appendix} This is a simple Monte Carlo program for $Z_2$ gauge theory written by M.~Creutz \cite{Creutz:2004}. \begin{lstlisting} /* Z_2 lattice gauge simulation / / Michael Creutz <<EMAIL>> / / http://thy.phy.bnl.gov/~creutz/z2.c / #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <math.h> / the lattice is of dimensions SIZE*4 / #define SIZE 6 int link[SIZE][SIZE][SIZE][SIZE][4]; /* last index gives link direction / / utility functions / void moveup(int x[],int d) { x[d]+=1; if (x[d]>=SIZE) x[d]-=SIZE; return; } void movedown(int x[],int d) { x[d]-=1; if (x[d]<0) x[d]+=SIZE; return; } void coldstart(){ / set all links to unity / int x[4],d; for (x[0]=0;x[0]<SIZE;x[0]++) for (x[1]=0;x[1]<SIZE;x[1]++) for (x[2]=0;x[2]<SIZE;x[2]++) for (x[3]=0;x[3]<SIZE;x[3]++) for (d=0;d<4;d++) link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][d]=1; return; } / for a random start: call coldstart() and then update once at beta=0 / / do a Monte Carlo sweep; return energy / double update(double beta){ int x[4],d,dperp,staple,staplesum; double bplus,bminus,action=0.0; for (x[0]=0; x[0]<SIZE; x[0]++) for (x[1]=0; x[1]<SIZE; x[1]++) for (x[2]=0; x[2]<SIZE; x[2]++) for (x[3]=0; x[3]<SIZE; x[3]++) for (d=0; d<4; d++) { staplesum=0; for (dperp=0;dperp<4;dperp++){ if (dperp!=d){ / move around thusly: dperp 6--5 ^ \| \| \| 1--4 \| \| \| -----> d 2--3 / / plaquette 1234 / movedown(x,dperp); staple=link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][dperp] link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][d]; moveup(x,d); staple=link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][dperp]; moveup(x,dperp); staplesum+=staple; / plaquette 1456 / staple=link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][dperp]; moveup(x,dperp); movedown(x,d); staple=link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][d]; movedown(x,dperp); staple=link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][dperp]; staplesum+=staple; } } / calculate the Boltzmann weight / bplus=exp(betastaplesum); bminus=1/bplus; bplus=bplus/(bplus+bminus); /* the heatbath algorithm / if ( drand48() < bplus ){ link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][d]=1; action+=staplesum; } else{ link[x[0]][x[1]][x[2]][x[3]][d]=-1; action-=staplesum; } } action /= (SIZESIZESIZESIZE46); return 1.-action; } /*****************************/ int main(){ double beta, dbeta, action; srand48(1234L); / initialize random number generator / / do your experiment here; this example is a thermal cycle / dbeta=.01; coldstart(); / heat it up / for (beta=1; beta>0.0; beta-=dbeta){ action=update(beta); printf( } printf("\n\n"); / cool it down */ for (beta=0; beta<1.0; beta+=dbeta){ action=update(beta); printf( } printf("\n\n"); exit(0); } \end{lstlisting} \newpage \bibliographystyle{spphys}
\section{INTRODUCTION} Ultra-luminous X-ray Sources (ULXs) are unusually bright X-ray sources, with L$_X$ $>$ $10^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$, which is approximately the Eddington limit for a 10~M$_{\odot}$ object \citep[e.g.][]{fen11}. Even though ULXs were discovered roughly three decades ago, the underlying mechanism that produces the powerful X-ray emission in many of these objects remains uncertain. However, after years of multi-wavelength observations, only a few ULXs remain strong candidates for the Intermediate Mass Black Hole (IMBH) scenario, such as HLX-1 in the galaxy ESO 243-49 \citep{farr09, webb12} and M82~X-1 \citep{str03}, while many others show indications of super-Eddington accretion and/or beaming from a stellar mass black hole \citep[sMBH, e.g.][]{sto06, king08, pou07, sor08, ber08, gla09, sut13, liu13, mot14, weng14, mid15} or a neutron star \citep{bach14}. Some galactic binaries are known to show super-Eddington luminosities, such as GRS~1915+105 \citep{fen04} and V4641~Sgr \citep{rev02}, but not persistently as ULXs do. However with the exception of a few distinct cases \citep[see][]{mid13, liu13, mot14} conclusive evidence on the true nature of many ULXs remains unclear. The ULX in Holmberg IX (Ho~IX X-1 from now on) is one such enigmatic source. The ULX, also known as Holmberg~IX~X-1 or M81~X-9, has been well studied in the X-rays and optical since its discovery by the Einstein Observatory \citep{fabb88}. In this paper we assume that the ULX is located at a distance of 3.6~Mpc \citep{ger11}. Perhaps one of the most notable features of this ULX is the massive nebula in which it resides. Stretching ~300 pc $\times$ 400 pc in size, the nebula was first discovered and associated with the ULX by \citet{mill94} and \citet{lap01} respectively. The ultimate power source for the bubble nebula has been a matter of some debate. Some explanations for its origin include 1) the combined strength of multiple O-stars and supernovae from the OB association in close proximity to the ULX, 2) a large hypernova event, or 3) winds and/or jets emanating from the ULX \citep[e.g.][]{pak08, abo08, abo07,ram06,pak02,pak03}. The suggestion that winds or jets might power the massive nebular bubble around Ho~IX X-1 is in line with the theory that many ULXs are similar to the famous supercritically accreting X-ray binary in our own Galaxy, SS~433, rather than an IMBH. Indeed in the case of Ho~IX X-1, the other two scenarios have ostensibly been ruled out as plausible explanations for the nebula distribution. For instance, \citet{ram06} showed that the energy released by six supernovae in the vicinity of the ULX is not sufficient to reproduce the energy of the expanding nebular shell, ruling out (1) above. \citet{pak08} similarly find that the mechanical energy required to produce the nebula must result from a cluster that is more than two orders of magnitude larger than the observed stellar association. They also suggest that the period of time needed for mass transfer to begin in Ho~IX X-1 is far shorter than required for a hypernova event to explain the birth of the ULX, ruling out (2). \citet{pak08} suggest that winds and/or jets instead are more likely to power the bubble. \citet[Figure~10]{ber10a} support this finding, when they use shock models to describe the high excitation optical lines seen in Ho~IX X-1. Finally, \citet{abo07} find radial velocity gradients that support the winds and/or jets explanation. Many authors have noted the striking resemblance of Ho~IX X-1 to SS 433. For instance, \citet{fab15} note that the optical spectrum of Ho~IX X-1 is similar to wind-dominated objects like SS 433. In an X-ray study, \citet{lua16} see spectral variability patterns that are consistent with precession of the angle to the line-of-sight of the rotation axis of the ULX. This is very similar to what is seen in SS 433 as well. These scenarios hint that the processes powering emission in Ho~IX X-1 and SS 433 may be similar, so much so that the two appear to be of the same family. If the Ho~IX X-1 nebula is indeed powered by jets as is the case with its SS 433 `cousin', direct evidence of these jets has yet to surface. However infrared photometry - an underused tool in the field of ULX astronomy - has the potential to produce a wealth of continuum information about the ULX that can be used to directly characterize the ULX SED. This has been done only once before for ULXs: in a study of Holmberg~II X-1. In this study \citet{ber10a, ber10b} used Spitzer mid-infrared data to constrain the ULX SED and found the data to be consistent with a broken power law typical of jet emission. The model was substantiated when \citet{cseh14} used the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (JVLA) to image the ULX and found signatures of jets emanating from the ULX. On the other hand, infrared photometry has been widely used in the X-ray binary community to uncover excess from irradiated disks, circumbinary disks, and dusty shells from companions stars \citep{rah10, mun06}. Thus Spitzer infrared photometry can be a powerful tool for uncovering structures and environments of ULXs, that optical and X-ray data cannot. In this paper we present Spitzer IRAC images of the ULX in Holmberg IX. Combining these images with multi-wavelength optical, UV, and X-ray data from the literature, we model the Ho~IX X-1 SED to determine the source of the infrared emission in this ULX. In Section 2 we provide the details of the Spitzer IRAC data analysis. In Section 3 we provide the fits to the full SED. In Section 4 we discuss the origin of the infrared emission. Finally we summarize our results in Section 5. \section{IRAC OBSERVATIONS AND DATA ANALYSIS} For this analysis, we used two sets of archival Spitzer Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) data of the dwarf galaxy Holmberg IX taken on November 15, 2007 (Astronomical Observation Request, AORs 22537472 and 22537728). IRAC is a four-channel camera that provides 5.12 $\times$ 5.12 arcmin images at 3.6, 4.5, 5.8 and 8.0 microns. We processed the data both manually and using the Post-processed Basic Calibration Data (PBCD) available for download from the archive, but found no difference between the two methods. We used the Spitzer MOsaicker and Point Source Extractor (MOPEX) APEX package\footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/SPITZER/docs/dataanalysistools/tools/mopex/mopexusersguide} to extract the photometric fluxes from the four channels. We followed the standard extraction procedure and conversion factors provided in the IRAC Instrument Handbook\footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/SPITZER/docs/irac/iracinstrumenthandbook/IRAC\_Instrument\_Handbook.pdf}. The pipeline mosaics for IRAC are accurate to within 20\%\footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/SPITZER/docs/irac/iracinstrumenthandbook/74/} of the flux. All data calibration information, including background subtraction, are available in the footnoted links as well as in \citet{mak05}, which contains the exact point source extraction procedure from MOPEX. To ensure our IR data were extracted from the same region as the Optical and X-ray data, we aligned the IRAC images with the {\it Hubble Space Telescope} (HST) Advance Camera for Surveys (ACS) F555W/V image using 11 common sources in both (HST ACS observation ID GO-9796 in Table 1). We find that the sources in the two images align to within 0.11 arcsec RMS. Table~1 provides fluxes extracted for the two sets of data and Figure~1 shows false-color images of the ULX in 3.6, 4.5, and 8.0 microns compared with a standard HST ACS image of the ULX. We also used a SUBARU H$_\alpha$ image to overplot the contours of the bubble nebula. As the fluxes in Table~1 show, the observations at 5.8 and 8.0 microns show a weak detection in one case (AOR 22537472) and an upper limit in another (AOR22537728) for a detection threshold of 4-sigma. Indeed both observations are right on the line between detection and a non-detection for the 4-sigma threshold. Because the two sets of observations are identical in exposure time and because they are contiguous (i.e. one observation was taken right after the other), we chose to combine the two sets of observations to reduce the noise error on the measurements. The resultant fluxes are also provided in Table~1. The enhanced signal to noise in the combined measurement suggests a statistically significant detection at 5.8 and 8.0 microns that can be used to characterize the IR emission. \section{SPECTRAL ENERGY DISTRIBUTION OF HOLMBERG IX X-1} To generate a full Spectral Energy Distribution (SED) of Ho~IX X-1, we used optical, UV, and X-ray data from the literature \citep{gris11,ber12,lua16}. A summary of all archival data used for this analysis is presented in Table~\ref{table1}. The optical data comes primarily from HST and the reduction strategy for that data can be found in \citet{gris11}. The UV data primarily comes from Optical Monitor on board {\it XMM-Newton} and the data analysis strategy for this data can be found in \citet{ber12}. Finally the X-ray data comes from {\it XMM-Newton} and the reduction strategy for these data can be found in \citet{lua16}. We used the extinction E(B-V) = 0.26 adopted by \citet{gris11} to correct for absorption in the UV, optical and IR. The extinction curves used for this correction are taken from \citet{card89}. This multi-wavelength data sample spans 5 years. We note that Ho~IX X-1 is known to show X-ray variations of factors of 4-5 over days to years \citep{vier10, lua16}. Unfortunately, the only available multi-wavelength dataset that was taken of this object includes X-ray data from {\it Chandra} that suffers from severe pile-up and is therefore unusable for the X-ray fitting portion of this analysis \citep{gris11}. However we were able to use this {\it Chandra} data set to establish an estimate for the approximate X-ray flux during the same epoch as the HST data used here. Indeed we find that the Chandra flux is very close to the mean between the two sets of {\it XMM} X-ray observations. Therefore, in the following, note that the actual HST-epoch X-ray flux is likely somewhere between the two {\it XMM} X-ray data sets and that the plotted data set provided here is {\it not} simultaneous. As the following sections will demonstrate, the multi-epoch nature of these data makes generating a good fit difficult. X-ray spectra exist in the archives from {\it XMM-Newton}, {\it Swift}, and {\it NuSTAR}. \citet{lua16} found two main types of spectra: one hard ultra-luminous (HUL)-like and one more disk-like \citep[see also][]{sut13}. We selected the {\it XMM-Newton} datasets 0112521101 and 0693851701 (refered to as obs 1 and obs 2 respectively from here forward), which represent each of the two, typical ULX spectra regimes seen in this object. \subsection{Spectral Fitting} We used XSPEC version 12.7.1 to model the two X-ray spectra of Ho~IX X-1 between 0.3 and 10 keV. The X-ray data were provided by and processed per the prescription of \citet{lua16}. The X-ray data were fit with three models: multi-color disk (MCD) + comptonization model (compTT), Self-Irradiated Funnel model (SIRF), and an irradiated disk model (DISKIR). Note that the former two were fit to the X-ray data only, while the latter (DISKIR) was fit to both the X-ray and Optical data since that made the most physical sense for this model as described in the following. We start with a model typically used to fit ULXs, with an accretion disk component (MCD in XSPEC) and the CompTT model to account for the Comptonization in a disk-corona geometry \citep[e.g.][]{gla09, wal14}. We obtain good fits for both spectra. The parameter fit results are shown in Table~\ref{table2}. The Self-IrRadiated Funnel model (SIRF in XSPEC), describes the emission from a ``supercritical funnel'', similar to SS~433 \citep{abo09}. The SIRF model provides acceptable fits for both sets of X-ray spectra. The accretion rate was fixed at 350 $\times$ Eddington, the funnel opening angle was set to 30 degrees and the inclination angle was set to zero. The inner radius for this model is calculated in units of the ``spherisation radius'' \citep{abo09}. In order to better compare them with the other models we convert them in units of km using the luminosity. We obtained estimates for the bolometric luminosities from the fitted X-ray models plus the jet model fit to the IRAC data (see Section 4). Then we used the accretion rate to estimate black hole masses of 41~M$_{\odot}$ and 107~M$_{\odot}$ for the first and the second observation, respectively. The spherization radius can then be calculated \citep{abo09} for each black hole mass. Finally we convert the fitted radii in the SIRF model to km. These are listed in column 5 in Table~\ref{table2}. The DISKIR model is particularly useful when optical and UV data are available in addition to the X-ray spectrum. This is because many ULXs detected in the optical/UV show SEDs well fit by an irradiated disk \citep{ber10a, ber12, gris12}. In this case it makes sense to fit the X-ray data together with the optical data, since the irradiation portion describes a large fraction of the optical/UV emission. Indeed an irradiated disk was found to have an important contribution in the optical in other ULXs \citep[e.g.][]{ber12}. Following Gierlinski et al. (2008, 2009) and Berghea \& Dudik (2012) we set the fraction of the flux thermalized in the inner disk at 0.1 and the radius of the Compton irradiated disk at 1.1 of the inner disk radius. A good fit requires we set a large Comptonized luminosity ($\geq$ unilluminated disk luminosity), and an outer disk of radius 1000 R$_{in}$ (where R$_{in}$ is the inner disk radius), but this parameter is not well constrained. The fits are not acceptable statistically, but we obtained estimates for the irradiated flux fraction. It is large for both X-ray obs 2 (HUL-like, $>$6.8\%), and X-ray obs 1 (disk-like, $>$5.7\%). Typical values of 2-4\% have been found for previous fits of ULX X-ray/optical datasets with the DISKIR model \citep{tao12, gris12, ber12}. \citet{sut14} used an improved model for irratiated disks (one that accounts for the color-temperature correction) to fit a sample of ULXs with disk-like spectra. In this study, \citet{sut14} compared the new DISKIR model results with a more traditional DISKIR model fit. They found that for most objects the reprocessing fraction is ten times lower than predicted by traditional DISKIR models that do not include the color-temperature corrections, and that these new reprocessing fractions are closer to what is observed in Galactic binaries. However for one of the brighter objects in that sample (NGC1313 X-2) they found a similar reprocessing fraction to ULXs where the spectrum may be more HUL-like. They interpreted the higher reprocessing fraction in the brighter ULX as originating in a higher scattering fraction onto the outer disk from the extensive wind thought to be driven off the disk; the high reprocessing fraction in Ho IX X-1 is consistent with this interpretation. \subsection{Extending the models to Longer Wavelengths} In the following we construct the SED by extending the X-ray models we fit in the previous section to the optical/UV and IR data. {\bf Extrapolated SIRF Model:} The extrapolated SIRF models are plotted in Figure~\ref{sed}. Neither of these X-ray models fit the optical data well, however the optical data is located between the two SIRF models. When the X-ray spectrum is disk-like, it over-predicts the optical data by a factor of 6.2. When the X-ray spectrum is HUL-like it under-predicts the optical data by a factor of 3.2. Taking into account the variability of the Ho~IX X-1 and the multi-epoch nature of this data set we conclude that a funnel model is capable of reproducing the optical and X-ray data. However Figure~\ref{sed} clearly shows that the SIRF model does not fit any of the IR data. Indeed if this SIRF model were the appropriate model for the optical and X-ray data, an additional component would be needed to explain the IR excess. {\bf Extrapolated Disk Models:} As expected, simple disk models without irradiation are too faint in the optical. Our MCD+CompTT models shown in Figure~\ref{sed} are more than an order of magnitude lower than the Hubble data if they are extrapolated into the optical. Following \citet{gris11} we added a B0~Ib star to fit the optical photometry (black line in Figure~\ref{sed}) in this case, which resulted in a good fit to the data from X-ray to optical. The optical data are fit so well by the stellar model, that an IR excess is clearly present at wavelengths longer than the H-band measurement. Thus an additional component is needed to explain the IRAC data for the extrapolated disk model as well. {\bf DISKIR model:} Per Section 3.1 we began fitting the DISKIR data to the optical + X-ray data since it makes physical sense to do so when optical data is available. This extrapolated DISKIR model, described in Section 3.1, was a very good fit to the optical data but unfortunately not statistically acceptable overall for either X-ray data set. Here too, the DISKIR model is also not a good fit the IRAC data. Based on these fits and the multi-epoch nature of this dataset, we conclude that all three models are plausible models for the optical/UV/X-ray data in Ho~IX X-1. To definitively rule out any one model would require good, simultaneous optical and X-ray data (Gris\'e et al. 2016, in prep). However, most importantly, none of these models fit the IR excess we see in Ho~IX X-1, suggesting another mechanism is responsible for this emission. \section{ORIGIN OF THE IR EMISSION IN HOLMBERG IX X-1} As Figure~\ref{sed} shows, there is a clear IR excess in Ho~IX X-1 that cannot be explained by the optical or X-ray models. The IR excess could be due to contamination from other stars within the 2 arcsecond extraction region, however based on the B0~Ib stellar model in Figure 2 (which is also the brightest star in the 2 arcsecond extraction circle), we expect the contribution from all stars in that field to be negligible in the IR since their collective SEDs drop sharply at IR wavelengths. There are four possible sources for the IR excess: 1) the irradiated disk/the companion star, 2) a heated dust shell, 3) a circumbinary disk such as those seen in X-ray binaries, or 4) a jet. Because none of the models from the previous sections produce sufficient emission in the IR to replicate our IRAC data, the latter three options are the only plausible emission mechanisms. We note that some fraction of the IR emission will also result from contamination from the bubble nebula. \citet{gris11} found some red excess in the I-band based on the stellar model fits to the HST data. However the HST images from this study suggest the I-band emission is not coming from nebular contamination, especially in the central location \citep{gris11}. In addition the H-band fits the stellar continuum very well and does not show a similar excess. We explore the three remaining options for the excess below. {\bf Heated Dust Shell:} Emission from a heated dust shell is one explanation for the IR excess seen in Ho~IX X-1. \citet{rah10} found evidence for a dust component with temperature $\sim$400~K from the Galactic X-ray binary GRS 1915+105. GRS1915+105 is a microquasar that has a red giant as a donor \citep{gre01}. \citet{rah10} suggests that the dust component could be related to the dusty shell often found surrounding red giants. We fit a spherical blackbody model to the Ho~IX X-1 IRAC data. This blackbody, shown in Figure~\ref{sed}, gives a dust temperature of $\sim$ 1100~K and a radius of $\sim$ 1400~R$_{\odot}$. However, the fit is quite poor, the $\chi^2_{\nu}$ being much greater than two, thereby precluding error estimates for the parameters. The dust temperature is normal for dusty shells around red giants, however if the companion star is a blue supergiant, as the optical HST data suggests, it is unlikely to be surrounded by dust. In addition this blackbody emission does not fit the 5.8 and 8.0 $\mu$m data well. We therefore rule out this option as a viable model for the infrared emission in the ULX. {\bf Circumbinary Disk:} An alternative explanation for a dust component is the circumbinary disk proposed by \citet{per10}, \citet{rah10} and \citet{mun06} to explain the IR emission in X-ray binaries (SS~433, GRS1915+105, A0620-00 and XTE J1118+480). Here the circumbinary disk is distinct from the accretion disk described in Section 3, and is composed of material that may have been lost through the L2 point \citep[e.g. SS433, see][]{per10}. If Ho~IX X-1 is more like these X-ray binaries, we might expect to see such a circumbinary disk in the infrared. In this case the black body model that we fit to the infrared data would represent emission from the inner circumbinary disk, while the redder 5.8 and 8.0 $\mu$m excess is likely emanating from the outer portion of the circumbinary disk as lower temperature blackbody emission. The four IRAC data points that comprise the IR excess in Ho~IX X-1 are not sufficient to fit a complicated circumbinary disk model \citep[e.g.][]{hil15, ake07}, however in its simplest form, the circumbinary disk model is very similar to an irradiated disk model, only the source of illumination in the former case is the accretion disk and the star. We therefore fit a very simple p-free disk model to the four IRAC points. As can be seen from Figure 2, the data are consistent with this simple p-free disk (${p = 0.64^{+0.09}_{-0.06}}$), but the disk vastly over-predicts the H-band flux and the temperature for the fit is unconstrained ($T > 1680 K$). We conclude that if a circumbinary disk is responsible for the IRAC emission in this object then the optical and/or IR emission must be variable. {\bf Jet Emission:} In the jet emission scenario we expect a broken power law with a break in the IR and we attempted to fit the combined IRAC and HST data with such a model. Extinction E(B-V) was fixed at 0.26 and the break energy at 0.35~eV (approximately at the 3.6 $\mu$m IRAC band, see Figure~\ref{sed}). For comparison the break is at 0.12~eV for Cygnus X-1 and 0.48 for GX~339-4 \citep{rah11}. Inspection of the fit clearly indicates that the HST H-band flux is prohibitively low for a reasonable power law model. The emission in H-band fits the stellar model so well that any additional contribution from a jet-dominated power law would either severely over predict the observed emission or suggest a power law slope that is unrealistically steep \citep{bla79, fal95}. Indeed the spectral index of the fit in Figure~\ref{sed} is $-4.3$ in the optical/IR compared with typical indices of $-0.4$ to $-1.0$ \citep{bla79, fal95}. We conclude from this that either a) the IR emission from Ho~IX X-1 is {\it not} jet-dominated or b) that the radio ejecta are transient as is thought to be the case with Ho~II X-1 \citep{cseh14}. The multi-epoch nature of the HST and IR data results in a degeneracy in the models that can only be broken by a series of radio monitoring activities designed to detect the jet emission when it is in its most luminous state. Based on the analysis presented in the previous sections, the IR emission in Ho~IX X-1 suggests that the system contains a circumbinary disk much like those detected in X-ray binaries (e.g SS~433, GRS1915+105, A0620-00 and XTE J1118+480) or emission from a variable jet such as that seen with Ho~II X-1 \citep[e.g.][]{cseh14}. In the transient jet scenario, simultaneous IR and optical data might uncover a more reasonable power-law slope and H-band emission that is significantly higher than observed in the data set presented here. We also find that the IR data is not well fit by a single black body, such as that expected from a dusty shell. However, in this case the simultaneity of the data will not significantly improve the fit, since the single black body fits neither the optical data nor the longer wavelength IR data as well. The degeneracy between the circumbinary disk and transient jet theory underscores the need for simultaneous observations when observing ULX structure and environments. In this case, very sensitive radio observations of Ho~IX X-1 may solidify these findings and help detect or constrain the power law break and slope needed to confirm jet activity. Indeed such radio observations have recently been obtained using the JVLA B-array and will be published in a follow-on study to this paper. However, as this study also indicates, deep radio {\it monitoring} observations with JVLA are also critical to providing information about the IR excess in this source in the event that the jet (if one exists) is variable. \section{CONCLUSIONS} Using {\it Spitzer} IRAC observations of Ho~IX X-1, we have constructed an SED of the ULX. Two contiguous IRAC observations of Ho~IX X-1 were made. The datasets at 5.8 and 8.0 microns are at the sensitivity limit of the IRAC instrument, however combining these measurements yields a statistically significant detection in both bands. The combined measurements coupled with detailed fits to previous optical/UV and X-ray data of Ho~IX X-1 suggest that the IR excess in this object is due either to a circumbinary disk such as those seen in SS~433 and other standard X-ray binaries or a variable jet such as that seen in Ho~II X-1 by \citet{cseh14}. Future high-sensitivity radio monitoring observations would be needed to break the degeneracy between the two models and determine if the IR excess seen in Ho~IX X-1 results from either mechanism. \acknowledgments We thank the anonymous referee for the very helpful suggestions that have greatly improved this paper. The authors thank Luangtip et al. for providing the X-ray data presented here and for their useful discussions. We also thank Michel Hillen, Hans Van Winckel, and Rachel Akeson for the useful discussions concerning circumbinary disk models and their application to this dataset. TPR acknowledges financial support from STFC as part of the consolidated grant ST/L00075X/1. This work is based on observations obtained from multiple telescope facilities including 1) {\it XMM-Newton}, an ESA science mission with instruments and contribution directly funded by ESA Member States and NASA, 2) The NASA/ESA {\it Hubble Space Telescope} and obtained from the Hubble Legacy Archive, which is a collaboration between the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI/NASA), the Space Telescope European Coordinating Facility (ST-ECF/ESA) and the Canadian Data Centre (CADC/NRC/CSA), and finally, 3) The NASA {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} which is managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory with data obtained from the {\it Spitzer Heritage Archive} which is maintained by the Spitzer Science Center (SSC), located on the campus of the California Institute of Technology and part of NASA's Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC) The Spitzer Space Telescope is a NASA mission managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. This website is maintained by the Spitzer Science Center, located on the campus of the California Institute of Technology and part of NASA's Infrared Processing and Analysis Center.
\section{Acknowledgments} \noindent This research was supervised by Ken Ono and David Zureick-Brown at the Emory University Mathematics REU and was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant number DMS-1557960). We would like to thank David Zureick-Brown for suggesting the problem that led to the present article and for offering us his invaluable advice and guidance; in particular, we acknowledge David Zureick-Brown for providing a detailed outline of the material on heights in Section~\ref{subsubsection:appendix-on-heights}. and for much help proving Proposition~\ref{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group}. We would like to acknowledge Brian Conrad for his meticulous efforts in providing us with enlightening comments, corrections, and suggestions on nearly every part of this paper. In addition, we would like to thank Davide Lombardo for writing an appendix for the present article and for many fruitful conversations. We thank Daniel Litt for much help proving Proposition~\ref{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction}. Finally, we would like to thank Jeff Achter, Jarod Alper, Michael Aschbacher, Anna Cadoret, Alina Cojocaru, John Cullinan, Dougal Davis, Anand Deopurkar, Noam Elkies, Jordan Ellenberg, Nick Gill, Jack Hall, Joe Harris, Eric Katz, Mark Kisin, Ben Moonen, Jackson Morrow, Anand Patel, Bjorn Poonen, Jeremy Rickard, Eric Riedl, Simon Rubinstein-Salzedo, David Rydh, Jesse Silliman, Jacob Tsimerman, Evelina Viada, Erik Wallace, and Alex Wright for their helpful advice. We used {\tt magma} and \mbox{\emph{Mathematica} for explicit calculations.} \bibliographystyle{alpha} \section{Background on Galois Representations of PPAVs} \label{section:background} This section is devoted to describing the basic definitions and properties concerning Galois representations associated to families of PPAVs. Specifically, in Section~\ref{subsection:setup}, we construct these Galois representations and provide precise definitions for the various monodromy groups discussed in Section~\ref{weaintevergonnaberoyals}. Then, in Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}, we explain how a family of PPAVs over a number field $K$ may be extended to a family over the number ring $\mathcal O_K$. The notation introduced in this section will be utilized throughout the rest of the paper. \subsection{Defining Galois Representations for Families of PPAVs}\label{subsection:setup} Let $K$ be a number field, and let $g \geq 0$ be an integer. Fix a base scheme $T$ (we usually take $T$ to be $\spec K$ or an open subscheme of $\spec \mathcal O_K$), and let $U$ be an integral $T$-scheme with generic point $\eta$ (we usually take $U$ to be an open subscheme of $\mathbb{P}_K^r$ or $\mathbb{P}_{\mathcal O_K}^r$). Let $A \to U$ be a \emph{family} of $g$-dimensional PPAVs, by which we mean the following: \begin{itemize} \item The morphism $A \to U$ is flat, proper, and finitely presented with smooth geometrically connected fibers of dimension $g$. \item $A$ is a group scheme over $U$, and the resulting abelian scheme is equipped with a principal polarization. \end{itemize} Note that $A \rightarrow U$ is automatically abelian, smooth, and projective, and further observe that the fiber $A_u$ over any point $u \in U$ is a PPAV of dimension $g$ over the \mbox{residue field $\kappa(u)$ of $u$.} Choose a geometric generic point $\overline{\eta}$ for $U$. If $\kappa(\eta)$ has characteristic prime to $m$, the action of the \'{e}tale fundamental group $\pi_1(U,\overline{\eta})$ on the geometric generic fiber $A_{\overline{\eta}}[m]$ gives rise to a continuous linear representation whose image is constrained by the Weil pairing to lie in the general symplectic group $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/m \mathbb Z)$. We denote this \emph{mod-$m$ representation} by \begin{equation}\label{atoll} \rho_{A,m} \colon \pi_1(U, \overline{\eta}) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/m \mathbb Z). \end{equation} The map in~\eqref{atoll} is well-defined up to the choice of base-point $\overline{\eta}$, and choosing a different such $\overline{\eta}$ would only alter the image of $\rho_{A,m}$ by an inner automorphism of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/m\mathbb Z)$. For this reason, when it will not lead to confusion, we may omit the basepoint from our notation and write $\pi_1(U)$ for $\pi_1(U, \overline \eta)$. If $\ell$ is a prime not dividing the characteristic of $\kappa(\eta)$, then we can take the inverse limit of the mod-$\ell^k$ representations to obtain the \emph{$\ell$-adic representation} \begin{equation}\label{itsladicguys} \rho_{A,\ell^\infty} \colon \pi_1(U) \to \varprojlim_k{\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell^k \mathbb Z)}. \end{equation} Moreover, if $\kappa(\eta)$ has characteristic $0$, we can take the inverse limit of all the mod-$m$ representations (or equivalently the product of all the $\ell$-adic representations) to obtain an \emph{adelic} or \emph{global representation} \begin{equation}\label{thisisthepartofme} \rho_A \colon \pi_1(U) \to \varprojlim_m {\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/m \mathbb Z)} \simeq \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z}). \end{equation} \vspace{-0.2in} \begin{remark} In the situation that $U = \spec K$, the choice of $\overline{\eta}$ corresponds to a choice of algebraic closure $\overline{K}$ of $K$. Taking $G_K \defeq \Gal(\overline{K}/K)$ to be the absolute Galois group, we have that $\pi_1(U, \overline{\eta}) = G_K$. This recovers the notion of a Galois representation of a PPAV over a field as a map $\rho_A: G_K \rightarrow \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. \end{remark} \vspace{-0.1in} \begin{remark} \label{remark:det-rho-is-chi} For a commutative ring $R$, recall from the definition of the general symplectic group that we have a multiplier map $\operatorname{mult} \colon \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(R) \to R^\times$. Let $\chi_m$ be the mod-$m$ cyclotomic character, and let $\chi$ be the cyclotomic character. If $U = \spec k$, (with $k$ an arbitrary characteristic $0$ field) it follows from $G_k$-invariance of the Weil pairing that $\chi_m = \mult \circ \rho_{A,m}$ and $\chi = \mult \circ \rho_{A}$. More generally, if $U$ is normal and integral, and $\phi: \pi_1(U) \rightarrow \pi_1(\spec K)$, then $\chi \circ \phi = \mult \circ \rho_A$, which holds because it holds for the generic fiber $A_\eta \rightarrow \spec K(\eta)$, and the map $\pi_1(\eta) \rightarrow \pi_1(U)$ is surjective. \end{remark} We now define the monodromy groups associated to the representations defined above. We call the image of $\rho_A \colon \pi_1(U) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ the {\it monodromy} of the family $A \to U$, and we denote it by $H_A$. When the base scheme is $T = \spec K$, we also define the {\it geometric monodromy}, denoted by $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$, to be the image of the adelic representation $\rho_{A_{\overline K}}\colon \pi_1(U_{\overline K}) \rightarrow \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ associated to the base-changed family $A_{\overline{K}} \to U_{\overline{K}}$. Since the cyclotomic character is trivial on $G_{\overline{K}}$, it follows that $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is actually a subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. We write $H_A(m)$ and $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(m)$ for the mod-$m$ reductions of the above-defined monodromy groups. We say $A \rightarrow U$ has big monodromy if $H_A$ is open in $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ and $A \rightarrow U$ has big geometric monodromy if $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is open in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. In particular, for each $u \in U$, $H_{A_u}$ and $H_{A_u}^{\operatorname{geom}}$ are the monodromy groups associated to the family $A_u \to \spec \kappa(u)$. Since $A_u$ is the pullback of $A$ along $\iota: u \rightarrow U$, $\rho_{A_u} = \iota \circ \rho_A$ and we obtain an inclusion $H_{A_u} \subset H_A$. Note that if $U$ is normal, then the map $\pi_1(\eta) \rightarrow \pi_1(U)$ is surjective, so we have that $H_{A_\eta} = H_A$. \subsection{Extending Families over $K$ to $\mathcal O_K$} \label{subsection:notation-for-families} In this section, we set up notation for extending a given rational family of PPAVs over a number field $K$ to a family over the number ring $\mathcal O_K$. This construction will become particularly important in Section~\ref{subsection:applying-wallace}, where we apply the results of~\cite{scoopdedoo}. Retain the setting of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. Start with a family $A \rightarrow U$ over $\spec K$. Define $Z \defeq \mathbb P_K^r \setminus U$ and let $\mathcal Z$ denote the closure of $Z$ in $\mathbb P^r_{\mathcal O_K}$. Using standard spreading out techniques, extend the family $A \rightarrow U$ to a family $\mathcal A \rightarrow \mathcal U$, so that $\mathcal U$ is an open subscheme of $\mathbb P^r_{\mathcal O_K}$ whose generic fiber over $\spec K \rightarrow \spec \mathcal O_K$ is $A \rightarrow U$. Recall that our definition of family from Section~\ref{subsection:setup} means $\mathcal A \rightarrow \mathcal U$ is smooth and proper with geometrically connected fibers and $\mathcal A$ is an abelian scheme over $\mathcal U$ with a principal polarization. Let $S$ be the finite set of primes $\fp \in \spec \mathcal O_K$ for which $\mathbb P^r_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} \setminus \mathcal U_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} \neq \mathcal Z_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p}$. Fix $m \in \mathbb Z$ and let $P_m \subset \Sigma_K$ be the set of primes in $\mathcal{O}_K$ dividing $m$. Then, the preimage of $P_m$ under the map $\mathcal{U} \to \spec \mathcal{O}_K$ is the complement of the locus on which $\mathcal{A}[m] \to \mathcal{U}$ is \'etale. Now, observe that the \'etale cover $\mathcal{A}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}}[m] \to \mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}}$ gives rise to a mod-$m$ representation $\pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{P_m}) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$, where $\rho_{A, m} \colon \pi_1(U) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$ is obtained by precomposing with $\pi_1(U) \to \pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})$. Under the correspondence between finite quotients of the \'etale fundamental group and connected finite Galois \'etale covers, the map $\pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{P_m}) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$ is associated to a connected finite Galois \'etale cover $\mathcal{V}_m \to \mathcal{U}_{P_m}$. Let $V_m$ be the fiber of $\mathcal{V}_m$ over $\spec K$, and observe that $V_m$ is a connected finite Galois \'etale cover of $U$. In this way, letting $m = \ell$ vary over the prime numbers, we obtain a collection of connected finite Galois \'etale covers $V_\ell \to U$ and $\mathcal V_\ell \to \mathcal U_{\mathcal O_{P_\ell}}$. By construction, the finite quotient of $\pi_1(U)$ corresponding to the cover $V_\ell \to U$ is the mod-$\ell$ monodromy group $H_A(\ell)$ associated to the family $A \to U$. Similarly, the finite quotient of $\pi_1(U_{\overline K})$ corresponding to the cover $(V_\ell)_{\overline K} \rightarrow U_{\overline K}$ is the geometric mod-$\ell$ monodromy group $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$. For a prime $\fp \not\in S \cup P_\ell$, the cover $(\mathcal V_\ell)_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} \to \mathcal U_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p}$ corresponds to a finite quotient $\pi_1(\mathcal U_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p}) \twoheadrightarrow H_{A,\fp}(\ell)$. Choosing an algebraic closure $\overline{\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p$ of $\mathbb F_\mathfrak p$, we define $H_{A,\mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$ to be the image of the \mbox{composite map $\pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline{\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p}) \to \pi_1(\mathcal U_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p}) \to H_{A,\mathfrak p}(\ell)$.} \section{Applications of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}}\label{iknewyouweretrouble} The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that the main result, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}, can be applied to a number of interesting families of PPAVs, such as families containing a dense open substack of the locus of Jacobians of hyperelliptic curves, trigonal curves, or plane curves. In Section~\ref{crit}, we prove a general tool that is needed to guarantee big monodromy for the loci in our applications, and in Section~\ref{androidbeatsios}, we examine each of these \mbox{applications in detail.} \subsection{Finite-Index Criterion}\label{crit} In this section we prove Proposition~\ref{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group}, which will be applied in the setting of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} to determine that $U$ has big monodromy when its image in the moduli stack of abelian varieties has big monodromy. We begin by recalling an elementary criterion giving surjectivity for the map on \'{e}tale fundamental groups induced by a morphism of algebraic stacks. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1} Suppose $f\colon X \rightarrow Y$ is a map of algebraic stacks. The fiber product $U \times_Y X$ is connected for all finite connected \'etale maps $U \rightarrow Y$, if and only if the induced map $\pi_1(X) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ is surjective. In particular, if $X$ and $Y$ are normal, integral, and Noetherian, and $f: X \rightarrow Y$ is a flat map with connected geometric generic fiber, then the induced map $\pi_1(X) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ is surjective. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Using the identification between connected finite \'etale covers of $Y$ and transitive $\pi_1(Y)$-sets, the first part is immediate from the fact that a continuous map $\phi \colon H \rightarrow G$ between profinite groups is surjective if and only if every finite discrete $G$-set with transitive $G$-action is transitive as a $H$-set. The latter fact holds because the image of $H$ is closed, and so $\phi$ is not surjective if and only if there is some open normal $N \subset G$ with $f(H) \subset N$, in which case $H$ does not acts transitively on $G/N$. For the second statement, we only need verify that a connected finite \'etale cover $U \rightarrow Y$ pulls back to a connected cover of $X$. Note that because $X$ and $Y$ are normal and integral, \'etale covers of $X$ and $Y$ are connected if and only if they are irreducible. (Here, we are using that normal and connected implies irreducible and that normality is local in the \'etale topology over Noetherian stacks by Serre's R1 + S2 criterion for normality.) Thus, we only need show that if $U \rightarrow Y$ is any irreducible finite \'etale cover, then so is $X \times_Y U \rightarrow X$. But this follows from the assumptions that $f$ is flat and $U$ is integral, which implies all generic points of $X \times_Y U$ map to the generic point of $U$. So, if $X \times_Y U$ were reducible, the geometric generic fiber over $U$ would also be reducible, which contradicts the assumption that $f$ has connected geometric generic fiber, since a geometric generic fiber of $X \times_Y U$ is also a geometric generic fiber of $f$. \end{proof} \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group} Let $k$ be an arbitrary field of characteristic $0$. Suppose $X$ is a scheme and $Y$ is a Deligne-Mumford stack over $k$, both of which are normal, integral, separated, and finite type over $k$, and let $f\colon X \rightarrow Y$ be a dominant map. Then, the image of the induced map $\pi_1(X) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ has finite index in $\pi_1(Y)$. If, in addition, the geometric generic fiber of $f$ is connected, then the map $\pi_1(X) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ is surjective. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} To begin, we reduce to the case in which $f$ is smooth. By generic smoothness, we may replace $X$ by a dense open $X' \subset X$ so that $f\|_{X'}$ is smooth. Since, $\pi_1(X') \rightarrow \pi_1(X)$ is a surjection by Lemma~\ref{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1}, in order to prove the proposition, we may replace $X$ by $X'$. The last sentence of this Proposition follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1} (here we only needed that the map be $f$ be flat, but we have already reduced to the case it is smooth). To conclude, we only need prove that the image of $\pi_1(X)\rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ has finite index in $\pi_1(Y)$, without the assumption that the geometric generic fiber of $f$ is connected. Since $f$ is smooth and $Y$ is Deligne-Mumford, we can find a scheme $U$ and a dominant \'etale map $U \rightarrow X$ so that $U \rightarrow Y$ factors through $\mathbb A^N_Y$ where $N$ is the dimension of the geometric generic fiber of $f$ and $U \rightarrow \mathbb A^N_Y$ \'etale. So, after passing to a dense open substack of $W \subset \mathbb A^N_Y$ and a dense open subscheme $U' \subset U$, we may assume that $U' \rightarrow W$ is a finite \'etale cover: To see why, take a smooth cover of $\mathbb A^N_Y$ by a scheme. The pullback to $U$ is a separated algebraic space, so it has a dense open subspace that is a scheme. The finiteness claim then follows because the resulting \'etale morphism of schemes is locally quasi-finite, of finite type, and quasi-separated, hence generically finite on the target. Since $U' \rightarrow W$ is finite \'etale, $\pi_1(U') \rightarrow \pi_1(W)$ has finite index. Because the maps $\pi_1(W) \rightarrow \pi_1(\mathbb A^N_Y)$ and $\pi_1(\mathbb A^N_Y) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ are surjective by Lemma~\ref{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1}, the composition $\pi_1(U') \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$ has finite index in $\pi_1(Y)$, and hence so does $\pi_1(X) \rightarrow \pi_1(Y)$. \end{proof} \subsection{Applications}\label{androidbeatsios} Let $K$ be a number field with fixed algebraic closure $\overline{K}$, let $\mg$ denote the moduli stack of curves of genus $g$ over $K$, and let $\ag$ denote the moduli stack of PPAVs of dimension $g$ over $K$. We have a natural map $\tau_g \colon \mg \rightarrow \ag$ given by the Torelli map, which sends a curve to its Jacobian. Let $\ug$ denote the universal family over $\ag$. Note that if $U$ is any scheme and $A \to U$ is a family of PPAVs, then there exist maps $A \to \ug$ and $U \to \ag$ so that $A$ equals the fiber product $U \times_\ag \ug$. We will also be interested in the locus of smooth hyperelliptic curves of genus $g$, $\hyperelliptic g \subset \mg$, and locus of trigonal curves of genus $g$, $\trigonal g \subset \mg$. If a curve $C$ is trigonal, there exists a unique nonnegative integer $M$, called the Maroni invariant, with the property that there is a canonical embedding into the Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb F_M \defeq \mathbb P_{\mathbb P^1} (\mathcal O_{\mathbb P^1} \oplus \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^1}(M))$. As mentioned in \cite{patel2015chow}, the Maroni invariant takes on all integer values between $0$ and $\frac{g+2}{3}$ with the same parity as $g$. Let $\trigonal g(M) \subset \mg$ denote the substack of trigonal \mbox{curves of Maroni invariant $M$.} In order to more easily utilize Proposition~\ref{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group} for the purpose of giving interesting examples of Theorem ~\ref{theorem:main}, we record the following easy consequence of Proposition~\ref{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group}: \vspace{-0.2cm} \begin{corollary} \label{corollary:criterion-for-applying-main} Let $U \subset \mathbb P^r_K$ be an open subscheme, and let $A \rightarrow U$ be a family of $g$-dimensional PPAVs. Let $\phi \colon U \rightarrow \ag$ be the map induced by the universal property of $\ag$. Let $V$ be the smallest locally closed substack of $\ag$ through which $U$ factors, and let $W \subset \ag$ be a normal integral substack. Suppose further that $W \cap V$ is dense in $W$ and that $V$ is normal. Then, if $W$ has big monodromy, so do $V$ and $U$. Furthermore, if the geometric generic fiber of $\phi$ is irreducible, then the monodromy of $V$ agrees with that of $U$. In particular, the conclusion of Theorem ~\ref{theorem:main} holds for $U$. \end{corollary} \vspace{-0.4cm} \begin{proof} By Lemma~\ref{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1}, if $W$ has big monodromy so does the dense open subset $W \cap V \subset W$. Therefore, $V$ has big monodromy, because it contains $W \cap V$, which has big monodromy. The result then follows from Proposition~\ref{proposition:stacky-dominant-map-surjective-fundamental-group}, once we verify that both $U$ and $V$ are normal, irreducible, separated, and finite type over $K$, with $V$ Deligne-Mumford. All of these conditions are immediate except possibly that $V$ is generically smooth, which holds by generic smoothness on a smooth \mbox{cover of $V$ by a scheme.} \end{proof} \vspace{-0.2cm} Before stating the main theorem of this section, we pause to describe more precisely what we mean by ``the locus of plane curves.'' \begin{remark} \label{remark:locus-of-plane-curves} In \autoref{corollary:abbreviated-examples}(c) and \autoref{corollary:examples}\autoref{big-plane}, we refer to the ``substack of Jacobians of plane curves of degree $d$,'' for $d \geq 3$, and we now make more precise what we mean by this locus. When $d=3$, all abelian varieties can be realized as the Jacobian of a plane curve, since all elliptic $1$ curves are plane curves, so in this case we take the locus to be all of $\mathscr M_{1,1}$. For $d \geq 4$, we will define a locally closed substack of $\mg$, where $g = \binom{d-1}{2}$, and the locus of Jacobians of plane curves of degree $d$ will denote the image of this under the Torelli map. For $d \geq 4$, let $\pi_d\colon \scv_d \ra \bp^{\binom{d+2}{2}-1}$ denote the universal family over the Hilbert scheme of plane curves of degree $d$, and let $U_d \subset \bp^{\binom{d+2}{2}-1}$ denote the dense open subscheme over which $\pi_d$ is smooth. Since $\scv_d\|_{U_d} \subset U_d \times \bp^2$, the action of $\PGL_3$ on $\bp^2$ induces an action on $\scv_d\|_{U_d}$ and hence on $U_d$. Then, we define the substack of Jacobians of plane curves of degree $d$ to be the stack theoretic quotient $[U_d/\PGL_3]$. Note that there is a natural map $[U_d/\PGL_3] \ra \mg$. It can be verified that this map is a locally closed immersion of stacks. Further, one can show $[U_d/\PGL_3]$ represents the functor associating to any base scheme $T$ projective flat morphisms $f \colon C \ra T$ where each geometric fiber is a proper smooth curve of genus $g := \binom{d-1}{2}$ with a degree $d$ invertible sheaf on $C$ which commutes with base change. In this sense, $[U_d/\PGL_3]$ may naturally be referred to as ``the locus of plane curves of degree $d$'' and it is evidently smooth, since $U_d$ is smooth, being a dense open subscheme of projective space. Let us now briefly sketch the proof of the two facts claimed above. First, one can first see that $[U_d/\PGL_3]$ represents the claimed functor by defining natural maps both ways and verifying they are mutually inverse. To show $[U_d/\PGL_3] \ra \mg$ is a closed immersion, one can factor $[U_d/\PGL_3] \ra \mg$ through the stack $G^2_d$ parameterizing $g^2_d$'s on the universal curve over $\mg$, via a natural generalization of the definition given in \cite[Chapter XXI, Definition 3.12]{ACMG:geometryOfCurves}. One can check the map $[U_d/\PGL_3] \ra G^2_d$ is an open immersion from the definitions. Finally, one can verify that the map $G^2_d \ra \mg$ is a locally closed immersion, using that every smooth plane curve of degree at least $4$ has a unique $g^2_d$, see \cite[Appendix A, Exercises 17 and 18]{ACGH:I}, and the valuative criterion for locally closed immersions \cite[Chapter 1, Corollary 2.13]{mochizuki2014foundations}. \end{remark} We are now in position to state and prove the main theorem of this section: \vspace{-0.2cm} \begin{theorem} \label{corollary:examples} Suppose $A \rightarrow U$ is a rational family of principally polarized abelian varieties and define $V$ to be the smallest locally closed substack of $\ag$ through which $U$ factors. The conclusion of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} holds whenever $V$ is normal and contains a dense open substack of one of the following loci: \begin{enumerate} \item[\customlabel{big-hyperelliptic}{(a)}] The locus $\tau_g(\hyperelliptic g)$ for any $g \geq 0$. For every $g \geq 0$ exists a $U$ dominating $\tau_g(\hyperelliptic g)$ because $\hyperelliptic g$ is unirational. \item[\customlabel{big-maroni}{(b)}] The locus $\tau_g(\trigonal g(M))$ of Jacobians of trigonal curves with Maroni invariant $M < \frac{g}{3}-1$ for any $g \geq 5$. In this case, there exists $U$ dominating $\tau_g(\trigonal g(M))$ because \mbox{$\trigonal g(M)$ is unirational.} \item[\customlabel{big-trigonal}{(c)}] The locus of trigonal curves $\trigonal g$ in any $g \geq 3$. We can take $U$ to be any open subscheme of $\trigonal g$, as $\trigonal g$ is rational. \item[\customlabel{big-plane}{(d)}] The locus of Jacobians of degree-$d$ plane curves for any $d \geq 3$. In this case, the open subscheme of the Hilbert scheme of degree-$d$ plane curves parameterizing smooth curves is rational and dominates the locus of Jacobians of degree-$d$ plane curves. \item[\customlabel{big-mg}{(e)}] The locus $\tau_g(\mg)$ for any $g \geq 1$. In this case, when $1 \leq g \leq 14$, $\mg$ is unirational, so there exists a $U$ dominating $\mg$. Moreover, when $3 \leq g \leq 6$, $\mg$ is rational, and so we may take $U$ to be any open subscheme of $\mg$. \item[\customlabel{big-ag}{(f)}] The locus $\ag$ for any $g \geq 1$. When $1 \leq g \leq 5$, $\ag$ is unirational, so such a $U$ exists. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} By Corollary~\ref{corollary:criterion-for-applying-main}, it suffices to check that each of the families enumerated above has a dense open substack which has big monodromy, is irreducible, and is normal, and to verify the rationality and unirationality claims made above. Irreducibility of these loci is well-known. Note that in the first five cases, if we denote the locus in question by $\tau_g(W) \subset \ag$, it suffices to verify that $W \subset \mg$ is smooth as a substack of $\mg$, as we now explain. First, $\tau_g(W) \subset \ag$ is generically smooth because it is reduced, since it is the image of $W$, which is reduced. Taking a smooth dense open $Z' \subset \tau_g(W)$, we have that $\tau_g^{-1}(Z') \subset W$ is a dense open substack, hence it is also smooth and has big monodromy. This implies $Z'$ also has big monodromy since the monodromy of a locus in $\mg$ agrees with the monodromy of its image in $\ag$ under $\tau_g$, as both can be identified with the monodromy action on the first cohomology group. We now conclude the proof by verifying that each locus in $\mg$ (in the first five cases) is normal, has big monodromy, and is rational or unirational when claimed. In fact, we just show the substack has big geometric monodromy, since this implies it has big monodromy by Proposition~\ref{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction}. \begin{enumerate}[(a)] \item The hyperelliptic locus, $\hyperelliptic g$, has big geometric monodromy as was shown independently in~\cite[Lemma 8.12]{mumford:tata-lectures-on-theta-ii} and~\cite[Th\'eor\`eme 1]{acampo:tresses-monodromie-et-le-groupe-symplectique}. The hyperelliptic locus $\hyperelliptic g$ is smooth and unirational because it is the quotient of an open subscheme of $\mathbb P^{2g+2}_K$ by the smooth action of $\PGL_2$. \item By~\cite[Theorem, p.~2]{bolognesi2016mapping}, $\trigonal g (M)$ has big geometric monodromy when $M < \frac{g}{3}-1$. Additionally, $\trigonal g(M)$ is smooth and unirational because it can be expressed as a quotient $[U/G]$ of a smooth rational scheme $U$ by a smooth group scheme $G$. Here, $G$ is the group of automorphisms of the Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb F_M$ and $U$ is an open subscheme of the projectivization of the linear system of class $3e + \left(\frac{g + 3M + 2}{2}\right) f$ on $\mathbb F_M$, where $f$ is the class of the fiber over $\mathbb P^1$ and $e$ is the unique section with negative self-intersection (see ~\cite[p.~8]{bolognesi2016mapping} for an explanation of this description of $U$). Note that in this application, we are implicitly translating between the topological monodromy representation of $\mg$ described in ~\cite[Theorem, p.~2]{bolognesi2016mapping} and the algebraic Galois representation in $\ag$, but these two representations are compatible, essentially because both are given by the action of the fundamental group on the first cohomology group. \item In the case that $g \geq 5$, we have $\trigonal g(g \bmod 2)$ is birational to $\trigonal g$, so $\trigonal g$ has a smooth dense open with big geometric monodromy by the previous part. Next, $\trigonal g$ is rational for $g \geq 5$ by~\cite[Theorem, p.~1]{ma2014rationality}. The cases $g = 3, 4$ hold because for such $g$, $\trigonal g$ forms a dense open in $\mg$, which is itself rational and smooth, as shown in the proof of part~\ref{big-mg} below. \item By \autoref{remark:locus-of-plane-curves}, the locus of plane curves (as was also defined in \autoref{remark:locus-of-plane-curves}) in $\mg$ is smooth. By~\cite[Th\'{e}or\`{e}me 4]{beauville1986groupe}, the locus of smooth degree-$d$ plane curves in the Hilbert scheme has big geometric monodromy. It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:surjectivity-criterion-pi1} that the locus of plane curves has big monodromy. The locus of \emph{smooth} degree-$d$ plane curves in the Hilbert scheme is certainly rational, as it is an open subscheme of the Hilbert scheme of degree-$d$ plane curves, which is itself isomorphic to $\mathbb P_K^{\binom{d+2}{2}-1}$. \item By~\cite[5.12]{deligne1969irreducibility}, the geometric monodromy of $\mg$ is all of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat {\mathbb Z})$ for every $g \geq 1$. Next, $\mg$, smooth by \cite[Theorem 5.2]{deligne1969irreducibility}. We have that $\mg$ is unirational for $1 \leq g \leq 14$ by~\cite{verra2005unirationality}. Moreover, when $3 \leq g \leq 6$, we have that $\mg$ is rational; see~\cite[p.~2]{casnati2007rationality} for comprehensive references. \item Note that $\ag$ has geometric big monodromy because $\ag$ contains $\mg$ and $\mg$ has monodromy $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat {\mathbb Z})$, as argued in point (d). Further, $\ag$ is smooth by \cite[Theorem 2.4.1]{oort:finite-group-schemes-local-moduli-for-abelian-varieties-and-lifting-problems}. We have that $\ag$ is unirational for $1 \leq g \leq 5$ \mbox{as shown in~\cite[p.~1]{verra2005unirationality}.}\qedhere \end{enumerate} \end{proof} \begin{remark} \label{remark:mmmm} In most of the cases enumerated in Theorem~\ref{corollary:examples}, we actually know that the geometric monodromy is not only big, but also equal to $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. By Corollary~\ref{corollary:criterion-for-applying-main}, this occurs when $U$ has irreducible geometric generic fiber over any of the following loci: \begin{enumerate} \item The locus $\trigonal g (M)$ for any $M < \frac{g}{3}-1$, by~\cite[Theorem, p.~2]{bolognesi2016mapping}; \item The locus of plane curves of degree $d$ with $d$ even, by~\cite[Theoreme 4(i)]{beauville1986groupe}; \item The locus $\mg$ for any $g$, by~\cite[5.12]{deligne1969irreducibility}; \item The locus $\ag$ for any $g$, because $\mg \subset \ag$ and $\mg$ has full monodromy by point (d). \end{enumerate} \end{remark} \begin{remark} If $A \to U$ is a family with $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}} = \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$, then the group $H_A$ can be determined as follows. The intersection $K \cap \bq^{\operatorname{cyc}}$ is of the form $\bq(\zeta_n)$ for some $n \ge 2$. Let $r_n : \wh{\bz} \to \bz / n \bz$ be the reduction map. Then \[ H_A = \ker (r_n \circ \operatorname{mult}) = \{M \in \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) : \operatorname{mult} M \equiv 1 \pmod{n} \}, \] which follows from Remark~\ref{remark:det-rho-is-chi}. Thus, when the conclusion of the preceding remark holds, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} tells us the following: \begin{itemize} \item If $K\neq \bq$, or if $K = \bq$ and $g \ge 3$, then most $u \in U(K)$ have $H_{A_u} = \ker (r_n \circ \operatorname{mult})$. \item If $K = \bq$ and $g \in \left\{ 1,2 \right\}$, then most $u \in U(K)$ are such that $[\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) : H_{A_u}] = 2$. \end{itemize} \end{remark} \begin{remark} \label{remark:} Theorem~\ref{corollary:examples}~\ref{big-hyperelliptic} tells us that if $U$ dominates $\hyperelliptic g$, then the conclusion of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} holds for $U$. In the case where $U$ has irreducible geometric generic fiber, we can say explicitly what the monodromy group of the family is and what its commutator is. For example, let $\mathscr{Y}_{2g+2,K}$ denote the family of genus-$g$ hyperelliptic curves over $K$ with Weierstrass equation given by $y^2 = x^{2g+2} + a_{2g+1}x^{2g+1} + \dots + a_0$. We show in~\cite[Theorem 1.2]{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:hyperelliptic-curves} that most members of $\mathscr{Y}_{2g+2, K}$ have monodromy equal to $H_{\mathscr Y_{2g+2,K}}$ (which we explicitly compute) over $K \neq \mathbb Q$, and have index-$2$ monodromy when $K = \mathbb Q$. We neither prove nor state this result precisely here, but a complete statement and proof is given in~\cite{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:hyperelliptic-curves}. \end{remark} \section{Explicit Surjectivity for Abelian Surfaces \\ By Davide Lombardo} \label{lombardstreet} Let $K$ be a number field and $A/K$ be an abelian surface such that $\operatorname{End}_{\overline{K}}(A)=\mathbb{Z}$. For every place $w$ of $K$ at which $A$ has good reduction, let $\operatorname{Frob}_w$ be the corresponding Frobenius element of $\operatorname{Gal}\left( \overline{K}/K\right)$ and let $f_w(x)$ be the characteristic polynomial of $\operatorname{Frob}_w$ acting on $T_\ell A$, where $\ell$ is any prime different from the residual characteristic of $w$ (as it is well known, this definition is well-posed). Let $F(w)$ be the splitting field over $\mathbb{Q}$ of $f_w(x)$. Using the fact that the action of $\operatorname{Gal}\left( \overline{K}/K \right)$ on $T_\ell A$ factors through $\operatorname{GSp}_4(\mathbb{Q}_\ell)$, one checks easily that for all $w$ as above the Galois group of $F(w)/\mathbb{Q}$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $D_4$, the dihedral group on 4 points. To state our result we need the following function: \begin{definition}\label{def:bFunction} Let $\alpha(g)=2^{10}g^3$ and set $ b(d,g,h)=\left( (14g)^{64g^2} d \max\left(h, \log d,1 \right)^2 \right)^{\alpha(g)}. $ \end{definition} We shall show the following result, which extends \cite[Theorem 1.2]{lombardo2015explicit} to the case of abelian surfaces: \begin{proposition}\label{prop:Main} Let $v$ be a place of $K$, of good reduction for $A$, such that the Galois group of $f_v(x)$ is isomorphic to $D_4$. Let $q_v$ be the order of the residue field at $v$. \mbox{For all primes $\ell$, let} \[ \rho_{\ell^\infty} : \operatorname{Gal}\left( \overline{K}/K \right) \to \operatorname{Aut}(T_\ell A) \cong \operatorname{GL}_4(\mathbb{Z}_\ell) \] be the natural $\ell$-adic Galois representation attached to $A/K$. We have $\operatorname{Im} \rho_{\ell^\infty}=\operatorname{GSp}_4(\mathbb{Z}_\ell)$ for all primes $\ell$ that are unramified in $K$ and strictly larger than \[ \max\{b(2[K:\mathbb{Q}],4,2h(A))^{1/4}, (2q_v)^8 \}. \] \end{proposition} From now on, let $v$ be a place as in the statement of proposition \ref{prop:Main}. Notice that $f_v(x)$ is irreducible by assumption, hence all its roots are simple. Moreover, $f_v(x)$ doesn't have any real roots, because (by the Weil conjectures) every root of $f_v(x)$ has absolute value $\sqrt{q_v}$, hence its only possible real roots are $\pm \sqrt{q_v}$. But these are algebraic numbers of degree at most 2 over $\mathbb{Q}$, while $f_v(x)$ is irreducible of degree 4, contradiction. In particular, the roots of $f_v(x)$ come in complex conjugate pairs, so we shall denote them by $\mu_1, \mu_2, \iota(\mu_1), \iota(\mu_2)$, where $\iota : \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ is complex conjugation. We shall need the following lemma: \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:Nonzero} Let $x,y,z$ be three distinct eigenvalues of $\operatorname{Frob}_v$. We have $y^2 \neq xz$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Suppose first that $z=\iota(x)$. Then $y^2=x\iota(x)=q_v$, which implies that $y=\pm \sqrt{q_v}$ is a root of $f_v(x)$. As we have already seen, this is a contradiction. Hence, up to renaming the eigenvalues of $\operatorname{Frob}_v$ if necessary, we can assume $x=\mu_1, z=\mu_2$ and $y=\iota(\mu_1)$. Since $\operatorname{Gal}(F(v)/\mathbb{Q})$ is isomorphic to $D_4$ by assumption, there is a $\sigma \in \operatorname{Gal}(F(v)/\mathbb{Q})$ such that $\sigma(\mu_1)=\mu_1, \sigma(\iota(\mu_1))=\iota(\mu_1), \sigma(\mu_2)=\iota(\mu_2)$ and $\sigma(\iota(\mu_2))=\mu_2$. Applying $\sigma$ to the equality $y^2=xz$, that is, $\iota(\mu_1)^2=\mu_1\mu_2$, we get $\iota(\mu_1)^2=\mu_1\iota(\mu_2)$, whence $\iota(\mu_2)=\mu_2$. But this implies that $\mu_2$ is real, which is once again a contradiction. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:Main}] Let $\ell$ be a prime unramified in $K$ and strictly larger than $b(2[K:\mathbb{Q}],4,2h(A))^{1/4}$. Let $\rho_\ell : \operatorname{Gal}\left(\overline{K}/K \right) \to \operatorname{Aut} A[\ell]$ be the natural Galois representation associated with the $\ell$-torsion of $A$. Much of the proof of~\cite[Theorem 3.19]{lombardoGL2type} still applies in the current setting, and shows that one of the following holds: \begin{enumerate} \item $\operatorname{Im}(\rho_{\ell^\infty}) = \operatorname{GSp}_{4}(\mathbb{Z}_\ell)$ \item the image of $\rho_\ell$ is contained in a maximal subgroup of $\operatorname{GSp}_4(\mathbb{F}_\ell)$ of type (2) in the sense of Theorem 3.3 in~\cite{lombardoGL2type}. \end{enumerate} If we are in case (1) we are done, so assume we are in case (2). To conclude the proof, we shall show that $\ell \leq (2q_v)^8$. If $\ell$ is equal to the residual characteristic of $v$ this inequality is obvious, so we can assume that $v \nmid \ell$. In this case, the characteristic polynomial of the action of $\operatorname{Frob}_v$ on $T_\ell A$ is $f_v(x)$. By \cite[Lemma 3.4]{lombardoGL2type}, the eigenvalues of any $x \in \operatorname{Im}(\rho_\ell)$ can be written as $\lambda \cdot \lambda_1^3, \lambda \cdot \lambda_1^2\lambda_2, \lambda \cdot \lambda_1\lambda_2^2,\lambda \cdot \lambda_2^3$ for some $\lambda, \lambda_1, \lambda_2 \in \mathbb{F}_{\ell^2}^\times$. Taking $g\defeq\rho_\ell(\operatorname{Frob}_v)$, we may assume the four eigenvalues $\nu_1, \ldots, \nu_4$ of $g$ satisfy $\nu_2^2=\nu_1\nu_3$. Let $\lambda$ be a place of $F(v)$ of characteristic $\ell$ and identify $\lambda$ with a maximal ideal of $\mathcal{O}_{F(v)}$. Since $f_v(x)$ splits completely in $F(v)$ by definition, its four roots $\mu_1, \mu_2, \iota(\mu_1), \iota(\mu_2)$ all belong to $\mathcal{O}_{F(v)}$. Upon reduction modulo $\lambda$, these four roots yield four elements of $\mathcal{O}_{F(v)}/\lambda$, which is a finite field of characteristic $\ell$. Moreover, as $\{\mu_1, \mu_2, \iota(\mu_1), \iota(\mu_2)\}$ is a Galois-stable set, its image in $\overline{\mathbb{F}_\ell}$ independent of the choice embedding of $\mathcal{O}_{F(v)}/\lambda$ into $\overline{\mathbb{F}_\ell}$, hence well defined. Denote by $\overline{\mu_1}, \overline{\mu_2}, \overline{\iota(\mu_1)}, \overline{\iota(\mu_2)}$ the images of $\mu_1, \mu_2, \iota(\mu_1), \iota(\mu_2)$ in $\overline{\mathbb{F}_\ell}$. Now observe that the characteristic polynomial of $g$ is the reduction modulo $\ell$ of $f_v(x)$, so its roots $\nu_1, \ldots, \nu_4 \in \overline{\mathbb{F}_\ell}^\times$ must coincide with $\overline{\mu_1}, \overline{\mu_2}, \overline{\iota(\mu_1)}, \overline{\iota(\mu_2)}$ in some order. Given that $\nu_2^2=\nu_1\nu_3$, there are three (necessarily distinct) eigenvalues of $\operatorname{Frob}_v$, call them $x,y,z$, that satisfy $y^2- xz \equiv 0 \pmod{ \lambda}$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:Nonzero}, $N_{F(v)/\mathbb{Q}}(y^2-xz)$ is a nonzero integer. Therefore, $N_{F(v)/\mathbb{Q}}(y^2-xz)$ has positive valuation at $\lambda$, hence it is divisible by $\ell$. In turn, this gives \[ \ell \leq \|N_{F(v)/\mathbb{Q}}(y^2-xz)\| = \prod_{\sigma \in \operatorname{Gal}(F(v)/\mathbb{Q})}\|\sigma(y)^2-\sigma(x)\sigma(z)\| \leq (2q_v)^8, \] where the inequality $\|\sigma(y)^2-\sigma(x)\sigma(z)\| \leq 2q_v$ follows immediately from the triangle inequality and the Weil conjectures. \end{proof} \section{Definitions and Properties of Symplectic Groups} \label{gorilla} In this section, we first detail the basic definitions and properties of symplectic groups, and we then proceed to prove a few group-theoretic lemmas that are used in our proof of the main result of this paper, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. The reader should feel free to proceed to Section~\ref{section:background} upon reading the statements of Propositions~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} and~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}. \subsection{Symplectic Groups}\label{subsection:stimpy} Fix a commutative ring $R$, a free $R$-module $M$ of rank $2g$ for some positive integer $g$, and a non-degenerate alternating bilinear form $\langle -, - \rangle \colon M \times M \to R$. Define the {\it general symplectic group} (alternatively, the \emph{group of symplectic similitudes}) $\operatorname{GSp}(M)$ to be the subgroup of $\operatorname{GL}(M)$ consisting of all $R$-automorphisms $S$ such that there exists some $m_S \in R^\times$, called the {\it multiplier} of $S$, satisfying $\langle S v, Sw \rangle = m_S \cdot \langle v, w \rangle$ for all $v, w \in M$. One readily observes that the {\it mult} map \begin{align} \mult \colon \operatorname{GSp}(M) & \rightarrow R^\times \\ S & \mapsto m_S \end{align} is a group homomorphism, and its kernel is the {\it symplectic group}, denoted by $\Sp(M)$. By choosing a suitable $R$-basis for $M$, we can arrange for the corresponding matrix of the inner product $\langle -, - \rangle$ to be given by $$\Omega_{2g} = \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} 0 & \on{id}_g \\ \hline -\on{id}_g & 0\end{array}\right],$$ where $\on{id}_g$ denotes the $g \times g$ identity matrix. From this choice of basis we obtain an identification $\GL(M) \simeq \GL_{2g}(R)$. We then define $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(R)$ to be the image of $\operatorname{GSp}(M)$ and $\Sp_{2g}(R)$ to be the image of $\Sp(M)$ under this identification. Let $\det \colon \GL_{2g}(R) \to R^\times$ be the determinant map. Since the diagram \begin{center} \begin{tikzcd} \operatorname{GSp}(M) \arrow{r}{\sim} \arrow[swap]{rd}{\operatorname{mult}^g} & \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(R) \arrow{d}{\operatorname{det}} \\ & R^\times \end{tikzcd} \end{center} \noindent commutes, where the diagonal map is the multiplier map raised to the $g^{\mathrm{th}}$ power, one deduces that $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(R)$ is in fact the subgroup of $\GL_{2g}(R)$ consisting of all invertible matrices $S$ satisfying $S^T \Omega_{2g} S = (\operatorname{mult} S) \, \Omega_{2g}$ and that $\Sp_{2g}(R) = \ker(\operatorname{mult} \colon \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(R) \to R^\times)$. Let $\operatorname{Mat}_{2g \times 2g}(R)$ denote the space of $2g \times 2g$ matrices with entries in $R$. In subsequent subsections, we will make heavy use of the ``Lie algebra'' $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(R)$, which is defined by \begin{align} \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(R) &\defeq \{M \in \operatorname{Mat}_{2g \times 2g}(R) : M^T \Omega_{2g} + \Omega_{2g} M = 0 \}. \end{align} It is easy to see that $M^T \Omega_{2g} + \Omega_{2g}M = 0$ is equivalent to $M$ being a block matrix with $g \times g$ blocks of the form \[ M = \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} A & B \\ \hline C & -A^T \end{array}\right], \] where $B$ and $C$ are symmetric. For the purpose of studying Galois representations associated to PPAVs, we will be primarily interested in the cases where the ring $R$ is the profinite completion $\widehat{\mathbb Z}$ of $\mathbb Z$, the ring of $\ell$-adic integers $\mathbb Z_{\ell}$ for a prime number $\ell$, or the finite cyclic ring $\mathbb Z / m \mathbb Z$ for a positive integer $m$. Note in particular that we have the identifications \begin{equation}\label{orientation1} \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell) \simeq \varprojlim_k \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell^k \mathbb Z) \quad \text{and} \end{equation} \begin{equation}\label{orientation2} \prod_{\text{prime } \ell} \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell) \simeq \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z}) \simeq \varprojlim_m \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z / m \mathbb Z). \end{equation} From~\eqref{orientation1} and~\eqref{orientation2}, we obtain the $\ell$-adic projection map $\pi_\ell \colon \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z}) \twoheadrightarrow \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ and the mod-$m$ reduction map $r_m \colon \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z}) \twoheadrightarrow \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z / m \mathbb Z)$. Observe that~\eqref{orientation1} and~\eqref{orientation2} both hold with $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}$ replaced by $\Sp_{2g}$. \subsection{Notation} \label{subsection:notation} In what follows, we study subquotients of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$, $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$, and $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell^k \mathbb Z)$ for $\ell$ a prime number and $k$ a positive integer. We use the following notational conventions: \begin{itemize} \item Let $H\subset \Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ be a closed subgroup. \item Let $H_{\ell} \defeq \pi_\ell(H) \subset \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ be the $\ell$-adic reduction of $H$. More generally, for any set $S$ of prime numbers, let $H_S$ denote the projection of $H$ onto $\prod_{\ell \in S} \Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. \item Let $H(m) = r_{m}(H) \subset \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/m \mathbb Z)$ be the mod-$m$ reduction of $H$. We often take $m = \ell^k$. \item Let $\Gamma_{\ell^k} = \ker(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell) \to \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell^k \mathbb Z))$. Notice that the map $M \mapsto \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^k M$ gives an isomorphism of groups $$\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) \simeq \ker(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell^{k+1} \mathbb Z) \to \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell^k \mathbb Z))$$ for every $k \geq 1$, so we will use $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell\mathbb Z)$ to denote the above kernel. \item For any group $G$, let $[G,G]$ be its commutator subgroup, and let $G^{\ab} \defeq G/{ {[G,G]}}$ be its abelianization. \item For any group $G$, let $\quo(G)$ the set of isomorphism classes of finite non-abelian simple quotients of $G$, and let $\occ(G)$ be the set of isomorphism classes of finite non-abelian simple \emph{sub}quotients of $G$. \item For any positive integer $m$, let $S_m$ denote the symmetric group on $m$ letters. \end{itemize} \subsection{Generalized Goursat's Lemma} In Sections~\ref{subsection:closed-subgroups} and~\ref{subsection:open-subgroups}, it will be crucial for us to have a theorem that allows us to express a subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ as (roughly) the product of its $\ell$-adic reductions. A natural tool for doing this is Goursat's lemma, but in much of the literature (e.g.,~\cite[Lemma 5.2.2]{ribbit} and~\cite[Lemma A.4]{zywina2010elliptic}), this result is only stated for \emph{finite} products of \emph{finite} groups. This section is devoted to proving Theorem~\ref{theorem:goursat}, which generalizes Goursat's lemma to apply in the setting that we need, namely for \emph{countable} products of \emph{profinite} groups. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:product-quotient} Let $G = \prod_{i=1}^n G_i$ be a product of profinite groups. Then every finite simple quotient of $G$ is a finite simple quotient of $G_i$ for some $i$, and vice versa. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Consider a finite simple quotient $\phi: G \twoheadrightarrow H$. Since each $G_i \subset G$ is normal, the image $\phi(G_i) \subset H$ is also normal. For any $i$, if $\phi(G_i)$ is larger than $\{1\}$, then it equals $H$ since $H$ is simple, and the composition $ G_i \hookrightarrow G \twoheadrightarrow H $ expresses $H$ as a quotient of $G_i$. If no such $i$ exists, then $\ker \phi = G$, contradiction. The ``vice versa'' statement is obvious. \end{proof} \begin{theorem} \label{theorem:goursat} Let $A$ be a countable set, and suppose $\{G_\alpha\}_{\alpha \in A}$ is a collection of profinite groups such that, for all pairs $\alpha, \beta \in A$ with $\alpha \neq \beta$, the groups $G_\alpha$ and $G_\beta$ have no finite simple quotients in common. Let $G := \prod_{\alpha \in A} G_\alpha$, and let $\pi_\alpha : G \to G_\alpha$ be the natural projections. If $H \subset G$ is a closed subgroup with $\pi_\alpha(H) = G_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \in A$, then $H = G$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} First take $A = \{1, 2\}$, so that $G = G_1 \times G_2$. The subgroup $ N_1 \times \{1\} \defeq (G_1 \times \{1\}) \cap H \subset G $ is normal because $\pi_1(H) = G_1$. This means $N_1$ is a normal subgroup of $G_1$. Similarly for the subgroup $\{1\} \times N_2$. With these definitions, the closed subgroup $ H / (N_1 \times N_2) \subset (G_1 / N_1) \times (G_2 / N_2) $ surjects onto each factor via the natural projections. We have thereby reduced to the case $N_1 = N_2 = 0$. By \cite[Lemma 5.2.1]{ribbit}, we know that $G_1 \simeq G_2$ as profinite groups. The result follows because two isomorphic profinite groups have a nontrivial finite simple quotient in common (and any quotient of $G_i / N_i$ is \emph{a priori} a quotient of $G_i$). Now take $A = \{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$ for $n \ge 3$, and suppose (by induction) that the result has been proven for $n-1$. For any $H \subset G = \prod_{i=1}^n G_i$ satisfying the hypotheses of the theorem, let $H'$ be the image of $H$ under the projection $G \twoheadrightarrow \prod_{i=1}^{n-1} G_i$. Then $H'$ satisfies the hypotheses for $n-1$, so we conclude that $H' = \prod_{i=1}^{n-1} G_i$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:product-quotient}, the groups $\prod_{i=1}^{n-1} G_i$ and $G_n$ have no finite simple quotients in common, so the $n = 2$ case tells us that $H = G$. The only remaining case is $A = \{1, 2, \ldots\}$. Consider $H \subset G$ satisfying the hypotheses of the theorem. For each $n$, let $H(n)$ be the image of $H$ under the projection $G \twoheadrightarrow \prod_{i=1}^{n} G_i$. By the finite case prove above, we know that $H(n) = \prod_{i=1}^n G_i$ for each $n \ge 1$. Fix an element $g \defeq (g_i)_{i \ge 1} \subset G$, and define a sequence $\{h_1, h_2, \ldots\}$ of elements of $H$ as follows: let $h_n$ be any element of $H$ whose image in $\prod_{i=1}^n G_i$ equals $(g_1, \ldots, g_n)$. In the product topology, $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} h_n = g$, so $g \in H$ since $H$ is closed. Since $g \in G$ was arbitrary, \mbox{we conclude that $H = G$.} \end{proof} \subsection{Closed Subgroups of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$} \label{subsection:closed-subgroups} As before, let $H \subset \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ be a closed subgroup. Our main result of this section is Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset}, which shows that properties of $H$ can be deduced from corresponding properties of the $\ell$-adic reductions $H_\ell \subset \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ as $\ell$ ranges over the prime numbers. We use Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} crucially in our proof of the main theorem, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}, and more specifically in the proof of Proposition~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc}. Our strategy is to combine Goursat's lemma with the observation that the groups $\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ have distinct sets of possible simple quotients as $\ell$ varies. We shall make use of the following version of Goursat's Lemma, which we apply in the proof of Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} to determine a subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ from its $\ell$-adic images. The next lemma enables us to verify the conditions required for applying Goursat's Lemma:\vspace{-0.2in} \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:simple-quotients-of-symplectic-group} If $g > 2$ or $\ell > 2$, we have $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) = \{\operatorname{PSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\}$. Moreover, for all $g \geq 2$, we have $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) \cap \quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_{\ell'})) = \varnothing$ if $\ell \neq \ell'$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Since $\Gamma_\ell$ is a pro-$\ell$ group, we have that $\quo (\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) = \quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z))$. Furthermore, quotienting by $\{\pm \on{id}_{2g}\}$, we have that $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)) = \quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)/\left\{ \pm \on{id}_{2g} \right\})$. By~\cite[Theorem 3.4.1]{omeara1978symplectic}, we have $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)/\left\{ \pm \on{id}_{2g} \right\} = \PSp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$ is simple for $g > 2$ or $\ell > 2$. It follows that $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) = \{\operatorname{PSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\}$ in this case. To finish the proof, note that $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) \cap \quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_{\ell'})) = \varnothing$ for $g > 2$ or $\ell, \ell' > 2$ because $\PSp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \bz) \neq \PSp_{2g}(\bz / \ell' \bz)$ for $\ell \neq \ell'$ because their orders are different. The only remaining case is where $g = 2$, $\ell = 2$, and $\ell' > 2$. In this case, observe that $\PSp_{2g}(\bz / \ell' \mathbb Z) \notin \quo( \Sp_{2g}(\bz / 2 \mathbb Z))$ for $\ell' > 2$, since the order of $\PSp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$ exceeds that of $\Sp_{2g}(\bz / 2 \mathbb Z)$. \end{proof} We are now ready to prove Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset}, assuming Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}. \begin{proposition} \label{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} Let $G \subset \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ be an open subgroup. There exists a positive integer $M$ such that, for every closed subgroup $H \subset G$, we have $H = G$ if and only if $H(M) = G(M)$ and $H(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$ for every prime $\ell \nmid M$. \end{proposition} \subsubsection{Idea of Proof} The idea of the proof is to find a sufficiently large $M$ so that if $H(M) = G(M)$ then $H_{\{\ell \hspace{.05cm}\nmid \hspace{.05cm}M\}} = G_{\{\ell \hspace{.05cm} \nmid\hspace{.05cm} M\}}$, which will reduce the problem to proving Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}. \begin{proof}[Proof assuming Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}] Again, the case where $g = 1$ is handled in~\cite[Lemma 7.6]{zywina2010hilbert}, so take $g \geq 2$. Let $p$ be the largest prime such that $G(p) \neq \Sp_{2g}(\bz / p \mathbb Z)$. Observe that the groups $\Gamma_{\ell^k}$ are open in $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ because they have finite index in $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$. Since $G \subset \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ is open, the group $G_{\{\ell \le p\}} \subset \prod_{\ell \le p} \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ is open too, so there exist exponents $e(\ell) \ge 1$ with the property that \[ \prod_{\ell \le p} \Gamma_{\ell^{e(\ell)}} \subset G_{\{\ell \le p \}}. \] Since the groups $\Gamma_{\ell^k}$ are finitely generated pro-$\ell$ open normal subgroups of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$, condition (ii) from~\cite[Proposition 10.6]{serre1989lectures} is satisfied. Hence, the equivalence of conditions (ii) and (iv) from~\cite[Proposition 10.6]{serre1989lectures} implies that the Frattini subgroup defined by \begin{align} \Phi(G_{\{\ell \le p\}}) \defeq \bigcap_{\substack{S \subset G_{\{\ell \le p\}} \\ S \text{ maximal closed in }G_{\{\ell \le p\}}}} S \end{align} is open and normal in $G_{\{\ell \le p\}}$. This means we can find exponents $e'(\ell) \ge 1$ such that \[ \prod_{\ell \le p} \Gamma_{\ell^{e'(\ell)}} \subset \Phi(G_{\{\ell \le p\}}). \] Define $M \defeq \prod_{\ell \le p} \ell^{e'(\ell)}$. Then $H(M) = G(M)$ implies that $H_{\{\ell \leq p\}} = G_{\{\ell \leq p\}}$. Now take $H$ satisfying $H(M) = G(M)$ and $H(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$ for every prime $\ell \nmid M$. We have that \[ H \subset G \subset H_{\{\ell \le p\}} \times \prod_{\ell > p} \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell). \] To show that $H = G$, we need only verify \[ H = H_{\{\ell \le p\}} \times \prod_{\ell > p} \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell), \] but this follows immediately from Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}. \end{proof} We now complete the proof of Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} by proving Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}. \begin{proposition} \label{theorem:truncate} Let $g \geq 2$ and let $H \subset \Sp_{2g}(\widehat {\mathbb Z})$ be a closed subgroup. Suppose there is a prime number $p \ge 2$ so that $H(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$ for all $\ell > p$. Then we have that \begin{equation}\label{meanttofly} H = H_{\{\ell \le p\}} \times \prod_{\ell > p} \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell). \end{equation} \end{proposition} \subsubsection{Idea of Proof} The idea of the proof is to apply Goursat's Lemma to conclude that if the group surjects onto each factor, then it surjects onto the product. We verify the hypotheses of Goursat's Lemma, using Lemma~\ref{lemma:simple-quotients-of-symplectic-group}, and the fact that all simple quotients of $H_{\{\ell \leq p\}}$ have smaller order than $\PSp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ for $\ell > p$. \begin{proof} The case where $g = 1$ is handled by~\cite[Lemma 7.6]{zywina2010hilbert}, so take $g \geq 2$. By~\cite[Theorem 1]{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:lifting-symplectic-group}, the fact that $H(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$ implies that $H_\ell = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ for all $\ell > p$. The proposition follows upon applying Theorem~\ref{theorem:goursat} to the product $H_{\{\ell \le p\}} \times \prod_{\ell > p} \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$. However, to apply it, we must check that the sets $\quo(H_{\{\ell \le p\}})$ and $\quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell))$ for $\ell > p$ are all pairwise disjoint. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:simple-quotients-of-symplectic-group}, it suffices to show that $\quo(H_{\{\ell \le p\}}) \cap \quo(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)) = \varnothing$ for any fixed $\ell > p$. Our strategy for checking this condition is to bound the sizes of the groups appearing in $\quo(H_{\{\ell \le p\}})$. First, observe that \[ \quo(H_{\{\ell \le p\}}) \subset \occ\left( \prod_{\ell \le p} \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)\right) = \bigcup_{\ell \le p} \occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)), \] where the last step follows from the first displayed equation of~\cite[p.\ IV-25]{serre1989abelian}. But $ \occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)) = \occ(\Gamma_\ell) \cup \occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)) $, and $\occ(\Gamma_\ell) = \varnothing$ because $\Gamma_\ell$ is a pro-$\ell$ group, so $ \occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)) = \occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)) $. Because $\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$ is not simple, every element of $\occ(\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z))$ is bounded in size by $\|\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)\| / 2$, so every element of $\quo(H_{\{\ell \le p\}})$ is bounded in size by $\|\Sp_{2g}(\bz / p \mathbb Z)\| / 2$. Observing that \[ \frac{1}{2} \cdot \|\Sp_{2g}(\bz / p \bz)\| < \|\PSp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \bz)\| \] for every $\ell > p$, the desired condition follows by applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:simple-quotients-of-symplectic-group}. \end{proof} \subsection{Open Subgroups of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$} \label{subsection:open-subgroups} We now return to studying the general symplectic group $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. The main result of this subsection tells us that the closure of the commutator subgroup of an open subgroup of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ is open: \begin{proposition} \label{theorem:commutator-open} Let $g \geq 2$, and let $H \subset \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ be an open subgroup. Then the closure of $[H, H]$ is an open subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. \end{proposition} In order to prove Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}, we shall require a number of preliminary lemmas, which are stated and proven in Sections~\ref{sec1} and~\ref{sec2}. \subsubsection{Openness Condition}\label{sec1} The next two lemmas give us a criterion for openness in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$: \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:open-image-in-finite-set} Let $S$ be a finite set of prime numbers, and let $H \subset \prod_{\ell \in S} \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ be a closed subgroup. If each $H_\ell \subset \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ is open, then $H \subset \prod_{\ell \in S} \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ is open. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} There exists a finite-index subgroup $H' \subset H$ such that $H'(\ell)$ is trivial for every $\ell \in S$, namely the intersection of the kernels of the mod-$\ell$ reductions maps $H \to H(\ell)$. Since each $H'_\ell$ is a pro-$\ell$ group, Theorem~\ref{theorem:goursat} implies that $H' = \prod_{\ell \in S} H'_\ell$. Thus, $H$ contains an open subgroup and is therefore itself open. \end{proof} \begin{lemma} \label{theorem:adelic-open} Let $g \geq 2$ and let $H \subset \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ be a closed subgroup. If $H_{\ell'}$ is open in $\Sp_{2g}(\bz_{\ell'})$ for all $\ell'$ and $H_\ell = \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for all but finitely many $\ell$, then $H$ is open in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Let $p$ be the largest prime with $H_{p} \neq \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_{p})$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:open-image-in-finite-set}, we have that $H_{\{\ell \le p\}} \subset \prod_{\ell \le p} \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)$ is an open subgroup. The result then follows from Proposition~\ref{theorem:truncate}. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Two Computational Lemmas}\label{sec2} The next two results are used in the proof of Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}. The following lemma describes the commutator of an element of $\Gamma_{\ell^m}$ with an element of $\Gamma_{\ell^n}$. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:commutator-formula} Let $n\le m$ be positive integers, and let $\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n U$ and $\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^m V$ be elements of $\GL_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$. Then we have \begin{align} & (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^nU)^{-1}(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^mV)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n U)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^m V)^{-1} \equiv \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{n+m} (VU - UV)\,\,\, (\operatorname{mod}{\ell^{2n+m}}). \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} We have \begin{align} (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^mV)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n U)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^mV)^{-1} &= \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^mV)U(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^mV)^{-1} \\ &= \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^m V)U \left(\sum_{i=0}^\infty (-1)^i \ell^{im} V^i\right) \\ &= \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n \sum_{i=0}^\infty \Big[ (-1)^i \ell^{im} U V^i + (-1)^i \ell^{(i+1)m} VUV^i \Big]\\ &= \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^n U + \ell^{n+m} (VU - UV) (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^m V)^{-1}. \end{align} Multiplying on the left by $(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^nU)^{-1}$ gives the desired result. \end{proof} In the next proposition, we show the commutator subalgebra of $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$ is sufficiently large for all primes $\ell$. \begin{proposition}\label{stopdrop} We have the following results: \begin{enumerate} \item For all $g \geq 1$ and $\ell \geq 3$ we have $[\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z), \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)] = \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$. \item For all $g \geq 1$ we have $[\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 4 \mathbb Z), \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 4 \mathbb Z)] \supset 2 \cdot \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z / 2 \mathbb Z)$. \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Statement (a) follows immediately from~\cite[Theorem 2.6]{eliotsteinclub}, which states that $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$ is simple for $\ell \geq 3$. It remains to prove Statement (b). For this, we compute several commutators and make deductions based on each one. For convenience, let $\mathfrak{g} = [\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 4 \mathbb Z), \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 4 \mathbb Z)]$, let $A, D$ denote arbitrary $g \times g$ matrices, and let $B,C,E,F$ denote symmetric $g \times g$ matrices. \mbox{Since} \begin{align} \label{equation:block-diagonal-commutator} \left[ \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} A & 0 \\ \hline 0 & -A^T \end{array}\right], \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} D & 0 \\ \hline 0 & -D^T \end{array}\right] \right] & = \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} AD - DA & 0 \\ \hline 0 & A^TD^T - D^TA^T \end{array}\right], \intertext{all block-diagonal matrices in $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/4\mathbb Z)$ with every diagonal entry equal to $0$ are contained in $\mathfrak{g}$. This can be seen by taking $A$ and $D$ to be various elementary matrices. Furthermore,} \label{equation:block-off-diagonal-commutator} \left[ \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} 0 & B \\ \hline C & 0 \end{array}\right], \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} 0 & E \\ \hline F & 0 \end{array}\right] \right] & = \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} BF - EC & 0 \\ \hline 0 & CE - FB \end{array}\right], \intertext{so we can arrange that $BF-EC$ is an elementary matrix with a single nonzero entry on the diagonal. Summing matrices from~\eqref{equation:block-diagonal-commutator} and~\eqref{equation:block-off-diagonal-commutator} tells us that all block-diagonal matrices are contained in $\mathfrak{g}$. Additionally,} \label{equation:identity-commutator} \left[ \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} \on{id}_g & 0 \\ \hline 0 & -\on{id}_g \end{array}\right], \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} 0 & B \\ \hline 0 & 0 \end{array}\right] \right] & = \left[\begin{array}{c\|c} 0 & 2B \\ \hline 0 & 0 \end{array}\right]. \intertext{Repeating the computation from~\eqref{equation:identity-commutator} with the other off-diagonal block nonzero implies that $2$ times any matrix in $\mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z / 2 \mathbb Z)$ whose diagonal blocks are $0$ is an element of $\mathfrak{g}$. The desired result follows because $2 \cdot \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z)$ is contained in the subspace generated by the matrices from~\eqref{equation:block-diagonal-commutator},~\eqref{equation:block-off-diagonal-commutator}, and~\eqref{equation:identity-commutator}. \nonumber \qedhere} \end{align} \end{proof} \subsubsection{Completing the Proof} In order to prove Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}, we require the following lemma, which states that the closure of the commutator $[\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}]$ is large. \begin{lemma} \label{proposition:commutator-effective} Fix $k \geq 1$. Then if $\ell \neq 2$, the closure of $[\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}]$ contains $\Gamma_{\ell^{2k}}$ and if $\ell = 2$, the closure of $[\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}]$ contains $\Gamma_{\ell^{2k+1}}$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} First suppose $\ell \geq 3$. Statement (1) of Proposition~\ref{stopdrop} implies that for any $W' \in \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$, there exist $U', V' \in \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)$ so that $V'U' - U'V' = W'$. Choosing lifts $W, U, V$ of $W', U', V'$, it follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:commutator-formula} that for every $i$ and for every such \begin{align} \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{2k+i} W \in \Gamma_{\ell^{2k+i}}, \quad \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^k U \in \Gamma_{\ell^k}, \quad \text{ and} \quad \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{k+i} V \in \Gamma_{\ell^{k+i}}, \end{align} we have that \begin{align} & (\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^k U)^{-1}(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{k+i} V)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^k U)(\on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{k+i} V)^{-1} \equiv \on{id}_{2g} + \ell^{2k+i} W\,\,\, (\operatorname{mod}{\ell^{2k+i+1}}). \end{align} Take $M_0 \in \Gamma_{\ell^{2k}}$. There exists $X_1 \in [\Gamma_{\ell^{2k}}, \Gamma_{\ell^{2k}}]$ and $M_1 \in \Gamma_{\ell^{2k+1}}$ with the property that $M_0 = X_1M_1$. Proceeding inductively in this manner, we obtain sequences $\{X_i : i = 1, 2, \dots\} \subset [\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}]$ and $\{M_i : i = 0, 1, 2, \dots\}$ with $M_i \in \Gamma_{\ell^{2k+i}}$ such that $M_i = X_{i+1}M_{i+1}$ for each $i$. Then we have that $$M_0 = \lim_{i \to \infty} \left(\prod_{j = 1}^{i} X_j \right)M_i = \prod_{j = 1}^\infty X_j.$$ It follows that $\Gamma_{\ell^{2k}}$ is contained in the closure of $[\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}]$. Now suppose $\ell = 2$. Observe that for each $k \geq 2$ we have $$\on{id}_{2g} + 2^k \cdot \mathfrak{sp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 4 \mathbb Z) = \ker(\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 2^{k+2} \mathbb Z) \to \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ 2^k \mathbb Z)).$$ It follows from Statement (2) of Proposition~\ref{stopdrop} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:commutator-formula} that for every choice of $\on{id}_{2g} + 2^{2k+i+1} W \in \Gamma_{2^{2k+i+1}}$ and for each nonnegative integer $i$, there exist $\on{id}_{2g} + 2^k U \in \Gamma_{2^k}$ and $\on{id}_{2g} + 2^{k+i} V \in \Gamma_{2^{k+i}}$ with the property that \begin{align} & (\on{id}_{2g} + 2^k U)^{-1}(\on{id}_{2g} + 2^{k+i} V)(\on{id}_{2g} + 2^k U)(\on{id}_{2g} + 2^{k+i} V)^{-1} \equiv \on{id}_{2g} + 2^{2k+i+1} W\,\,\, (\operatorname{mod}{\ell^{2k+i+2}}). \end{align} One may now finish the proof by applying a similar inductive argument to the one used in the case $\ell \geq 3$. \end{proof} We are finally in position to prove the main result of this section. \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}] By Lemma~\ref{theorem:adelic-open}, it suffices to prove the following two statements: \begin{enumerate} \item The closure of $[H,H]$ surjects onto $\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for all but finitely many $\ell$. \item The closure of $[H,H]$ maps onto an open subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for each $\ell$. \end{enumerate} For Statement (a), notice that $H$ surjects onto $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for all but finitely many $\ell$. Note that for $\ell \geq 3$, we have $[\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell), \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)] = \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ because, by~\cite[Proposition 3]{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:lifting-symplectic-group}, we have that $$\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell) = [\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell), \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z_\ell)] \subset [\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell), \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)] \subset \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell).$$ Thus, $[H,H]$ itself surjects onto $[\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell), \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)] = \Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for all $\ell \geq 3$. To show statement (b), we prove that the closure of $[H', H']$ is open in $\Sp_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$ for any open subgroup $H' \subset \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$. Since $H'$ is open, there exists some $k \geq 1$ such that $\Gamma_{\ell^k} \subset H'$, so by Lemma~\ref{proposition:commutator-effective}, there exists $m \geq 2k$ such that $\Gamma_{\ell^m} \subset [\Gamma_{\ell^k}, \Gamma_{\ell^k}] \subset [H', H']$. Thus, $[H', H']$ contains an open subgroup and must therefore itself be open, as desired. \end{proof} \section{Introduction and Statement of Results} \label{section:introduction} \subsection{Background} One of the most significant breakthroughs in the theory of Galois representations came in 1972, when Serre proved the Open Image Theorem for elliptic curves in his seminal paper~\cite{causalrelationship}. Serre's theorem states that for any elliptic curve $E$ over a number field $K$ without complex multiplication, the image of the associated \emph{adelic} Galois representation $\rho_E$ is an open subgroup of the general symplectic group $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. The Open Image Theorem not only gives rise to many important \mbox{corollaries --} from the simple consequence that the image of $\rho_E$ has finite index in $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$, to the intriguing result that the density of supersingular primes of $E$ is $0$ -- but recently, within the past two decades, the theorem has also inspired a body of research concerning the following question: \begin{question} How large can the image of the adelic Galois representation associated to an elliptic curve be, and how often do elliptic curves attain this largest possible Galois image? \end{question} The first major result addressing the above question was achieved by Duke in~\cite{duke:elliptic-curves-with-no-exceptional-primes}. He proved that for ``most'' elliptic curves $E$ over $\mathbb Q$ in the standard family with Weierstrass equation $y^2 = x^3 + ax + b$, the image of the \emph{mod-$\ell$ reduction} of $\rho_E$ is all of $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$ for every prime number $\ell$; here and in what follows, ``most'' means a density-$1$ subset of curves ordered by na\"{i}ve height. Duke's result does not imply, however, that $\rho_E$ surjects onto $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ for most $E$. In fact, as Serre observes in~\cite{causalrelationship}, the image of $\rho_E$ has index divisible by $2$ in $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ for every elliptic curve $E/\mathbb Q$. Nonetheless, Jones proves in~\cite[Theorem 4]{josofabank} that most elliptic curves $E$ in the standard family over $\mathbb Q$ have \emph{adelic} Galois representations with image as large as possible (i.e., with index $2$ in $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$). The obstruction to having surjective adelic Galois representation faced by elliptic curves over $\mathbb Q$ does not occur over other number fields. In~\cite[Theorem 1.5]{greasy}, Greicius constructed the first explicit example of an elliptic curve over a number field with Galois image equal to all of $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. Greicius' example is not the only elliptic curve with this property: in~\cite[Theorem 1.2]{zywina2010elliptic}, Zywina employs the above result of Jones to show that most elliptic curves in the standard family over a number field $K \neq \mathbb Q$ have Galois image equal to all of $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ as long as $K \cap \mathbb Q^{\cyc} = \mathbb Q$, where $\mathbb Q^{\cyc}$ is the maximal cyclotomic extension of $\mathbb Q$. Subsequently, in~\cite[Theorem 1.15]{zywina2010hilbert}, Zywina achieves an intriguing generalization of this result: using a variant of Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem, he shows that most members of \emph{every} non-isotrivial rational family of elliptic curves over \emph{any} number field have Galois image as large as possible given the constraints imposed by the arithmetic and geometric properties of the family. Further results over $\mathbb Q$ were obtained in~\cite{grant:a-formula-for-the-number-of-elliptic-curves-with-exceptional-primes},~\cite{cojocaruH:uniform-results-for-serres-theorem-for-elliptic-curves}, and~\cite{cojocaruGJ:one-parameter-families-of-elliptic-curves} (see~\cite[p.~6]{zywina2010hilbert} for a more detailed overview). Given that the above question is so well-studied in the context of elliptic curves, it is natural to wonder whether any of the aforementioned theorems extend to abelian varieties of higher dimension. There are several results showing that ``most'' closed points have Galois representation which has finite index inside the Galois representation of the family: In \cite{cadoret2015open}, (see also \cite{cadoret2015integral},) the author shows that the set of $K$-points whose Galois image does not have finite index in the Galois image of the family is a thin set. Further, in \cite{cadoretuniform-i} and \cite{cadoretuniform-ii}, the authors show that when the base of the family is a curve, the set of $K$-points (and more generally closed points of bounded degree) failing to have finite index is a finite set. Moreover, explicit examples of curves whose Jacobians have maximal Galois image have been constructed: it follows from the results of~\cite{dooleyfat} and~\cite{zywina2010elliptic} that one can algorithmically write down equations of abelian surfaces and three-folds over $\mathbb Q$ with Galois image as large as possible. However, we are not aware of any results in the literature describing the density of higher-dimensional abelian varieties whose adelic Galois representations \mbox{have maximal image,} and not only Galois image of finite index. \subsection{Main Result}\label{weaintevergonnaberoyals} The primary objective of this article is to prove that an analogue of Zywina's result for rational families of elliptic curves in~\cite[Theorem 1.15]{zywina2010hilbert} holds for abelian varieties of arbitrary dimension, subject to a mild hypothesis on the \emph{monodromy} (i.e., Galois image) of the family under consideration. Before stating our theorems, we must establish some of the requisite notation; we expatiate upon this and other important background material in Section~\ref{subsection:setup}, where precise definitions are provided. Let $K$ be a number field with fixed algebraic closure $\overline{K}$, let $U \subset \mathbb P^r_K$ be a dense open subscheme, and let $A \rightarrow U$ be a family of $g$-dimensional principally polarized abelian varieties (henceforth, PPAVs). Let $H_A \subset \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ be the monodromy of the family and let $H_{A_u} \subset H_A$ be the monodromy of the fiber $A_u$ over $u \in U$. Finally, to facilitate our enumeration of PPAVs, let $\operatorname{Ht}\colon\mathbb P^r(\overline K) \rightarrow \mathbb R_{>0}$ denote the absolute multiplicative height on projective space,\footnote{See~\cite[Section B.2, p.~174]{afraidofheights} for the definition.} and define a height function $\\| - \\|$ on the lattice $\mathcal O^r_K$ sending $\left( t_1, \ldots, t_n \right) \mapsto \max_{\sigma,i}\|\sigma(t_i)\|$, where $\sigma$ varies over all field embeddings $\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \mathbb C$. Our main result is stated as follows: \begin{theorem} \label{theorem:main} Let $B, n > 0$, and suppose that the rational family $A \to U$ is non-isotrivial and has big monodromy, meaning that $H_A$ is open in $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. Let $\delta_\mathbb Q$ be the index of the closure of the commutator subgroup of $H_A$ in $H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$, and let $\delta_K = 1$ for $K \neq \mathbb Q$. Then $[H_A : H_{A_u}] \geq \delta_K$ for all $u \in U(K)$, and we have the following asymptotic statements: \[ \frac{\|\{u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}_K^r : \lVert u \rVert \le B,\, [H_A : H_{A_u}] = \delta_K\}\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}_K^r : \lVert u \rVert \le B\}\|} = 1 + O((\log B)^{-n}), \text{ and} \] \[ \frac{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \leq B,\, [H_A : H_{A_u}] = \delta_K\}\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} = 1 + O((\log B)^{-n}), \] where the implied constants depend only on $A \to U$ and $n$. \end{theorem} \begin{remark}\label{remkydoo} Notice that Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} holds trivially in dimension $0$. In~\cite[Theorem 1.15]{zywina2010hilbert}, where the $1$-dimensional case of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} is treated, Zywina bounds the error more sharply, by $O( (\log B)B^{-1/2} )$ as opposed to our bound of $O( (\log B)^{-n} )$. In what follows, we shall primarily restrict ourselves to the case where the dimension $g$ is at least $2$. \end{remark} \begin{remark} In~\cite{scoopdedoo}, Wallace studies a variant of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} in the $2$-dimensional case.~Unfortunately, his argument relies upon a mistaken Masser-W\"{u}stholz-type result of Kawamura,~\cite[Main Theorem 2]{ifyouseekamy}. Although Wallace describes in~\cite[p.~468]{scoopdedoo} how to correct some of the errors in Kawamura's proof, the modified argument still appears to be mistaken; see~\cite[p.~27]{lombardoGL2type} for a description of one error in Kawamura's argument that Wallace does not adequately address. Using the result stated in Appendix~\ref{lombardstreet}, written by Davide Lombardo, we are able to patch this error in Wallace's argument. \end{remark} \begin{remark} \label{remark:} The locus of $u \in U(K)$ with $[H_A : H_{A_u}] > \delta_K$ will not in general be Zariski-closed, so the ``sparseness'' of this locus can only be quantified by an asymptotic statement. To see why, consider the family of elliptic curves over $K$ given by \mbox{the Weierstrass equations} $y^2 = x^3 + x + a$ for $a \in K$. Note that the mod-$2$ reduction of the monodromy is nontrivial for the family but is trivial for infinitely many members of the family, namely those for which the defining polynomial $x^3 + x + a$ factors completely over $K$. \end{remark} We now outline the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem is the prototype for results like Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}, but it only applies in the setting of finite groups. Indeed, the phenomenon that Galois representations associated to elliptic curves over $\bq$ \emph{never} surject onto $\operatorname{GSp}_2(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ shows that Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem cannot hold for infinite groups. However, when $A \to U$ has \emph{big monodromy}, in the sense that $H_A$ is open in $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$, the problem is essentially reduced to showing that, for most $u \in U(K)$, the mod-$\ell$ reduction of $H_{A_u}$ contains $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / \ell \bz)$ for each sufficiently large prime $\ell$. This reduction uses an infinite version of Goursat's lemma. Since these mod-$\ell$ reductions are \emph{finite} groups, the na\"{i}ve expectation is that Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem can be applied once for each $\ell$. Unfortunately, the sum of the resulting error terms does not \emph{a priori} converge to zero. To overcome this problem, we divide the primes $\ell$ into three regions. \begin{enumerate} \item We handle all sufficiently large primes by means of a delicate argument involving the large sieve that allows us to apply a recent result of Lombardo (namely,~\cite[Theorem 1.2]{lombardo2015explicit} and Proposition~\ref{prop:Main}). \item For the smaller primes, Wallace's effective version of the Hilbert Irreducibility Theorem gives sufficiently good error terms. His approach is to complete $\phi: U \to \spec K$ to a map $\widetilde{\phi} : \mathcal{U} \to \spec \mathcal{O}_K$ (see Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}), and then to apply the large sieve using information gleaned from the special fibers of $\widetilde{\phi}$. To ensure that the monodromy maps associated to special fibers of $\widetilde{\phi}$ capture enough information about the monodromy of the whole family, we assume the family is non-isotrivial and has big monodromy. Our main contribution to this step is an application of the Grothendieck Specialization Theorem, which shows that Wallace's Property~\ref{property-a2}---concerning the relation between the monodromy maps associated to a geometric \emph{special} fiber and to a geometric \emph{generic} fiber---holds in a very general setting. \item Lastly, to handle the finitely many primes that remain, the Cohen-Serre version of the Hilbert Irreducibility Theorem suffices. \end{enumerate} We encourage the reader to refer to Section~\ref{subsection:outline} for a more detailed discussion of the intricate arguments outlined above. \subsection{Applications} We record a number of interesting applications of our main result. These and several further applications are stated and proven in Theorem~\ref{corollary:examples}. \begin{theorem}[Abbreviation of Theorem~\protect{\ref{corollary:examples}}] \label{corollary:abbreviated-examples} Let $\ag$ denote the moduli stack of $g$-dimensional PPAVs, suppose $A \to U$ is a rational family, and let $V$ be the smallest locally closed substack of $\ag$ through which $U \rightarrow \ag$ factors. The conclusion of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} holds if $V$ is normal and contains a dense open substack of any of the following loci: \begin{enumerate} \item the substack of Jacobians of hyperelliptic curves, or \item the substack of Jacobians of trigonal curves, or \item the substack of Jacobians of plane curves of degree $d$ (see \autoref{remark:locus-of-plane-curves} for a more precise description of this substack), or \item the substack of Jacobians of all curves in $\mg$, or \item the moduli stack $\ag$. \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} Theorem~\ref{corollary:abbreviated-examples} has the following noteworthy corollary: \begin{corollary} \label{corollary:infinitely-many-maximal-image} For every $g > 2$, there exist infinitely many PPAVs $A$ over $\mathbb Q$ with the property that $\rho_A(G_\mathbb Q) = \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} Let $\trigonal g(g\bmod 2) \subset \ag$ denote the locus of trigonal curves over $\mathbb Q$ of lowest Maroni invariant (as defined at the beginning of Section~\ref{androidbeatsios}). We have that $\trigonal g(g\bmod 2)$ is rational and normal when $g > 2$ (by Theorem~\ref{corollary:examples}~\ref{big-maroni}) and has monodromy equal to all of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ when $g > 2$ (by Remark~\ref{remark:mmmm}). Since $\trigonal g(g\bmod 2)$ is a dense open substack of the locus Jacobians of trigonal curves, Theorem~\ref{corollary:abbreviated-examples} implies that \mbox{Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} applies to $\trigonal g(g\bmod 2)$.\qedhere} \end{proof} \begin{remark} The above proof of Corollary~\ref{corollary:infinitely-many-maximal-image} is not constructive. For explicit examples of $1$-, $2$-, and $3$-dimensional PPAVs with maximal adelic Galois representations, see~\cite[Theorem 1.5]{greasy} and ~\cite[Sections 5.5.6-8]{causalrelationship},~\cite{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:hyperelliptic-curves}, \mbox{and~\cite[Theorem 1.1]{seaweed}, respectively.} \end{remark} We conclude this section with a representative example, which has incidentally enjoyed significant discussion in the literature. \begin{example} \label{example:} In this example, we take our family to be the Hilbert scheme $\mathscr H_4$ of plane curves of degree $4$ over $\mathbb Q$. There is quite a bit of earlier work concerning Galois representations associated to Jacobians of such curves. For instance, a single example of a plane quartic such that the adelic Galois representation associated to its Jacobian has image equal to $\operatorname{GSp}_6(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$ is given in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{seaweed}. In \cite[Corollary 1.1]{anni2016residual}, an example of a genus-$3$ hyperelliptic curve whose Jacobian has mod-$\ell$ monodromy equal to $\operatorname{GSp}_6(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$ for primes $\ell \geq 3$ is constructed. For any $\ell \geq 13$,~\cite[Theorem 0.1]{arias2015large} gives an infinite family of $3$-dimensional PPAVs with mod-$\ell$ monodromy equal to $\operatorname{GSp}_6(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$. All of these existence statements are subsumed by the main results of the present article: indeed, from Remark~\ref{remark:mmmm} and Theorem~\ref{corollary:abbreviated-examples}, we obtain the considerably stronger statement that a density-$1$ subset of this family has Galois representation with image equal to $\operatorname{GSp}_6(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. \end{example} The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{gorilla}, we define the symplectic group and prove properties concerning its open and closed subgroups. In Section~\ref{section:background}, we introduce the basic definitions and properties associated to Galois representations of abelian varieties and families thereof. These definitions and properties are used heavily in Section~\ref{section:new-proof-of-main-theorem}, which is devoted to proving the main theorem of this article, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. In Section~\ref{iknewyouweretrouble}, we show that Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} can be applied to study many interesting families of PPAVs, and in so doing, we prove a result that implies Theorem~\ref{corollary:abbreviated-examples}. Finally, in Appendix~\ref{lombardstreet}, Davide Lombardo proves a key input that we employ in Section~\ref{section:new-proof-of-main-theorem} to handle the genus-$2$ case of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. \section{Proof of the Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}} \label{section:new-proof-of-main-theorem} \def1.3{0.7} \subsection{Outline of the Proof} \label{subsection:outline} With the view of making the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} more readily comprehensible, we now briefly describe the key aspects of the argument. We encourage the reader to refer to Figure~\ref{figure:proof-schematic} for a schematic diagram illustrating the argument. We begin in Section~\ref{subsection:big-geometric-monodromy-equivalence} by proving Proposition~\ref{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction}, showing that a non-isotrivial family with big monodromy also has big geometric monodromy. Then, in Section~\ref{toomanynotes}, we introduce some of the notation and standing assumptions employed in the proof. In particular, since our family has big geometric monodromy, by Proposition~\ref{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction}, we are able to define the constant $C$ in point (b) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes}, which will later be needed to apply the results of \cite{scoopdedoo} (see Section~\ref{subsubsection:setup-and-statement-of-wallace}). Then, in Section~\ref{attheskyfall}, we reduce the problem to checking that most members of the family have the same the mod-$M'$ image and, for all sufficiently large primes $\ell$, the same mod-$\ell$ image as that of the family, where $M'$ is an appropriately chosen integer depending on the family. The mod-$M'$ image is dealt with in Section~\ref{subsection:cohen-serre} using Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre}, which is the Cohen-Serre version of the Hilbert Irreducibility Theorem. For dealing with the mod-$\ell$ images, there are two regimes of primes to consider, a medium regime and a high regime, when $\ell$ is bigger than a suitable power of $\log B$. We handle with both of these regimes in Section~\ref{subsection:applying-wallace} by applying a result of Wallace, \cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}, for which we must verify the following four conditions:~\ref{assumption-4},~\ref{property-a1},~\ref{property-a2}, and~\ref{property-a3}. The rest of the section is devoted to verifying that these conditions hold in our setting. Conditions~\ref{assumption-4} and~\ref{property-a1}, which are fairly easy to check, are treated in Sections~\ref{subsection:applying-wallace} and~\ref{ver1}. Next, condition~\ref{property-a2} is dealt with in Section~\ref{ver2} by applying the Grothendieck Specialization Theorem in Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-B}. These first three conditions together essentially yield an effective version of the Hilbert Irreducibility Theorem, which allows us to check primes $\ell$ in the medium regime. Finally, in Section~\ref{ver3}, we verify condition~\ref{property-a3}, which allows us to dispense with primes in the high regime. The key input to checking this condition is a recent result of Lombardo, stated in Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo}. In order to apply Lombardo's result to our setting, as is done in Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-C}, we must verify two hypotheses and relate the na\"{i}ve height we are using to the Faltings height used in Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo}. The first hypothesis is verified in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-1} using \cite[Proposition 5]{ellenbergEHK:non-simple-abelian-varieties-in-a-family}. The second hypothesis is a somewhat trickier condition, and we verify it in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-2} using the large sieve, Theorem~\ref{theorem:large-sieve}. In order to apply the large sieve, we must bound contributions at each prime, which is done in Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-v} using a general scheme-theoretic result of Ekedahl~\cite[Lemma 1.2]{ekedahl1988effective} together with Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}. We conclude the section with a brief appendix concerning the relationship between the na\"{i}ve height and the Faltings height (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:height}). \begin{figure} \centering \begin{equation} \nonumber \begin{tikzpicture}[baseline= (a).base] \node[scale=.8] (a) at (0,0){ \begin{tikzcd}[column sep=tiny] \qquad && & \text{Prop.}\nolink{~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre}} \ar{ddl}[swap]{\begin{array}{c}\text{Cohen-Serre,}\\ \text{\nolink{\cite[Thm. 1.2]{zywina2010hilbert}}}\end{array}} & & \text{Lem.}\nolink{~\ref{lemma:height}} \ar{ldd} & \text{Lem.\nolink{~\ref{lemma: height-0}}} \ar{l} && \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{proposition:good-cover}}} \ar{ldd}\ar{dddd}{\text{\nolink{\cite[Lem. 1.2]{ekedahl1988effective}}}} \\ \\ \qquad \text{Thm.\nolink{~\ref{theorem:main}}} && \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc}}} \ar{ll} & & \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{proposition:check-C}}} \ar{ddl}{\text{Cond.\nolink{~\ref{property-a3}}}} & & \text{Lem.\nolink{~\ref{lemma:davide-2}}} \ar{ll}[swap]{\text{Thm.\nolink{~\ref{theorem:lombardo}}\hspace{.1cm}(2)}} & \text{Lem.\nolink{~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction}}} \ar{l} & \\ \qquad && & & & & & \\ \qquad && & \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace}}}\ar{uul}{\text{\nolink{\cite[Thm. 4.3]{scoopdedoo}}}} && \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{proposition:check-B}}} \ar{ll}{\text{Cond.\nolink{~\ref{property-a2}}}} & \text{Lem.\nolink{~\ref{lemma:davide-1}}} \ar{uull}[swap]{\text{Thm.\nolink{~\ref{theorem:lombardo}}\hspace{.1cm}(1)}} & & \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{proposition:good-v}}} \ar{uul} \\ &&& & && \\ \qquad && & & \text{Prop.\nolink{~\ref{proposition:verifying-assumptions}}} \ar{uul}{\text{Cond.\nolink{~\ref{assumption-4}}}} & & & \end{tikzcd} }; \end{tikzpicture} \end{equation} \caption{ A schematic diagram for the proof of the main theorem, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}.} \label{figure:proof-schematic} \end{figure} \def1.3{1.3} \subsection{Equivalence of Big Geometric Monodromy and Big Monodromy} \label{subsection:big-geometric-monodromy-equivalence} In the course of the proof, it will be useful to know that our given family $A \rightarrow U$ not only has big monodromy, but also has big geometric monodromy. In particular, this is crucially needed to define the constant $C$ in point $(b)$ of Section~\ref{toomanynotes}, which is used in applying the results of~\cite{scoopdedoo} (see Section~\ref{subsubsection:setup-and-statement-of-wallace}). We now prove the following result, implying that our given family has big geometric monodromy. \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction} Suppose $A \rightarrow U$ is a non-isotrivial family of abelian varieties, with $U$ an open subscheme $\mathbb P^r_K$, for $K$ a number field. Then, $A$ has big geometric monodromy if and only if it has big monodromy. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} We first show the easier direction: if the family $A \to U$ has big geometric monodromy then $A \to U$ also has big monodromy, in the sense that $H_A$ is open in $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. To see this, consider the exact sequence \[ \begin{tikzcd} 0 \ar{r} & \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) \ar{r} & \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) \ar{r}{\operatorname{mult}} & \wh{\bz}^\times \ar{r} & 0. \end{tikzcd} \] Since $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}} \subset H_A$, the big geometric monodromy assumption tells us that $H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ is open in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. It therefore suffices to show that $\operatorname{mult}(H_A)$ is open in $\wh{\bz}^\times$. But $\operatorname{mult}(H_A) = \chi(G_K)$, as mentioned in Remark~\ref{remark:det-rho-is-chi}, and $\chi(G_K)$ has finite index because $K/\mathbb Q$ \mbox{has finite degree.} It only remains to prove that if the family has big monodromy and is non-isotrivial, it has big geometric monodromy. To complete the proof, we first reduce to the case that $U \subset \mathbb P^1_K$. For this reduction, choose a line $L \subset \mathbb P^r_K$ so that $U \cap L$ is non-isotrivial, and replace $U$ by $U \cap L$. It suffices to prove that $A \times_U (U \cap L) \rightarrow U \cap L$ has big geometric monodromy, so we may assume $U \subset \mathbb P^1_K$. Now, define $G \defeq \bigcup_{g \in \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})/H_A} g H_A^{\operatorname{geom}} g^{-1}$, where $g$ ranges over coset representatives of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})/H_A$, which is a finite set by assumption. We claim that $G \subset \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ is a normal subgroup. To see this claim, it follows from the exact sequence \begin{equation} \nonumber \begin{tikzcd} 1 \ar {r} & \pi_1(U_{\overline K}) \ar {r} & \pi_1(U) \ar {r} & \pi_1(K) \ar {r} & 1 \end{tikzcd}\end{equation} that $\pi_1(U_{\overline K}) \subset \pi_1(U)$ is normal, and hence $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}} \subset H_A$ is normal. Therefore, by construction, $G$ is normal as a subgroup of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$, hence normal as a subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. Since $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ has finite index in $G$, it suffices to prove that $G$ has finite index in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. Let $Q \defeq \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) / G$ and let $\phi\colon \Sp_{2g}(\bz) \rightarrow Q$ denote the composition of the completion map $\Sp_{2g}(\bz) \rightarrow \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$ with the reduction $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) \rightarrow Q$. Let $M_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ denote the image of the topological monodromy representation $\pi_1^{\operatorname{top}}(U_{\bc}) \rightarrow \Sp_{2g}(\bz)$. Since we are assuming $U$ is an open subscheme of $\mathbb P^1$, we have $\pi_1(U_{\bc}) \simeq \pi_1(U_{\overline K})$, so the comparison theorem tells us that $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is the completion of $M_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$. This situation is summarized by the diagram \begin{equation} \nonumber \begin{tikzcd} M_A^{\operatorname{geom}} \ar{d} \ar {r} & \ker(\phi) \ar {r} \ar {d} & \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z) \ar{d}\ar{dr}{\phi} & \\ H_A^{\operatorname{geom}} \ar {r} & G \ar {r} & \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) \ar {r} & Q. \end{tikzcd}\end{equation} Assume for the sake of contradiction that $G$ does not have finite index in $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$. To complete the proof, it suffices to show that $A \rightarrow U$ is isotrivial. Since $G$ does not have finite index, $Q$ is infinite, and hence $\ker \phi$ is a normal subgroup of infinite index in $\Sp_{2g}(\bz)$. By the Margulis normal subgroup theorem \cite[Chapter IV, Theorem 4.9]{margulis:discrete-subgroups}, all normal subgroups of $\Sp_{2g}(\bz)$ are either contained in the center or have finite index. Since we are assuming $\ker \phi$ has infinite index, it is contained in the center, which is $\pm 1$. Therefore, $M_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is also contained in $\pm 1$, which implies its completion, $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$, is also contained in $\pm 1$. We now show that if $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is finite, then $A$ is isotrivial. After a making a finite base change, we may assume $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}$ is trivial. Then, it is a standard fact that $A$ is isotrivial when its monodromy representation is trivial. For example, this follows from \cite{grothendieck:un-theoreme-sur-les-homomorphismes}. \end{proof} \subsection{Notation and Standing Assumptions}\label{toomanynotes} Before proceeding with the proof, we set some notation and assumptions, which will remain in place for the remainder of this section. \begin{enumerate} \item As mentioned in Remark~\ref{remkydoo}, the genus-$1$ case is handled in~\cite[Theorem 7.1]{zywina2010hilbert}, so we will restrict our consideration to the case where $g \geq 2$. \item Since we are assuming that $A \to U$ has big monodromy, it follows that $A \to U$ has big geometric monodromy, by Proposition~\ref{proposition:big-geometric-monodromy-reduction}. Define $C$ to be the smallest integer bigger than $2$, depending only on $U$, with the property that for all primes $\ell > C$ we have $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$ and $H_A(\ell) = \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$. \item Using \cite[Proposition 6.1]{zywina2010hilbert} and the explanation given after the statement of \cite[Theorem 7.1]{zywina2010hilbert}, one readily checks that in Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}, the asymptotic statement for $K$-valued points (i.e., points in $U(K)$) can be deduced immediately from the statement for \emph{lattice points} (i.e., points in $U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r$). In what follows, we will work with $K$-valued points or lattice points depending on what is most convenient. \item Let $K^{\operatorname{cyc}} \subset \overline{K}$ denote the maximal cyclotomic extension of $K$, and let $K^{\ab} \subset \overline{K}$ denote the maximal abelian extension of $K$. \item In what follows, for a subgroup $H$ of a topological group $G$, let $[H,H]$ denote the \emph{closure} of the usual commutator subgroup. \end{enumerate} \subsection{Main Body of the Proof} \label{attheskyfall} We begin by reducing the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} to proving Proposition~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc}. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} assuming Proposition~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc}] As argued in~\cite[Proof of Theorem 7.1]{zywina2010hilbert}, for any $u \in U(K)$ we have \begin{align} [H_A :H_{A_u}] & = [H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z}) : \rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline{K}/K^{\operatorname{cyc}}))]. \intertext{In the case that $K = \mathbb Q$, the Kronecker-Weber Theorem tells us that $\bq^{\cyc} = \bq^{\ab}$, so we have} [H_A : H_{A_u}] & = \delta_{\mathbb Q} \cdot [[H_A, H_A] : \rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline{\bq}/\bq^{\ab}))], \end{align} where $\delta_{\mathbb Q}$ is the index of $[H_A, H_A]$ in $H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$. Then Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} follows immediately from point (c) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes} and the following proposition. \end{proof} \begin{proposition}\label{lemma:ab-cyc} Let $B, n > 0$. We have the following asymptotic statements, where the implied constants depend only on $U$ and $n$: \begin{enumerate} \item[\customlabel{asymptotic-commutator}{(1)}] For every number field $K$, \[ \frac{ \|\{ u\in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K: \lVert u \rVert \le B,\, \rho_{A_u}(\operatorname{Gal}(\overline{K} / K^{\operatorname{ab}})) = [H_A, H_A] \}\| }{ \|\{ u\in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K: \lVert u \rVert \le B \}\| } = 1 + O(( \log B )^{-n}). \] \item[\customlabel{asymptotic-symplectic}{(2)}] Furthermore, if $K \neq \bq$, \[ \frac{ \|\{ u\in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K: \lVert u \rVert \le B,\, \rho_{A_u}(\operatorname{Gal}(\overline{K} / K^{\operatorname{cyc}})) = H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz}) \}\| }{ \|\{ u\in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K: \lVert u \rVert \le B \}\| } = 1 + O(( \log B )^{-n}). \] \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{remark} Proposition~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc} is a generalization of~\cite[Proposition 7.9]{zywina2010hilbert} from the case $g = 1$ to all dimensions. We shall prove it assuming Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre} and Proposition~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace}. The basic idea behind the argument is to reduce the problem of studying the (global) monodromy groups to one of studying the mod-$M'$ and mod-$\ell$ monodromy groups. \end{remark} \begin{proof}[Proof assuming Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre} and Proposition~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace}] Assuming point (1), the proof of point (2) is completely analogous to the proof of~\cite[Proposition 7.9(ii)]{zywina2010hilbert}, which consists of two key steps. The first is the fact that $[H_A, H_A]$ is an open normal subgroup of $H_A \cap \Sp_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$, which follows from Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}. The second is~\cite[Proposition 7.7]{zywina2010hilbert}, which is a variant of Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem and does not depend in any way on the context of elliptic curves (with which~\cite[Section 7]{zywina2010hilbert} is concerned). It therefore suffices to prove point (1). Since $\Gal(\overline{K}/K^{\ab}) = [G_K, G_K]$, it follows by the continuity of $\rho_{A_u}$ and the compactness of profinite groups that $\rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab})) = [H_{A_u}, H_{A_u}]$. Thus $\rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab}))$ is a closed subgroup of $\left[H_A, H_A \right]$. Moreover, by Proposition~\ref{theorem:commutator-open}, $[ H_A, H_A ]$ is an open subgroup of $\Sp_{2g}(\wh{\bz})$, so we may apply Proposition~\ref{theorem:adelic-surjective-subset} with $G = [ H_A, H_A ]$ and $H = \rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab}))$. In so doing, we obtain a positive integer $M$ so that the only closed subgroup of $[H_A, H_A]$ whose mod-$M$ reduction equals $[H_A, H_A](M) = [H_A(M), H_A(M)]$ and whose mod-$\ell$ reduction equals $\Sp_{2g}(\bz/\ell \mathbb Z)$ for every prime number $\ell \nmid M$ is $[H_A, H_A]$ itself. The same property is true when $M$ is replaced by any multiple $M'$ of $M$, and we choose a multiple $M'$ which is divisible by all primes less than $C$, where $C$ is defined as in point (b) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes}. The defining property of $M'$ then implies that \begin{align} & \frac{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B,\, \rho_{A_u}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab})) \neq [ H_A, H_A ] \}\|}{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B \} \|} \leq \nonumber \\ & \qquad \frac{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B,\, \rho_{A_u, M'}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab})) \neq [ H_A(M'), H_A(M') ] \}\|}{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B \} \|}\,\,+ \raisetag{-0.6cm}{\label{equation:goursat-m-bound}}\\ & \qquad \frac{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B,\, \rho_{A_u, \ell}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab})) \neq \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z) \text{ for some } \ell \nmid M' \}\|}{\|\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B \} \|} \raisetag{-0.6cm}{\label{equation:goursat-l-bound}}. \end{align} The rest of this section is devoted to finding upper bounds for~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound} and~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound}. To bound~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound}, notice that we have $$\rho_{A_u, M'}(\Gal(\overline K/K^{\ab})) \neq [H_A(M'), H_A(M')] \Longrightarrow H_{A_u}(M') \neq H_A(M').$$ It then follows from Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre} that~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound} is bounded by $O( (\log B)/B^{\left[ K:\mathbb Q \right]/2} )$. To bound~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound}, notice that for $\ell \geq 3$ we have $$\rho_{A_u, \ell}(\Gal(\overline{K}/K^{\ab})) \neq \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z) \Longrightarrow H_{A_u}(\ell) \not\supset \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z) ,$$ because~\cite[Proposition 3(a)]{landesman-swaminathan-tao-xu:lifting-symplectic-group} tells us that $\Sp_{2g}(\bz /\ell \mathbb Z)$ has trivial abelianization for $\ell \ge 3$. Since $C \geq 3$ by definition, it follows from Proposition~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace} that~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound} is $O(( \log B )^{-n} )$, since $\ell \nmid M'$ implies that $\ell > C$. Combining the above estimates completes the proof of point (1). \end{proof} It now remains to bound the terms~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound} and~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound}. \subsection{Bounding the Contribution of~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound}} \label{subsection:cohen-serre} The next result is the means by which we bound~\eqref{equation:goursat-m-bound}; it is an immediate corollary of the Cohen-Serre version of Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem (see~\cite[Theorem 1.2]{zywina2010hilbert}) since the set in the numerator of~\eqref{equation:cohen-serre} is a ``thin set.'' \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:applying-cohen-serre} For every integer $M' \ge 2$, we have \begin{align} \label{equation:cohen-serre} \frac{\|\{u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K : \lVert u \rVert \le B,\, H_{A_u}(M') \neq H_A(M') \} \|}{ \|\{ u\in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}^r_K: \lVert u \rVert \le B \}\| } \ll \frac{ \log B}{B^{[K:\bq]/2}}, \end{align} where the implied constant depends only in $U$ and $M'$. \end{proposition} \subsection{Bounding the Contribution of~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound}} \label{subsection:applying-wallace} To complete the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}, it remains to bound~\eqref{equation:goursat-l-bound}. We do this in Proposition~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace}, which relies on a strong version of Hilbert's Irreducibility Theorem due to Wallace, namely~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}. Before we can state and apply Wallace's result, we must introduce the various conditions upon which it depends. The setup detailed in~\cite[Section 3.2]{scoopdedoo} applies in a more general context than the one described below, but we specialize our discussion for the sake of brevity. \subsubsection{Setup and Statement of~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}} \label{subsubsection:setup-and-statement-of-wallace} We start by introducing some notation to help us count points $u \in U(K)$ whose associated monodromy groups $H_{A_u}$ are not maximal. Let $B > 0$, and make the following two definitions: \begin{align} E_\ell(B) & \defeq \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B,\, H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) \not\subset H_u(\ell) \}, \text{ and}\\ E(B) &\defeq \bigcup_{\text{ prime }\ell > C} E_{\ell}(B), \end{align} where $C$ is defined as in point (b) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes}. Note in particular that for any $\ell > C$ we have $H_A(\ell) / H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) \simeq (\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)^\times$; this condition is important for the proof of~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo} to go through, so we impose the following restriction: \vspace{0.1cm} \begin{align}\label{thatswhatpeoplesay} \text{\emph{For the rest of this section, we will maintain $\ell > C$ as a standing assumption.}} \end{align} For ease of notation, we redefine the set $S \subset \Sigma_K$ of ``bad'' primes, defined in Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}, by adjoining to it all primes $\ell < C$. \begin{remark}\label{thanksdavide} Note that our definition of $E(B)$ differs slightly from that given in~\cite[Theorem 1.1]{scoopdedoo}, where it is defined to be the union over \emph{all} primes $\ell$ of $E_{\ell}(B)$. This difference is inconsequential, as we can always deal with a finite collection of primes using Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre}. Indeed, this is exactly why we replace $M$ by a multiple $M'$ divisible by all primes $\ell < C$ in the proof of Proposition~\ref{lemma:ab-cyc}. \end{remark} Now that we have introduced the setup needed for stating~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}, we declare the four criteria required for the theorem to be applied. For this, it will now be crucial to recall notation from the geometric setup detailed in Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}. \begin{definition} \label{definition:assumptions} In order to apply~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}, we need to verify the following geometric condition on the connected Galois \'{e}tale covers $V_\ell \to U$: \begin{enumerate} \item[\customlabel{assumption-4}{(G)}] Let $\zeta_\ell$ denote a primitive $\ell^{\mathrm{th}}$ root of unity. Each connected component of the base-change $(V_{\ell})_{K(\zeta_\ell)}$ is geometrically irreducible. \end{enumerate} We also need the following three asymptotic conditions concerning the monodromy groups $H_A(\ell)$, $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$, and $H_{A, \mathfrak p}(\ell)$ for~\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo} to be applied: \begin{enumerate} \item[\customlabel{property-a1}{(A1)}] There exist constants $\beta_1, \beta_2 > 0$ such that \[ \| H_A(\ell) \| \ll \ell^{\beta_1} \quad \text{and} \quad \| \{\text{conjugacy classes of } H_A(\ell) \} \| \ll \ell^{\beta_2}, \] where the implied constants depend only on $U$. \item[\customlabel{property-a2}{(A2)}] There exists a constant $\beta_3 > 0$ such that \[ \geometricprimes \ell \defeq \|\{ \text{prime } \mathfrak{p} \subset \mathcal O_K : \mathfrak{p} \in S \cup P_\ell \text{ or } H_{A, \mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) \not\simeq H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) \} \| \ll \ell^{\beta_3}, \] where the implied constant depends only on $A \rightarrow U$. \item[\customlabel{property-a3}{(A3)}] For each $B > 0$, there exists a subset \[ F(B) \subset \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\} \] and constants $c, \gamma > 0$ depending only on $A \rightarrow U$ such that \begin{align} \lim_{B \to \infty} \frac{\|F(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} = 1 \quad \text{and} \quad F(B) \cap E(B) \subset \bigcup_{\ell \le c (\log B)^\gamma} E_{ \ell}(B). \end{align} \end{enumerate} \end{definition} We are now in a position to state Wallace's main result: \begin{theorem}[\protect{\cite[Theorem 3.9]{scoopdedoo}}] \label{theorem:wallace-hit} Suppose that condition \ref{assumption-4} holds and that conditions \ref{property-a1}--\ref{property-a3} hold with the values $\beta_1, \beta_2, \beta_3, \gamma$.\footnote{The constant $c$ from condition\ref{property-a3} is absorbed into the implied constant in~\ref{thepressure'sonyoufeelityouvegotitallbelieveitthistimeforafricawhatever}.} Then we have \begin{equation}\label{thepressure'sonyoufeelityouvegotitallbelieveitthistimeforafricawhatever} \frac{\|E(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \frac{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\} \setminus F(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} + \frac{(\log B)^{(\beta_1 + \beta_2 + 2)\gamma +1}}{B^{1/2}}, \end{equation} where the implied constant depends only on $U$. \end{theorem} \subsubsection{Bounding~\ref{equation:goursat-l-bound}, Conditional on Verifying \ref{assumption-4}, \ref{property-a2}, and \ref{property-a3}} We have not yet determined that the conditions declared in Definition~\ref{definition:assumptions} hold in our setting. We defer the verification of these conditions to Sections~\ref{ver1},~\ref{ver2}, and~\ref{ver3}. Nevertheless, assuming that these conditions hold, we obtain the following consequence: \begin{proposition} \label{corollary:applying-wallace} Let $n>0$. Then we have \begin{equation}\label{cuzbabynowwe'vegotbadblood} \frac{\left\|\left\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal{O}_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B,\, H_{A_u}(\ell) \neq \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) \text{ for some } \ell > C \right\}\right\|}{\left\|\left\{ u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \\|u \\| \leq B \right\} \right\|} \ll \left( \log B \right)^{-n}, \end{equation} where the implied constant depends only on $U$ and $n$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof}[Proof assuming Propositions~\ref{proposition:verifying-assumptions},~\ref{proposition:check-B}, and~\ref{proposition:check-C}] Note that condition~\ref{property-a1} holds trivially in our setting, because \[ \max\{\|H_A(\ell)\|, \|\{\text{conjugacy classes of $H_A(\ell)$}\}\|\} \leq \|\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)\|, \] and $\|\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)\| = O(\ell^\beta)$ for some positive constant $\beta$ depending only on $g$ because $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz/\ell\bz) \subset \GL_{2g}(\bz/\ell\bz)$. Condition \ref{assumption-4} holds by Proposition~\ref{proposition:verifying-assumptions}, and condition \ref{property-a2} holds by Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-B}. Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-C} constructs $F(B)$ that not only satisfy condition \ref{property-a3}, but also have the property that \begin{equation} \frac{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\} \setminus F(B) \|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \left( \log B \right)^{-n} \end{equation} for every $n >0$. Upon applying the argument in point (c) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes}, which relates the left-hand-sides of~\eqref{thepressure'sonyoufeelityouvegotitallbelieveitthistimeforafricawhatever} and~\eqref{cuzbabynowwe'vegotbadblood}, the proposition follows from Theorem~\ref{theorem:wallace-hit}. \end{proof} The rest of this section is devoted to verifying the conditions necessary for the proof of Proposition~\ref{corollary:applying-wallace}. \subsection{Verifying Condition \ref{assumption-4}}\label{ver1} In this section, we will consider the base-change of the setting established in~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families} from $K$ to a finite extension $L \subset \overline{K}$ of $K$; in this setting, we obtain a family $A_L \to U_L$ and a (not necessarily connected) finite Galois \'{e}tale cover $(V_\ell)_L \to U_L$. To verify condition \ref{assumption-4}, we employ the following lemma: \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:geometrically-connected-components} Let $L \subset \overline{K}$ be a finite extension of $K$. We have that $H_{A_L}(m) \simeq H_{A_L}^{\operatorname{geom}}(m)$ if and only if all connected components of $(V_m)_L$ are geometrically connected over $L$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Observe that $(V_m)_L$ and $(V_m)_{\overline{K}}$ are finite Galois \'etale covers of $U_L$ and $U_{\overline{K}}$, which need not be connected. Let $W \subset (V_m)_L$ be a connected component, and let $\widetilde{W} \subset (V_m)_{\overline{K}}$ be a connected component mapping to $W$. By construction, $W \to U_L$ is the connected Galois \'etale cover corresponding to the surjection $\pi_1(U_L) \twoheadrightarrow H_{A_L}(m)$. Likewise, $\widetilde{W} \to U_{\overline{K}}$ corresponds to $\pi_1(U_{\overline{K}}) \twoheadrightarrow H_{A}^{\operatorname{geom}}(m) = H_{A_L}^{\operatorname{geom}}(m)$. This implies that: \begin{itemize} \item The degree $d_1$ of $W \to U_L$ equals $\|H_{A_L}(m)\|$. \item The degree $d_2$ of $\widetilde{W} \to U_{\overline{K}}$ equals $\|H_{A_L}^{\operatorname{geom}}(m)\|$. \end{itemize} On the other hand, the maps $(V_m)_L \to U_L$ and $(V_m)_{\overline{K}} \to U_{\overline{K}}$ have equal degrees. Therefore $d_1 = d_2$ if and only if all connected components of $(V_m)_L$ are geometrically connected. \end{proof} We are now in position to prove condition \ref{assumption-4}. \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:verifying-assumptions} Condition \ref{assumption-4} holds in the setting of Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $L = K(\zeta_\ell)$, and recall the assumption~\eqref{thatswhatpeoplesay}. Since $(V_\ell)_L \to U_L$ is \'etale and $U_L$ is smooth over $L$, it follows that $(V_\ell)_L$ is smooth over $L$. Therefore $(V_\ell)_L$ is geometrically irreducible over $L$ if and only if it is geometrically connected over $L$. Now, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:geometrically-connected-components}, it suffices to show that $H_{A_L}(\ell) = H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$. Since we always have $H_{A_L}(\ell) \supset H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$, it suffices to prove the reverse inclusion $H_{A_L}(\ell) \subset H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g} (\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$. Since $\chi_\ell$ is trivial on $G_L = \pi_1(\spec K(\zeta_\ell))$, it follows from Remark~\ref{remark:det-rho-is-chi} that $H_{A_L}(\ell) \subset \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)$. \end{proof} \subsection{Verifying Condition~\ref{property-a2}}\label{ver2} Before we carry out the verification of condition \ref{property-a2} in Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-B}, we need to introduce a modified version of the geometric setup developed in~\cite[Subsection 5.2]{zywina2010hilbert} and in the proof of~\cite[Theorem 5.3]{zywina2010hilbert}. \subsubsection{Geometric Setup from~\cite{zywina2010hilbert}} \label{subsubsection:geometric-setup} Fix the following notation: for a prime $\mathfrak p \subset \mathcal O_K$, let $K_\mathfrak p$ be the completion of $K$ at $\mathfrak p$, let $K_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}$ be the maximal unramified extension of $K_\mathfrak p$, let $\mathcal O_\mathfrak p$ be the ring of integers of $K_\mathfrak p$, and let $\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}$ be the ring of integers of $K_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}$. For a ring $R$, define $\gr R(1,r)$ to be the Grassmannian of lines in $\mathbb P^r_{R}$ and let $\mathscr L_R \subset \mathbb P^r_R \times \gr R(1,r)$ denote the universal line over $\gr R(1,r)$. Let $Z$ and $\mathcal Z$ be as defined in Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}. We now construct a closed subscheme $\mathcal W$ of the Grassmannian parameterizing all lines whose intersections with $\mathcal Z$ are not \'etale over the base. Define the projection $p: \mathscr L_{\mathcal O_K} \cap ( \mathcal Z \times \gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r) ) \rightarrow \gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r)$. Let $\mathcal X_1$ be the open subscheme of $\mathscr L_{\mathcal O_K} \cap ( \mathcal Z \times \gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r))$ on which $p$ is \'etale. Define $\mathcal W \defeq p(\mathscr L_{\mathcal O_K} \cap (\mathcal Z \times \gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r) ) \setminus \mathcal X_1)$ with reduced subscheme structure and define $\mathcal X \defeq \gr{\mathcal O_K}(1,r) \setminus \mathcal W$. Note that $\mathcal W$ is closed because $p$ is proper. Considering $\mathcal W$ and $\mathcal X$ as schemes over $\mathcal O_K$, let $W$ and $X$ denote their fibers over $K$. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:nonempty-etale-locus} The scheme $\mathcal W$, as defined above, is a proper closed subscheme of $\gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} It suffices to show that $\mathcal X$ is nonempty. In turn, it suffices to show $X$ is nonempty. Since $X$ is the set of points in $\gr K(1,r)$ over which $p$ is \'etale, by generic flatness, we need only verify that there is an open subscheme of $\gr K(1,r)$ on which the fibers of $p_K$ are \'etale. Since $Z$ is reduced, hence generically smooth, and the fiber of $p_K$ over $[L]$ is identified with $Z \cap L$, a Bertini theorem (specifically \cite[Theoreme I.6.10(2)]{jouanolou1982theoremes} applied to the smooth locus of $Z$ over $K$) implies that $Z \cap L$ is indeed \'etale over $\kappa([L])$ for $[L]$ general in $\gr K(1,r)$. \end{proof} \begin{remark} \label{remark:exists-line} By Lemma~\ref{lemma:nonempty-etale-locus}, $\mathcal W$ is a proper closed subscheme of $\mathbb P^r_{\mathcal O_K}$. Observe that for any line $[L] \in (\gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r) \setminus \mathcal W)(\mathbb F_\mathfrak p)$, there exists a lift $[\mathcal L] \in (\gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r) \setminus \mathcal W)(\mathcal O_\mathfrak p)$. The purpose of the above construction is to ensure that $\mathcal L \cap \mathcal Z_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p}$ is \'etale over $\mathcal O_\mathfrak p$, which we use in the proof of Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-B}. \end{remark} \subsubsection{Applying the Setup to Check~\ref{property-a2}} In the following proposition, we use the Grothendieck Specialization Theorem to verify that condition \ref{property-a2} holds in our situation: \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:check-B} For a prime ideal $\mathfrak p \subset \mathcal O_K$ let $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p)$ denote its norm and define $\nonEtalePrimes$ to be the finite set of primes over which the fiber of $\mathcal W$ is empty. Then, \begin{align} \geometricprimes \ell \leq \|\nonEtalePrimes \cup P_\ell\| + \|\{\mathrm{primes}\,\,\, \mathfrak p \subset \mathcal O_K : \gcd(\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p),\, \| \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\|) \neq 1 \}\|. \end{align} In particular, we have that $\geometricprimes \ell$ is bounded by a fixed power of $\ell$, so condition \ref{property-a2} holds in the setting of Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}. \end{proposition} \begin{remark} \label{remark:} In fact, it is true that $\geometricprimes \ell \ll \log \ell$. Apart from a finite number of primes depending only on the family $A \rightarrow U$, we need only throw out those primes whose norms are not coprime to $\|\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\|$. Since $\|\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\|$ grows polynomially in $\ell$, the number of distinct primes dividing $\|\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z)\|$ is at most logarithmic in $\ell$. \end{remark} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-B}] Take a prime ideal $\mathfrak{p} \notin \nonEtalePrimes \cup P_\ell$ so that $\gcd(\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p), \|\Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \bz)\|) = 1$. It suffices to show $H_{A,\mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) = H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell).$ Choose $[\mathcal L] \in (\gr {\mathcal O_K}(1,r) \setminus \mathcal W)(\mathcal O_\mathfrak p)$, which exists Remark~\ref{remark:exists-line}. Furthermore, define $\mathcal D \defeq \mathcal L \cap \mathcal Z_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p}$ and $\mathcal Y \defeq \mathcal L \setminus \mathcal D$. We have the commutative diagram \begin{equation} \label{equation:} \nonumber \begin{tikzcd} \mathcal Y_{\overline K} \ar {rr} \ar {dr} & & \mathcal U_{\overline K} \ar {dr} \\ & \mathcal Y_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\text{un}}} \ar {r} & \mathcal U_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}} \ar{r} & \mathcal U \\ \mathcal Y_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p} \ar{ur}\ar{rr} & & \mathcal U_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p}. \ar{ur} \end{tikzcd}\end{equation} By applying the \'{e}tale fundamental group functor to the above diagram, we obtain \begin{equation} \label{equation:pi-1-property-3.3} \begin{tikzcd} \pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline K}) \ar{rr}{\iota_{\overline K}} \ar{dr}{\alpha_{\overline K}} \ar{dd}{\phi} & & \pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline K}) \ar{dr}{\beta_{\overline K}}& \\ & \pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\text{un}}}) \ar {r}{\iota_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\text{un}}}} & \pi_1(\mathcal U_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}}) \ar{r}{\beta_{\mathcal O_\mathfrak p^{\operatorname{un}}}} \ar{r} & \pi_1(\mathcal U) \ar{r}{\rho_{A,\ell}}& \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)\\ \pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p}) \ar{ur}{\alpha_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p}}\ar[swap]{rr}{\iota_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p}} & & \pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p}) \ar[swap]{ur}{\beta_{\overline {\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p}}. & \end{tikzcd}\end{equation} By Remark~\ref{remark:exists-line}, $\mathcal D$ is \'etale over $\mathcal O_\mathfrak p$. By the Grothendieck Specialization Theorem,~\cite[Th\'eor\`eme 4.4]{orgogozo2000theoreme}, there is a map $\phi \colon \pi_1(\mathcal{Y}_{\overline{K}}) \xrightarrow{\sim} \pi_1(\mathcal{Y}_{\overline{K}_\mathfrak p}) \rightarrow \pi_1(\mathcal{Y}_{\overline{{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p})$ which makes the triangle on the left in~\eqref{equation:pi-1-property-3.3} commute and induces an isomorphism on the largest prime-to-$\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p)$ quotients of the source and target. Note that $\pi_1(\mathcal{Y}_{\overline{K}}) \xrightarrow{\sim} \pi_1(\mathcal{Y}_{\overline{K}_\mathfrak p})$ is an isomorphism by \cite[Expos\'e XIII, Proposition 4.6]{SGA1Grothendieck1971}. Since the rest of the diagram~\eqref{equation:pi-1-property-3.3} commutes, the \mbox{entire diagram commutes.} Now, observe that we have \begin{align} (\rho_{A,\ell} \circ \beta_{\overline K})(\pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline{K}})) = H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) \intertext{where the last step follows from the assumption~\ref{thatswhatpeoplesay}. By \cite[Lemma 5.2]{zywina2010hilbert}, (since the scheme $W$ used in \cite[Lemma 5.2]{zywina2010hilbert} is contained in the scheme $W$ we have constructed above) we have that} (\rho_{A, \ell} \circ \beta_{\overline K} \circ \iota_{\overline K})(\pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline{K}})) = H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z). \end{align} Since $\phi$ induces an isomorphism on prime to $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p)$ parts, and because we assumed that $\gcd(\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p), \|\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z)\|) = 1$, we deduce that \begin{align} (\rho_{A,\ell}\circ \beta_{\overline {\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p} \circ \iota_{\overline{{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p})(\pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline{{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p})) &= (\rho_{A,\ell}\circ \beta_{\overline {\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p} \circ \iota_{\overline{{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p} \circ \phi)(\pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline{K}})) \\ &= (\rho_{A, \ell} \circ \beta_{\overline K} \circ \iota_{\overline K})(\pi_1(\mathcal Y_{\overline{K}})) \\ &= \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z). \end{align} Therefore, $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) \subset (\rho_{A,\ell} \circ \beta_{\overline {\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p})(\pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline{\mathbb F}_\mathfrak p})) = H_{A,\mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell)$. Since $\ell \nmid \mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p)$, we have that $\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p$ contains nontrivial $\ell^{\mathrm{th}}$ roots of unity. Thus, the mod-$\ell$ cyclotomic character is trivial on $\pi_1(\mathcal U_{\overline {{\mathbb F}}_\mathfrak p})$, and so $\Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) \supset H_{A,\mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell).$ Hence, we have that \[ H_{A,\mathfrak p}^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell) = \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/ \ell \mathbb Z) = H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(\ell). \qedhere \] \end{proof} \subsection{Verifying Condition \ref{property-a3}}\label{ver3} \label{subsection:lombardo} It remains to check that condition \ref{property-a3} is satisfied in our setting. As usual, before carrying out the argument, we must fix some notation. Let $\Sigma_K$ denote the set of nonzero prime ideals of $\mathcal O_K$, and for a prime $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_K$ of good reduction, let $\frob_\mathfrak p \in G_K$ denote the corresponding Frobenius element. Given a PPAV $A/K$, let $\charpoly_A(\frob_\mathfrak p)$ denote the characteristic polynomial of $\rho_A(\frob_\mathfrak p) \in \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\widehat{\mathbb Z})$, and observe that $\charpoly_A(\frob_\mathfrak p)$ has coefficients in $\mathbb Z$. Finally, let $h(A)$ denote the absolute logarithmic Faltings height of $A$, obtained by passing to any field extension over which $A$ \mbox{has semi-stable reduction.} \subsubsection{Applying Lombardo's Result} The key input for our proof of this condition is the following theorem of Lombardo, which is an effective version of the Open Image Theorem: \begin{theorem}[\protect{\cite[Theorem 1.2]{lombardo2015explicit} and Proposition~\ref{prop:Main} in Appendix~\ref{lombardstreet}}] \label{theorem:lombardo} Let $A / K$ be a PPAV of dimension $g \ge 2$. Suppose that we have the following two conditions: \begin{enumerate}[(1)] \item $\End_{\overline{K}}(A) = \bz$. \item There exists a prime $\mathfrak{p} \in \Sigma_K$ at which $A$ has good reduction and such that the splitting field of $\charpoly_A(\frob_{\mathfrak{p}})$ has Galois group isomorphic to $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$. \end{enumerate} Then there are constants $c_1, c_2 > 0$ and $\gamma_1, \gamma_2$, depending only on $g$ and $K$, for which the following statement is true: For every prime $\ell$ unramified in $K$ and strictly larger than \[ \max \{ c_1 (\mathbf{N} (\mathfrak{p}))^{\gamma_1}, c_2 (h(A))^{\gamma_2}\}, \] the $\ell$-adic Galois representation surjects onto $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz_\ell)$. \end{theorem} \begin{remark}\label{remark:gee} The group structure of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ is defined by how $S_g$ acts on $(\bz / 2\bz)^g$, namely by permuting the $g$ factors. This group appears because it is the largest possible Galois group of a reciprocal polynomial, by which we mean a polynomial $P(T)$ satisfying $P(T) = P(1/T) \cdot T^{\deg P}$. \end{remark} Now, the proof of condition \ref{property-a3} will follow from Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo} once we know that the two hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo} hold for a density-$1$ subset of the $K$-valued points of the family. We shall first check condition \ref{property-a3} under the assumption that these hypotheses hold most of the time. To this end, it will be convenient to introduce notation to help us count the points that fail to satisfy one of the hypotheses in Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo}. For a given family $A \to U$, define the following two sets: \begin{align} D_1(B) & \defeq \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B,\,\text{$A_u$ fails hypothesis (1)}\}, \text{ and} \\ D_2(B) & \defeq \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B,\, \text{$A_u$ fails hypothesis (2) for all $\mathfrak{p}$ with $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}) \le (\log B)^{n+1}$}\}. \end{align} In the next proposition, we verify condition~\ref{property-a3}, conditional upon the assumptions that sets $D_1(B)$ and $D_2(B)$ are sufficiently small (these assumptions are proven in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-1} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-2} respectively): \begin{proposition} \label{proposition:check-C} Let $n>0$. There are constants $c, \gamma$ depending only on $U$ such that the following holds: if we define \[ F(B) \defeq \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B,\, H_{A_u}(\ell) \supset \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z) \text{ for all } \ell > c(\log B)^\gamma\}, \] then we have \begin{equation} \label{yousayyourefineIknowyoubetterthanthat} \frac{\|F(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \left( \log B \right)^{-n}, \end{equation} where the implied constant depends only on $U$ and $n$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof}[Proof assuming Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-1}, Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-2}, and Lemma~\ref{lemma:height}] Let $c_1, c_2$ and $\gamma_1, \gamma_2$ be as in Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo}. There exist constants $c_2', \gamma_2'$, chosen appropriately in terms of the constants $c_0, d_0$ provided by Lemma~\ref{lemma:height}, such that the following holds: for $u \in U(K)$ with $\operatorname{Ht}(u) > B_0$, where $B_0$ is a positive constant depending only on $U$, we have that \[ c_2(h(A_u))^{\gamma_2} \le c_2'(\log \operatorname{Ht}(u))^{\gamma_2'}. \] The requirement that $\operatorname{Ht}(u)$ be sufficiently large is insignificant because \begin{equation}\label{ifyoucouldseethatimtheoonewhounderstandsyoubeenhereallalongsowhycantyouseeeeyoubelongwithmeeee} \frac{\|\{ u \in U(K): \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B_0\}\|}{\|\{ u \in U(K): \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \frac{1}{B^{[K : \bq](r+1)}}, \end{equation} and the right-hand-side of~\eqref{ifyoucouldseethatimtheoonewhounderstandsyoubeenhereallalongsowhycantyouseeeeyoubelongwithmeeee} is dominated by the right-hand-side of~\eqref{yousayyourefineIknowyoubetterthanthat}. If we take \[ c = \max(c_1, c_2') \quad \text{and} \quad \gamma = \max((n+1)\gamma_1, \gamma_2'), \] Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo} tells us that \[ \{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\} \setminus F(B) \subset D_1(B) \cup D_2(B). \] The desired result follows from Lemmas~\ref{lemma:davide-1} and \ref{lemma:davide-2}, from which we deduce that \[ \frac{\|D_1(B) \cup D_2(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \left( \log B \right)^{-n}. \qedhere \] \end{proof} In what follows, we prove the results upon which the above proof of Proposition~\ref{proposition:check-C} depends. To begin with, we check that hypotheses (1) and (2) from Theorem~\ref{theorem:lombardo} hold in our setting by bounding $D_1$ in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-1} (thus verifying hypothesis (1)) and bounding $D_2$ in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-2} (thus verifying hypothesis (2)). \subsubsection{Verifying Hypothesis $(1)$} We check that hypothesis (1) holds in our setting via the following lemma: \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:davide-1} We have that \begin{align} \label{equation:bound-d1} \frac{\|D_1(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll \frac{\log B}{B^{[K:\mathbb Q]/2}}, \end{align} where the implied constant depends only on $U$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Choose $\ell > \max\{C, \ell_1(g)\}$, where $C$ is defined in~\eqref{thatswhatpeoplesay} and $\ell_1(g)$ is the constant, depending only on the dimension $g$, given in \cite[Proposition 4]{ellenbergEHK:non-simple-abelian-varieties-in-a-family}. By \cite[Proposition 4]{ellenbergEHK:non-simple-abelian-varieties-in-a-family}, we have that $\|D_1(B)\|$ is bounded above by $\left\| \left\{ u \in U(K) : H_{A_u}(\ell) \supset \Sp_{2g}(\mathbb Z/\ell \mathbb Z) \right\}\right\|.$ The lemma then follows from Proposition~\ref{proposition:applying-cohen-serre}, where we are using point (c) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes} to pass from lattice points to $K$-valued points. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Verifying Hypothesis $(2)$} We complete the verification of hypothesis $(2)$ in Lemma~\ref{lemma:davide-2} by means of an argument involving the large sieve, which lets one bound a set in terms of its reduction modulo primes. The large sieve is stated as follows: \begin{theorem}[Large Sieve,~{\cite[Theorem 4.1]{zywina2010elliptic}}] \label{theorem:large-sieve} Let $\lVert - \rVert$ be a norm on $\br \otimes_{\bz} \mathcal{O}_{K}^r$, and fix a subset $Y \subset \mathcal{O}_K^r$. Let $B \ge 1$ and $Q > 0$ be real numbers, and for every prime ${\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K$, let $0 \le \omega_{\mathfrak{p}} < 1$ be a real number. Suppose that we have the following two conditions: \begin{enumerate} \item The image of $Y$ in $\br \otimes_{\bz} \mathcal{O}_{K}^r$ is contained in a ball of radius $B$. \item For every ${\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K$ with $\mathbf{N} (\mathfrak{p}) < Q$, we have $ \|Y_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \le (1 - \omega_{\mathfrak{p}})\cdot \mathbf{N} (\mathfrak{p})^r $, where $Y_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is the image of $Y$ under reduction modulo $\mathfrak{p}$. \end{enumerate} Then we have that \[ \|Y\| \ll \frac{B^{[K:\bq]r} + Q^{2r}}{L(Q)}, \quad \text{where} \quad L(Q) \defeq \sum_{\substack{\mathfrak{a} \subset \mathcal{O}_K\,\,\, \mathrm{ squarefree} \\[0.1cm] \mathbf{N} (\mathfrak{a}) \le Q}}\,\,\, \prod_{\mathrm{prime}\,\,\,\mathfrak{p} \| \mathfrak{a}} \frac{\omega_{\mathfrak{p}}}{1 - \omega_{\mathfrak{p}}}, \] and the implied constant depends only on $K$, $r$, and $\|\|-\|\|$. \end{theorem} We must now specialize the abstract setup in Theorem~\ref{theorem:large-sieve} to our setting. To do so, we define the various objects at play in the large sieve as follows: \begin{definition} \label{definition:sieve-sets} Introduce the following notation: \begin{itemize}[leftmargin=0.2in] \item Let $\|\|-\|\|$ be the norm defined in Section~\ref{weaintevergonnaberoyals}. \item Let $B \geq 1$, take $Q \defeq (\log B)^{n+1}$. \item Let $m$ be the positive integer produced by Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}, let $\zeta_m$ denote a primitive $m^{\mathrm{th}}$ root of unity, and let $\Sigma^m_K \subset \Sigma_K$ be the set of ${\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K$ which split completely in $K(\zeta_m)$. Now, with $\galSlope, \galMin$ as in Lemma~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction}, we may take $\omega_{\mathfrak{p}} = \galSlope$ for all $\mathfrak{p} \in \Sigma^m_K$ with $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}) > \galMin$ and $\omega_{\mathfrak{p}} = 0$ for all other ${\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K$. \item We take $Y$ to be the following set: $$Y \defeq \{u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \|\|u\|\| \le B,\, \text{$A_u$ fails hypothesis (2) for all $\mathfrak{p}$ with $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}) \le (\log B)^{n+1}$}\}.$$ As above, $Y_\mathfrak p$ denotes the mod-$\mathfrak p$ reduction of $Y$. \item Define $T_{\mathfrak p}$ by $$T_{\mathfrak{p}} \defeq \{x \in \mathcal{U}_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} : \text{splitting field of }\charpoly_A(\frob_\mathfrak p) \text{ has Galois group } (\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g \}.$$ The motivation for defining $T_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is that its complement contains $Y_\mathfrak p$. \end{itemize} \end{definition} To ensure that the choices made in Definition~\ref{definition:sieve-sets} are suitable, we must prove Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction}, which when taken together assert that there exist a positive integer $m$ and $\sigma, \tau> 0$ so that $\|Y_\mathfrak p\| \leq \left( 1-\galSlope \right) \cdot \mathbf{N} (\mathfrak p)^r$ for all $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_K^m$. However, the proof of this result is rather laborious, and stating it now would serve to distract the reader from the primary thrust of the argument. We therefore defer the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction} to Section~\ref{thoughtweweregoinstrong}, and conditional upon this, we now use the large sieve to check that hypothesis (2) \mbox{holds in our setting.} \begin{proposition}\label{lemma:davide-2} For $n >0$, we have that \[ \frac{\|D_2(B)\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) : \operatorname{Ht}(u) \le B\}\|} \ll (\log B)^{-n}. \] \end{proposition} \begin{proof}[Proof assuming Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction}] Theorem~\ref{theorem:large-sieve} yields the estimate \begin{align} \|Y\| & \ll \frac{B^{[K : \bq]r} + (\log B)^{2n(n+1)}}{L((\log B)^{n+1})}, \\ \intertext{whose denominator is bounded below by} L((\log B)^n) &> \sum_{\substack{{\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma^m_K \\ \tau < \mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}) < (\log B)^{n+1}}} \frac{\galSlope}{1 - \galSlope} \\ &> \galSlope \cdot \|\{{\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma^m_K : \tau < \mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}) \le (\log B)^{n+1} \}\|. \end{align} Applying the Chebotarev Density Theorem yields that \begin{align} \|\{{\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma^m_K : \tau < \mathbf{N} ({\mathfrak{p}}) \le (\log B)^{n+1} \}\| &\gg \|\{{\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K : \tau < \mathbf{N} ({\mathfrak{p}}) \le (\log B)^{n+1} \}\|. \\ \intertext{Applying the Prime Number Theorem yields that} \|\{{\mathfrak{p}} \in \Sigma_K : \tau < \mathbf{N} ({\mathfrak{p}}) \le (\log B)^{n+1} \}\|&\gg \frac{(\log B)^{n+1}}{\log ((\log B)^{n+1})}. \end{align} Combining the above estimates, we deduce that \begin{align} \frac{\|Y\|}{\|\{u \in U(K) \cap \mathcal O_K^r : \|\|u\|\| \le B\}\|} & \ll \frac{B^{[K:\mathbb Q]r} + (\log B)^{2n(n+1)}}{\frac{(\log B)^{n+1}}{\log ((\log B)^{n+1})}} \cdot \frac{1}{B^{[K:\mathbb Q]r}} \\ & \ll\frac{\log (( \log B )^{n+1})}{(\log B)^{n+1}} \ll (\log B)^{-n}. \end{align} Finally, employing point (c) of Section~\ref{toomanynotes} to translate the above estimate from lattice points to $K$-valued points yields the desired result. \end{proof} \subsubsection{Validating the Sieve Setup}\label{thoughtweweregoinstrong} This section is devoted to proving Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction}, which together verify that the sieve setup introduced in Definition~\ref{definition:sieve-sets} satisfies the necessary conditions for applying the large sieve as we did in the proof of Proposition~\ref{lemma:davide-2}. We start by constructing the value of $m$ that we use in our application of the large sieve: \begin{proposition}\label{proposition:good-cover} There is a positive integer $m$ and a subset $\mathcal C \subset \Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$ invariant under conjugation in $\Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$, and hence in $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$, such that the following holds: \begin{enumerate} \item We have $H_A(m) = \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \mathbb Z)$ and $H_A^{\operatorname{geom}}(m) = \Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \mathbb Z)$. \item For any $\mathfrak{p} \notin S$ and any closed point $x \in \mathcal{U}_{\mathbb F\mathfrak p}$, if $\rho_{A, m}(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C$, then the splitting field of $\charpoly(\frob_x)$ has Galois group $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$.\footnote{For the definition of $S$, see the sentence immediately preceding Remark~\ref{thanksdavide}.} \end{enumerate} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} In the first step, we construct $m$ as a product of four appropriate primes, depending on the family $A \to U$. By, for example, Hilbert irreducibility, (or more precisely \cite[\S 9.2, Proposition 1]{serre1989lectures} in conjunction with \cite[\S 13.1, Theorem 3]{serre1989lectures} applied to the extension $\mathbb Q(x_1, \ldots, x_g)[T]/(T^{2g} + \sum_{i=1}^{g-1} (-1)^i x_i (T^{2g-i} + T^i) + (-1)^g x_g T^g + 1)$ over $\mathbb Q(x_1, \ldots, x_g),$) there exists a degree-$2g$ polynomial $P(T) \in \bz[T]$ satisfying $P(T) = P(1/T) \cdot T^{\deg P}$ with Galois group $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$. It is easy to exhibit elements of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ whose left-action on $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ is described by one of the following four cycle types: \begin{equation} \label{equation:splittings} \begin{array}{c} 2 + 1 + \cdots + 1, \\ 4 + 1 + \cdots + 1, \\ (2g-2) + 1 + 1, \\ 2g. \end{array} \end{equation} We choose these cycle types because any subgroup of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ containing an element with each of these cycle types is in fact all of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ by \cite[Lemma 7.1]{kowalski2006large}. For each such partition, the Chebotarev Density Theorem tells us that there are infinitely many primes $\ell$ such that $P(T) \pmod{\ell}$ splits according to the chosen partition. For $\ell > C$ we have $\rho_{A, \ell}(\pi_1(U)) = \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$ and $\rho_{A, \ell}(\pi_1(U_{\overline{K}})) = \Sp_{2g}(\bz / \ell \mathbb Z)$. So, for $i \in \left\{ 1,2,3,4 \right\}$ we can find $\ell_i > C$ so that $P(T) \pmod{\ell_i}$ splits according to the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ partition above. By the Chinese remainder theorem, $(a)$ holds. To complete the proof, we construct $\mathcal C$ and verify $(b)$. Since characteristic polynomials are conjugacy-invariant, the set \[ \mathcal C \defeq \{M' \in \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \mathbb Z) : \charpoly(M')\ (\operatorname{mod}\, \ell_i) \text{ splits as in \eqref{equation:splittings} for all $i \in \left\{ 1,2,3,4 \right\}$}\} \] is a union of conjugacy classes of $\operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \mathbb Z)$. By \cite[Theorem A.1]{rivin2008walks} there exists an $M \in \Sp_{2g}(\bz)$ such that $\charpoly(M)(T) = P(T)$, which shows that $\mathcal C$ is nonempty. For this choice of $\mathcal C$, conclusion (2) follows from \cite[Lemma 7.1]{kowalski2006large}, which says that any subgroup of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$ that contains elements realizing all four cycle types in \eqref{equation:splittings} must actually equal all of $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$. \end{proof} The reason why we constructed $m$ in Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover} in the way that we did is that it allows us to apply the following theorem, which is a crucial tool for bounding the set of Frobenius elements with certain Galois groups modulo each prime. \begin{theorem}[\protect{\cite[Lemma 1.2]{ekedahl1988effective}}] \label{theorem:ekedahl} Let $X$ be a scheme, and let $\pi\colon X \ra \spec \mathcal O_K$ be a morphism of finite type. Let $\phi\colon Y \ra X$ be a connected finite Galois \'{e}tale cover with Galois group $G$, and let $\rho \colon \pi_1(X) \to G$ denote the corresponding finite quotient. Suppose that $\pi \circ \phi$ has a geometrically irreducible generic fiber, and let $\mathcal C$ be a conjugacy-invariant subset of $G$. For every $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_K$, we have \[ \frac{\lvert \{ x \in X_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} : \rho(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C\} \rvert }{\lvert X_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p} \rvert} = \frac{\|\mathcal C\|}{\|G\|} + O((\mathbf{N} (\mathfrak{p}))^{-1/2}), \] with implicit constants depending only on the family $Y \rightarrow X$. By $\frob_x$ we mean the Frobenius element in $\pi_1(X)$ corresponding to $x \in X$. \end{theorem} We now apply Theorem~\ref{theorem:ekedahl} to the conjugacy-invariant set $\mathcal C$ from Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover} in order to obtain a lower bound on $\|T_\mathfrak p\|$, the number of points $u \in U(K)$ with the splitting field of $\charpoly_{A_u}(\frob_\mathfrak p)$ having Galois group equal to $(\bz/2\bz)^g \rtimes S_g$. \begin{proposition}\label{proposition:good-v} As $\mathfrak{p}$ ranges through the elements of $\Sigma_K^m$, where $m$ is defined as in Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}, we have that $ \|T_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \gg (\mathbf{N} ({\mathfrak{p}}))^r. $ \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $L \defeq K(\zeta_m)$. As in Section~\ref{subsection:notation-for-families}, let $\mathcal{V}_m \to \mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}}$ be the connected Galois \'etale cover associated to the mod-$m$ Galois representation $\rho \colon \pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}}) \to \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$, and let $\mathcal{X}$ be one of the connected components of $(\mathcal{V}_m)_{L}$. The map $\mathcal{X} \to (\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})_{L}$ is the connected Galois \'etale cover associated to the map \[ \begin{tikzcd} \rho' \colon \pi_1((\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})_{L}) \ar{r} & \pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}}) \ar{r}{\rho} & \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz); \end{tikzcd} \] note that the image of this composite map equals $\rho(\pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})) \cap \Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$ by Remark~\ref{remark:det-rho-is-chi}, since $\chi_m$ is trivial on $K(\zeta_m)$. By Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}(a), we have $\rho(\pi_1(\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})) = \operatorname{GSp}_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$, so we conclude that $\rho'(\pi_1((\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})_{L})) = \Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$. We seek to apply Theorem~\ref{theorem:ekedahl} with \[ \mathcal{X} \to (\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal O_{P_m}})_{L} \to \spec \mathcal{O}_{L} \quad \text{in place of} \quad Y \to X \to \spec \mathcal{O}_K. \] To do so, we must check that this composition has geometrically irreducible generic fiber, which follows from the second part of Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}(a) in conjunction with Lemma~\ref{lemma:geometrically-connected-components}. Now let $\mathcal C \subset \Sp_{2g}(\bz / m \bz)$ be as in Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}(b). For any $\mathfrak{p} \in \Sigma^m_K \setminus S$ and $\mathfrak p' \in \Sigma_{L}$ lying over $\mathfrak p$, we have $(\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}} \simeq \mathcal{U}_{\mathbb F_\mathfrak p}$, and so there is a bijection between \begin{align} \{x \in (\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}} : \rho'(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C\} \quad \text{and} \quad \{x \in \mathcal{U}_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p}} : \rho(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C\}. \end{align} By Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-cover}(b), $T_{\mathfrak{p}}$ contains the latter set, so we have \begin{align} \|T_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \ge \|\{x \in \mathcal{U}_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}} : \rho(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C\}\| &= \|\{x \in (\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}} : \rho'(\frob_x) \in \mathcal C\}\| \\ &= \left( \frac{\|\mathcal C\|}{\|G\|} + O((\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}'))^{-1/2}) \right) \cdot \|(\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}}\|, \end{align} where the last step above follows from Theorem~\ref{theorem:ekedahl}. Now, we have the estimate \[ \|(\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak{p}'}}\| \gg (\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}'))^r, \] because the complement of $(\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}}$ in $(\bp^r_{\mathcal{O}_{L}})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}}$ has codimension at least 1, since $\mathfrak p \notin S$. Combining our results, and using that $S$ is a finite set, we find that \begin{align} \|T_\mathfrak p\| \geq \left( \frac{\|\mathcal C\|}{\|G\|} + O\left(\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}')^{-1/2}\right) \right) \|(\mathcal{U}_{L})_{\mathbb F_{\mathfrak p'}}\| &\gg \mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}')^r = \mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p})^r. \qedhere \end{align} \end{proof} The following lemma completes our verification of the sieve setup by constructing the necessary constants $\sigma, \tau$. \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:bounding-Y-reduction} There are constants $\galSlope,\galMin > 0$ so that for all $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma^m_K$ with $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p) > \tau$, we have $\|Y_\mathfrak p\| \leq \left( 1-\galSlope \right) \cdot \mathbf{N} (\mathfrak p)^r.$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By Proposition~\ref{proposition:good-v}, there are constants $\galSlope', \galMin' > 0$ so that, for all $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma^m_K$ with $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p) > \galMin'$, we have $\|T_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \geq \galSlope' \cdot(\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p))^r$. For such $\mathfrak{p}$, we have that \[ \|Y_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \le (1 - \galSlope') \cdot (\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}))^r + O((\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}))^{r-1}), \] where the error term is on order of $\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak p)$ smaller than the main term because $\mathcal{Z}$ has codimension at least $1$ in $\bp^r_{\mathcal{O}_K}$. By replacing $\galSlope'$ with a slightly smaller $\galSlope$ and $\galMin'$ with a slightly larger $\galMin$, we may write \[ \|Y_{\mathfrak{p}}\| \le (1 - \galSlope) \cdot (\mathbf{N}(\mathfrak{p}))^r. \hfill \qedhere \] \end{proof} \subsubsection{Discussion of Heights} \label{subsubsection:appendix-on-heights} In this section, we prove a result that describes the relationship between the absolute multiplicative height on projective space and the absolute logarithmic Faltings height. Let $\operatorname{Ht}$ be the height on $\bp_K^r$ as defined in~\ref{weaintevergonnaberoyals}, and let $h$ be the Faltings height. Let $\log\operatorname{Ht}$ be the absolute logarithmic height on $\bp^r(\overline{K})$, and note that $\log\operatorname{Ht}$ naturally restricts to a logarithmic height function defined on the open subscheme $U \subset \bp_K^r$. Let $\ag$ be the moduli stack of $g$-dimensional PPAVs, and let $p \colon \ug \ra\ag$ be the universal family of abelian varieties. Let $\pi\colon \ag\ra \coarseag$ be its coarse moduli space, and let $j(A)\in \coarseag(K)$ be the closed point represented by $A$. As in \cite[Section 2]{FalFinite}, we choose $n\in\bn$ such that the line bundle $\mathscr{L}=((\pi \circ p)_\omega_{\ug/\ag})^{\otimes n}$ is very ample, where $\omega_{\ug/\ag}$ is the canonical sheaf of $p \colon \ug \ra \ag$. Fix an embedding $i\colon\coarseag\hookrightarrow\bp^N$ with $i^*\so_{\mathbb P^N}(1) \simeq \mathscr{L}$. The modular height $\log \operatorname{Ht}(j(A))$ of $A$ is then the restriction along $i$ of the absolute logarithmic height (i.e.,~the absolute logarithmic height of $j(A)$ considered as a point of $\bp^N(K)$). On the other hand, $\so_{\mathbb P^N}(1)$ is a metrized line bundle and restricts to give a metric on $\mathscr{L}$ \cite[p.~36]{FalRP}; we denote by $\log\operatorname{Ht}_{\mathscr{L}}$ the corresponding height function on $\coarseag$. We now relate the height on projective space and the Faltings height by piecing together results from the literature on heights: \begin{lemma} \label{lemma: height-0} Let $g$ be a positive integer, $K$ a number field, and let $n\in \bn$ be as in the definition of the modular height. Then there exist constants $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that for every principally polarized abelian variety $A$ over $K$, we have \[\|n\cdot h(A)-\log\operatorname{Ht}(j(A))\|\leq \alpha \cdot \log\max\{1, \log\operatorname{Ht}(j(A))\}+\beta.\] \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By~\cite[Proof of Lemma 3]{FalFinite}, there exist constants $\alpha_1$ and $\beta_1$ such that for all abelian varieties $A/K$, we have \[\|n\cdot h(A)-\log\operatorname{Ht}_{\mathscr{L}}(j(A))\|\leq \alpha_1 \cdot \log(\log\operatorname{Ht}_{\mathscr{L}}(j(A)))+\beta_1.\] By \cite[B.3.2(b)]{afraidofheights}, there is a constant $\beta_2$ such that \[\|\log\operatorname{Ht}_{\mathscr{L}}(j(A))-\log\operatorname{Ht}(j(A))\|\leq\beta_2. \qedhere \] \end{proof} \begin{lemma} \label{lemma:height} There exist constants $c_0$ and $d_0$ depending only on $A \to U$ such that \[ h(A_u) \le c_0 \log \operatorname{Ht}(u) + d_0 \] for all $u \in U(K)$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} By \cite[p.~19, Section 2.6, Theorem]{serre1989lectures}, $\operatorname{Ht}(j(A_u)) \ll \operatorname{Ht}(u)$ and $\operatorname{Ht}(u) \ll \operatorname{Ht}(j(A_u))$ for all $u \in U$. The result then follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma: height-0}. \end{proof}
\section{Introduction} One of the central questions in mathematical atomic physics is how many electrons a nucleus can bind. Despite convincing experimental evidence that there can be only one or two excess electrons, even a uniform bound on the excess charge still eludes a rigorous mathematical proof. So far, this so-called ionization conjecture has only been proved in simplified models of an atom, namely the Thomas--Fermi model \cite{LieSim-77b}, the Thomas--Fermi--von-Weizs\"acker model \cite{Solovej-90}, the reduced Hartree--Fock model \cite{Solovej-91} and the (full) Hartree--Fock model \cite{Solovej-03}. In the latter two models the conjecture is settled in the weak form that there is a universal constant $C$ such that the number of electrons bound by a nucleus of charge $Z$ is at most $Z+C$. Recently, we were able to prove this also in the Thomas--Fermi--Dirac--von Weizs\"acker model \cite{FraNamBos-16} and in this paper we will extend and generalize our method to treat the M\"uller model of an atom. The M\"uller energy functional was introduced in \cite{Mueller-84} (see also \cite{BuiBae-02}) and has received increasing interest in theoretical and computational quantum chemistry. For references and a systematic mathematical investigation we refer to \cite{FraLieSieSei-07}. Like Hartree--Fock and unlike Thomas--Fermi theory (and its relatives), M\"uller theory is a \emph{density matrix} and not a density functional theory. This means that $N$-electron configurations are described by self-adjoint operators $\gamma$ (\emph{one-body density matrices}) on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^3)$ satisfying $0\leq\gamma\leq 1$ and $\Tr\gamma =N$. (For the sake of simplicity we ignore here the electron spin. Its inclusion would not change our results and methods qualitatively.) To each one-body density matrix $\gamma$, we can associate a density $\rho_\gamma$ formally by $\rho_\gamma(x) = \gamma(x,x)$. (This definition can be made proper, for instance, using the spectral decomposition of the operator $\gamma$.) The energy in M\"uller theory is given by the functional $$ \mathcal{E}_Z^{\rm M}(\gamma) = \Tr (-\Delta \gamma) - \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \frac{Z\rho_\gamma(x)}{\|x\|} {\, \rm d} x + D(\rho_\gamma) - X(\gamma^{1/2}). $$ Here $$ D(\rho_\gamma) = \frac{1}{2} \iint_{\mathbb{R}^3\times \mathbb{R}^3} \frac{\rho_\gamma(x) \rho_\gamma(y) }{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y $$ models the Coulomb repulsion between the electrons and $$ X(\gamma^{1/2}) = \frac{1}{2} \iint_{\mathbb{R}^3\times \mathbb{R}^3} \frac{\|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 }{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y $$ models the exchange energy. The latter term, which involves the operator square root $\gamma^{1/2}$ of the operator $\gamma$, is the only, but important, difference to Hartree--Fock theory, where the exchange energy is modelled by $X(\gamma)$. We will review the heuristic reason for this choice at the end of the introduction. The ground state energy in M\"uller theory is given by \begin{equation} \label{eq:muellermin} E_Z^{\rm M}(N)= \inf \left\{ \mathcal{E}_Z^{\rm M}(\gamma)\,\|\, 0\le \gamma\le 1\text{ on } L^2(\mathbb{R}^3), \Tr \gamma=N \right\}. \end{equation} Here and in the following we do not need to assume that the parameters $Z>0$ (the nuclear charge) and $N>0$ (the number of electrons) are integers. In \cite{FraLieSieSei-07}, it was shown that the minimization problem $E_Z^{\rm M}(N)$ has a minimizer if $N\le Z$. It was also conjectured that for any $Z>0$ there is a critical electron number $N_c(Z)<\infty$ such that $E_Z^{\rm M}(N)$ has no minimizer if $N>N_c(Z)$. A simple by-product of our main result is a proof of this conjecture. We shall prove \begin{theorem}[Ionization bound]\label{main} There is a constant $C>0$ such that for all $Z>0$, if the minimization problem $E_Z^{\rm M}(N)$ in \eqref{eq:muellermin} has a minimizer, then $N\leq Z+C$. \end{theorem} The basic strategy is to compare with Thomas--Fermi theory as in Solovej's fundamental works \cite{Solovej-91} and \cite{Solovej-03}. Recall that in Thomas--Fermi theory, the ground state energy is obtained by minimizing the density functional $$ \mathcal{E}_Z^{\rm TF}(\rho)= c^{\rm TF}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \rho^{5/3}(x) {\, \rm d} x - \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \frac{Z \rho(x)}{\|x\|} {\, \rm d} x + D(\rho) $$ with \begin{equation} \label{eq:ctf} c^{\rm TF}= \frac{3}{5}(6\pi^2)^{2/3} \end{equation} under the constraints $$ 0\le \rho \in L^1(\mathbb{R}^3)\cap L^{5/3}(\mathbb{R}^3), \quad \int \rho = N.$$ (For comparison of our $c^{\rm TF}$ with the corresponding constant in \cite{Solovej-03} we note that in our definition of the M\"uller energy functional the kinetic energy is involves $-\Delta$, not $-(1/2)\Delta$, and that we ignore the electron spin.) As in reduced and full Hartree--Fock theory we establish that certain quantities can be approximated by the corresponding quantities in Thomas--Fermi theory up to distances of order $o(1)$ away from the nucleus. This is remarkably far from the nucleus, since a priori, the standard Thomas--Fermi approximation is valid on distances of order $O(Z^{-1/3})$. In a certain sense our result shows that M\"uller theory belongs, like Thomas--Fermi--von Weizs\"acker, Thomas--Fermi--Dirac--von Weizs\"acker and reduced and full Hartree--Fock theory, to a Thomas--Fermi universality class. A quantitative version of this universality property is the following basic comparison theorem between M\"uller and Thomas--Fermi theory. \begin{theorem}[Screened potential estimate] \label{thm:screened-intro} Let $\gamma_0$ be a M\"uller minimizer for some $N\ge Z\ge 1$ and let $\rho_0=\rho_{\gamma_0}$. Let $\rho^{\rm TF}$ be the Thomas--Fermi minimizer with $N=Z$. For every $r>0$, define the screened nuclear potentials \begin{align} \Phi_r(x) = \frac{Z}{\|x\|} - \int_{\|y\|\le r} \frac{\rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y, \qquad \Phi_r^{\rm TF}(x) = \frac{Z}{\|x\|} - \int_{\|y\|\le r} \frac{\rho^{\rm TF}(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} Then there are universal constants $C>0$, $\varepsilon>0$ such that $$ \left\|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x) -\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\right\| \le C (\|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}+1) $$ for all $N \ge Z\ge 1$ and $\|x\|>0$. \end{theorem} The significance of the power $\|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}$ is that $\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x) \sim \|x\|^{-4}$ for $\|x\|$ small (see, e.g., \cite{Solovej-03}). Another consequence of this comparison is that the atomic {\em radius} of ``infinite atoms'' in M\"uller theory is very close to that in Thomas--Fermi theory. Similarly as in \cite[Theorem 1.5]{Solovej-03}, we have the following asymptotic estimate for the radii of ``infinite atoms". \begin{theorem}[Radius estimate] \label{thm:radius} Let $\gamma_0$ be a M\"uller minimizer for some $N\ge Z\ge 1$ and let $\rho_0=\rho_{\gamma_0}$. For $\kappa>0$, we define the radius $R(N,Z,\kappa)$ as the largest number such that $$ \int_{\|x\|\ge R(N,Z,\kappa)} \rho_0(x) {\, \rm d} x = \kappa. $$ Then there are universal constants $C>0$, $\varepsilon>0$ such that $$ \limsup_{N\ge Z\to \infty}\left\| R(N,Z,\kappa) - B^{\rm TF} \kappa^{-1/3}\right\| \le C \kappa^{-1/3-\varepsilon} $$ for all $\kappa \ge C$, where $B^{\rm TF}= 5 c^{\rm TF} (4/(3\pi^2))^{1/3}$. \end{theorem} As we have already mentioned, Theorems \ref{main} and \ref{thm:radius} are straightforward consequences of Theorem \ref{thm:screened-intro}. We establish the latter by Solovej's ingenious bootstrap argument \cite{Solovej-91, Solovej-03}, which he used to prove the ionization conjecture in reduced and full Hartree--Fock theory. The iterative step of this inductive proof relies on a bound on the number of electrons far away from the nucleus. Both in \cite{Solovej-91} and \cite{Solovej-03} this bound is derived by `multipliying the equation by $\|x\|$', a fundamental strategy that goes back to Benguria and Lieb \cite[Theorem 7.23]{Lieb-81b}, \cite{Lieb-84} (see also \cite{Nam-12} for a modification of this strategy). Due to the presence of the exchange term, this strategy seems to fail both in Thomas--Fermi--Dirac--von Weizs\"acker theory and in M\"uller theory (although it does work in Hartree--Fock theory), and this is probably the reason why even the problem of bounding the number of electrons has remained unsolved for so long in these models. In \cite{FraNamBos-16}, inspired by \cite{NamBos-16} and \cite{FraKilNam-16}, we have developed a new strategy to obtain a bound on the number of electrons far away from the nucleus, which replaces the `multiplication by $\|x\|$' strategy. While this new strategy was used in \cite{NamBos-16,FraKilNam-16,FraNamBos-16} only in the context of density functional theory, we demonstrate here that it can also be applied in density matrix theory. This argument gives the a-priori bound $N\leq 2Z(1+o(1))$ (see Lemma~\ref{roughbound}). Fortunately, just like the `multiplication by $\|x\|$' strategy, it can also be applied to bound the number of electrons far away from the nucleus, which is the content of Lemma \ref{lem:L1-bound}. We end this introduction by listing some of the similarities and differences between M\"uller and Hartree--Fock theory; for proofs we refer to \cite{FraLieSieSei-07}. \begin{enumerate} \item The M\"uller energy functional is convex in $\gamma$ and strictly convex in $\rho_\gamma$, which shows, in particular, that the density of a minimizer is spherical symmetric. This property is shared by reduced Hartree--Fock theory, but not by full Hartree--Fock theory. Spherical symmetry leads to some minor simplifications in our argument, but we deliberately do not take advantage of these in order to emphasize the generality of our approach. We do, however, point out the places in the proofs where one could use spherical symmetry. \item Electrons in M\"uller theory have a strictly negative self-energy. This phenomenon does not appear in (reduced or full) Hartree--Fock theory, but it does appear in Thomas--Fermi--Dirac--von Weizs\"acker theory. While it has no direct consequences for us, it shows the delicate nature of the exchange term. \item Since, for integer $N$, the Hartree--Fock minimizer is a projection (which is equal to its square root), the M\"uller ground state energy does not exceed the Hartree--Fock ground state energy. \item The reason why $\gamma^{1/2}$ appears naturally in the exchange term can be seen from the following integral condition. While in Schr\"odinger theory the total Coulomb repulsion energy is modeled by the integral of $\|x-y\|^{-1}$ against the two-particle density, in M\"uller theory it is modeled by the integral against $(1/2) (\rho_\gamma(x)\rho_\gamma(y) - \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2)$. The latter expression, when integrated with respect to $y$, yields $((N-1)/2)\rho_\gamma(x)$, which coincides with the value that the two-particle density of any state would give. In contrast, the Hartree--Fock analogue $(1/2) (\rho_\gamma(x)\rho_\gamma(y) - \|\gamma(x,y)\|^2)$ would give an integral which is too large (unless $\gamma$ is a projection). \item The prize to be paid for the correct integral condition is that the expression $(1/2) (\rho_\gamma(x)\rho_\gamma(y) - \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2)$ is, in general, not non-negative (while the true two-particle density and $(1/2) (\rho_\gamma(x)\rho_\gamma(y) - \|\gamma(x,y)\|^2)$ are). Because of this, the `multiplication by $\|x\|$' strategy \cite{Lieb-84} to show the existence of a maximum number of electrons seems not to work. As we have already mentioned, we can nevertheless prove this conjecture, based on an alternative argument. \item The ground state energies for neutral atoms (i.e., $N=Z$) in M\"uller and Hartree--Fock theory agree to within $o(Z^{5/3})$; see \cite{Siedentop-09}. In particular, M\"uller theory correctly reproduces the Scott and the Dirac--Schwinger corrections to Thomas--Fermi theory. \end{enumerate} \emph{Convention.} Throughout the paper we will assume that $E_Z^{\rm M}(N)$ has a minimizer $\gamma_0$ for some $N\ge Z$. We will write $\rho_0=\rho_{\gamma_0}$ for short. We will also often write $\mathcal E^{\rm M}$ instead of $\mathcal E^{\rm M}_Z$. \subsection{Acknowledgements} The authors are grateful to Heinz Siedentop for a motivating discussion. Partial support by U.S. National Science Foundation DMS-1363432 (R.L.F.), Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Project Nr. P 27533-N27 (P.T.N.), CONICYT (Chile) through CONICYT--PCHA/Doctorado Nacional/2014, Fondecyt Project \# 116--0856 and Iniciativa Cient\'ifica Milenio (Chile) through Millenium Nucleus RC--120002 ``F\'isica Matem\'atica'' (H.V.D.B.) is acknowledged. \section{Localizing density matrices} In this section we collect some known results that will be needed later. \begin{lemma} For all functions $\chi: \mathbb{R}^3 \to [-1,1]$ and all density matrices $0\le \gamma \le 1$, we have \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:X-1} X(\chi \gamma^{1/2} \chi) \le X((\chi \gamma \chi)^{1/2}) \end{eqnarray} and \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:X-2} X(\chi \gamma^{1/2}) \le \Big(\Tr (-\Delta \chi \gamma \chi) \Big)^{1/2} \Big(\int \chi^2 \rho_\gamma \Big)^{1/2}\end{eqnarray} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The first estimate is taken from \cite[Lemma 3]{FraLieSieSei-07}. The second estimate follows from the Schwarz and Hardy inequalities: \begin{align} X(\chi \gamma^{1/2}) &= \frac{1}{2}\iint \frac{\|\chi(x) \gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\le \frac{1}{2} \left( \iint \frac{\|\chi(x) \gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|^2} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \right)^{1/2} \left( \iint \|\chi(x) \gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \right)^{1/2}\\ &\le \Big(\Tr (-\Delta \chi \gamma \chi) \Big)^{1/2} \Big(\int \chi^2 \rho_\gamma \Big)^{1/2}. \qedhere \end{align} \end{proof} Using this lemma we obtain some rough a-priori bounds for a minimizer $\gamma_0$. \begin{corollary} If $\gamma_0$ is a M\"uller minimizer, then \begin{equation} \label{eq:apriorikinrep} \int \rho_0^{5/3} + \Tr(-\Delta\gamma_0) + D(\gamma_0) \leq C \left( Z^{7/3} + N \right) \end{equation} and \begin{equation} \label{eq:aprioriex} X(\gamma_0^{1/2}) \leq C \left( Z^{7/3} + N \right)^{1/2} N^{1/2} \,. \end{equation} \end{corollary} \begin{proof} We know from \cite[Lemma 1]{FraLieSieSei-07} that $\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma_0)\leq 0$. On the other hand, we deduce from \eqref{eq:X-2} that \begin{equation} \label{eq:aprioriex1} X(\gamma_0^{1/2}) \le \Big( \Tr(-\Delta \gamma_0) \Big)^{1/2} N^{1/2}. \end{equation} and therefore, by the kinetic Lieb--Thirring inequality \cite{LieThi-75} and the fact that the ground state energy in Thomas--Fermi theory equals a negative constant times $Z^{7/3}$, \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma_0) & \geq \frac14 \Tr(-\Delta\gamma_0) + C^{-1}\int \rho_0^{5/3} - Z \int \|x\|^{-1} \rho_0 + D(\rho_0) - CN \\ & \geq \frac14 \Tr(-\Delta\gamma_0) + (2C)^{-1}\int \rho_0^{5/3} + (1/2) D(\rho_0) - C Z^{-7/3} - CN. \end{align} This proves \eqref{eq:apriorikinrep}, and then \eqref{eq:aprioriex} follows from \eqref{eq:aprioriex1}. \end{proof} We next discuss how to localize the M\"uller energy. \begin{lemma}[IMS-type formula] \label{lem:IMS} For all quadratic partitions of unity $\sum_{i=1}^n f_i^2 =1$ with $ \nabla f_i \in L^{\infty}$ and for all density matrices $0\le \gamma \le 1$ with $\Tr((1-\Delta) \gamma)<\infty$, we have \begin{align} &\sum_{i=1}^n \mathcal{E}_{Z}^{\rm M} (f_i \gamma f_i ) - \mathcal{E}_{Z}^{\rm M} (\gamma) \le \int \Big(\sum_{i=1}^n \|\nabla f_i (x)\|^2 \Big) \rho_\gamma(x) {\, \rm d} x \\ & \qquad + \sum_{i<j}^n \iint \frac{f_i(x)^2 \Big(\|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 - \rho_\gamma(x) \rho_\gamma(y) \Big) f_j(y)^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} First, for the kinetic term, by the IMS formula, \begin{align} \sum_{i=1}^n \Tr(-\Delta f_i \gamma f_i) - \Tr(-\Delta \gamma) = \Tr \Big( \Big( \sum_{i=1}^n \|\nabla f_i\|^2\Big) \gamma \Big) = \int \Big(\sum_{i=1}^n \|\nabla f_i \|^2 \Big) \rho_\gamma. \end{align} Next, for the direct term, we also have the exact identity $$ \sum_{i=1}^n D(\rho_{f_i \gamma f_i}) = \sum_{i=1}^n D(f_i^2 \rho_\gamma) = D(\rho_\gamma) - \sum_{i<j}^n \iint \frac{f_i(x)^2 \rho_\gamma(x) \rho_\gamma(y)f_j(y)^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y . $$ For the correlation-exchange terms, using \eqref{eq:X-1} we can estimate \begin{align} & - \sum_{i=1}^n X((f_i \gamma f_i)^{1/2}) \le - \sum_{i=1}^n X(f_i \gamma^{1/2} f_i) \\ & = - X(\gamma^{1/2}) + \sum_{i< j}^n \iint \frac{f_i^2(x) \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 f_j^2(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} This finishes the proof. \end{proof} \section{Exterior $L^1$-estimate} In this section we control $\int_{\|x\|>r} \rho_0$. We introduce the screened nuclear potential $$ \Phi_r(x)=\frac{Z}{\|x\|} - \int_{\|y\|<r} \frac{\rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y. $$ As was shown in \cite{FraLieSieSei-07}, the M\"uller functional is convex and thus any minimizing density is spherically symmetric. Therefore, when $\|x\|\geq r$, we may write $\Phi_r(x)=Z_r/ \abs x$ with $Z_r = Z- \int_{\|y\|<r} \rho_0(y) {\, \rm d} y$. As we mentioned in the introduction, the spherical symmetry is not essential for our strategy. In the rest of the paper, we will use the cut-off function $$\chi_r^+ (x)=\1(\|x\|\ge r)$$ and a smooth function $\eta_r:\mathbb{R}^3\to [0,1]$ satisfying \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:def-eta-r} \chi_r^+ \ge \eta_r \ge \chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+, \quad \abs{\nabla \eta_r} \le C (\lambda r)^{-1}. \end{eqnarray} \begin{lemma} \label{lem:L1-bound} For all $r>0,s>0,\lambda\in (0,1/2]$ we have \begin{align} \int \chi^+_{r}\rho_0 &\le C \int_{r<\|x\|<(1+\lambda)^2 r} \rho_0 + C \Big(\sup_{\|z\|\ge r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+ + s + \lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ \lambda^{-1}\Big) \\ &\quad +C \Big( s^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{3/5} + C \Big( s^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/3}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} From the minimality of $\gamma_0$, we have the binding inequality \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:binding-inequality} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma_0) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\chi_1 \gamma_0 \chi_1) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_{Z=0}(\chi_2 \gamma_0 \chi_2) \end{eqnarray} for every partition of unity $\chi_1^2+\chi_2^2=1$. For fixed $\lambda\in (0,1/2]$, $s>0,\ell>0, \nu\in \mathbb{S}^2$ we choose $$ \chi_1 (x) = g_1 \Big( \frac{\nu \cdot \theta(x) -\ell}{s}\Big),\quad \chi_2(x)= g_2\Big( \frac{\nu \cdot \theta(x) -\ell}{s}\Big) $$ where $g_1,g_2: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ and $\theta: \mathbb{R}^3\to \mathbb{R}^3$ satisfy $$ g_1^2+g_2^2=1, \quad g_1(t)=1 \text{~if~} t \le 0, \quad g_1(t)=0 \text{~if~} t \ge 1,\quad \|\nabla g_1\| + \|\nabla g_2\| \le C, $$ $$ \|\theta (x)\| \le \|x\|, \quad \theta(x) =0 \text{~if~} \|x\| \le r, \quad \theta(x)=x \text{~if~} \|x\| \ge (1+\lambda) r, \quad \|\nabla \theta\|\le C \lambda^{-1}. $$ Now let us bound the left side of \eqref{eq:binding-inequality} from above. By the IMS-type formula in Lemma \ref{lem:IMS}, \begin{align} &\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\chi_1 \gamma_0 \chi_1) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_{Z=0}(\chi_2 \gamma_0 \chi_2) - \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma_0) \\ & \qquad \le \int \Big( \|\nabla \chi_1\|^2 + \|\nabla \chi_2\|^2\Big) \rho_0 + \int \frac{Z\chi_2^2(x) \rho_0(x)}{\|x\|} {\, \rm d} x \\ & \qquad + \iint \frac{\chi_2^2(x) \Big( \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 - \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y)\Big) \chi_1^2(y) }{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} We have $$ \int \Big( \|\nabla \chi_1\|^2 + \|\nabla \chi_2\|^2\Big) \rho_0 \le C(1+ (\lambda s)^{-2}) \int_{\nu \cdot \theta(x) -s \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x) } \rho_0(x) {\, \rm d} x. $$ For the attraction and direct terms, we can estimate \begin{align} & \int \frac{Z\chi_2^2(x) \rho_0(x)}{\|x\|} {\, \rm d} x - \iint \frac{\chi_2^2(x) \rho_0(x) \chi_1^2(y) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &= \int \chi_2^2(x) \rho_0(x) \Phi_r (x) {\, \rm d} x - \iint_{\|y\| \ge r} \frac{\chi_2^2(x) \rho_0(x) \chi_1^2(y) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\le \int_{\ell \le x \cdot \theta(x) } \rho_0(x) \big[\Phi_r(x)\big]_+ {\, \rm d} x - \iint_{\|y\| \ge r, \nu \cdot \theta(y) \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x)-s} \frac{ \rho_0(x) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} Since $\theta (x) = x$ when $\|x\| \ge (1+\lambda)r$, we obtain \[ \iint_{\substack{\|y\| \ge r \\ \nu \cdot \theta(y) \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x)-s}} \frac{ \rho_0(x) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \ge \iint_{\substack{\|x\|,\|y\| \ge (1+\lambda) r \\ \nu \cdot y \le \ell \le \nu \cdot x-s}} \frac{ \rho_0(x) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \] For the correlation-exchange term, we use \begin{align} \iint \frac{\chi_2^2(x) \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 \chi_1^2(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \le \iint_{\nu \cdot \theta(y) - s \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x)} \frac{ \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} Thus in summary, from \eqref{eq:binding-inequality} it follows that \begin{align} \label{eq:binding-consequence-1-ext} & \iint_{\substack{\|x\|,\|y\| \ge (1+\lambda) r \\ \nu \cdot y \le \ell \le \nu \cdot x-s}} \frac{ \rho_0(x) \rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \le C(1+ (\lambda s)^{-2}) \int_{\nu \cdot \theta(x) -s \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x) } \rho_0(x) {\, \rm d} x \nonumber\\ &+ \int_{\ell \le x \cdot \theta(x) } \rho_0(x) \big[\Phi_r(x)\big]_+ {\, \rm d} x + \iint_{\nu \cdot \theta(y) - s \le \ell \le \nu \cdot \theta(x)} \frac{ \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \end{align} for all $s>0,\ell>0$ and $\nu \in \mathbb{S}^2$. Next, we integrate \eqref{eq:binding-consequence-1-ext} over $\ell \in (0,\infty)$, then average over $\nu \in \mathbb{S}^2$ and use $$ \int_{\mathbb{S}^2} [\nu\cdot z]_+\,\frac{d\nu}{4\pi} = \frac{\|z\|}{4}, \quad \forall z\in \mathbb{R}^3. $$ For the left side, we also use Fubini's theorem and $$ \int_0^\infty \Big( \1\big(b \le \ell \le a - s\big) + \1\big(- a \le \ell \le - b - s\big) \Big) {\, \rm d} \ell \ge \Big[ [a-b]_+ -2s \Big]_+ $$ with $a=\nu \cdot x$, $b=\nu \cdot y$. For the right side, we use the fact that $\{x:\nu\cdot \theta(x)\ge \ell\}\subset \{x:\|x\|\ge r\}$ since $\ell>0$ and $\theta(x)=0$ when $\|x\|<r$. All this leads to \begin{align} &\frac{1}{2} \iint_{\|x\|,\|y\|\ge (1+\lambda)r} \frac{\|x-y\|/4-2s}{\|x-y\|} \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y) {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \le C(s+\lambda^{-2}s^{-1}) \int_{\|x\|\ge r} \rho_0(x) {\, \rm d} x + \int_{\|x\|\ge r} [\|\theta(x)\|/4][\Phi_r(x)]_+ \rho_0(x) {\, \rm d} x \\ &+ \iint_{\|x\|\ge r} \frac{\|\theta(x)-\theta(y)\|/4+ s}{\|x-y\|}\|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y . \end{align} Using $\|\theta(x)\|\le \|x\|$ and $\|\theta(x)-\theta(y)\|\le C \lambda^{-1}\|x-y\|$, we can simplify the above estimate to \begin{align} \frac{1}{8} \left( \int \chi^+_{(1+\lambda)r}\rho_0 \right)^2 &\le \Big(\frac{1}{4} \sup_{\|z\|\ge r} [\|z\| \Phi_r(z)]_+ + Cs + C\lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ C\lambda^{-1}\Big) \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 \nonumber \\ & + s D(\chi^+_{(1+\lambda)r}\rho_0 ) + s \iint \frac{\chi_r^+(x) \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y . \end{align} In order to bring this estimate in the desired form, let us replace $r$ by $(1+\lambda)r$ in the latter inequality and write \begin{align} \label{eq:ext-1/8-pre} &\frac{1}{8} \left( \int \chi^+_{(1+\lambda)^2r}\rho_0 \right)^2 \nonumber \\ & \qquad \le \Big(\frac{1}{4} \sup_{\|z\|\ge (1+\lambda)r} [\|z\| \Phi_{(1+\lambda)r}(z)]_+ + Cs + C\lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ C\lambda^{-1}\Big) \int \chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+ \rho_0 \nonumber \\ & \qquad + s D(\chi^+_{(1+\lambda)^2r}\rho_0 ) + s \iint \frac{\chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+(x) \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \,. \end{align} We can estimate the left side of \eqref{eq:ext-1/8-pre} as $$ \left( \int \chi^+_{(1+\lambda)^2r}\rho_0 \right)^2 \ge \frac{1}{2} \left( \int \chi^+_{r}\rho_0 \right)^2 - \left( \int_{r<\|x\|<(1+\lambda)^2 r} \rho_0 \right)^2. $$ Now we estimate the right side of \eqref{eq:ext-1/8-pre}. For the first term, we can simply use $\Phi_{(1+\lambda) r}(z)\le \Phi_r(z)$ and $\chi_{(1+\lambda)r}\le \chi_r$ to get \begin{align} &\Big(\frac{1}{4} \sup_{\|z\|\ge (1+\lambda)r} [\|z\| \Phi_{(1+\lambda)r}(z)]_+ + Cs + C\lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ C\lambda^{-1}\Big) \int \chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+ \rho_0 \\ &\le \Big(\frac{1}{4} \sup_{\|z\|\ge r} [\|z\| \Phi_{r}(z)]_+ + Cs + C\lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ C\lambda^{-1}\Big) \int \chi_{r}^+ \rho_0. \end{align} For the second term, by the Hardy--Littewood--Sobolev, H\"older and Lieb--Thirring inequalities, \begin{align} D(\chi_{(1+\lambda)^2r}^+ \rho_0) &\leq C \\| \chi_{(1+\lambda)^2 r}^+ \rho_0 \\|_{L^{6/5}}^2 \le C \\| \chi_{(1+\lambda)^2 r}^+ \rho_0 \\|_{L^{1}}^{7/6} \\| \chi_{(1+\lambda)^2 r}^+ \rho_0 \\|_{L^{5/3}}^{5/6}\\ & \le C \\| \chi_{r}^+ \rho_0 \\|_{L^{1}}^{7/6} \Big( \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} . \end{align} Here we have used $\eta_r^2 \ge \chi_{(1+\lambda)^2r}^+$. For the third term, by \eqref{eq:X-2}, \begin{align} \iint \frac{\chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+(x)\|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y &\le \iint \frac{\eta_{r}(x)^2\|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\le 2 \Big( \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}. \end{align} Thus from \eqref{eq:ext-1/8-pre}, we deduce that \begin{align} \left( \int \chi^+_{r}\rho_0 \right)^2 &\le C \left( \int_{r<\|x\|<(1+\lambda)^2 r} \rho_0 \right)^2 \\ &+C \Big( \sup_{\|z\|\ge r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+ + s + \lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ \lambda^{-1}\Big) \int \chi_{r}^+ \rho_0 \\ &+Cs \Big( \chi_{r}^+ \rho_0 \Big)^{7/6} \Big( \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \\ &+Cs \Big( \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}. \end{align} This implies that \begin{align} \int \chi^+_{r}\rho_0 &\le C \int_{r<\|x\|<(1+\lambda)^2 r} \rho_0 + C \Big(\sup_{\|z\|\ge r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+ + s + \lambda^{-2}s^{-1}+ \lambda^{-1}\Big) \\ &+C \Big( s^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{3/5} + C\Big( s^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/3}. \qedhere \end{align} \end{proof} As a by-product of the above proof, we get the following important a-priori bounds. \begin{corollary}\label{roughbound} If $\gamma_0$ is a M\"uller minimizer, then \begin{equation} \label{eq:roughbound} \Tr\gamma_0 = N \le 2Z + C(Z^{2/3}+1). \end{equation} Moreover, \begin{equation} \label{eq:apriorikinrepimpr} \int \rho_0^{5/3} + \Tr(-\Delta\gamma_0) + D(\gamma_0) \leq C \left( Z^{7/3} + 1 \right) \end{equation} and \begin{equation} \label{eq:apriorieximpr} X(\gamma_0^{1/2}) \leq C \left( Z^{5/3} + 1 \right) \,. \end{equation} \end{corollary} We emphasize that \eqref{eq:roughbound} proves the conjecture from \cite{FraLieSieSei-07} that there is a critical electron number. \begin{proof} In \eqref{eq:ext-1/8-pre}, we can choose $\lambda=1/2$ and take $r\to 0^+$. This leads to $$ N^2 \le (2Z+Cs+Cs^{-1} + C) N + Cs D(\rho_0)+ Cs X(\gamma_0^{1/2}). $$ Optimizing over $s>0$, we deduce that \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:binding-consequence-2} N \le 2Z + C + C \sqrt{\Big(D(\rho_0)+ X(\gamma_0^{1/2})+N\Big)N^{-1}} \end{eqnarray} According to the a-priori bounds \eqref{eq:apriorikinrep} and \eqref{eq:aprioriex} we have $$D(\gamma_0)+X(\gamma_0) \le C(Z^{7/3}+N).$$ Inserting this bound into \eqref{eq:binding-consequence-2} we obtain \eqref{eq:roughbound}. The bounds \eqref{eq:apriorikinrepimpr} and \eqref{eq:apriorieximpr} now follow immediately from \eqref{eq:apriorikinrep} and \eqref{eq:aprioriex}. \end{proof} \section{Spliting outside from inside} Recall that we have introduced a smooth cut-off function $\eta_r:\mathbb{R}^3\to [0,1]$ satisfying $$ \chi_r^+ \ge \eta_r\ge \chi_{(1+\lambda)r}^+$$ with $\lambda\in (0,1/2]$. Of course, we can choose $\eta_r$ such that there is a quadratic partition of unity $$ \eta_-^2 + \eta_{(0)}^2 + \eta_r^2 =1 $$ with \begin{align} \supp \eta_- \subset \{\|x\| \le r\},& \quad \supp \eta_{(0)} \subset \{ (1-\lambda)r \le \|x\| \le (1+\lambda)r\}, \\ \quad \eta_-(x) =1 \text{~if~} \|x\| \le (1-\lambda) r,& \quad \|\nabla \eta_-\|^2 +\|\nabla \eta_{(0)}\|^2+\|\nabla \eta_r\|^2 \le C(\lambda r)^{-2}. \end{align} Let us introduce the reduced Hartree-Fock functional \begin{equation} \label{eq:rhf} \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\gamma)= \Tr(-\Delta \gamma) -\int \Phi_r(x) \rho_\gamma (x) {\, \rm d} x + D(\rho_\gamma). \end{equation} The main result of this section is \begin{lemma} \label{lem:split} For all $r>0$, all $\lambda\in (0,1/2]$, all density matrices $0\le \gamma \le 1$ satisfying $\supp \rho_\gamma \subset \{x: \|x\|\ge r\}$ and $\Tr \gamma \le \int \chi_r^+\rho_0$ we have $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\gamma) + \mathcal{R} $$ where \begin{align} \mathcal{R} &\le C (1+ (\lambda r)^{-2}) \int_{(1-\lambda)r \le \|x\| \le (1+\lambda)r} \rho_0 + C \lambda r^3 \sup_{\|z\|\ge (1-\lambda)r}[ \Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(z)]_+^{5/2} \\ &\quad + C \Big( \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \eta_r \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} It suffices to show that \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:key-split}\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) - \mathcal{R} \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\gamma)\end{eqnarray} Here and in the following the subscript $Z$ of $\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}$ is dropped for simplicity. {\bf Upper bound.} From the minimality of $\gamma_0$ and the fact that $N\mapsto E^{\rm M}(N)$ is non-increasing, we have $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma).$$ Since $\eta_-$ and $\rho_\gamma$ have disjoint supports, we have the operator identity $$(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma)^{1/2} = (\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-)^{1/2} + \gamma^{1/2} $$ and the kernel identity $$\|(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma )^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 = \|(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-)^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2 + \|\gamma^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2.$$ Therefore, we can split the exchange term $$ X((\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma)^{1/2})=X((\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-)^{1/2}) + X(\gamma^{1/2}). $$ Consequently, \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma) &= \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-)+ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma) + \iint \frac{(\eta_-^2\rho_0)(x) \rho_\gamma(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_{r=0} (\gamma) + \iint_{\|x\| \le r} \frac{\rho_0(x) \rho_\gamma(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & = \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r(\gamma). \end{align} Thus, $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_- + \gamma) \le \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_- \gamma_0 \eta_-) + \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF}(\gamma). $$ This is the upper bound in \eqref{eq:key-split}. {\bf Lower bound.} By the IMS-type formula in Lemma \ref{lem:IMS}, \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) &\ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_-\gamma_0\eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \\ &\quad - \int \Big( \|\nabla \eta_-\|^2 + \|\nabla \eta_{(0)}\|^2 + \|\nabla \eta_r\|^2\Big) \rho_0 \\ & \quad + \iint \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y)(\eta_-(y)^2 + \eta_{(0)}(y))^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \quad + \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y) \eta_-(y)^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \quad - \iint \frac{(\eta_r(x)^2+\eta_{(0)}(x)^2) \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y . \end{align} We have $$ - \int \Big( \|\nabla \eta_-\|^2 + \|\nabla \eta_{(0)}\|^2 + \|\nabla \eta_r\|^2\Big) \rho_0 \ge - C(\lambda r)^{-2} \int_{(1-\lambda)r\le \|x\| \le (1+\lambda)r} \rho_0. $$ Moreover, \begin{align} &\mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) + \iint \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y)(\eta_-(y)^2 + \eta_{(0)}(y))^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y\\ &\qquad \qquad - \iint \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) + \iint_{\|y\|\le r} \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\qquad \qquad - \iint \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &= \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) - X((\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r)^{1/2}) - \iint \frac{\eta_r(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) - 3 \Big( \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \eta_r^2 \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}. \end{align} In the last inequality we have used \eqref{eq:X-2} twice, once with $\chi=1$ and once with $\chi=\eta_r$. Similarly, we have \begin{align} &\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) + \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y) \eta_-(y)^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\qquad - \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) + \iint_{\|y\|\le (1-\lambda)r} \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\qquad - \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &= \mathcal{E}_{(1-\lambda)r}^{\rm RHF}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) - X ((\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)})^{1/2}) - \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ &\ge \mathcal{E}_{(1-\lambda)r}^{\rm RHF}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) - 3 \Big( \Tr(-\Delta \eta_{(0)} \gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \eta_{(0)}^2 \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}\\ &\ge \Tr\bigl((-(1/2)\Delta - \Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}) \eta_{(0)} \gamma_0 \eta_{(0)} \bigr)- C \int \eta_{(0)}^2 \rho_0 \,. \numberthis \label{eq:intermediate-region-bound} \end{align} Applying the Lieb--Thirring inequality with $V = \Phi_{(1-\lambda)r} \boldsymbol1_{\supp \eta_{(0)}}$, we obtain \begin{align} \Tr\bigl((-(1/2)\Delta - \Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}) \eta_{(0)} \gamma_0 \eta_{(0)} \bigr) &\ge \Tr [-(1/2)\Delta - V]_- \ge -C \int V^{5/2}\\ & \ge -C \lambda r^{3} \sup_{\abs{x} \ge (1-\lambda)r}[\Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(x)]_+^{5/2}. \end{align} Thus \eqref{eq:intermediate-region-bound} implies that \begin{align} &\mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_{(0)}\gamma_0 \eta_{(0)}) + \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \rho_0(x)\rho_0(y) \eta_-(y)^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \qquad - \iint \frac{\eta_{(0)}(x)^2 \|\gamma_0^{1/2}(x,y)\|^2}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} x {\, \rm d} y \\ & \ge - C \lambda r^{3 }\sup_{\abs{x} \ge (1-\lambda)r}[\Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(x)]_+^{5/2} - C \int_{(1-\lambda)r \le \|x\| \le (1+\lambda)r} \rho_0. \end{align} Putting everyting together, we conclude that \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) &\ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\eta_-\gamma_0\eta_-) + \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \\ & \quad - C(1+(\lambda r)^{-2}) \int_{(1-\lambda)r\le \|x\| \le (1+\lambda)r} \rho_0 \\ &\quad - C \lambda r^{3 }\sup_{\abs{x} \ge (1-\lambda)r}[\Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(x)]_+^{5/2} \\ & \quad - 3 \Big( \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \Big)^{1/2} \Big( \int \eta_r \rho_0 \Big)^{1/2}. \end{align} This implies the lower bound in \eqref{eq:key-split}. \end{proof} As a by-product of the above proof we obtain \begin{lemma} \label{lem:outside-kinetic} For all $r>0$ and all $\lambda\in (0,1/2]$ we have \begin{align} \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) & \le C (1+ (\lambda r)^{-2}) \int \chi_{(1-\lambda)r}^+\rho_0 \\ & \quad + C\lambda r^3 \sup_{\|z\|\geq (1-\lambda)r} [\Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(z)]_+^{5/2} + C\sup_{\|z\|\ge r}[\|z\| \Phi_r(z)]_+^{7/3}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} We apply Lemma \ref{lem:split} with $\gamma=0$ and obtain $\mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r)\leq\mathcal R$. On the other hand, by the kinetic Lieb--Thirring inequality and the fact that the ground state energy in Thomas--Fermi theory is a negative constant times $-Z^{7/3}$, we have \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_r (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \geq & (1/2) \Tr(-\Delta\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \\ & + C^{-1} \int (\eta_r^2 \rho_0)^{5/3} - \sup_{\|z\|\geq r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+ \int \frac{\eta_r^2 \rho_0}{\|x\|} + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0) \\ =& (1/2) \Tr(-\Delta\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) - C \sup_{\|z\|\geq r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+^{7/3}. \end{align} Therefore, $$ \Tr(-\Delta\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \leq C\mathcal R + C \sup_{\|z\|\geq r} [\|z\|\Phi_r(z)]_+^{7/3}, $$ which implies the lemma. \end{proof} \section{A collection of useful facts} \iffalse \subsection{Thomas--Fermi theory}\label{sec:TF} The following theorem about TF theory is contained in \cite[Sections 4, 5]{Solovej-03} and appeared explicitly as \cite[Thm. 10, Thm. 11]{FraNamBos-16}. We will denote $$c_{\rm TF}= \frac{3}{5}(3\pi^2)^{2/3}.$$ (For comparison with \cite{Solovej-03} we note that in our definition of the M\"uller energy functional the kinetic energy is involves $-\Delta$, not $-(1/2)\Delta$.) \begin{theorem} \label{thm:TF-V}(i) Let $V: \mathbb{R}^3 \to \mathbb{R}$ such that $V\in L^{5/2}+L^\infty$ and $V$ vanishes at infinity. For every $m>0$, there exists a unique minimizer $\rho_V^{\rm TF}$ for the TF energy functional $$ \mathcal{E}_V^{\rm TF}(\rho)= c^{\rm TF} \int \rho(x)^{5/3}{\, \rm d} x - \int V(x) \rho(x) {\, \rm d} x +D(\rho). $$ subject to $$ \rho\ge 0, \quad \rho\in L^{5/3}(\mathbb{R}^3) \cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^3), \quad \int \rho \le m. $$ It satisfies the TF equation $$ \frac{5c^{\rm TF}}{3}(\rho_V^{\rm TF}(x))^{2/3} = [\varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x) - \mu_V^{\rm TF}]_+ $$ with $\varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x) = V(x)-\rho_V^{\rm TF}\|x\|^{-1}$ and a constant $\mu_V^{\rm TF} \ge 0$. Moreover, if $\mu_V^{\rm TF}>0$, then $\int \rho_V^{\rm TF}=m$. (ii) Assume further that $V$ is harmonic for $\|x\|>r>0$, continuous for $\|x\|\ge r$ and $\lim_{\|x\|\to \infty} \|x\|V(x) \le m.$ If $$\mu_V^{\rm TF}< \inf_{\|x\|=r} \varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x),$$ then $\mu_V^{\rm TF}=0$, $\int \rho_V^{\rm TF} = \lim_{\|x\|\to \infty} \|x\|V(x)$ and for all $\|x\|>r$ we have $$ \varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x)> 0, \quad \Delta \varphi_V^{\rm TF} = 4\pi \rho_V^{\rm TF} = 4\pi \Big( \frac{3}{5 c^{\rm TF}} \Big)^{3/2} \varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x)^{3/2} $$ and the Sommerfeld estimate \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:Sommerfeld} \left(1+ a_r \Big(\frac{r}{\|x\|}\Big)^\zeta\right)^{-2} \le \frac{\varphi_V^{\rm TF}(x)}{A^{\rm TF} \|x\|^{-4}} \le1+ A_r \Big(\frac{r}{\|x\|}\Big)^\zeta. \end{eqnarray} Here $A^{\rm TF}=(5 c^{\rm TF})^3(3 \pi^2)^{-1}$, $\zeta=(\sqrt{73}-7)/2 \approx 0.77$ and $$ a_r=\sup_{\|z\|=r} \left( \frac{\varphi_V^{\rm TF}(z)}{A^{\rm TF} \|z\|^{-4}} \right)^{-1/2} -1, \quad A_r= \sup_{\|z\|=r} \frac{\varphi_V^{\rm TF}(z)}{A^{\rm TF} \|z\|^{-4}}-1. $$ (iii) For the standard atomic case $V=Z/\|x\|$, there exists a unique absolute minimizer $\rho^{\rm TF}$ (over all $0\le \rho \in L^{5/3}(\mathbb{R}^3) \cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^3)$). We have $\int \rho^{\rm TF} =Z$. Moreover, $$0< \varphi^{\rm TF}(x) = Z\|x\|^{-1} - \rho^{\rm TF}\|x\|^{-1} \le A^{\rm TF} \|x\|^{-4},\quad \forall \|x\|>0$$ and $$\varphi^{\rm TF}(x) \ge A^{\rm TF} \|x\|^{-4} \left(1+ C \Big(\frac{Z^{-1/3}}{\|x\|}\Big)^\zeta\right)^{-2}, \quad \forall \|x\|\ge Z^{-1/3}.$$ Consequently, $$\rho^{\rm TF}(x) \le \Big(\frac{3 A^{\rm TF}}{5c^{\rm TF}}\Big)^{3/2} \|x\|^{-6},\quad \forall \|x\|>0$$ and $$\rho^{\rm TF}(x) \ge \Big(\frac{3 A^{\rm TF}}{5 c^{\rm TF}}\Big)^{3/2} \|x\|^{-6} \left(1+ C \Big(\frac{Z^{-1/3}}{\|x\|}\Big)^\zeta\right)^{-3}, \quad \forall \|x\|\ge Z^{-1/3}.$$ \end{theorem} \fi \subsection{Semiclassical analysis} In order to compare M\"uller theory with Tho\-mas--Fermi theory, we use a semiclassical approximation. The following results are taken from \cite[Lemma 8.2]{Solovej-03} (more precisely, we have optimized over $\delta>0$ and changed $V\mapsto 2V$). We put $$ L_{\rm sc}= (15 \pi^2)^{-1}. $$ \begin{lemma}\label{lem:semi} For $s>0$, fix a smooth function $g:\mathbb{R}^3\to [0,1]$ such that $$ \supp g \subset \{\|x\| \le s\}, \quad \int g^2=1,\quad \int \|\nabla g\|^2 \le Cs^{-2}. $$ (i) For all $V: \mathbb{R}^3\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $[V]_+, [V-Vg^2]_+ \in L^{5/2}$ and for all density matrices $0\le \gamma \le 1$, we have \begin{align} \label{eq:semi-lower} \Tr( (-\Delta-V)\gamma) &\ge - L_{\rm sc} \int [V]_+^{5/2} - C s^{-2} \Tr \gamma \nonumber\\ &\qquad - C \left( \int [V]_+^{5/2}\right)^{3/5}\left( \int [V-Vg^2]_+^{5/2}\right)^{2/5}. \end{align} (ii) On the other hand, if $[V]_+\in L^{5/2}\cap L^{3/2}$, then there is a density matrix $\gamma$ such that $$ \rho_\gamma= \frac{5}{2}L_{\rm sc} [V]_+^{3/2}g^2 $$ and \begin{align} \label{eq:semi-upper} \Tr( -\Delta\gamma) \leq \frac{3}{2}L_{\rm sc}\int [V]_+^{5/2} + C s^{-2} \int [V]_+^{3/2}. \end{align} \end{lemma} \subsection{Coulomb potential estimate} The following bound is essentially contained in \cite[Cor. 9.3]{Solovej-03} and appears explicitly in \cite[Lem. 18]{FraNamBos-16} (applied to both $\pm f$). \begin{lemma} \label{lem:f1/\|x\|} For every $f\in L^{5/3} \cap L^{6/5} (\mathbb{R}^3)$ and $x\in \mathbb{R}^3$, we have \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:Coulomb-estimate-2} \left\| \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|} \frac{f(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y \right\| \le C \\|f\\|_{L^{5/3}}^{5/6} (\|x\|D(f))^{1/12}. \end{eqnarray} \end{lemma} \section{Screened potential estimate} From now on we always assume that $\gamma_0$ is a minimizer for $E_Z^{\rm M}(N)$ with $N\ge Z \ge 1$. Our main tool to prove the ionization bound is the following \begin{lemma}[Screened potential estimate] \label{lem:screened} There are universal constants $C>0,\varepsilon>0,D>0$ such that $$ \| \Phi_{\|x\|}(x) - \Phi^{\rm TF}_{\|x\|}(x) \| \le C \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall \|x\|\le D. $$ \end{lemma} We prove Lemma 13 using a bootstrap argument based on two lemmas. \begin{lemma}[Initial step] \label{thm:screened-first} There is a universal constant $C_1>0$ such that $$ \| \Phi_{\|x\|}(x) - \Phi^{\rm TF}_{\|x\|}(x) \| \le C_1 Z^{49/36-a}\|x\|^{1/12}, \quad \forall \|x\|>0, $$ with $a = 1/198$. \end{lemma} \begin{lemma}[Iterative step] \label{thm:screened-it} There are universal constants $C_2, \beta,\delta,\varepsilon >0$ such that, if \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:assume-D} \| \Phi_{\|x\|}(x) - \Phi^{\rm TF}_{\|x\|}(x) \| \le \beta \|x\|^{-4}, \quad \forall \|x\| \le D \end{eqnarray} for some $D\in [Z^{-1/3}, 1]$, then \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:assume-D-it} \| \Phi_{\|x\|}(x) - \Phi^{\rm TF}_{\|x\|}(x) \| \le C_2 \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall D\le \|x\| \le D^{1-\delta}. \end{eqnarray} \end{lemma} Let us prove Lemma \ref{lem:screened} using Lemmas \ref{thm:screened-first} and \ref{thm:screened-it}. The proof is identical to \cite[Proof of Lemma 15]{FraNamBos-16}, but is repeated here for the convenience of the reader. \begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:screened}] We use the notations in Lemmas \ref{thm:screened-first} and \ref{thm:screened-it} and set $\sigma=\max\{C_1,C_2\}$. Without loss of generality we may assume that $\beta<\sigma$ and $\varepsilon\le 3a=1/66$. Let us denote $$D_n=Z^{-\frac{1}{3}(1-\delta)^n}, \quad n=0,1,2,\ldots .$$ From Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first}, we have $$ \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le C_1 Z^{49/36-a}\|x\|^{1/12} \le \sigma \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall \|x\| \le D_0=Z^{-1/3}. $$ From Lemma \ref{thm:screened-it}, we deduce by induction that for all $n=0,1,2,...$, if $$\sigma (D_n)^\varepsilon \le \beta,$$ then $$ \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le \sigma \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall \|x\|\le D_{n+1}.$$ Note that $D_n\to 1$ as $n\to\infty$ and that $\sigma>\beta$. Thus, there is a minimal $n_0=0,1,2,\ldots$ such that $\sigma (D_{n_0})^\epsilon>\beta$. If $n_0\ge 1$, then $\sigma (D_{n_0-1})^\epsilon\le\beta$ and therefore by the preceding argument $$ \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le \sigma \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall \|x\|\le D_{n_0} \,. $$ As we have already shown, the same bound holds for $n_0=0$. Let $D =(\sigma^{-1}\beta)^{1/\epsilon}$, which is a universal constant, and note that by choice of $n_0$ we have $D_{n_0}\geq D$. \end{proof} We will prove Lemmas \ref{thm:screened-first} and \ref{thm:screened-it} in the following two sections. \section{Initial step} In this section we prove Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first}. Recall that we always assume $Z \ge 1$. For simplicity we write $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}(\gamma) = \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}_{r=0}(\gamma) = \Tr (-\Delta \gamma) - \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \frac{Z\rho_\gamma(x)}{\|x\|} {\, \rm d} x + D(\rho_\gamma). $$ \begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first}] The strategy is to bound $\mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\gamma_0)$ from above and below using the semi-classical estimates from Lemma \ref{lem:semi}. The main term in both bounds is $\mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF})$, but in the lower bound we will get an additional term $D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF})$. The error terms in the upper and lower bounds will then give an upper bound on $D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF})$ which will imply the lemma. \textbf{Upper bound.} We shall show that \begin{equation} \label{eq:initialupper} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) \leq \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF}) + C Z^{11/5}. \end{equation} Indeed, since $$ N\mapsto \inf\{ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma) \|\ 0\leq\gamma\leq 1,\ \Tr\gamma=N\} $$ is non-increasing (indeed, it is even non-increasing when $N/16$ is added, see \cite[Proposition 4]{FraLieSieSei-07} and note the different convention for the kinetic energy) and since the contribution of the exchange term to the energy is non-positive, we have \begin{align}\label{eq:initialupper1} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}(\gamma_0) & \leq \inf\{ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M}_Z(\gamma) \|\ 0\leq\gamma\leq 1,\ \Tr\gamma\leq N\} \notag \\ & \leq \inf\{ \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}(\gamma) \|\ 0\leq\gamma\leq 1,\ \Tr\gamma\leq N \}. \end{align} Thus, \eqref{eq:initialupper} follows from a well-known bound on the ground state energy in reduced Hartree--Fock theory (essentially in \cite[Proof of Theorem 5.1]{Lieb-81b}), but we include a proof for the sake of completeness. We introduce the Thomas--Fermi potential $$ \varphi^{\rm TF}(x)=\frac{Z}{\|x\|} - \rho^{\rm TF} \|x\|^{-1} $$ and apply Lemma \ref{lem:semi} (ii) with $V=\varphi^{\rm TF}$ and a spherically symmetric $g$ to obtain a density matrix $\gamma'$. Because of the Thomas--Fermi equation we have $$ \rho_{\gamma'} = \frac{5}{2}L_{\rm sc} \left( \varphi^{\rm TF}\right)^{3/2}g^2 = \rho^{\rm TF} g^2. $$ Since $$ \Tr\gamma' = \int \rho_{\gamma'} = \int \rho^{\rm TF} =Z \leq N, $$ we obtain $$ \inf\{ \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}(\gamma) \|\ 0\leq\gamma\leq 1,\ \Tr\gamma\leq N\} \leq \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF}(\gamma'). $$ By the semiclassical estimate from Lemma~\ref{lem:semi} (ii) \begin{align} \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF} ( \gamma') & \le \frac{3}{2}L_{\rm sc}\int [V]_+^{5/2} + C s^{-2} \int [V]_+^{3/2} - \int \frac{Z}{\|x\|} \left(\rho^{\rm TF}g^2\right) \\ & \qquad + D(\rho^{\rm TF}* g^2) \\ &\le c^{\rm TF} \int [\rho^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/3} - \int \frac{Z}{\|x\|} \rho^{\rm TF} + D(\rho^{\rm TF}) \\ & \qquad + C s^{-2} \int \rho^{\rm TF} + \int \left(\frac{Z}{\|x\|}-\frac{Z}{\|x\|}g^2\right) \rho^{\rm TF} \\ & = \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF}) + C s^{-2} \int \rho^{\rm TF} + \int \left(\frac{Z}{\|x\|}-\frac{Z}{\|x\|}g^2\right) \rho^{\rm TF}, \end{align} where we have used the convexity of $D$ in the second inequality. By Newton's theorem, $\|x\|^{-1} - \|x\|^{-1}g^2$ is non-negative, bounded by $\|x\|^{-1}$ and vanishes when $\|x\|>s$. Moreover, bounding $\varphi^{\rm TF}$ in the Thomas--Fermi equation from above by $Z\|x\|^{-1}$, we find $$ \rho^{\rm TF}(x) \leq \left( \frac{3}{5 c^{\rm TF}} \right)^{3/2} Z^{3/2} \|x\|^{-3/2}. $$ These facts yield $$ \int \left(\frac{Z}{\|x\|}-\frac{Z}{\|x\|}g^2\right) \rho^{\rm TF} \leq C Z^{5/2} s^{1/2}. $$ Thus, after optimization in $s$, $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm RHF} ( \gamma') \leq \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF}) + C Z^{11/5}. $$ Combining this with \eqref{eq:initialupper1} we obtain \eqref{eq:initialupper}. \textbf{Lower bound.} We now show that \begin{equation} \label{eq:initiallower} \mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\gamma_0) \ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF}) + D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}) - CZ^{25/11}. \end{equation} With the Thomas--Fermi potential introduced above we can write $$ \mathcal{E}^{\rm M} (\gamma_0) = \Tr ((-\Delta-\varphi^{\rm TF})\gamma_0) + D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}) - D(\rho^{\rm TF}) - X(\gamma_0^{1/2}). $$ According to \eqref{eq:apriorieximpr} we can bound the exchange term by $$X(\gamma_0^{1/2}) \le C Z^{5/3}.$$ Next, from the semiclassical estimate \eqref{eq:semi-lower} we have \begin{align} \Tr( (-\Delta-\varphi^{\rm TF})\gamma_0) &\ge - L_{\rm sc} \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - C s^{-2}\Tr \gamma_0 \nonumber\\ &\qquad - C \left( \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2}\right)^{3/5}\left( \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}-\varphi^{\rm TF}g^2]_+^{5/2}\right)^{2/5}. \end{align} According to \eqref{eq:roughbound} we can bound $\Tr \gamma_0=N\le CZ$. Moreover, by scaling, $$ \int \|\varphi^{\rm TF}\|^{5/2} = C \int (\rho^{\rm TF})^{5/3} \le C Z^{7/3} $$ and, as explained in \cite[end of page 554]{Solovej-03}, $$ \int \|\varphi^{\rm TF}- \varphi^{\rm TF}g^2\|^{5/2} \le CZ^{5/2} s^{1/2}.$$ Thus, \begin{align} \Tr( (-\Delta-\varphi^{\rm TF})\gamma_0) &\ge - L_{\rm sc} \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - Cs^{-2}Z - C Z^{12/5} s^{1/5}. \end{align} Optimizing over $s>0$ we get \begin{align} \Tr( (-\Delta-\varphi^{\rm TF})\gamma_0) &\ge - L_{\rm sc} \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - CZ^{25/11}. \end{align} Note that from the Thomas--Fermi equation, we have \begin{equation} \label{eq:initiallowercomp} - L_{\rm sc} \int [\varphi^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - D(\rho^{\rm TF}) = \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}(\rho^{\rm TF}), \end{equation} which proves \eqref{eq:initiallower}. \textbf{Conclusion.} Combining \eqref{eq:initialupper} and \eqref{eq:initiallower} we infer that $$ D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}) \le CZ^{25/11}. $$ From the Coulomb estimate \eqref{eq:Coulomb-estimate-2} with $f= \rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}$ and the kinetic estimates $$\int \rho_0^{5/3} \le CZ^{7/3}, \quad \int (\rho^{\rm TF})^{5/3} \le CZ^{7/3},$$ (the first one follows from \eqref{eq:apriorikinrepimpr} and the second one follows simply by scaling) we find that for all $\|x\|>0$, \begin{align} \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\| &=\left\| \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|} \frac{\rho_0(y) - \rho^{\rm TF}(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y \right\| \\ &\le C \\|\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}\\|_{L^{5/3}}^{5/6} (\|x\|D(\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}))^{1/12} \\ &\le CZ^{179/132}\|x\|^{1/12}. \end{align} Since $179/132= 49/36- 1/198$, this is the desired bound. \end{proof} \section{Iterative step} In this section we will prove Lemma \ref{thm:screened-it}. We split the proof into five steps. \noindent {\bf Step 1.} We collect some easy consequences of \eqref{eq:assume-D}. \begin{lemma} \label{lem:screened-easy-bounds} Assume that \eqref{eq:assume-D} holds true for some $\beta, D\in (0,1]$. Then for all $r\in (0, D]$, we have \begin{align}\label{eq:int-rho-1} \left\| \int_{\|x\|<r} (\rho_0 - \rho^{\rm TF}) \right\| &\le \beta r^{-3},\\ \label{eq:int-rho-2} \sup_{\|x\| \ge r} \|x\| \|\Phi_{r}(x)\| &\le C r^{-3},\\ \int_{\|x\|>r} \rho_0 &\le C r^{-3},\label{eq:int-rho-4}\\ \int_{\|x\|>r} \rho_0^{5/3} &\le C r^{-7},\label{eq:int-rho-3}\\ \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) &\le C (r^{-7}+\lambda^{-2}r^{-5}), \quad \forall \lambda \in (0,1/2].\label{eq:int-rho-2.5} \end{align} \end{lemma} We emphasize that, while \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} are straightforward consequences of \eqref{eq:assume-D}, the bounds \eqref{eq:int-rho-2.5}, \eqref{eq:int-rho-3} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} rely on the outside $L^1$ bound from Lemma \ref{lem:L1-bound} and the outside kinetic energy bound from Lemma \ref{lem:outside-kinetic}. Recall that the smooth cut-off function $\eta_r$ is defined in \eqref{eq:def-eta-r} and depends on the parameter $\lambda$. \begin{proof} The proofs of \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} can be carried out similarly to \cite[Proof of Lemma 20]{FraNamBos-16}. Note that, in contrast to the corresponding statement in \cite[Lemma 20]{FraNamBos-16}, in \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} we claim a bound on $\|\Phi_r(x)\|$. This, however, follows in the same way by applying \cite[Lemma 19]{FraNamBos-16} both to $\Phi_r$ and to $-\Phi_r$. Note that there is an alternative, simpler proof of \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} based on the spherical symmetry of $\rho_0$, which follows from the convexity of the M\"uller functional. It implies that $\Phi_r(x)-\Phi_r^{\rm TF}(x) = \|x\|^{-1} \int_{\|y\|<r} (\rho_0 - \rho^{\rm TF}) {\, \rm d} y$ for $\|x\|\geq r$, so that \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} follows immediately from \eqref{eq:assume-D} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} follows from \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and a corresponding bound for $\Phi_r^{\rm TF}(x)$. Now we prove \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-2.5}. By \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and the bound $\rho^{\rm TF}\le C \|x\|^{-6}$, we have \begin{align} \label{eq:int-rho-r-r/2} \int_{r/3<\|x\|<r} \rho_0 &= \int_{\|x\|<r} (\rho_0 - \rho^{\rm TF}) - \int_{\|x\|<r/3} (\rho_0 - \rho^{\rm TF}) + \int_{r/3<\|x\|<r} \rho^{\rm TF} \nonumber\\ & \le \beta r^{-3} + \beta (r/3)^{-3} + Cr^{-3} \le C r^{-3}. \end{align} Inserting this and the bound \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} into the bound from Lemma~\ref{lem:outside-kinetic}, we obtain \begin{align} \Tr(-\Delta \eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) & \le C (1+ (\lambda r)^{-2}) \int \chi_{(1-\lambda)r}^+\rho_0 \nonumber\\ & \quad + C\lambda r^3 \sup_{\|z\|\geq (1-\lambda)r} [\Phi_{(1-\lambda)r}(z)]_+^{5/2} + C\sup_{\|z\|\ge r}[\|z\| \Phi_r(z)]_+^{7/3} \nonumber\\ &\le C \Big(\lambda^{-2} r^{-2} \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 + \lambda^{-2}r^{-5} + r^{-7} \Big). \label{eq:Tr-eta-int-chir} \end{align} In \eqref{eq:Tr-eta-int-chir}, replacing $r$ by $r/3$ and using again \eqref{eq:int-rho-r-r/2} we get \begin{align} \Tr(-\Delta \eta_{r/3} \gamma_0 \eta_{r/3}) \le C \Big(\lambda^{-2} r^{-2} \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0+ \lambda^{-2}r^{-5} + r^{-7} \Big). \label{eq:Tr-eta-int-chir-a} \end{align} From the exterior bound from Lemma~\ref{lem:L1-bound}, replacing $r$ by $r/3$ and choosing $s=r$ (this choice is not optimal but sufficient), we find that \begin{align} \int \chi^+_{r/3}\rho_0 &\le C \int_{r/3<\|x\|<(1+\lambda)^2 r/3} \rho_0 + C \Big(\sup_{\|z\|\ge r/3} [\|z\|\Phi_{r/3}(z)]_+ + \lambda^{-2}r^{-1}\Big) \\ &\quad +C \Big( r^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_{r/3} \gamma_0 \eta_{r/3}) \Big)^{3/5} + C \Big(r^2 \Tr (-\Delta \eta_{r/3} \gamma_0 \eta_{r/3}) \Big)^{1/3}. \end{align} Inserting \eqref{eq:int-rho-2}, \eqref{eq:int-rho-r-r/2} and \eqref{eq:Tr-eta-int-chir} into the latter estimate leads to \begin{align} \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 \le \int \chi^+_{r/3}\rho_0 &\le C (r^{-3} + \lambda^{-2} r^{-1}) \\ &\quad + C \Big(\lambda^{-2} \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 + \lambda^{-2}r^{-3} + r^{-5} \Big)^{3/5} \\ &\quad + C \Big(\lambda^{-2} \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 + \lambda^{-2}r^{-3} + r^{-5} \Big)^{1/3} \end{align} which implies \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} immediately (we can choose $\lambda=1/2$ on the right side). Inserting \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} into \eqref{eq:Tr-eta-int-chir} we obtain \eqref{eq:int-rho-2.5}. Finally, from \eqref{eq:int-rho-2.5} and the kinetic Lieb--Thirring inequality, we have \[ \int_{\|x\|>r} \rho_0^{5/3} \le \int (\eta_{r/3}^2 \rho_0)^{5/3} \le C \Tr(-\Delta \eta_{r/3} \gamma_0 \eta_{r/3}) \le C (r^{-7}+\lambda^{-2}r^{-5}). \] which implies \eqref{eq:int-rho-3} (we can choose $\lambda=1/2$ on the right side). \end{proof} \noindent {\bf Step 2.} \noindent Now we introduce the exterior Thomas--Fermi energy functional $$ \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm TF}(\rho)= c^{\rm TF}\int \rho^{5/3} - \int V_r \rho + D(\rho), \quad V_r(x)=\chi_r^+ \Phi_r(x) $$ with $c_{\rm TF}$ from \eqref{eq:ctf}. \begin{lemma}\label{exteriortf} The functional $\mathcal{E}_r^{\rm TF}(\rho)$ has a unique minimizer $\rho_r^{\rm TF}$ over $$ 0\le \rho \in L^{5/3}(\mathbb{R}^3) \cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^3), \quad \int \rho \le \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0. $$ This minimizer is supported on $\{\|x\|\ge r\}$ and satisfies the Thomas--Fermi equation $$ \frac{5c^{\rm TF}}{3} \rho_r^{\rm TF}(x)^{2/3} = [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x)-\mu_r^{\rm TF}]_+ $$ with $\varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x)= V_r(x)-\rho_r^{\rm TF}\|x\|^{-1}$ and a constant $\mu_r^{\rm TF} \ge 0$. Moreover, if \eqref{eq:assume-D} holds true for some $\beta, D\in (0,1]$, then \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:rho-r-TF-5/3} \int (\rho_r^{\rm TF})^{5/3} \le Cr^{-7}, \quad \forall r\in (0,D]. \end{eqnarray} \end{lemma} The proof of this lemma is identical to that of \cite[Lemma 21]{FraNamBos-16} and is omitted. \bigskip \noindent {\bf Step 3.} Now we compare $\rho_r^{\rm TF}$ with $\chi_r^+\rho^{\rm TF}$. \begin{lemma} \label{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF} We can choose a universal constant $\beta>0$ small enough such that, if \eqref{eq:assume-D} holds true for some $D\in [Z^{-1/3},1]$, then $\mu_r^{\rm TF}=0$ and \begin{align} \left\| \varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x) - \varphi^{\rm TF}(x) \right\| \le C (r/\|x\|)^{\zeta}\|x\|^{-4}, \\ \left\| \rho_r^{\rm TF}(x) - \rho^{\rm TF}(x) \right\| \le C (r/\|x\|)^{\zeta}\|x\|^{-6} \end{align} for all $r\in [Z^{-1/3},D]$ and for all $\|x\| \ge r$. Here $\zeta=(\sqrt{73}-7)/2\approx 0.77$. \end{lemma} The proof of this lemma is identical to that of \cite[Lemma 22]{FraNamBos-16} and is omitted. \bigskip \noindent {\bf Step 4.} In this step, we compare $\rho_r^{\rm TF}$ with $\chi_r^+\rho_0$. \begin{lemma} \label{lem:DrhorTF-rho0}Let $\beta>0$ be as in Lemma \ref{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF}. Assume that \eqref{eq:assume-D} holds true for some $D\in [Z^{-1/3},1]$. Then $$ D(\chi_r^+\rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF})\le C r^{-7+b}, \quad \forall r\in [Z^{-1/3},D], $$ where $b = 1/3$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The proof of this lemma is analogous, but somewhat more involved than the proof of Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first}. The strategy is to bound $\mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r)$ from above and below using the semi-classical estimates from Lemma \ref{lem:semi}. The main term in both bounds is $\mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF})$, but in the lower bound we will get an additional term $D(\chi_r^+\rho_0-\rho_r^{\rm TF})$. The error terms in the upper and lower bounds will then give the desired bound in the lemma. {\bf Upper bound.} We shall prove that \begin{equation} \label{eq:iterativeupper} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \leq \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + C r^{-7} \left( r^{2/3} + \lambda^{-2} r^2 + \lambda \right). \end{equation} We use Lemma~\ref{lem:semi} (ii) with $V_r' \equiv \chi_{r+s}^+\varphi_r^{\rm TF} $, $s \le r$ to be chosen later and $g$ spherically symmetric to obtain a density matrix $\gamma_r$ as in the statement. Since $\mu_r^{\rm TF} = 0$ by Lemma \ref{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF}, we deduce from the Thomas--Fermi equation in Lemma \ref{exteriortf} that \[ \rho_{\gamma_r} = \frac{5}{2}L_{\rm sc} \left( \chi_{r+s}^+ \left(\varphi_r^{\rm TF}\right)^{3/2}\right)g^2 = \left(\chi_{r+s}^+ \rho_r^{\rm TF}\right) g^2. \] Note that $\rho_{\gamma_r}$ is supported in $\{\|x\|\ge r\}$ and $$ \Tr\gamma_r = \int \rho_{\gamma_r} = \int \chi_{r+s}^+ \rho_r^{\rm TF} \leq \int \rho_r^{\rm TF} \leq \int \chi_r^+\rho_0. $$ Thus, we may apply Lemma~\ref{lem:split} and obtain \begin{align} \label{eq:iterativeupper1} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) & \le \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\gamma_r) + \mathcal{R}. \end{align} By the semiclassical estimate from Lemma~\ref{lem:semi} (ii) \begin{align} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} ( \gamma_r) & \le \frac{3}{2}L_{\rm sc}\int [V_r']_+^{5/2} + C s^{-2} \int [V_r']_+^{3/2} - \int \Phi_r \left((\chi_{r+s}^+\rho_r^{\rm TF})g^2\right) \\ & \qquad + D(\rho_r^{\rm TF}* g^2) \\ &\le \frac{3}{2}L_{\rm sc}\int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - \int \Phi_r \rho_r^{\rm TF} + D(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) \\ & \qquad + C s^{-2} \int \rho_r^{\rm TF} + \int (\Phi_r-\Phi_rg^2) \chi_{r+s}^+\rho_r^{\rm TF} + \int_{r \le \abs{x} \le r+s} \Phi_r \rho_r^{\rm TF} \\ & = \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + C s^{-2} \int \rho_r^{\rm TF} + \int_{r \le \abs{x} \le r+s} \Phi_r \rho_r^{\rm TF}, \end{align} where we have used the convexity of $D$ in the second inequality. The equality in the last line holds, since $\Phi_r(x)$ is harmonic when $\abs{x} \ge r$ and $g$ is chosen spherically symmetric. According to \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} in Lemma~\ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds} we have $$ \int \rho_r^{\rm TF} \leq \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0 \leq C r^{-3}. $$ We now use the fact that $\rho_r^{\rm TF}(x) \leq C \|x\|^{-6}$ for all $\|x\|\geq r$, which follows from Lemma \ref{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF} because of the corresponding bound for $\rho^{\rm TF}$. (In fact, the claimed upper bound does not need the full strength of Lemma \ref{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF}, so as part of the proof one shows that $\varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x)\leq C r^{-4}$ for $\|x\|\geq r$ and therefore the claimed bound follows from the Thomas--Fermi equation for $\rho_r^{\rm TF}$.) Thus, using \eqref{eq:int-rho-2} in Lemma \ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds}, $$ \int_{r \le \abs{x} \le r+s} \Phi_r \rho_r^{\rm TF} \leq C r^{-3} \int_{r \le \abs{x} \le r+s} \|x\|^{-1} \rho_r^{\rm TF} \leq C r^{-8} s. $$ Optimizing over $s$ (which leads to $s \sim r^{5/3}$) we obtain \begin{equation} \label{eq:iterativeupper2} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} ( \gamma_r)\leq \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + C r^{-7+2/3}. \end{equation} Finally, we estimate $\mathcal R$ using Lemma~\ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds} and obtain \begin{align} \mathcal{R} &\le C (1+(\lambda r)^{-2}) r^{-3} + C \lambda r^3 (r^{-4})^{5/2} + C (r^{-7}+\lambda^{-2}r^{-5})^{1/2} (r^{-3})^{1/2} \\ & \leq C \left( \lambda^{-2} r^{-5} + \lambda r^{-7} \right) . \end{align} Combining this with \eqref{eq:iterativeupper1} and \eqref{eq:iterativeupper2} we obtain the claimed upper bound \eqref{eq:iterativeupper}. {\bf Lower bound.} We shall prove that \begin{equation} \label{eq:iterativelower} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \geq \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF}) - C r^{-7+ 1/3} \end{equation} We use Lemma~\ref{lem:semi} (i) in a way similar to the proof of Lemma~\ref{thm:screened-first} to obtain \begin{align} \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) &= \Tr ((- \Delta - \varphi_r^{\rm TF})\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF}) - D(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) \\ & \ge - L_{\rm sc } \int[\varphi_r^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} - C s^{-2} \int \eta_r^2 \rho_0 \\ & \qquad - C \left( \int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} \right)^{3/5} \left(\int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}-\varphi_r^{\rm TF}g^2]_+^{5/2} \right)^{2/5} \\ & \qquad + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF}) - D(\rho_r^{\rm TF})\\ & = \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{TF}) - C s^{-2} \int \eta_r^2 \rho_0 \\ & \qquad - C \left( \int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} \right)^{3/5} \left(\int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}-\varphi_r^{\rm TF}g^2]_+^{5/2} \right)^{2/5}. \end{align} The last identity used the Thomas--Fermi equations similarly as in \eqref{eq:initiallowercomp}. In order to control the remainder terms we note that by Lemmas~\ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds} and \ref{exteriortf} we have \begin{align} \int \eta_r^2 \rho_0 & \le C r^{-3} \,, \qquad \int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}]_+^{5/2} = C \int \left(\rho_r^{\rm TF}\right)^{5/3} \le C r^{-7} \,. \end{align} In order to bound the convolution term we use, as in the proof of Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first} the fact that $\|x\|^{-1} - \|x\|^{-1}* g^2\geq 0$, and therefore also $\rho_r^{\rm TF}* (\|x\|^{-1} - \|x\|^{-1}* g^2)\geq 0$. Since $\varphi_r^{\rm TF} = \chi_r^+ \Phi_r - \rho_r^{\rm TF} * \|x\|^{-1}$, we conclude that $$ \varphi_r^{\rm TF}-\varphi_r^{\rm TF}g^2 \leq \chi_r^+ \Phi_r - (\chi_r^+ \Phi_r) g^2. $$ Since $\Phi_r$ is harmonic outside a ball of radius $r$ and $g$ is spherically symmetric, $\chi_r^+ \Phi_r - (\chi_r^+ \Phi_r) * g^2$ is supported in $\{r-s\leq \|x\|\leq r+s\}$ and, by Lemma \ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds}, its absolute value is bounded by $C r^{-4}$. Thus, $$ [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}-\varphi_r^{\rm TF}g^2]_+ \leq C r^{-4} \1\big(r-s \le \abs \dotv \le r+s \big) $$ and therefore $$ \int [\varphi_r^{\rm TF}-\varphi_r^{\rm TF}g^2]_+^{5/2} \leq C r^{-8} s $$ To summarize, we have shown that $$ \mathcal{E}_r^{\rm RHF} (\eta_r \gamma_0 \eta_r) \ge \mathcal{E}^{\rm TF}_r(\rho_r^{\rm TF}) + D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF}) - C \left( s^{-2} r^{-3} + r^{-37/5} s^{2/5} \right). $$ Optimizing over $s$ (which leads to $s\sim r^{11/6}$) we obtain \eqref{eq:iterativelower}. \textbf{Conclusion.} Combining \eqref{eq:iterativeupper} and \eqref{eq:iterativelower} we infer that \[ D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0- \rho_r^{\rm TF}) \le C r^{-7} \left( r^{1/3} + \lambda^{-2} r^2 + \lambda \right). \] The next step is to replace $\eta_r^2$ by $\chi_r^+$. By using the Hardy--Littewood--Soloblev inequality and \eqref{eq:int-rho-3}, we get \begin{align} D(\chi_r^+ \rho_0 - \eta_r^2 \rho_0) &\le D(\1\big((1+\lambda)r \ge \|x\| \ge r\big) \rho_0) \\ &\le C \\| \1\big((1+\lambda)r \ge \|x\| \ge r\big) \rho_0\\|_{L^{6/5}}^2\\ &\le C \left( \int \chi_r^+ \rho_0^{5/3}\right)^{6/5} \left( \int_{(1+\lambda)r \ge \|x\| \ge r} \right)^{7/15} \\ &\le C (r^{-7})^{6/5} (\lambda r^3)^{7/15} = C\lambda^{7/15} r^{-7}. \end{align} Therefore, \begin{align} D(\chi_r^+\rho_0 - \rho_r^{\rm TF}) &\le 2 D(\chi_r^+\rho_0 - \eta_r^2 \rho_0) + 2D(\eta_r^2 \rho_0 - \rho_r^{\rm TF}) \\ &\le C r^{-7} \left(\lambda^{7/15} + r^{1/3} + \lambda^{-2}r^2 \right). \end{align} This bound is valid for all $\lambda \in (0,1/2]$ and by optimizing over $\lambda$ (which leads to $\lambda \sim r^{30/37}$) we obtain \begin{align} D(\chi_r^+\rho_0 - \rho_r^{\rm TF}) \le C r^{-7+1/3}. \end{align} This is the desired estimate. \end{proof} \noindent {\bf Step 5.} Now we are ready to conclude. The argument is similar to that in \cite[Lemma 17]{FraNamBos-16}, but for the convenience of the reader we provide the details. \begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{thm:screened-it}] Let $r\in [Z^{-1/3},D]$ and $\|x\|\ge r$. As in \cite[Eq. (97)]{Solovej-03}, we can decompose \begin{align} \Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x) &= \varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x) -\varphi^{\rm TF}(x)+ \int_{\|y\|>\|x\|} \frac{\rho_r^{\rm TF}(y)-\rho^{\rm TF}(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y,\\ &\qquad + \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|} \frac{\rho_r^{\rm TF}(y)-(\chi_r^+\rho_0)(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y. \end{align} By Lemma \ref{lem:varphirTF-varphiTF}, we have \begin{align} \left\| \varphi_r^{\rm TF}(x) - \varphi^{\rm TF}(x) \right\| \le C (r/\|x\|)^{\zeta}\|x\|^{-4} \end{align} and \begin{align} \int_{\|y\|>\|x\|} \frac{\|\rho_r^{\rm TF}(y)-\rho^{\rm TF}(y)\|}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y \le C \int_{\|y\|>\|x\|} \frac{(r/\|y\|)^{\zeta}\|y\|^{-6}}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y \le C (r/\|x\|)^{\zeta}\|x\|^{-4}. \end{align} Moreover, from \eqref{eq:Coulomb-estimate-2}, \eqref{eq:int-rho-3}, \eqref{eq:rho-r-TF-5/3} and Lemma \ref{lem:DrhorTF-rho0}, we get \begin{align} \left\| \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|} \frac{\rho_r^{\rm TF}(y)-(\chi_r^+\rho_0)(y)}{\|x-y\|} {\, \rm d} y \right\| &\le C \\| \rho_r^{\rm TF}-\chi_r^+\rho_0\\|_{L^{5/3}}^{5/6} \Big(\|x\| D(\rho_r^{\rm TF}-\chi_r^+\rho_0)\Big)^{1/12} \\ &\le C (r^{-7})^{1/2} (\|x\| r^{-7+b} )^{1/12} \\ & = C \|x\|^{-4+b/12} (\|x\|/r)^{4+1/12-b/12} , \end{align} Thus in summary, for all $r\in [Z^{-1/3},D]$ and $\|x\|\ge r$, we have \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:bootstrap-total}\|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le C (r/\|x\|)^\zeta \|x\|^{-4}+ C (\|x\|/r)^{5} \|x\|^{-4+b/12}.\end{eqnarray} Now let us conclude using \eqref{eq:bootstrap-total}. We choose a constant $\delta\in(0,1)$ sufficiently small such that \begin{equation} \label{eq:delta1} \frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} \Big( \frac{49}{36} -a \Big) < \frac{49}{36} \end{equation} and \begin{equation} \label{eq:delta2} \frac{b}{12} -\frac{10 \delta}{1-\delta}>0. \end{equation} We recall that $a$ and $b$ are the constants from Lemmas \ref{thm:screened-first} and \ref{lem:DrhorTF-rho0}, respectively. We distinguish two cases. {\bf Case 1:} $D^{1+\delta}\le Z^{-1/3}$. In this case, we simply use the initial step. Indeed, for all $$\|x\|\le D^{1-\delta}\le (Z^{-1/3})^{(1-\delta)/(1+\delta)},$$ by Lemma \ref{thm:screened-first} we have \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:bootstrap-total-1a} \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le C_1 Z^{49/36-a} \|x\|^{1/12} \le C_1 \|x\|^{1/12- 3 \frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} (49/36-a)}. \end{eqnarray} Note that $$ \frac{1}{12} - 3 \times \frac{49}{36} = -4 $$ Therefore, \eqref{eq:delta1} implies that $$ \frac{1}{12} - \frac{3(1+\delta)}{1-\delta} \Big( \frac{49}{36} -a \Big)> -4. $$ {\bf Case 2:} $D^{1+\delta}\ge Z^{-1/3}$. In this case, we use \eqref{eq:bootstrap-total} with $r=D^{1+\delta}$. For all $D \le \|x\| \le D^{1-\delta}$ we have $$ \|x\|^{2\delta/(1-\delta)} \le r/\|x\| \le \|x\|^\delta.$$ Therefore, \eqref{eq:bootstrap-total} implies that \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:bootstrap-total-1b} \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le C \|x\|^{-4+\zeta \delta} + C\|x\|^{-4+b/12 -10 \delta/(1-\delta)}. \end{eqnarray} Both exponents of $\|x\|$ are strictly greater than $-4$ according to \eqref{eq:delta2}. In summary, from \eqref{eq:bootstrap-total-1a} and \eqref{eq:bootstrap-total-1b}, we conclude that in both cases, $$ \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x)-\Phi_{\|x\|}^{\rm TF}(x)\|\le C \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall D \le \|x\| \le D^{1-\delta}.$$ with $$\varepsilon:=\min\Big\{\frac{1}{12} - \frac{3(1+\delta)}{1-\delta} \Big( \frac{49}{36} -a \Big) + 4, \frac{b}{12} -\frac{10 \delta}{1-\delta}, \zeta\delta \Big\}>0.$$This completes the proof of Lemma \ref{thm:screened-it}. \end{proof} \section{Proof of the main Theorem} \label{sec:proof-main-result} Now we prove the uniform bound $N\le Z+C$. The argument is identical to the proof of Theorem 1 in \cite{FraNamBos-16}, but we repeat it below for the convenience of the reader. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{main}] Since we have proved $N\le 2Z + C(Z^{2/3}+1)$ in Lemma \ref{roughbound}, it remains to consider the case $N\ge Z\ge 1$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:screened-intro}, we can find universal constants $C, \varepsilon, D>0$ such that $$ \|\Phi_{\|x\|}(x) - \Phi^{\rm TF}_{\|x\|}(x) \| \le C \|x\|^{-4+\varepsilon}, \quad \forall \|x\|\le D. $$ In particular, \eqref{eq:assume-D} holds true with a universal constant $\beta=C D^\varepsilon$. We can choose $D$ sufficiently small such that $D\leq 1$ and $\beta\leq 1$, which allows us to apply Lemma \ref{lem:screened-easy-bounds}. Then using \eqref{eq:int-rho-1} and \eqref{eq:int-rho-4} with $r=D$, we find that $$ \int_{\|x\|>D} \rho_0 + \left\| \int_{\|x\|<D} (\rho_0 - \rho^{\rm TF}) \right\| \le C. $$ Combining with $\int\rho^{\rm TF}=Z$, we obtain the ionization bound \begin{equation} N = \int \rho_0 = \int_{\|x\|>D} \rho_0 + \int_{\|x\|<D} (\rho_0-\rho^{\rm TF}) + \int_{\|x\|<D} \rho^{\rm TF} \le C + Z. \qedhere \end{equation} \end{proof} The proofs of Theorems \ref{thm:screened-intro} and \ref{thm:radius} follow from Lemma \ref{lem:screened} in the same way as \cite[Theorems 1 and 2]{FraNamBos-16} follow from \cite[Lemma 15]{FraNamBos-16}.
\section{Introduction} Many electronic-structure methods use basis sets made of states that move or change with atomic positions. A very popular subset of these methods (most quantum-chemical\cite{Gaussian, Turbomol,Gamess,ADF} and a significant fraction of solid-state methods\cite{Siesta,CP2K,Crystal,OpenMX,FHI-AIMS}) use atomic-like basis functions, composed of the product of a radial function and a spherical harmonic, normally centered around atoms. In other cases, the localised basis is obtained dynamically, using a finer auxiliary basis.\cite{Onetep,Conquest,BigDFT} The detail of the kind of functions is not important in this work, what matters here is that such a basis is generally not orthonormal, it spans a subspace of the Hilbert space (a finite basis is always used), and both the basis and the subspace change with the evolution of a set of external parameters such as the atomic positions. Non-orthogonal basis sets have been used since the early times of quantum mechanics, especially in the context of quantum chemistry.\cite{Lowdin1950} The matrix representation of Schr\"odinger's equation (using Dirac notation) $H \| \psi \rangle = E \| \psi \rangle$ in a basis $\{ \| e_{\mu} \rangle , \mu = 1 \dots \cal{N} \} $ gives \begin{equation} \sum_{\nu} H_{\mu \nu} C_{\nu} = E \sum_{\nu} S_{\mu\nu} C_{\nu} \; , \end{equation} where \begin{equation} \label{coeff-expansion} \| \psi \rangle = \sum_{\mu} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \, C_{\mu} \, , \end{equation} $H_{\mu \nu}= \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle$ and $S_{\mu \nu}= \langle e_{\mu} \| e_{ \nu} \rangle$, the latter being the overlap matrix. Similarly, there are electronic structure methods based on the integration of time-evolving quantum problems, most prominently based on time-dependent density-functional theory.\cite{RungeGross,Yabana,Tsolakidis2002,Octopus,ONTDDFT,Bowler} The time-dependent Kohn-Sham equation arising is analogous to the time dependent Schr\"odinger equation $H \| \psi \rangle = i \, \partial_t \| \psi \rangle$ (using $\hbar = m_e = e = 1$), which, for a non-orthogonal basis set, becomes \begin{equation} \sum_{\nu} H_{\mu \nu} C_{\nu} = i \, \sum_{\nu} S_{\mu \nu} \, \partial_t C_{\nu} \; , \end{equation} in a situation in which the basis set is fixed.\cite{Tsolakidis2002} If the basis set moves in time (e.g., related to nuclear motion) the equation becomes rather \begin{equation} \label{old-td-eq} \sum_{\nu} (H_{\mu \nu} - i \, D_{\mu \nu} ) C_{\nu} = i \, \sum_{\nu} S_{\mu \nu} \, \partial_t C_{\nu} \; , \end{equation} in which the new terms $D_{\mu \nu}= \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_t \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_t e_{\nu} \rangle$ appear related to the basis set evolution,\cite{Todorov2001,Rudiger2002,Kaxiras2015} although at sufficiently low nuclear velocities these terms can be neglected.\cite{Kaxiras} Similar objects to the $D_{\mu\nu}$ matrix in Eq.~\ref{old-td-eq} can also be found in time-dependent methods using localised molecular orbitals.\cite{WeitaoYang2010} Extra terms related to derivatives also appear when calculating the forces on atoms for geometry relaxation, ab initio molecular dynamics calculations, or Ehrenfest dynamics simulations.\cite{Todorov2001,Rudiger2002} There are terms arising, called Pulay forces,\cite{Pulay1969} which again involve basis vector derivatives. The matrix representation of the quantum formalism used above has its limitations, however, and a more general formalisation was introduced\cite{Vanderbilt1984, Ballantine1986, Artacho1991, Head-Gordon1993} based on tensors, which offers a better suited and more flexible framework for non-orthogonal basis sets, corresponding to a description of magnitudes in an Euclidean space with oblique axes. It allowed, for instance, the formalisation of second quantisation based on non-orthogonal bases,\cite{Artacho1991} which was then used to formulate many-body theories using such bases,\cite{Head-Gordon1993,Holomorphic} and to formulate corrective methods such as DFT+$U$ for the non-orthogonal case.\cite{ORegan2011,Palacios2014,Jacob2015} It also connected naturally with non-Hermitian representations proposed earlier for the better exploitation of localisation.\cite{Weeks,Bullett,Anderson} In this paper we use concepts of differential geometry to extend that oblique-axis formalism to the calculation of derivatives when the basis and the Hilbert space it spans change with parameters such as atomic positions or time. This offers insights into the geometric interpretation of the dynamical equations arising with moving basis sets. In particular, the affine connection defined for the changing basis allows the proposal of optimised propagators for the numerical integration of quantum time-evolving problems. It should be noted that there have been previous works on derivatives in the tensorial formalism for non-orthogonal bases in electronic structure,\cite{MHG-gradients} including relaxations with curvy steps.\cite{MHG-curvy} They were, however, always addressing derivatives of a scalar, the total energy, a special case which allows for circumvention of the key concepts in this work, the affine connection and the covariant derivative. An alternative way of using differential geometry in electronic structure was initially explored in Ref.~\onlinecite{ORegan} when calculating derivatives with respect to the basis functions themselves, instead of external parameters as in this work. This is beyond the scope of the present paper. The ideas in this paper should be useful for time-dependent (or parameter dependent) methods involving basis functions, auxiliary support functions, or any kind of states, which move during simulations, including atomic-like basis orbitals, support functions or generalised Wannier functions in large scale electronic-structure methods, or even the projectors for the core-electron description in projected-augmented-wave (PAW) methods. The connection is also made with the Berry formalism of geometric phases. In Section II the general formalism is presented, while Section III shows its application in several contexts. Many derivations have been pushed to appendices with a view to attaining a more concise exposition of the relevant ideas in the main text, while preserving a reasonably self-contained paper. \section{Formulation} \subsection{Tensorial representations} \label{SectForm} In this work we will use tensorial representations as used in Ref.~\onlinecite{Artacho1991}. Here are the essentials before we get into derivatives. Consider a basis consisting on a set of linearly-independent, non-orthogonal states, \begin{equation} \{ \| e_{\mu} \rangle, \; \mu = 1 \dots \cal{N} \} \end{equation} spanning a subspace $\Omega$ of the relevant Hilbert space $\cal{H}$ for our quantum problem. We will use here the tensorial notation for oblique angles.\cite{Vanderbilt1984, Ballantine1986, Artacho1991, Head-Gordon1993} For this, the dual basis\cite{Algebra,Artacho1991} is defined as the set of vectors $\{ \| e^{\mu} \rangle, \; \mu = 1 \dots \cal{N} \}$ in the same space $\Omega$ that fulfil \begin{equation} \langle e^{\mu} \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \delta^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \langle e_{\nu} \| e^{\mu} \rangle = \delta_{\nu}^{\phantom{e}\mu} \; , \end{equation} where $\delta^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu}=\delta_{\nu}^{\phantom{e}\mu}= \delta^{\mu}_{\nu}$ is Kronecker's delta. They also fulfil\cite{Artacho1991} \begin{equation} \sum_{\mu} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \langle e^{\mu} \| = \sum_{\mu} \| e^{\mu} \rangle \langle e_{\mu} \| = P_{\Omega} \; , \end{equation} where $P_{\Omega}$ is the projector onto the $\Omega$ Hilbert space. The metric tensors are given by the overlap, $S_{\mu\nu} = \langle e_{\mu} \| e_{\nu} \rangle$, and its upper-indices counterpart $S^{\mu\nu} = \langle e^{\mu} \| e^{\nu} \rangle$, which is the inverse (in the matrix sense) of the overlap matrix. In this paper we will mostly (always, unless explicitly stated) use the {\it natural representation} as defined in Ref.~\onlinecite{Artacho1991}. A state $\| \psi \rangle \in \Omega$ is represented by the contravariant first-rank tensor \begin{equation} \psi^{\mu}= \langle e^{\mu} \| \psi \rangle \; , \end{equation} which corresponds to the coefficients $C_{\mu}$ of the vector expansion in Eq.~\ref{coeff-expansion}, since, \begin{equation} \| \psi \rangle = P_{\Omega} \| \psi \rangle = \sum_{\mu} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \langle e^{\mu} \| \psi \rangle = \sum_{\mu} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \psi^{\mu} = \| e_{\mu} \rangle \psi^{\mu} \; . \end{equation} The last identity just reflects the fact that from now on we will use Einstein's convention for tensors,\cite{Einstein1916} by which repeated indices imply a sum. A bra $\langle \psi \| \in \Omega^\dagger$ will be represented by the equivalent covariant tensor, \begin{equation} \psi_{\mu} = \langle \psi \| e_{\mu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} coming from \begin{equation} \langle \psi \| = \langle \psi \| e_{\mu} \rangle \langle e^{\mu} \| = \psi_{\mu} \langle e^{\mu} \| \; . \end{equation} Note that the representation of the bra is not the complex conjugate of the representation of the ket (see Appendix~\ref{NotationAppendix}). The covariant and contravariant character of a tensor relates to the way they transform under basis change (see Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix} for the definition). An operator acting in $\Omega$ is represented by the second-rank tensor given by \begin{equation} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \langle e^{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} since \begin{equation} P_{\Omega} H P_{\Omega} = \left ( \|e_{\mu} \rangle \langle e^{\mu} \| \right ) \, H \, \left ( \| e_{\nu} \rangle \langle e^{\nu} \| \right ) = \|e_{\mu} \rangle H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \langle e^{\nu} \| \; . \end{equation} Schr\"odinger's equation $H \| \psi \rangle = E \| \psi \rangle$ in this representation then becomes \begin{equation} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \, \psi^{\nu} = E \, \psi^{\mu} \; . \end{equation} It should be noted at this point that the formalism described here is equally valid for $\| \psi \rangle$ being a single-particle or a many-particle state. It just requires the $\| e_{\mu} \rangle$ basis states (and their duals) to represent the same number of particles as $\|\psi \rangle$. One can also use this formalism for many-particle systems building on single-particle non-orthogonal basis states by using non-orthogonal second quantization.\cite{Artacho1991,Head-Gordon1993} In some parts below we will refer to single-particle (mean-field-like) situations since they are frequently found in different contexts, such as Kohn-Sham density-functional theory,\cite{Kohn-Sham} but the present formalism is not limited to such situations. The other representation to be considered in this work is the traditional quantum-chemical representation (henceforth called the {\it matrix representation}), which uses $\psi^{\mu}$ and $H_{\mu\nu}= \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle$ for the representation of states and operators, respectively, the Schr\"odinger equation now reading \begin{equation} H_{\mu\nu} \, \psi^{\nu} = E \, S_{\mu\nu} \, \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} as detailed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Artacho1991}. An Hermitian operator in the natural representation would fulfil \begin{equation} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \left ( H_{\nu}^{\phantom{e}\mu} \right )^ = \left ( S_{\nu\lambda} H^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\sigma} S^{\sigma\mu} \right )^* \; , \end{equation} where $H_{\nu}^{\phantom{e}\mu} = \langle e_{\nu} \| H \| e^{\mu}\rangle$. In the matrix representation hemiticity is reflected just by $H_{\mu\nu}= \left ( H_{\nu\mu} \right )^$. Further details on the tensorial notation used in this work are found in Appendix~\ref{NotationAppendix}. All of these magnitudes are tensors in the sense that they represent abstract objects that are defined independently of the basis set. Tensor components transform in a well defined fashion when changing the basis set. Transformations under basis change of the different tensors in this paper are discussed in Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}. \subsection{Parameter vector space} \label{ParameterSpace} In this work we provide a comprehensive formalisation of derivatives of the quantities just defined with respect to any parameters that the basis may depend on, including both the basis change within $\Omega$ and the evolution of $\Omega$ itself. Such parameters will normally be nuclear positions as in a molecular dynamics or Ehrenfest simulations, or time, as when following the dynamics governed by time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation (or the time-dependent Kohn-Sham equation in time-dependent density-functional theory, or analogous mean-field-like equation). We will then consider those parameters as defining a vector space $\Theta$ of dimension $N$, spanned by the basis \begin{equation} \{ \mathbf{u}_i, \; i = 1 \dots N \} \; , \end{equation} such that any vector $\mathbf{R} \in \Theta$ is expanded as \begin{equation} {\mathbf R} = R^i {\mathbf u}_i \: . \end{equation} Please keep in mind that these $R^i$ variables represent any parameters that a particular quantum problem may depend on, not necessarily nuclear positions (in the Applications section below there will be examples for nuclear positions, but also for time as a single parameter in a one-dimensional $\Theta$). We keep the tensor notation for the vectors in $\Theta$ for convenience. This allows for oblique angles in this space as well if ever wanted. We will always use Greek letters as indices for the quantum (electronic) components and Latin for the components of vectors in parameter space. Our electronic basis set and space do then depend on $\mathbf{R}$, i.e. $\Omega=\Omega(\mathbf{R})$, $\| e_{\mu} \rangle = \| e_{\mu} (\mathbf{R}) \rangle$, and so will the projector $P_{\Omega}$ and all the tensors defined above. It is important to note that, although we will exploit analogies with the differential geometry defined for curved spaces as in general relativity, the situation described here may be discussed more formally using the language of fibre bundles,\cite{FibreBundle} with $\Theta$ as the base space, and $\Omega(\mathbf{R})$ as a fibre for each {\bf R}. When moving in the base space, the Hilbert space associated to each fibre turns within the ambient Hilbert space ${\cal H}$, very much as the tangent space would turn for a curved space. Although both the base space $\Theta$ and each fiber $\Omega(\mathbf{R})$ are each flat Euclidean spaces, the overall bundle is curved. The parameter-dependent Hilbert space $\Omega (\mathbf{R})$ and its turning is also the basis of the Berry formalism of geometric phases in quantum mechanics.\cite{Berry-orig, Berry} In this case the relevant $\Omega$ space would be the one associated with the ground state, or, in a mean-field-like setting (as in e.g. density-functional theory), the space spanned by the occupied single-particle states (occupied space), although also larger spaces are considered, e.g. for metallic systems, or disentangling bands.\cite{Marzari1997} We relate this work to the Berry formalism below. Finally, the change of basis between fibres can be regarded as a gauge transformation given in principle by any $\cal{N} \times \cal{N}$ invertible matrix of complex numbers, i.e., belonging to the general linear group GL$(\cal{N},\mathbb{C})$. In this paper, however, we prefer to introduce the formalism in an accessible, self-contained manner, using basic quantum mechanics, tensors, and simple manipulations therein. In what follows, we will investigate the rate of change of quantum states, and operators acting upon them, with respect to the evolving basis vectors as we navigate the parameter vector space. We will find that the components of such change due to space preserving and space non-preserving basis function evolution must be separately considered, as follows. \subsection{Differential geometry} \subsubsection{Covariant derivative} The derivative of the $\psi^{\mu}$ components of a quantum state $\| \psi \rangle$ with respect to $R^i$ will be indicated by \begin{equation} \partial_i \psi^{\mu} = {\partial \psi^{\mu} \over \partial R^i} \; . \end{equation} It is easy to show (see Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}) that such a derivative does not transform as a tensor under basis change. Using the conventional nomenclature: it is a non-tensor. Let us then define the covariant derivative as one that transforms as a tensor, which we can easily do as follows: \begin{equation} \label{covdevdef} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu} \equiv \langle e^{\mu} \| P_{\Omega} \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} \| \psi \rangle \right \} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} \| \psi \rangle \right \} \; . \end{equation} The projector directly acting on $\| \psi \rangle$ might appear redundant if starting with $\| \psi \rangle \in \Omega$. It is not so, however, the important point being that the derivative is calculated for the state being projected on the {\it varying} $\Omega$ space, and therefore, even though $\| \psi \rangle$ and $P_{\Omega} \|\psi \rangle$ are equal at {\bf R}, they are not necessarily equal at any nearby point, $\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d} R^i \mathbf{u}_i$. Put another way, the covariant derivative must be applied before projection onto $\Omega$, since both $\|\psi \rangle$ and $P_{\Omega}$ may evolve in time. This definition gives a well-behaved tensor since the defined $\text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu}$ is the tensor representation of the vector $P_{\Omega} \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} \| \psi \rangle \right \} \in \Omega$ (see also Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}). The justification for this particular definition will become clear throughout this section. We can already point to the fact that for $\| \psi \rangle \in \Omega$ such that neither $\|\psi \rangle$ nor $\Omega$ change with {\bf R}, and for a basis set that does change, the proposed covariant derivative is zero (while the usual derivative is not), thereby indicating that it is the intrinsic rate of change of the state what is being measured, excluding the basis set change. This point will be proven more generally below. It is analogous to the definition of covariant derivatives in gauge-dependent theories, as the physical derivative independent of change of local gauge. The relationship between $\text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu}$ and $\partial_i \psi^{\mu}$ is obtained as follows: \begin{align} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu} &= \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} \| \psi \rangle \right \} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ \| e_{\nu} \rangle \langle e^{\nu} \| \psi \rangle \right \} \\ &= \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ \| e_{\nu} \rangle \psi^{\nu} \right \} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \| e_{\nu} \rangle \psi^{\nu} + \partial_i \psi^{\mu} \; . \end{align} This gives us an alternative definition of the covariant derivative, expressed in objects all defined within $\Omega$, namely, \begin{equation} \label{covdevdef2} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu} = \partial_i \psi^{\mu} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} \nu i} \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} where we have used the following definition \begin{equation} \label{christoffel} D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} \nu i} \equiv \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle \; . \end{equation} The $i$ index is located after the index of the state being differentiated. This choice can be remembered by thinking of it as $\partial_i \| e_{\mu} \rangle = \partial \| e_{\mu} \rangle / \partial R^i$. This second expression of the covariant derivative (Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2}) can be shown to give a tensor within this formalism (see Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}). \subsubsection{Affine connection} The quantity defined in Eq.~\ref{christoffel} is also a non-tensor and plays the role of the Christoffel symbols of the second kind in the Levi-Civita connection of conventional differential geometry. Keeping the nomenclature, our Christoffel symbols as defined in Eq.~\ref{christoffel} thus define the affine connection relevant to our problem. Remember, however, that this is not differential geometry for curved spaces, where the tangent space at one point directly relates to the overall manifold, but rather for a rotating Hilbert space $\Omega$ within ${\cal H}$ when moving in parameter space $\Theta$. In the former, there is one metric tensor at every point, while in the latter there are still two metrics, one for $\Omega$ and one for $\Theta$. Hence, we do not establish a relationship between the defined Christoffel symbols and the electronic metric and its derivatives. The defined Christoffel symbols exhibit other expected properties. They give, for instance, the expansion coefficients in $\Omega$ of the derivative of a basis vector: \begin{equation} P_{\Omega} \, \partial_i \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \| e_{\mu} \rangle \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \| e_{\mu} \rangle D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} \nu i} \, , \end{equation} so that when moving from one point $\mathbf{R} \in \Theta$ to another infinitesimally close to it $\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}$, the basis vectors transform as \begin{equation} \label{BasisProp} \| e_{\nu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) \rangle = \| e_{\nu} (\mathbf{R}) \rangle + \| e_{\mu} (\mathbf{R}) \rangle D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} \mathrm{d} R^i \; , \end{equation} to linear order for infinitesimal $\mathrm{d} \mathbf{R}$. The second term of the right hand side accounts for the fact that not only the space is turning, but the basis set itself is changing when displacing in $\Theta$. The turning of the Hilbert space $\Omega$ as we move in parameter space $\Theta$ demands the definition of the way the vector $\|\psi (\mathbf{R}) \rangle$ in $\Omega (\mathbf{R})$ propagates when moving to the neighbouring point $\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d} \mathbf{R}$ into the slightly turned Hilbert space $\Omega(\mathbf{R}+\mathrm{d} \mathbf{R})$. The required propagation is given by \begin{equation} \label{prop} \psi^{\mu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) = \psi^{\mu} (\mathbf{R}) + \partial_i \psi^{\mu} (\mathbf{R}) \mathrm{d} R^i \; , \end{equation} again for infinitesimal $\mathrm{d} \mathbf{R}$. This means that the vector is first propagated in $\Omega (\mathbf{R})$ and then projected into $\Omega (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R})$ by retaining the same vector components. This is consistent to linear order with the projective propagation of the state $\|\psi\rangle$ when moving from $\mathbf{R}$ to $\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}$, \begin{multline} \label{abstractprop} \|\psi (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) \rangle = P_{\Omega (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R})} \{ P_{\Omega (\mathbf{R})} \|\psi (\mathbf{R}) \rangle \\ + P_{\Omega (\mathbf{R})} \partial_i [ P_{\Omega (\mathbf{R})} \| \psi (\mathbf{R})\rangle ] \mathrm{d} R^i \} \, . \end{multline} This last expression shows the propagation of a vector when moving in $\Theta$, irrespective of basis set and basis set transformation. It involves the covariant derivative in its final term. The equivalence between Eqs.~\ref{prop} and \ref{abstractprop} is shown in Appendix~\ref{PropAppendix}. Differently from canonical differential geometry of curved spaces, in the formalization presented here the proposed Christoffel symbols do not necessarily contract with the metric tensor following conventional rules for lowering or raising indices. The required equalities among these objects are presented in Appendix~\ref{ChristAppendix}. \subsubsection{Covariant derivative for the bra representation} The natural representation of the bra of any state, $\langle \psi \| $, is $\psi_{\mu} = \langle \psi \| e_{\mu} \rangle$. Its covariant derivative is defined in analogy to Eq.~\ref{covdevdef}, namely, \begin{equation} \label{covdevbra} \text{\dh}_i \psi{\mu} \equiv \, \partial_i \left \{ \langle \psi \| P_{\Omega} \, \right \} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \, , \end{equation} which, again working in analogy with that which was done for Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2}, gives \begin{equation} \label{covdevbra2} \text{\dh}_i \psi_{\mu} = \partial_i \psi_{\mu} + \psi_{\nu} D^{\nu}_{\phantom{i} i \mu} \; , \end{equation} where we have defined the corresponding Christoffel symbol \begin{equation} \label{christoffelbra} D^{\nu}_{\phantom{i} i \mu} \equiv \langle \partial_i e^{\nu} \| e_{\mu} \rangle \end{equation} (see the different order of indices in the symbol as compared to the definition in Eq.~\ref{christoffel}). The Christoffel symbols of Eqs.~\ref{christoffel} and \ref{christoffelbra} are easy to interrelate, since $\langle e^{\mu} \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \delta^{\mu}_{\phantom{i}\nu} $ for all $\mathbf{R} \in \Theta$, and, therefore, \begin{equation} \partial_i \delta^{\mu}_{\phantom{i}\nu} = \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle = D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} i \nu} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} \nu i} = 0 \; , \end{equation} which leads to \begin{equation} \label{christoffelrelation} D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} i \nu} = - D^{\mu}_{\phantom{i} \nu i} \; \end{equation} (general relations among Christoffel symbols can be found in Appendix~\ref{ChristAppendix}). The covariant derivative for the bra can then be written as \begin{equation} \label{covdevbra3} \text{\dh}_i \psi_{\mu} = \partial_i \psi_{\mu} - \psi_{\nu} D^{\nu}_{\phantom{i} \mu i} \; . \end{equation} This derivative transforms as the corresponding tensor, as can be easily checked following any of the two procedures used above (and in Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}) for the case of the ket representation. \subsubsection{Covariant derivative for operators} Following the spirit of Eqs.~\ref{covdevdef} and \ref{covdevbra}, let us define the covariant derivative of an operator $H$ in its natural representation $H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu}$ as \begin{equation} \label{covdevop} \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \equiv \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} H P_{\Omega} \right \} \| e_{\nu} \rangle \;, \end{equation} which becomes \begin{equation} \label{covdevop2} \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda i} H^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\nu} - H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda} D^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} \; . \end{equation} For the last term we have used Eq.~\ref{christoffelrelation}. This last expression coincides with the usual definition of the covariant derivative of a second-rank tensor in other differential geometry contexts, including general relativity, once the connection (the Christoffel symbols) has been defined. It can also be written as \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} + [D,H]^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} \; , \end{equation} where the conmutator in the last term is defined as the two last terms in Eq.~\ref{covdevop2}. This definition gives a well-behaved tensor, transforming as such under a basis set change. It can be straightforwardly checked following either of the two procedures used before for $\text{\dh}_i \psi{^\mu}$: by noticing from Eq.~\ref{covdevop} that it is a tensor representation of an operator within $\Omega$, and by following Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}. It is also a definition consistent with the previous ones. The following Leibniz chain rule for a vector \begin{equation} \label{chain} \text{\dh}_i \left ( H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} \right ) = \left ( \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \right ) \psi^{\nu} + H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \left ( \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\nu} \right ) \; , \end{equation} and the expected behavior of a scalar (zero-rank tensor) \begin{equation} \label{e_deriv} \text{\dh}_i E = \text{\dh}_i \left ( \psi_{\mu} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} \right ) = \partial_i \left ( \psi_{\mu} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} \right ) = \partial_i E \; , \end{equation} are proved in Appendix~\ref{ChainRuleAppendix}. \subsubsection{Matrix representation} Let us extend the previous definitions to the matrix representation, which will be useful in the next section. Since the ket is equally represented in the natural and matrix representations, the covariant derivative of a ket is also equally defined, as in Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2}. The bra is, however, different, since $\langle \psi \|$ is represented by $\psi^{\mu } = \langle \psi \| e^{\mu} \rangle$ (see details of present notation in Appendix~\ref{NotationAppendix}). Its covariant derivative is then defined as \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu } = \partial_i \left \{ \langle \psi \| P_{\Omega} \right \} \| e^{\mu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} and, therefore, without resorting to the ambient Hilbert space ${\cal H}$, it is expressed as \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu } = \partial_i \psi^{\mu } + \psi^{\nu } D_{\nu i}^{\phantom{ei}\mu} \; , \end{equation} which is just the Hermitian conjugate of Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2} (see Appendix~\ref{ChristAppendix} for relations among Christoffel symbols). For an operator in this representation, the covariant derivative is defined as \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} = \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_i \left \{ P_{\Omega} H P_{\Omega} \right \} \| e_{\nu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} which becomes \begin{equation} \label{covdevHmatrix} \text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} = \partial_i H_{\mu\nu} + D_{\mu\phantom{e} i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} H_{\sigma\nu} + H_{\mu\sigma} D_{\phantom{e} i \nu}^{\sigma} \; . \end{equation} \subsubsection{Geometric interpretation of the affine connection} Eqs.~\ref{prop} and \ref{abstractprop} give the basis for a clearer geometric interpretation of the affine connection defined above, and the corresponding covariant derivative. Closing Eq.~\ref{abstractprop} from the left with $\langle e^{\mu} ( \mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) \|$, one obtains \begin{equation} \label{affinerot} \psi^{\mu} ( \mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) = A^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R} : \mathbf{R}) \big \{ \psi^{\nu} + ( \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\nu} ) \mathrm{d} R^i \big \} \, , \end{equation} where the terms within the curly brackets are defined at {\bf R}, and \begin{equation} \label{TimeOverlap} A^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R} : \mathbf{R}) \equiv \langle e^{\mu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) \| e_{\nu} (\mathbf{R}) \rangle \, , \end{equation} defines the basis transformation (as in Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}) when moving from {\bf R} to $\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}$ (the linear equivalence between Eqs.~\ref{affinerot} and \ref{prop} is shown in Appendix~\ref{Geometric-Appendix}). Eq.~\ref{TimeOverlap} represents the local gauge transformation. In principle any invertible matrix with a smooth behaviour with respect to {\bf R} is allowed. In Eq.~\ref{affinerot}, the basis set transformation information is now carried by the $A$ tensor instead of the Christoffel symbols. The Christoffel symbols would reappear in Eq.~\ref{affinerot} if replacing the covariant derivative by its definition in terms of the regular derivative, Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2}. That would indeed defeat the purpose of Eq.~\ref{affinerot} (and would bring us back to Eq.~\ref{prop}, as shown in the mentioned Appendix~\ref{Geometric-Appendix}). The usefulness of expressing the propagation as in Eq.~\ref{affinerot} becomes evident when using it, for instance, for finite-differences time integrators for solving the time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation, as we will do in Section~\ref{quantumevolution} and Appendix~\ref{ModifiedCK-Appendix}, where we will essentially replace $\text{\dh}_t \psi^{\mu}$ by $-i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu}$. In addition to its utility for integrators, it is presented here because it conveys the geometric meaning of the affine connection quite clearly: the covariant derivative is the intrinsic one, independent of the basis set change, accounting for both the physical variation of the state and the turning of the Hilbert space $\Omega$, while the Christoffel symbols linearly account for the basis set transformation. \subsubsection{Rotation versus deformation} So far we have talked about basis change or transformation in general. We make here the distinction between pure rotations of the basis and what we will call basis {\it deformation} (in analogy with elasticity theory). They are defined as the ones for anti-Hermitian and Hermitian $D_{\mu\nu i}$, repectively. A small arbitrary transformation will thus have a rotation and a deformation component, that can be obtained from $( D_{\mu\nu i} - D^{}_{\nu\mu i}) / 2$, and $( D_{\mu\nu i} + D^{}_{\nu\mu i} ) / 2$, respectively. Appendix~\ref{rotation-appendix} shows how a small unitary transformation of the basis, defined as one that keeps constant overlap (and therefore corresponding to basis rotations in $\Omega$) has an associated anti-Hermitian $D_{\mu\nu i}$ tensor. This consideration will be relevant in the Applications section below, in the context of finite-differences integrators. \subsubsection{Parallel transport and unitary propagation} \label{ParallelTransport} The analog of the parallel transport in curved spaces would be the propagation of a state vector $\|\psi \rangle \in \Omega (\mathbf{R})$, which, in itself, would not vary (it would be constant if $\Omega={\cal H}$) when moving in $\Theta$ away from point {\bf R}. Such intrinsic constancy is reflected by a null covariant derivative, \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu} = \partial_i \psi^{\mu} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} \psi^{\nu} = 0 \, . \end{equation} Therefore, parallel transport of any vector along any line in $\Theta$ is then obtained from Eq.~\ref{prop}, propagating \begin{equation} \psi^{\mu} (\mathbf{R} + \mathrm{d}\mathbf{R}) = \psi^{\mu} (\mathbf{R}) - D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} (\mathbf{R}) \psi^{\nu} (\mathbf{R}) \mathrm{d} R^i \end{equation} (for infinitesimal d{\bf R}) along the corresponding line. Vectors that are orthogonal to each other at a given point would propagate keeping their orthogonality. Appendix~\ref{UnitaryAppendix} shows that any unitary propagation (one such the condition $\text{\dh}_i \{ \psi_{n\mu} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}m} \} = 0$ is preserved) maintains the orthogonality of propagated vectors. Parallel transport is a special case, since $\text{\dh}_i \psi^{\nu}_m = \text{\dh}_i \psi_{\mu n} = 0$. More generally, a set of vectors in parallel transport keep their mutual scalar products (this can also be seen following the reasoning of Appendix~\ref{UnitaryAppendix}). This also applies to the two metric tensors, which are composed precisely of the scalar products of basis vectors. Since such scalar products are preserved under parallel transport, then \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i S_{\mu\nu}= \text{\dh}_i S^{\mu\nu} = 0 \, , \end{equation} which reflects a fundamental property of the theory, that the covariant derivative conserves the metric. This result is also derived explicitly in Appendix~\ref{ChristAppendix}. \subsubsection{Curvature} The Riemann-Christoffel curvature for a curved space characterises the fact that if you take one vector in a vector field using the Levi-Civita connection along one direction, and then along another direction to reach a certain point, it gives a different result than if changing the order of directions in which you arrive to the same point (or analogously, if following a closed loop). This is locally quantified with the difference in changing the order of second derivatives, by defining the curvature tensor $R^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}i\nu j}$ such that \begin{equation} \label{curvdef} R^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}i \nu j} \psi^{\nu} = \text{\dh}_i \text{\dh}_j \psi^{\mu} - \text{\dh}_j \text{\dh}_i \psi^{\mu} \; . \end{equation} Using the covariant derivatives defined above, one obtains: \begin{equation} \label{curvexp} R^{\mu}_{\phantom{e} i \nu j} = \partial_i D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu j} - \partial_j D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda i} D^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\nu j} - D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda j} D^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} \, , \end{equation} again in perfect analogy to the expression for curved spaces. \subsubsection{Relation to Berry connection and curvature} In Subsection~\ref{ParameterSpace} the analogy with Berry's geometric phase formalism\cite{Berry} was mentioned. Indeed, for a quantum mechanical (single- or many-particle) state $\| \Psi ( \mathbf{R} ) \rangle$, the Berry connection is normally defined as \begin{equation} {\cal A}_{j} = i \, \langle \Psi \| \partial_j \Psi \rangle \end{equation} ($i=\sqrt{-1}$), which is nothing but ($i$ times) the connection defined in this work (Eq.~\ref{christoffel}) for a space $\Omega$ spanned by a single state. It generalises to the trace \begin{equation} \label{BerryConnection} {\cal A}_{j} = i \, \sum_n^{occ} \langle \psi_n \| \partial_j \psi_n \rangle \; , \end{equation} for a set of single-particle states $\| \psi_n \rangle$ spanning the occupied space in the context of a mean-field-like approach to the many-particle problem (as is the case for the Kohn-Sham states in density-functional theory). As expected from Berry's work, it is easy to see that \begin{equation} \label{TraceConnection} {\cal A}_j = i \, D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\mu j} \; , \end{equation} where $D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\mu j}$ is the trace of the connection defined in Eq.~\ref{christoffel} (bear in mind that the $\| \psi_n \rangle$ states in this context play the role of the basis of the relevant space, i.e., the $\| e_{\mu}\rangle$ states of the previous sections, and $\Omega$ refers here to the occupied space). The expression in Eq.~\ref{BerryConnection} assumes orthonormal states, whereas Eq.~\ref{TraceConnection} is valid for any non-orthogonal basis of the relevant $\Omega$ space. More generally, the Berry connection matrix ${\cal A}_{mnj} = i \, \langle \psi_m \| \partial_j \psi_n \rangle$ corresponds to ($i$ times) this work's $D_{mn j}$ connection in the matrix representation, which can be transformed to any other tensorial representation for non-orthogonal states. Similarly to what happens to the connection, the curvature of this work and that of Berry are closely related. The Berry curvature is usually defined as \begin{equation} {\cal R}_{ij} = - 2 \; \mathrm{Im} \left \{ \langle \partial_i \Psi \| \partial_j \Psi \rangle \right \} \; , \end{equation} for a quantum mechanical state $\| \Psi \rangle$, which generalises to \begin{equation} \label{BerryCurv} {\cal R}_{ij} = - 2 \; \mathrm{Im} \left \{ \sum_n^{occ} \langle \partial_i \psi_n \| \partial_j \psi_n \rangle \right \} \end{equation} for a set of single-particle states $\| \psi_n \rangle$ spanning the occupied space. The curvatures in Eqs.~\ref{curvexp} and \ref{BerryCurv} are very closely interrelated when considering our $\Omega$ Hilbert space as the occupied space (or any specific subspace that we are computing the curvature for). Starting with \begin{equation} \partial_i D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu j} = \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| \partial_j e_{\nu} \rangle - \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i \partial_j e_{\nu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} we can easily see that \begin{equation} \partial_i D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu j} - \partial_j D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} = \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| \partial_j e_{\nu} \rangle - \langle \partial_j e^{\mu} \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle \; . \end{equation} If we now trace over the quantum variables, in analogy with the Ricci curvature \begin{equation} \label{RicciBerry} {\cal R}_{ij} = R^{\mu}_{\phantom{e} i \mu j} = \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| \partial_j e_{\mu} \rangle - \langle \partial_j e^{\mu} \| \partial_i e_{\mu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} since the following traces annihilate: \begin{equation} D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda i} D^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\mu j} - D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda j} D^{\lambda}_{\phantom{e}\mu i} = 0 \; . \end{equation} If the basis $\{ \| e_{\mu} \rangle \}$ is invariably orthonormal, then $\langle e^{\mu} \| = \langle e_{\mu} \|$, for any {\bf R}, and thus $\langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| = \langle \partial_i e_{\mu} \|$, and \begin{equation} \langle \partial_j e_{\mu} \| \partial_i e_{\mu} \rangle = \langle \partial_i e_{\mu} \| \partial_j e_{\mu} \rangle ^* \; , \end{equation} and, therefore, \begin{equation} \label{BerryRicci} {\cal R}_{ij} = 2 i \; \mathrm{Im} \left \{ \langle \partial_i e_{\mu} \| \partial_j e_{\mu} \rangle \right \} \; , \end{equation} which is nothing but Eq.~\ref{BerryCurv} (times $i$) for the $\| \psi_n \rangle$ states taken as an orthonormal basis of occupied space $\Omega$. Therefore, Berry's curvature is nothing but the Ricci curvature of our turning occupied space. This result is directly generalizable to any other orthonormal basis of occupied space, e.g., a basis of Wannier functions, still under Eq.~\ref{BerryRicci}. If the basis is non-orthogonal (non-orthogonal Wannier functions), Eq.~\ref{RicciBerry} is then the relevant definition. If seeking an expression closer to Eq.~\ref{BerryRicci}, the definition in Eq.~\ref{RicciBerry} can also be re-expressed as \begin{align} \label{BerryRicciNon} {\cal R}_{ij} = & 2 i \; \mathrm{Im} \left \{ S^{\mu\nu} \langle \partial_i e_{\nu} \| \partial_j e_{\mu} \rangle \right \} \notag \\ & + ( \partial_i S^{\mu\nu} ) D_{\nu\mu j} - ( \partial_j S^{\mu\nu} ) D_{\nu\mu i} \; , \end{align} which, in addition to the expected redefinition of the trace with the metric tensor in the first term, includes two additional terms related to the variation of the metric itself. \subsubsection{The topology of $\Omega (\mathbf{R})$} When solving a quantum-mechanical problem using a finite basis set that changes in parameter space, we will then have two relevant fibre bundles, one within the other: the one spanned by the basis, $\Omega$, and the one spanned by the occupied states. The curvature and topology of $\Omega$({\bf R}) and its relation with the ones corresponding to the occupied space could have implications on the effect of the approximation implied by the basis. We will not explore this point further in this paper. We can however, point to Ref.~\onlinecite{Mead1992} for the implications of Berry concepts on the dependence of the occupied space on atomic positions in molecular systems, including the effect of conical intersections, for instance. Rethinking such ideas considering a wider-than-occupied space could be an avenue for future investigation. \section{Applications} \subsection{Quantum time evolution} \label{quantumevolution} \subsubsection{Basic equations} Using the present formalism, we can consider a one-dimensional parameter space with time as the only variable. In the natural representation, the time dependent Schr\"odinger equation $H \| \psi \rangle = i \partial_t \| \psi \rangle$ becomes simply \begin{equation} \label{td} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} = i \, \text{\dh}_t \, \psi^{\mu} \, , \end{equation} where the time covariant derivative is defined as \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_t \, \psi^{\mu} = \partial_t \, \psi^{\mu} + D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu t} \, \psi^{\nu} \, , \end{equation} and the corresponding temporal Christoffel symbol as \begin{equation} D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu t} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_t \| e_{\nu} \rangle = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_t e_{\nu} \rangle \, . \end{equation} Equation \ref{td} reflects the physics in a basis-set independent form, in the sense that the well-behaved tensors in the equation all transform as in Appendix~\ref{BasisChangeAppendix}, and transmit the physics of the original Schr\"odinger equation for an evolving basis set and Hilbert space. Eq.~\ref{td} can be obtained by minimising the action for the following Lagrangian: \begin{equation} L = i \, \psi_{\mu} \text{\dh}_t \psi^{\mu} - \psi_{\mu} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} which is easily obtained using the ideas above from the standard $L = i \, \langle \psi \| \partial_t \psi \rangle - \langle \psi \| H \| \psi \rangle$. The matrix representation also allows a concise representation of the physical equation, albeit less elegantly, carrying around the metric tensors, as follows. \begin{equation} \label{matschroe} H_{\mu\nu} \psi^{\nu} = i \, S_{\mu\nu} \,\text{\dh}_t \, \psi^{\nu} \, , \end{equation} which corresponds to Eq.~\ref{old-td-eq} of the Introduction, or \begin{equation} S^{\mu\sigma} H_{\sigma\nu} \psi^{\nu} = i \,\text{\dh}_t \, \psi^{\mu} \, . \end{equation} If following the propagation of the density matrix instead of that of the wave functions, the dynamics is defined by the Liouville - Von Neumann equation, \begin{equation} i \, \partial_t \rho = [ H, \rho] \; , \end{equation} where the density operator $\rho$ would be \begin{equation} \rho (t) = \| \Psi (t) \rangle \langle \Psi (t) \| \end{equation} for a pure quantum state, or \begin{equation} \rho (t) = \sum_n^{occ} \| \psi_n (t) \rangle \langle \psi_n (t) \| \end{equation} for the set of occupied states in a mean-field setting. (It can also be generalised to statistical mixtures in general, including thermal). Again, for the evolving Hilbert space $\Omega$, the expression of this equation in terms of the corresponding tensors is obtained by closing it with $\langle e^{\mu} \|$ from the left and $ \| e_{\nu} \rangle $ from the right, and substituting $\rho$ and $H$ by $P_{\Omega} \rho P_{\Omega}$ and $P_{\Omega} H P_{\Omega}$, giving \begin{equation} i \, \text{\dh}_t \rho^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = [ H, \rho]^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\sigma} \rho^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu} - \rho^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\sigma} H^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \; \end{equation} in its natural representation. The matrix representation of this equation is much less elegant. The conventional definition of density matrix in a typical quantum chemistry setting is $\sum_n^{occ} C_{\mu n} C_{\nu n}^$, in the language of Eq.~\ref{coeff-expansion} of the Introduction. This is nothing but \begin{equation} \rho^{\mu\nu} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \, \rho \, \| e^{\nu} \rangle \; . \end{equation} In this representation, the Louiville - Von Neumann equation becomes \begin{equation} i \, \text{\dh}_t \rho^{\mu\nu} = S^{\mu\sigma} H_{\sigma\kappa} \rho^{\kappa\nu} - \rho^{\mu\sigma} H_{\sigma\kappa} S^{\kappa\nu} \; . \end{equation} For any of the former equations, the time dependence of the basis orbitals may be due to the variation in time of other parameters like atomic positions $R^i$. In such cases, the Christoffel symbols in the covariant derivatives would satisfy \begin{equation} D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e} \nu t} = v^i D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e} \nu i} \; , \end{equation} (or equivalent representations) where $v^i = \partial R^i / \partial t$ are the corresponding nuclear velocities. \subsubsection{Crank-Nicholson integrator} In various contexts a time-dependent Schr\"odinger-like equation is numerically solved by discretizing time, using adequate integrator algorithms (for a comparison of the performance and stability of different options see Refs.~\onlinecite{Koslov,Correa}). In the context of non-orthogonal basis sets and within mean-field-like theories for which matrix inversion is affordable, the Crank-Nicholson algorithm has been used quite successfully.\cite{Tsolakidis2002} The generalization of that procedure to a moving basis set was achieved by incorporating a L\"owdin orthonormalisation step, an idea due to Sankey and collaborators,\cite{Sankey} which will be discussed below. The Crank-Nicholson-L\"owdin procedure proved quite successful in the integration of the Kohn-Sham equations for several studies of electronic stopping power for ionic projectiles shooting through varied materials.\cite{Zeb2013,Correa2013,Ullah2015} Here we define new integrators based on the Crank-Nicholson idea, inspired by the affine connection defined above, and we compare them with the Crank-Nicholson-L\"owdin procedure. Let us first revise the Crank-Nicholson method in this context for non-moving bases.\cite{Tsolakidis2002} The basics: a state $\| \psi \rangle$ evolving according to $H \| \psi \rangle = i \partial_t \| \psi \rangle$ can be propagated from $t$ to $t+\mathrm{d}t$ by considering the backwards and forwards evolution from each of those time points to the one in the middle, as follows: \begin{align} \label{CK-abstract} \| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t/2 ) \rangle &= \Big \{ 1 - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t) \Big \} \| \psi (t) \rangle \notag \\ \| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t/2 ) \rangle &= \Big \{ 1 + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t+\mathrm{d}t) \Big \} \| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t) \rangle \, , \end{align} which, by eliminating the middle point becomes \begin{align} \| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t) \rangle = \Big [ 1 + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t+\mathrm{d}t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ 1 - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t) \Big \} \| \psi (t) \rangle \end{align} thereby ensuring, by construction, that the algorithm respects invariance under time reversal. The use of this algorithm is complicated by the dependence on $H (t+\mathrm{d}t)$, which requires the use of an iterative self-consistency procedure.\cite{Kaxiras} For practical purposes, however, in many implementations the algorithm is simplified by using $H(t)$ in both factors, \begin{align} \label{CK-kets} \| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t) \rangle = \Big [ 1 + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ 1 - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H (t) \Big \} \| \psi (t) \rangle \end{align} which allows a direct evaluation of $\| \psi (t+\mathrm{d}t) \rangle$ from information of the previous time step. This change is of course of no consequence if the Hamiltonian does not change with time, but this is hardly the case for any mean-field-like Hamiltonian (such as that of Kohn and Sham), given the dependence of the Hamiltonian on the evolving electron density or wave-functions. For a fixed, not evolving basis set, this is used\cite{Tsolakidis2002} as \begin{multline} \label{CK-natural} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \\ \Big [ \delta_{\mu}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\mu}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ \delta^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu} - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, \end{multline} (please note that the first factor does not indicate an inversion of the particular $(\mu,\sigma)$ element, but of the tensor as a whole; see Appendix~\ref{InverseAppendix} for the notation and relevant definitions used in this paper for inverse second-rank tensors). In the matrix representation it becomes \begin{multline} \label{CK-matrix} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \\ \Big [ S_{\mu\sigma} + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\mu\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, , \end{multline} keeping in mind that the lower indices within the inverted tensor become upper indices (see Appendix~\ref{InverseAppendix}). For fixed bases this algorithm has the enormous virtue of being strictly unitary,\cite{Tsolakidis2002} in the sense that when propagating an orthonormal set of states $\psi^{\mu}_m$, the set remains orthonormal at $t+\mathrm{d}t$ regardless of the size of d$t$. \subsubsection{Revising Crank-Nicholson for a moving basis} For a moving basis set, the algorithm has to be generalized. One straightforward generalisation is achieved by replacing $H_{\mu\sigma}(t)$ in Eq.~\ref{CK-matrix} by $H_{\mu\sigma}(t) - i D_{\mu\sigma t}(t)$ (in the matrix representation, for instance), giving \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-matrix} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \Big [ S_{\mu\sigma} + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} ( H_{\mu\sigma} - i D_{\mu\sigma t} ) \Big ]^{-1} \\ \times \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} ( H_{\sigma\nu} - i D_{\sigma\nu t} ) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \end{multline} (where we have dropped the $t$-dependence of the tensors for clarity). Here, $D_{\mu\sigma t} = \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_t e_{\sigma} \rangle$ is the required temporal Christoffel symbol. Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix} can be derived from Eq.~\ref{prop} using the tensorial time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation in Eq.~\ref{td} and the definition of the covariant derivative, Eq.~\ref{covdevdef2}. This would be only linearly correct in d$t$ in what concerns both Hilbert space turning and basis set transformation, and therefore the nice unitary propagation feature for arbitrary d$t$ is lost. Indeed, the loss of hermiticity of the propagated effective Hamiltonian makes this problem apparent, albeit that the propagation is correct and well-behaved in the limit of small d$t$. A much more promising approach is obtained by building on Eq.~\ref{affinerot} instead of Eq.~\ref{prop}, which exactly accounts for basis set change if $\Omega(t+\mathrm{d}t)=\Omega(t)$. Within the matrix representation, one obtains \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-matrix2} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \Big [ S_{\mu\lambda}(t+\mathrm{d}t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\mu\lambda} (t+\mathrm{d}t) \Big ]^{-1} \\ \times A_{\lambda}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t) \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu}(t) - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \; , \end{multline} where $A_{\lambda}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t) = \langle e_{\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t) \| e^{\sigma} (t) \rangle$ is defined analogously to Eq.~\ref{TimeOverlap}. The derivation of Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix2} is given in Appendix~\ref{ModifiedCK-Appendix}. The algorithm given by Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix2} would again require an iterative self-consistency procedure for every time step. An analog to Eq.~\ref{CK-kets} can also be considered with a view to removing the dependence on $H_{\mu\nu} (t+\mathrm{d}t)$ and $S_{\mu\nu} (t+\mathrm{d}t)$. This is achieved with the following Ansatz: \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-matrix3} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = A^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t) \\ \times \Big [ S_{\lambda\sigma} (t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\lambda\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} (t) - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, . \end{multline} The integrator in Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix3} keeps the strict unitary character of the algorithm for a transforming basis set in a fixed $\Omega$ space. This can be seen by noticing that the last two transformations in Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix3} (the ones in curly and square brackets) correspond to the original Crank-Nicholson scheme for a fixed Hamiltonian, and that the $A$ tensor transformation is nothing but a change of basis. The latter, however, is only linearly correct in d$t$ if $\Omega$ does turn. Indeed, for an arbitrarily large d$t$, the set $P_{\Omega(t + \mathrm{d}t)} \| \psi_m \rangle$ is not necessarily orthonormal even if the set $P_{\Omega(t)} \| \psi_m \rangle$ was. The advantage of Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix3} with respect to Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix} is important, however, since the space turning diminishes with better converged bases, while the basis change does not necessarily diminish (think of the perfectly converged limit of $\Omega={\cal H}$ for a moving basis: the basis still changes and the Hilbert space does not). In practice, the tensor $A^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t)$ of Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix3} is somewhat inconvenient for calculations. It can be replaced by \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-matrix4} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = S^{\mu\kappa}(t+\mathrm{d}t) A_{\kappa\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t) \\ \times \Big [ S_{\lambda\sigma} (t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\lambda\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} (t) - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, , \end{multline} which involves the inversion of the overlap matrix at $t+\mathrm{d}t$ and the calculation of the overlap between the $t$ basis vectors and the ones at $t+\mathrm{d}t$ (in addition to the Crank-Nicholson operations at $t$). Similarly, the practical implementation of the self-consistent procedure implied by Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix2} would actually imply using the following self-consistent integrator instead: \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-matrix5} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \Big [ S_{\mu\lambda}(t+\mathrm{d}t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\mu\lambda} (t+\mathrm{d}t) \Big ]^{-1} \\ \times A_{\lambda\kappa} (t +\mathrm{d}t \! : \! t) \, \Big \{ \delta^{\kappa}_{\phantom{e}\nu} - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} S^{\kappa\sigma} (t) H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, . \end{multline} \subsubsection{Procedure based on L\"owdin orthonormalization} \label{secSankey} An alternative integrator was proposed\cite{Sankey} and has been used\cite{Zeb2013,Correa2013,Ullah2015} for strict unitary propagation for arbitrary d$t$. Following the previous notation, this propagator can be written as \begin{multline} \label{Sankey} \psi^{\mu} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = \{ S^{-1/2} (t+\mathrm{d}t) \}^{\mu l} \{ S^{1/2} (t) \}_{l\lambda} \\ \times \Big [ S_{\lambda\sigma} (t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\lambda\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} (t) - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}(t) \, . \end{multline} This is analogous to Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} inasmuch as it first does the physical (Crank-Nicholson) propagation for the basis at $t$ and within $\Omega(t)$, and then it transforms to conform to the basis at time $t+\mathrm{d}t$. The basis transformation is done differently, however. It can be seen as the following process: ($i$) It first changes basis within $\Omega(t)$ to a L\"owdin orthonormal basis. ($ii$) It then assumes that the coefficients in this basis do not change when changing to the L\"owdin basis of $t+\mathrm{d}t$. ($iii$) It then undoes the L\"owdin transformation in $t+\mathrm{d}t$ obtaining the sought coefficients in the non-orthogonal basis at $t+\mathrm{d}t$. This procedure has the advantage that the propagation is now strictly unitary by construction for any d$t$, even considering the turning of the Hilbert space, which should give larger stability to the method for relatively large values of d$t$. The propagated vectors are guaranteed to be orthonormal. However, the vectors propagated following this L\"owdin procedure (Eq.~\ref{Sankey}) do not constitute a fair representation of what the evolution of the corresponding vectors would be in ${\cal H}$ in the sense that it does not properly counter the effect of the transforming basis. In order to see this, consider the case of a set of vectors at $t=0$, $ \{ \| \psi_n \rangle \}$, all within $\Omega$ and all initially orthonormal, $ {\cal S}_{nm} = \langle \psi_n \| \psi_m \rangle = \delta_{nm}$. Consider, as well, that the dynamics is such that the vectors do not rotate with time, changing only in phase, as would be the case for eigenstates of a time-independent Hamiltonian, for instance. Take now a basis set for $\Omega$ that does rotate with time, but keeps orthonormality at all times. In this scenario it is clear that the coefficients $\psi^{\mu}_n$ should transform with time to capture the fact that the non-rotating eigenvectors are described in the frame of a rotating basis. This is properly taken care of in the integrator proposed in Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} by the $A_{\kappa\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t)$ tensor, which does the needed basis transformation. For the L\"owdin procedure, however, the coefficients do not change, except for the global phase dictated by the Hamiltonian evolution, i.e., \begin{equation} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}n} (t + \mathrm{d} t) = e^{-i \omega_n \mathrm{d} t} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}n} (t), \, , \end{equation} as is obvious from the fact that if $S_{\mu\nu} = \delta_{\mu\nu}$ at all times, and therefore \begin{equation} S^{-1}_{\mu\nu} = S^{-1/2 \, \mu\nu} = S^{1/2}_{\mu\nu} = \delta_{\mu\nu} \end{equation} at all times. This simple situation clearly illustrates the above assertion on the unfair representation by Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} of the states' evolution in a generic situation. It is not clear however how significant such discrepancies can be. In particular, the case made above is for pure rotations of the basis set. We explore this point in more depth in Appendix~\ref{SankeyAppendix}, finding interesting dependencies on the rotating versus deforming basis sets. In particular, for fixed-shape atomic-like orbitals as basis functions, such basis rotations correspond to Galileo transforms in parameter space, which would suggest no physical significance to the discrepancies between the solvers in Eqs.~\ref{Sankey} and \ref{CKmov-matrix4} for such rotations. This could be behind the apparent success of Eq.~\ref{Sankey}. A more quantitative analysis should be the focus of further work. \subsubsection{Strictly unitary propagation} If not using Eq.~\ref{Sankey} for propagation, we are left with Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} (or Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix5} if using self-consistency), which does not strictly conserve the orthonormality of propagated states for finite d$t$ if the space $\Omega$ turns within ${\cal H}$. The propagator can still be used as long as d$t$ is small enough such that the unitary propagation is preserved within a desired tolerance. An alternative, however, is re-orthonormalising the states. This can be done with any orthonormalisation procedure, e.g., Gram-Schmidt or the iterative procedure used when finding eigenstates by minimization in electronic structure (see, e.g., Ref~\onlinecite{Payne1990}). The L\"owdin orthonormalization method described above can be used for this as well, with the advantage that the orthonormal states keep closest to the states prior to orthonormalization (we need to remember we are not just after an orthonormal basis of the evolved occupied space, but actually following the evolution of separate states). Consider a set of $M$ states, $\{ \| \psi_n \rangle , n=1, ... , M \}$, where $M < {\cal N}$, being ${\cal N}$ the dimension of $\Omega$, and which are represented by $\{ \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}n}, n= 1 ... M, \mu = 1, ... , {\cal N} \}$, and are all, therefore, within $\Omega$. Consider they have been propagated by Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} and are not strictly orthonormal, i.e., \begin{equation} {\cal S}_{nm} = \langle \psi_n \| \psi_m \rangle \ne \delta_{nm} \; , \end{equation} where \begin{equation} {\cal S}_{nm} = \psi_{\mu n} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}m} \end{equation} is an $M\times M$ matrix. By diagonalising ${\cal S}_{mn}$, one can obtain ${\cal S}^{-1/2\phantom{i}nm}$, whereupon the strictly unitary propagator version of Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix4} becomes \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-unitary1} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}n} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = {\cal S}^{-1/2 \phantom{i} nm} (t+\mathrm{d}t) S^{\mu\kappa}(t+\mathrm{d}t) A_{\kappa\lambda} (t +\mathrm{d}t : t) \\ \times \Big [ S_{\lambda\sigma} (t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\lambda\sigma} (t) \Big ]^{-1} \Big \{ S_{\sigma\nu} (t) - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}_{\phantom{e}m} (t) \, . \end{multline} The self-consistent alternative orthonormalising Eq.~\ref{CKmov-matrix5} would read: \begin{multline} \label{CKmov-unitary2} \psi^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}n} (t+\mathrm{d}t) = {\cal S}^{-1/2 \phantom{i} nm} (t+\mathrm{d}t) \\ \times \Big [ S_{\mu\lambda}(t+\mathrm{d}t) + i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} H_{\mu\lambda} (t+\mathrm{d}t) \Big ]^{-1} A_{\lambda\kappa} (t +\mathrm{d}t \! : \! t) \, \\ \times \Big \{ \delta^{\kappa}_{\phantom{e}\nu} - i \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{2} S^{\kappa\sigma} (t) H_{\sigma\nu} (t) \Big \} \psi^{\nu}_{\phantom{e}m} (t) \, . \end{multline} This orthonormalisation step can be done at every evolution step, after a determined number of them, or when the deviation from orthonormality reaches some tolerance. \subsection{Forces} Additional terms related to derivatives also appear when calculating the forces on atoms for geometry relaxation or ab initio molecular dynamics calculations. In the following we restrict the discussion to adiabatic forces, leaving for further work the consideration of additional terms that appear for moving basis sets in non-adiabatic settings.\cite{Todorov2001} Considering for simplicity one single state $\| \psi \rangle$, and using the language of the Introduction, one calculates quantities like \begin{align} \label{PulayOld} & \frac{\partial E} {\partial R_i} = \partial_i \langle \psi \| H \| \psi \rangle = \partial_i \left \{ \sum_{\mu\nu} C_{\mu}^* \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle C_{\nu} \right \} \notag \\ &= \sum_{\mu\nu} \bigg \{ C_{\mu}^* \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_iH \| e_{\nu} \rangle C_{\nu} \notag \\ & +(\partial_i C_{\mu}^) \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle C_{\nu} + C_{\mu}^ \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle (\partial_i C_{\nu}) \notag \\ & + C_{\mu}^* \langle \partial_i e_{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle C_{\nu} + C_{\mu}^* \langle e_{\mu} \| H \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle C_{\nu} \bigg \} \, . \end{align} The last two terms, called Pulay forces,\cite{Pulay1969} involve again basis vector derivatives. We discuss here the relevance of the present formalism for these forces and related concepts. \subsubsection{Hellmann-Feynman theorem} The Hellman-Feynman theorem states that, given $E = \langle \psi \| H \| \psi \rangle$ (for a normalised $\| \psi \rangle$), the derivative of $E$ with respect to $R^i$ fulfils \begin{equation} \label{HF-general} \partial_i E = \langle \psi \| \partial_i H \| \psi \rangle \end{equation} if $H \| \psi \rangle = E \| \psi \rangle$ (and $\langle \psi \| H = \langle \psi \| E$). It is easy to see that, using the latter equations in $\Omega$, \begin{equation} \label{schroe} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \psi^{\nu} = E \psi^{\mu} \; \, {\rm and} \; \; \psi_{\mu} H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \psi_{\nu} E \; , \end{equation} and the Hellman-Feynman theorem then reads, \begin{equation} \partial_i E = \psi_{\mu} \left ( \partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \right ) \psi^{\nu} \; . \end{equation} In Eq.~\ref{e_deriv} we saw that the derivative of a scalar needs no correction. Actually, \begin{equation} \label{forces} \text{\dh}_i E = \partial_i E = \psi_{\mu} \left ( \partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \right ) \psi^{\nu} = \psi_{\mu} \left ( \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \right ) \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} the last identity being easy to check by using Eqs.~\ref{covdevop2} and \ref{schroe}. This is a very transparent expression of the theorem in its general quantum mechanical form in Eq.~\ref{HF-general}. \subsubsection{Hellman-Feynman theorem in matrix representation} The matrix representation gives a less concise expression of the same theorem, except when using the covariant derivative of $H$. Starting with the Schr\"odinger equation, instead of Eq.~\ref{schroe}, we have \begin{equation} \label{schroematrix} H_{\mu\nu} \psi^{\nu} = E S_{\mu\nu} \psi^{\nu} \; \, {\rm and} \; \; \psi^{\mu } H_{\mu\nu} = \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\nu} E \; . \end{equation} Expanding the derivative $\partial_i E= \partial_i \left ( \psi^{\mu } H_{\mu\nu}\psi^{\nu} \right )$ and using the fact that $\langle \psi \| \psi \rangle = 1 = \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\nu} \psi^{\nu}$, the Hellman-Feynman theorem is obtained in this representation as \begin{equation} \partial_i E = \psi^{\mu } \left [ \partial_i H_{\mu\nu} - E \, \partial_i S_{\mu\nu} \right ] \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} which can also be expressed as \begin{equation} \label{HFmatrix} \partial_i E = \psi^{\mu } \left [ \partial_i H_{\mu\nu} - E ( D_{\mu i\nu} + D_{\mu\nu i} ) \right ] \psi^{\nu} \; . \end{equation} Let us see how it looks using the covariant derivative. Introducing its definition for the matrix representation of $H$ (Eq.~\ref{covdevHmatrix}) into the previous expression (Eq.~\ref{HFmatrix}), \begin{multline} \label{stepHFmatrixcov} \partial_i E = \psi^{\mu } [ \text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} - D_{\mu\phantom{e}i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} H_{\sigma\nu} - H_{\mu\sigma} D^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}i\nu} \\ - E ( D_{\mu i\nu} + D_{\mu\nu i} ) ] \psi^{\nu} \; . \end{multline} Using now the Schr\"odinger equation again (Eq.~\ref{schroematrix}), the following elements of the previous equation become: \begin{align} \psi^{\mu } D_{\mu\phantom{e}i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} H_{\sigma\nu} \psi^{\nu} &= E \, \psi^{\mu } D_{\mu\phantom{e}i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} S_{\sigma\nu} \psi^{\nu} \, , \quad \mbox{and} \\ \psi^{\mu } H_{\mu\sigma} D_{\phantom{e}i\nu}^{\sigma} \psi^{\nu} &= E \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\sigma} D_{\phantom{e}i\nu}^{\sigma} \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{align} whereupon Eq.~\ref{stepHFmatrixcov} becomes \begin{multline} \label{step2HFmatrixcov} \partial_i E = \psi^{\mu } [ \text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} - E ( D_{\mu\phantom{e}i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} S_{\sigma\nu} + S_{\mu\sigma} D^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}i\nu} \\ + D_{\mu i\nu} + D_{\mu\nu i} ) ] \psi^{\nu} \; . \end{multline} Using now the relations between Christoffel symbols in Eqs.~\ref{ChristRelations}, we find that \begin{align} D_{\mu\phantom{e}i}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} S_{\sigma\nu} &= - D_{\mu i}^{\phantom{ee}\sigma} S_{\sigma\nu} = - D_{\mu i\nu} \\ S_{\mu\sigma} D^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}i\nu} &= - S_{\mu\sigma} D^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu i} = - D_{\mu \nu i} \; , \end{align} and introducing these in Eq.~\ref{step2HFmatrixcov} gives a quite simple final result for the Hellman-Feynman theorem in the matrix representation in terms of the Hamiltonian's covariant derivative, namely, \begin{equation} \label{HFmatrixcov} \partial_i E = \text{\dh}_i E = \psi^{\mu } ( \text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} ) \psi^{\nu} \; . \end{equation} This last equation can also be derived directly from Eq.~\ref{forces} using the fact that the covariant derivative conserves the metric, as discussed in section~\ref{ParallelTransport}, i.e., $\text{\dh}_i S_{\mu\nu} = \text{\dh}_i S^{\mu\nu} = 0$. From Eq.~\ref{forces}, we have \begin{align} \text{\dh}_i E &= \psi_{\mu} \left ( \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \right ) \psi^{\nu} = \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\lambda} (\text{\dh}_i S^{\lambda\sigma} H_{\sigma\nu} ) \psi^{\nu} \\ &= \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\lambda} \big \{ S^{\lambda\sigma} (\text{\dh}_i H_{\sigma\nu} ) + (\text{\dh}_i S^{\lambda\sigma} ) H_{\sigma\nu} \big \} \psi^{\nu} \\ &= \psi^{\mu } \delta_{\mu}^{\phantom{e}\sigma} (\text{\dh}_i H_{\sigma\nu} ) \psi^{\nu} + \psi^{\mu } S_{\mu\lambda} \, 0 \, H_{\sigma\nu} \psi^{\nu} \\ &= \psi^{\mu } (\text{\dh}_i H_{\mu\nu} ) \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{align} which is nothing but Eq.~\ref{HFmatrixcov}. \subsubsection{Pulay forces} When facing the problem of calculating the forces, $\partial_i E$, one still needs to calculate $\partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu}$. For the time-dependent Schr\"odinger or the von Neumann equations above, the relevant derivatives were obtained by solving equations defined in (an evolving) $\Omega$. In this case, however, the calculation of $\partial_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu}$ is done by integration, effectively using an auxiliary basis set in $\cal{H}$ (analytically with Gaussians, on a real-space grid, etc.). The usual procedure follows \begin{align} \label{pulay} \partial_i & H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \partial_i \langle \psi^{\mu} \| H \| \psi_{\nu} \rangle = \\ &= \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i H \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle e^{\mu} \| H \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle \; . \notag \end{align} The last two terms give rise to the so-called Pulay terms,\cite{Pulay1969} as already presented in Eq.~\ref{PulayOld}. There is nothing substantially new offered by differential geometry in this context. It is interesting, however, to separate the terms residing fully within $\Omega$ from the contributions outside it. Defining $Q_{\Omega}$ as $P_{\Omega}$'s complement, i.e., $P_{\Omega} + Q_{\Omega} = \mathbb{1}$ (the identity operator in $\cal{H}$), we can expand \begin{align} \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle &= \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| ( P_{\Omega} + Q_{\Omega}) H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \\ &= \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| e_{\sigma} \rangle \langle e^{\sigma} \| H \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| Q_{\Omega} H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \\ &= D^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}i\sigma} H^{\sigma}_{\phantom{e}\nu} + \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| Q_{\Omega} H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \; . \end{align} Doing this for both Pulay terms and using the definition of the covariant derivative $\text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu}$, one arrives at \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} = \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i H \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle \partial_i e^{\mu} \| Q_{\Omega} H \| e_{\nu} \rangle + \langle e^{\mu} \| H Q_{\Omega} \| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle \end{equation} the last two terms being explicitly built from the components out of $\Omega$ of both vectors $H \| e_{\nu} \rangle$ and $\| \partial_i e_{\nu} \rangle$ (and their duals/bras). Indeed, if neglecting out-of-space components, then \begin{equation} \text{\dh}_i H^{\mu}_{\phantom{e}\nu} \simeq \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \; , \end{equation} and considering Eq.~\ref{forces}, we arrive upon \begin{equation} \partial_i E \simeq \psi_{\mu} \langle e^{\mu} \| \partial_i H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation} or, in the matrix representation, \begin{equation} \partial_i E \simeq \psi^{\mu } \langle e_{\mu} \| \partial_i H \| e_{\nu} \rangle \psi^{\nu} \; , \end{equation*} where the Pulay terms have disappeared. Neglecting those terms, however, spoil the correspondence between $E$ and $\partial_i E$. This just reflects the fact that, in the time-dependent equations above, the derivatives of the basis vectors were naturally projected onto $\Omega$, which is not the case here. \section{Conclusions} Covariant derivatives are defined for derivatives of quantum mechanical states in situations of basis sets varying as a function of external parameters. The concepts from differential geometry used to re-formalize dynamical equations allow for better insights into the meaning of connection terms appearing in dynamical equations. In addition to relating to the Berry-phase and gauge formalisms, these geometrical insights enable the evaluation of existing, and proposal of new, finite-differences propagators for time evolution equations. \begin{acknowledgments} We would like to thank Daniel Sanchez-Portal and Jorge Kohanoff for interesting and intense discussions on the problem of integrating time-dependent Kohn-Sham equations, Ivo Souza for discussions on the relation of this work with the Berry formalism, and Jonathan M. Evans for suggestions on the mathematics. D. D. O'R. would like to thank S. M.-M. Dubois, A. A. Mostofi, C.-K. Skylaris, and M. C. Payne for helpful comments an early stage of this work. Both authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for the careful reading of the manuscript and for their constructive comments, which have helped to improve the paper noticeably. E. A. acknowledges funding from the EU through the ElectronStopping Grant Number 333813, within the Marie-Curie CIG program, and from MINECO, Spain, through Grant Number FIS2015-64886-C5-1-P. D. D. O'R. gratefully acknowledges the support of the National University of Ireland and the School of Physics at Trinity College Dublin. \end{acknowledgments}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro} The purpose of this paper is to introduce an algebraic interpretation of the univariate $q$-Meixner polynomials. The $q$-Meixner polynomials, $\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};b,c;q\right)$ are defined as follows \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric} \begin{align} \label{eqHyperMeix} \mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};b,c;q\right) = {}_{2}\phi_{1}\left({q^{-n},q^{-x}} \atop {bq} \middle\| q;-\frac{q^{n+1}}{c} \right)~, \end{align} with the basic hypergeometric series given by \begin{align} \label{eqHyperDef} {}_{r}\phi_{s}\left({a_1,\ldots,a_r} \atop {b_1,\ldots,b_s} \middle\| q;z \right) =\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(a_1;q)_n\cdots(a_r;q)_n}{(q;q)_n(b_1;q)_n\ldots(b_s;q)_n}\left[(-1)^n q^{\binom{n}{2}}\right]^{1+s-r} z^n~, \end{align} where $\binom{n}{2}$ is the standard binomial coefficient, and $(a;q)_n = (1-a)(1-aq)\cdots(1-aq^{n-1})$ stands for the $q$-Pochhammer symbol. These polynomials were introduced by Meixner \cite{rf1934_Meixner_polyn} in 1934 as the ones orthogonal with respect to the negative binomial distribution. Their connection with $\mathfrak{su}(1,1)$ is well established (see for instance \cite{rf1982_Basu_Wolf_irrepsSL2R, rf1991_Vilenkin_Klimyk_specialfct, rf1986_Granovskii_Zhedanov_su11Meixner, rf1993_Floreanini_LeTourneux_Vinet_quantmechpolyndiscrete}). Some 40 years later, Griffiths \cite{rf1975_Griffiths_multivMeix} provided their multivariate generalization, orthogonal with respect to the negative multinomial distribution. A group theoretical interpretation whereby Meixner polynomials in $d$ variables arise as matrix elements of $SO(d,1)$ representations on oscillator states was given recently \cite{rf2014_Genest_Miki_Vinet_Zhedanov_JPhysA_multivMeixInterp} and allowed for an elegant characterization of these polynomials. There remains to cast their $q$-analogs in a similar algebraic setting. We thus wish to initiate for the $q$-Meixner polynomials a program that has been carried through in part for the $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials. Of the 4 families of $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric}, two, the related quantum and affine $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials, have been given algebraic interpretations. At the univariate level, two dual points of view have been offered. On the one hand, Koornwinder obtained in \cite{rf1989_Koornwinder_repsuq2} the $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials as matrix elements of unitary $q$-irreducible representations of twisted $SU_q(2)$ quantum group. See also \cite{rf2000_Koelink_qkrawspherfct} and \cite{rf2004_Smirnov_Campigotto_qMeixAsDFctsu11}. A similar treatment of the $q$-Meixner polynomials based on the quantum group $SU_q(1,1)$ is given in \cite{rf2004_Smirnov_Campigotto_qMeixAsDFctsu11} in addition. On the other hand, Genest, Post, Vinet, Yu and Zhedanov \cite{rf2016_Genest_Post_Vinet_Yu_Zhedanov_qrotkraw} identified these same polynomials as matrix elements of $q$-exponentials of $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(2))$ generators on representation bases. The latter approach was subsequently generalized \cite{rf2016_Genest_Post_Vinet_algebqkraw} to encompass the multivariate situation and to interpret the $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials in many variables introduced by Gasper and Rahman \cite{rf2007_Gasper_Rahman_multivqracah}. We shall here focus on the univariate $q$-Meixner polynomials. This is interesting on its own and essential for a study of the multivariate case. Significant differences with respect to the analysis of the $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials given in \cite{rf2016_Genest_Post_Vinet_Yu_Zhedanov_qrotkraw} will be observed. An embedding of $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ in the direct sum of two $q$-Weyl algebras associated to a pair of independent $q$-oscillators will be used and the $q$-Meixner polynomials will be observed to arise as matrix elements of unitary $q$-pseudorotation operators built from $q$-exponentials in the $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ generators realized in terms of $q$-boson operators. While other treatments of the $q$-Meixner polynomials can be found elsewhere \cite{rf2004_Smirnov_Campigotto_qMeixAsDFctsu11, rf2003_Atakishiev_Atakishiev_Klimyk_qLaguerreqMeix, rf2000_Rosengren_quantalgebAskWil}, we wish to point out that the approach presented here extends itself naturally to the multivariable case. We shall also illustrate its power by using it to obtain a full characterization of the polynomials. The article is organized as follows. In the first section, a model à la Schwinger of $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ in terms of two independent $q$-oscillators is presented. In \autoref{sec:unitoper} the unitary operators of interest are introduced. Their matrix elements are then expressed in terms of $q$-Meixner polynomials in \autoref{sec:matelem}. Unitarity naturally leads to the orthogonality relations. In \autoref{sec:qto1limit}, the $q\to1$ limits of the unitary operators and of the matrix elements are given. The determination of the backward, forward relations and difference equation is carried out in \autoref{sec:backfordiff}. Complementary backward, forward relations and recurrence relation are presented in \autoref{sec:dualbackforrecu}. A duality property satisfied by the polynomials leading to new identities is exhibited in \autoref{sec:duality}. Generating functions of two types are derived in \autoref{sec:genfct}. Concluding remarks will be found in \autoref{sec:conclusion}. Basic $q$-identities that are used throughout the paper have been collected for reference in \autoref{app:AppendixA}. \autoref{app:AppendixB} contains the list of the ``dual'' relations satisfied by the $q$-Meixner polynomials. \section{$\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ and $q$-oscillators} \label{sec:model} Consider two uncoupled $q$-oscillators \cite{rf1989_Macfarlane_qharmosc, rf1989_Biedenharn_quantgroupandqboson, rf1991_Floreanini_Vinet_qorthpolynoscillgroup} A and B whose sets of dynamical operators, $\{A\pm,A_0\}$ and $\{B\pm,B_0\}$, respectively, obey the following relations :\vspace{1em} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \center{\hspace{-3em}Oscillator A :} \vspace{-1em} \begin{align} \begin{aligned} \vspace{0em} [A_0 , A_\pm] &= \pm A_\pm~, \\ [A_- , A_+] &= q^{A_0}~, \\ A_-A_+ - q&A_+A_- = 1~, \end{aligned} \end{align} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.54\textwidth} \center{\hspace{-8em}Oscillator B :} \vspace{-1em} \begin{align} \label{eqABalgebra} \begin{aligned} \vspace{0em} [B_0 , B_\pm] &= \pm B_\pm~, \\ [B_- , B_+] &= q^{-B_0-1}~, \\ qB_-B_+ - &B_+B_- = 1~, \end{aligned} \end{align} \end{minipage} \begin{align} \text{with}\quad[A_\pm,B_\pm]=[A_\pm,B_0]=[A_0,B_\pm]=[A_0,B_0]=0~.\nonumber \end{align} This can be viewed as a two-dimensional system. The subalgebras associated to the $q$-oscillators A and B admit the semi-infinite irreducible representations given by the following actions on the orthonormal basis vectors $\ket{n_A}$, $\ket{n_B}$ with $n_A$, $n_B=0,1,2,\dots$ : \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \vspace{-2em} \begin{align} \begin{aligned} A_0\ket{n_A} &= n_A\ket{n_A}~,\\ A_-\ket{n_A} &= \sqrt{\frac{1-q^{n_A}}{1-q}} \ket{n_A-1}~, \\ A_+\ket{n_A} &= \sqrt{\frac{1-q^{n_A+1}}{1-q}} \ket{n_A+1}~, \end{aligned} \end{align} \end{minipage} \begin{minipage}[t]{0.54\textwidth} \vspace{-2em} \begin{align} \label{eqABactions} \begin{aligned} B_0\ket{n_B} &= n_B\ket{n_B}~,\\ B_-\ket{n_B} &= \sqrt{\frac{q^{-n_B}-1}{1-q}} \ket{n_B-1}~, \\ B_+\ket{n_B} &= \sqrt{\frac{q^{-(n_B+1)}-1}{1-q}} \ket{n_B+1}~. \end{aligned} \end{align} \end{minipage}\\ Note that $A_\pm^\dagger = A_\mp$ and $B_\pm^\dagger = B_\mp$ in this representation. Consider the operators \begin{align} \label{eqJoper} J_0 = \frac{A_0 + B_0 + 1}{2} \qquad ,\qquad J_\pm = q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+2}{2}}A_\pm B_\pm~. \end{align} They act on the vector space spanned by the basis states $\ket{n_A} \otimes \ket{n_B}\equiv\ket{n_A,n_B}$ of the combined system. It is immediate to check that $J_0$, $J_\pm$ realize the commutation relations of $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ : \begin{align} \label{eqJalgebra} \begin{aligned} \vspace{0em} [J_0,J_\pm]&=\pm J_\pm~\qquad,\qquad[J_+,J_-]&=-\frac{q^{J_0}-q^{-J_0}}{q^{1/2}-q^{-1/2}}~. \end{aligned} \end{align} It will prove practical to use the following notation for the 2 $q$-oscillator vector states. We shall write \begin{align} \ket{n}_\beta\equiv\ket{n,n+\beta-1}\quad,\quad\beta=1,2,3,\dots \end{align} where \begin{align} n\equiv n_A\qquad,\qquad\beta\equiv n_B-n_A+1~. \end{align} It is immediate to see that the orthonormality relation \begin{align} \label{eqOrthonV} {}_{\beta}\brkt{n}{n^{\prime}}_{\beta^{\prime}}=\delta_{\beta\beta^{\prime}}\delta_{nn^{\prime}} \end{align} follows from $\brkt{n_A, n_B}{n_A^{\prime},n_B^{\prime}}=\delta_{n_A n'_A}\delta_{n_B n_B^{\prime}}$. It is also readily observed that $J_0$ and $J_\pm$ preserve the value of $\beta$. As a matter of fact, the actions of these operators in the basis $\ket{n}_\beta$ read : \begin{align} \label{eqJactions} \begin{aligned} J_0\ket{n}_\beta&=\left(n+\frac{\beta}{2}\right)\ket{n}_\beta~, \\ J_-\ket{n}_\beta&=q^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\sqrt{\frac{1-q^n}{1-q} \frac{q^{1-n-\beta}-1}{1-q}} \ket{n-1}_\beta~, \\ J_+\ket{n}_\beta&=q^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\sqrt{\frac{1-q^{n+1}}{1-q} \frac{q^{-n-\beta}-1}{1-q}} \ket{n+1}_\beta~. \end{aligned} \end{align} One thus sees that $J_0$ and $J_\pm$ transform among themselves the vector states $\ket{n}_\beta$ with a fixed value of $\beta$. An infinite-dimensional representation of $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ labelled by $\beta$ has thus been constructed. \section{The unitary operator $U(\theta)$ and its matrix elements} \label{sec:unitoper} In this section, a $q$-analog of the unitary operator representing $SU(1,1)$ group elements is introduced and its unitarity is demonstrated. Its matrix elements will prove related to $q$-Meixner polynomials. Operators of that type have also been introduced by Zhedanov \cite{rf1993_Zhedanov_qrot}. \subsection{The unitary operator $U(\theta)$} Consider the following operator $U(\theta)$ : \begin{align} \label{eqOperU} \hspace{-2em}U(\theta)=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right) e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right) E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right) E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)~. \end{align} The limit of this operator when $q\to1$ will be obtained in \autoref{sec:qto1limit} and the result will justify the statement made at the beginning of this section. Let us now show that $U(\theta)$ is unitary. In the framework of the previous sections, using Eqs. \eqref{eqABalgebra} and \eqref{eqBCH2}, one can obtain the following relations : \begin{align} e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)(A_+B_+)E_q(-\alpha A_-B_-) = A_+B_+-\frac{\alpha q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2} + \frac{\alpha q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2(1-\alpha A_-B_-)} \end{align} and \begin{align} e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)q^{-B_0-1}E_q(-\alpha A_-B_-) = \frac{q^{-B_0-1}}{1-\alpha A_-B_-}~. \end{align} This leads to \begin{align} e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)\left(A_+B_+ -\frac{\alpha q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2}\right)E_q(-\alpha A_-B_-) = A_+B_+ -\frac{\alpha q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2}~, \end{align} which allows one to write \begin{align} e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)e_q\left(\beta A_+B_+ -\frac{\alpha \beta q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2}\right) = e_q\left(\beta A_+B_+ -\frac{\alpha \beta q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2}\right) e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)~. \end{align} Remarking that \begin{align} (A_+B_+)(q^{-B_0-1})&=q(q^{-B_0-1})(A_+B_+)~,\nn\\ (q^{A_0})(A_+B_+)&=q(A_+B_+)(q^{A_0})~,\nonumber \end{align} and using \eqref{eqeqsum}, one obtains the identity \begin{align} \label{eqIdeee} e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)e_q\left(-\frac{\alpha \beta q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2}\right)e_q(\beta A_+B_+) = e_q(\beta A_+B_+)e_q\left(-\frac{\alpha \beta q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2}\right)e_q(\alpha A_-B_-)~. \end{align} Similarly, inversing the previous equation, one finds \begin{align} \label{eqIdEEE} E_q(\gamma A_+B_+)E_q\left(\frac{\gamma \delta q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2}\right)E_q(\delta A_-B_-) =E_q(\delta A_-B_-)E_q\left(\frac{\gamma \delta q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2}\right)E_q(\gamma A_+B_+)~. \end{align} The fact that \eqref{eqOperU} is a unitary operator ($UU^\dagger=U^\dagger U=1$) can now easily be checked with the help of \eqref{eqIdeee} and \eqref{eqIdEEE}. \section{Matrix elements of $U(\theta)$ and $q$-Meixner polynomials} \label{sec:matelem} We now wish to determine the matrix elements of the $q$-pseudorotation operator $U(\theta)$, in the basis formed by the $q$-oscillator states $\ket{x}_\beta$. Using the fact that \begin{align} \label{eqABaction} (A_-B_-)^\mu \ket{x}_\beta &= (1-q)^{-\mu} \sqrt{(q^{-x};q)_\mu\ (q^{1-x-\beta};q)_\mu q^{\mu x - \binom{\mu}{2}}} \ket{x-\mu}_\beta~, \\ (A_+B_+)^\nu \ket{y}_\beta &= (1-q)^{-\nu} \sqrt{(q^{y+1};q)_\nu\ (q^{y+\beta};q)_\nu q^{-\nu(y+\beta)-\binom{\nu}{2}}} \ket{y+\nu}_\beta~, \end{align} and the definition \eqref{eqqExp}, one finds : \begin{align} \xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)&={}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}\nn\\ &=E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{x+\beta}\right)\sum_{\mu}\sum_{\nu}e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-(x-\mu+\nu)}\right)\frac{\theta^{\mu+\nu}(-1)^{\mu}}{(q;q)_\mu(q;q)_\nu}\sqrt{(q^{-x};q)_\mu(q^{1-x-\beta};q)_\mu}\nn\\ &\times\sqrt{(q^{x-\mu+1};q)_\nu(q^{x-\mu+\beta};q)_\nu}\sqrt{q^{\binom{\mu}{2}-\binom{\nu}{2}+\mu x+\mu\beta+\nu\mu-\nu x}}{}_{\beta}\brkt{n}{x-\mu+\nu}_{\beta}~. \end{align} In terms of the variable $\gamma=x-\mu$, the orthogonality of the basis vectors \eqref{eqOrthonV} imposes $n=x-\mu+\nu=\gamma+\nu$. Further simplifications using various $q$-Pochhammer identities lead to \begin{align} \label{eqXi} \hspace{-2em}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}=(-1)^x \theta^{n+x} &{n+\beta-1 \brack n}_q^{\frac12} {x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q^{\frac12} \sqrt{\frac{q^{\binom{x}{2}-\binom{n}{2}}}{(-\theta^2;q)_{x+\beta}(-\theta^2q^{-n};q)_n}} \nn\\ &\times\sum_{\gamma}\frac{\left(q^{-n};q\right)_\gamma\left(q^{-x};q\right)_\gamma}{(q;q)_\gamma\left(q^\beta;q\right)_\gamma}\left(-\frac{q^{n+1}}{\theta^2}\right)^\gamma~. \end{align} Recalling definition \eqref{eqHyperMeix}, one arrives at \begin{align} \label{eqXii} \hspace{-2em}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}=(-1)^x \theta^{n+x} {n+\beta-1 \brack n}_q^{\frac12} {x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q^{\frac12} \sqrt{\frac{q^{\binom{x}{2}-\binom{n}{2}}}{(-\theta^2;q)_{x+\beta}(-\theta^2q^{-n};q)_n}} \mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~, \end{align} which entails the interpretation of $q$-Meixner polynomials as matrix elements of $q$-pseudorotation representations on $q$-oscillator states (see also \cite{rf1993_Zhedanov_qrot}). Note that these matrix elements are real and that in general the formulas derived within the present setting $($with $b=q^{\beta-1})$ extend to the full admissible range of the parameter $b$ $(0<b<1)$ as in \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric}. \subsection{Orthogonality relations} The unitarity of the operator $U(\theta)$ can be used to obtain the orthogonality of the $q$-Meixner polynomials in the following way. Introduce the negative binomial distribution \begin{align} \label{eqOmega} \omega_x^{(\beta)}=\left[\xi_{0,x}^{(\beta)}\right]^2=\theta^{2x}{x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q\frac{q^{\binom{x}{2}}}{(-\theta^2;q)_{x+\beta}}~. \end{align} One can write \begin{align} \label{eqOrthMatx} {_\beta\bra{n'}}U U^\dagger\ket{n}_\beta = \sum_{x=0}^\infty {_\beta\bra{n'}}U\ket{x}_\beta {_\beta\bra{x}}U^\dagger\ket{n}_\beta = \sum_{x=0}^\infty \xi_{n',x}^{(\beta)} \left(\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}\right)^ = \delta_{nn^\prime}~. \end{align} Substituting \eqref{eqXii} and using the reality of the matrix elements, the relation \eqref{eqOrthMatx} translates into the orthogonality relation for the $q$-Meixner polynomials : \begin{align} \label{eqOrthPolyn} \hspace{-2em}\sum_{x=0}^\infty\omega_x^{(\beta)}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\mathcal{M}_{n^\prime}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)=\frac{q^{\binom{n}{2}}}{\theta^{2n}}\frac{(q;q)_n\left(-\theta^2 q^{-n};q\right)_n}{(q;q)_{n+\beta-1}(q;q)_{\beta-1}}\delta_{nn^\prime}~. \end{align} A dual relation can similarly be obtained. One has \begin{align} \label{eqOrthMatn} {_\beta\bra{x'}}U^\dagger U\ket{x}_\beta = \sum_{n=0}^\infty {_\beta\bra{x'}}U^\dagger\ket{n}_\beta {_\beta\bra{n}}U\ket{x}_\beta = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)} \left(\xi_{n,x'}^{(\beta)}\right)^* = \delta_{xx^\prime}~. \end{align} Following parallel steps, the following relation is found : \begin{align} \label{eqOrthPolynDual} \hspace{-2em}\sum_{n=0}^\infty\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x^\prime};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\frac{\theta^{2n}q^{-\binom{n}{2}}}{\left(-\theta^2 q^{-n};q\right)_n}{n+\beta-1 \brack n}_q=\frac{1}{\omega_x^{(\beta)}}\delta_{xx^\prime}~. \end{align} \section{$q\to1$ limit} \label{sec:qto1limit} It is instructive to obtain the $q\to1$ limits of $U(\theta)$ and its matrix elements. This is done now. \subsection{Operator $U(\theta)$} \label{subsec:operU} Let \begin{align} \lim_{q\to 1}X_0 = \widetilde{X_0}~,\qquad \lim_{q\to 1}X_\pm = \widetilde{X_\pm}~, \qquad X = A,B~. \end{align} In the limit $q\to1$, the commutation relations become : \begin{align} \begin{aligned} \label{eqqto1algebra} &[\widetilde{X_0},\widetilde{X_\pm}] = \pm\widetilde{X_\pm}~,\qquad [\widetilde{X_-},\widetilde{X_+}] = 1~,\qquad X = A,B~,\\ &[\widetilde{A}_\pm,\widetilde{B}_\pm]=[\widetilde{A}_\pm,\widetilde{B}_0]=[\widetilde{A}_0,\widetilde{B}_\pm]=[\widetilde{A}_0,\widetilde{B}_0]=0~. \end{aligned} \end{align} Noting that \begin{align} &\lim_{q\to 1}\frac{e_q\left(-\theta^2 q^{-B_0-1} \right)}{e_q\left(-\theta^2 \right)} = \left(1+\theta^2\right)^{-(1+\widetilde{B_0})} = \exp\left(-\ln(1+\theta^2)(1+\widetilde{B_0})\right)~, \\ &\lim_{q\to 1}\frac{E_q\left(\theta^2 q^{A_0} \right)}{E_q\left(\theta^2 \right)} = \left(1+\theta^2\right)^{-\widetilde{A_0}} = \exp\left(-\ln(1+\theta^2)\widetilde{A_0}\right)~, \end{align} the $q\to 1$ limit of \eqref{eqOperU}, denoted $\widetilde{U(\theta)}$, is found to be : \begin{align} \label{eqLimOp1} \hspace{-2em}\widetilde{U(\theta)}= \exp\left[-\ln(1+\theta^2)\frac{(1+\widetilde{B_0})}{2}\right] \exp\left[\theta\widetilde{A_+}\widetilde{B_+}\right]\exp\left[-\theta\widetilde{A_-}\widetilde{B_-}\right] \exp\left[-\ln(1+\theta^2)\frac{\widetilde{A_0}}{2}\right]~. \end{align} The identities \begin{align} \label{eqIdBCHcl} e^{\alpha \widetilde{A_-}}e^{-\beta \widetilde{A_0}}=e^{-\beta \widetilde{A_0}}e^{(e^{-\beta})\alpha\widetilde{A_-}}~,\qquad \text{and} \qquad e^{\gamma \widetilde{B_0}}e^{\delta \widetilde{B_+}}=e^{(e^{\gamma})\delta \widetilde{B_+}}e^{\gamma\widetilde{B_0}}~, \end{align} obtained from the usual Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff formula $e^A B e^{-A} = B + [A,B] + \frac12[A,[A,B]] + \cdots$ allow to simplify \eqref{eqLimOp1} into \begin{align} \label{eqLimOp2} \hspace{-1em}\widetilde{U(\theta)} = \exp\left[\frac{\theta}{\sqrt{1+\theta^2}}\widetilde{A_+}\widetilde{B_+}\right]\exp\left[-\ln(1+\theta^2)\frac{(\widetilde{A_0}+\widetilde{B_0}+1)}{2}\right]\exp\left[\frac{-\theta}{\sqrt{1+\theta^2}}\widetilde{A_-}\widetilde{B_-}\right]~. \end{align} Recall the Schwinger realization of $\mathfrak{su}(1,1)$ : \begin{align} \label{eqClassSu11} \widetilde{J_0} = \frac{\widetilde{A_0}+\widetilde{B_0}+1}{2} \quad &, \quad \widetilde{J_\pm} = \widetilde{A_\pm}\widetilde{B_\pm} \quad ,\\ [\widetilde{J_0},\widetilde{J_\pm}] = \pm \widetilde{J}_\pm \quad&,\quad [\widetilde{J_+},\widetilde{J_-}]=-2\widetilde{J_0}~. \nonumber \end{align} Under the change of variable $\theta = \sinh \tau$, $\tau \in \mathbb{R}$, \eqref{eqLimOp2} becomes \begin{align} \label{eqUClassInterp} \widetilde{U}(\sinh \tau) &= \exp\left[\tanh \tau \widetilde{J_+}\right] \exp\left[-2 \ln(\cosh\tau)\widetilde{J_0}\right] \exp\left[-\tanh \tau \widetilde{J_-}\right] \nn\\ &= \exp\left[\tau\left(\widetilde{J_+} - \widetilde{J_-}\right)\right]~, \end{align} where the following disentangling formula for $\mathfrak{su}(1,1)$ \cite{rf1985_Truax_squeeze} has been used : \begin{align} \label{eqsu11Truax} \hspace{-2em}\exp\left(\tau L_+-\overline{\tau}L_-\right)=\exp\left[\left(\frac{\tau}{\|\tau\|}\tanh\|\tau\|\right)L_+\right]\exp\left[-2\ln\left(\cosh\|\tau\|\right)L_0\right]\exp\left[-\left(\frac{\overline{\tau}}{\|\tau\|}\tanh\|\tau\|\right)L_-\right]~. \end{align} The operator \eqref{eqUClassInterp} is hence identified as representing a (two-dimensional) pseudorotation, thus allowing to say that $U(\theta)$ represents a $q$-pseudorotation in two dimensions. \subsection{Matrix elements} \label{subsec:matrixelem} For the $q$-Meixner polynomials one has \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric} \begin{align} \label{eqLimQMeixMeix} \lim_{q\to 1}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\frac{c}{1-c};q\right)=M_n(x;\beta,c)~. \end{align} One thus straightforwardly obtains : \begin{align} \label{eqLimXi1} \lim_{q\to 1}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}= (-1)^x (\theta)^{x+n}{n+\beta-1 \choose n}^{\frac12} {x+\beta-1 \choose x}^{\frac12} \left(1+\theta^2\right)^{-\frac{(\beta+n+x)}{2}} M_n\left(x,\beta,\frac{\theta^2}{1+\theta^2}\right)~. \end{align} Under the change of variable $\theta = \sinh \tau$, this becomes \begin{align} \label{eqLimXi2} \lim_{q\to 1}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}= (-1)^x {n+\beta-1 \choose n}^{\frac12} {x+\beta-1 \choose x}^{\frac12} \frac{(\tanh\tau)^{x+n}}{(\cosh\tau)^\beta} M_n\left(x,\beta,\tanh^2\tau\right)~, \end{align} in keeping with results obtained in \cite{rf2014_Genest_Miki_Vinet_Zhedanov_JPhysA_multivMeixInterp} on the $SU(1,1)$ interpretation of the standard univariate Meixner polynomials. \section{Backward, forward relations and difference relation} \label{sec:backfordiff} The algebraic interpretation of the $q$-Meixner polynomials that we have provided offers a cogent framework to derive the basic features of those polynomials. We shall focus in this section on the lowering and raising formulas as well as the difference equation. We shall begin by deriving two identities that will prove fundamental in obtaining the desired properties. We wish to show that \begin{align} \label{eqUdAmU} U^\dagger(q^{-1/2}\theta)A_-U(\theta)=A_-\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}B_+~. \end{align} First, from the commutation relations \eqref{eqABalgebra}, one finds that \begin{align} \hspace{-2em}U^\dagger(q^{-1/2}\theta)A_-U(&\theta)=E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0}{2}}A_+B_+\right)A_-\nn\\ &\times\Bigg[e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)e_q\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\Bigg]\nn\\ &\times E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right) E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)~. \end{align} Using \eqref{eqIdeee}, this leads to \begin{align} U^\dagger(q^{-1/2}\theta)&A_-U(\theta)=E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0}{2}}A_+B_+\right)A_-\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}\times\Bigg[e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)e_q\left(-\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)\Bigg]\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}\times E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}=E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0}\right) \Bigg[E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0}{2}}A_+B_+\right)A_- e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\Bigg]\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}\times e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)~.\nonumber \end{align} With the help of \eqref{eqBCH1}, the expression in the square brackets is computed to be \begin{align} E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0}{2}}A_+B_+\right)A_- e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right) = A_-+\theta q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}B_+~, \end{align} and one thus arrives at \eqref{eqUdAmU}. The Hermitian conjugate of the relation \eqref{eqUdAmU} also gives another useful identity : \begin{align} \label{eqUdApU} U^\dagger(\theta)A_+U(q^{-1/2}\theta)=A_+\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta B_- q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}~. \end{align} \subsection{Backward relation} The backward relation is obtained as follows. One has \begin{align} {}_{\beta+1}\bra{n}A_-U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}&=\sqrt{\frac{1-q^{n+1}}{1-q}}\xi_{n+1,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &={}_{\beta+1}\bra{n}U(q^{-1/2}\theta)U^\dagger(q^{-1/2}\theta)A_-U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}\nn\\ &={}_{\beta+1}\bra{n}U(q^{-1/2}\theta)\Bigg(A_-\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}B_+\Bigg)\ket{x}_{\beta}~, \end{align} with the help of \eqref{eqUdAmU}. In terms of matrix elements, one finds \begin{align} \hspace{-2em}\sqrt{1-q^{n+1}}\xi_{n+1,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)=\sqrt{\left(1-q^x\right)\left(1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}\right)}\xi_{n,x-1}^{(\beta+1)}(q^{\nicefrac{-1}{2}}\theta)+\theta q^{\nicefrac{x}{2}}\sqrt{1-q^{x+\beta}}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta+1)}(q^{\nicefrac{-1}{2}}\theta)~. \end{align} Using the expression \eqref{eqXii} of $\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}$ in terms of $q$-Meixner polynomials and simplifying, one arrives at \begin{align} \label{eqBackRel} \hspace{-1em}\theta^2\left(1-q^\beta\right)\mathcal{M}_{n+1}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)&= q\left(1-q^{-x}\right) \left(1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}\right)\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-(x-1)};q^{\beta},\theta^2q^{-1};q\right)\nn\\ &+\theta^2\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right)\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta},\theta^2q^{-1};q\right)~, \end{align} which coincides with the relation given in \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric}. \subsection{Forward relation} One proceeds similarly for the forward relation. Using \eqref{eqUdApU}, we have \begin{align} {}_{\beta}\bra{n}A_+U(q^{-1/2}\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta+1}&=\sqrt{\frac{1-q^n}{1-q}}\xi_{n-1,x}^{(\beta+1)}(q^{-1/2}\theta)\nn\\ &={}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)\Bigg(A_+\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta B_- q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}\Bigg)\ket{x}_{\beta+1}~. \end{align} Applying the $q$-oscillator operators on the right leads to \begin{align} \sqrt{1-q^n}\xi_{n-1,x}^{(\beta+1)}(q^{-1/2}\theta)=\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta}}\sqrt{1-q^{x+1}}\xi_{n,x+1}^{(\beta)}(\theta)+\theta q^{x/2}\sqrt{1-q^{x+\beta}}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)~. \end{align} Using \eqref{eqXii} and simplifying, the following forward relation for the $q$-Meixner polynomials is obtained : \begin{align} \label{eqForRel} \hspace{-1em}\frac{1}{\theta^2q^x}\frac{1-q^n}{1-q^\beta}\mathcal{M}_{n-1}\left(q^{-x};q^\beta,\theta^2q^{-1};q\right)=\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)-\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x+1)};q^{\beta-1};\theta^2;q\right)~, \end{align} which checks with the formulas in \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric}. \subsection{Difference equation} The difference equation is found by combining the two ladder relations. Indeed, we see that \begin{align} &{}_{\beta}\bra{n}A_+A_-U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}=\frac{1-q^n}{1-q}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &={}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)\Bigg(A_+\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta B_- q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}\Bigg) \Bigg(A_-\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{B_0}}+\theta q^{\frac{A_0+B_0}{2}}B_+\Bigg)\ket{x}_{\beta}~, \end{align} upon using the identities \eqref{eqUdAmU} and \eqref{eqUdApU}. This leads to the following relation in terms of matrix elements \begin{align} \left(1-q^n\right)\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)&=\left[ \left(1-q^x\right)\left(1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}\right)+\theta^2q^x\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right) \right]\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &+\theta\sqrt{1-q^{x+1}}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta}}\sqrt{1-q^{x+\beta}}q^{x/2}\xi_{n,x+1}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &+\theta\sqrt{1-q^x}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}}\sqrt{1-q^{x+\beta-1}}q^{(x-1)/2}\xi_{n,x-1}^{(\beta)}(\theta)~. \end{align} Finally, given \eqref{eqXii}, the difference equation of the $q$-Meixner polynomials is obtained, and is seen to correspond to the one in \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric} \begin{align} \label{eqDiffRel} \hspace{-2em}\left(1-q^n\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)&=-\theta^2q^x\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x+1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}+\left[ \left(1-q^x\right)\left(1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}\right)+\theta^2q^x\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right) \right]\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}-\left(1-q^x\right)\left(1+\theta^2q^{x+\beta-1}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x-1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} \section{Complementary backward, forward relations and recurrence relation} \label{sec:dualbackforrecu} The recurrence relation and complementary ladder relations on the variable are derived by following an approach similar to the one of the last section. In this case, one needs formulas analogous to \eqref{eqUdAmU} and \eqref{eqUdApU} with $U(\theta)$ instead of $U^\dagger(\theta)$ on the left. With the help of \eqref{eqIdEEE}, one finds \begin{align} U(\theta)&q^{-A_0/2}A_-U^\dagger(\theta)=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right) e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)q^{-A_0/2}A_- \nn\\ &\times\left[E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right) E_q\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\right]\nn\\ &\times e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)\nn\\ &=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right) e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)q^{-A_0/2}A_- \nn\\ &\times\left[E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right) E_q\left(\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)\right]\nn\\ &\times e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-2em}=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)\left\{e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)q^{-A_0/2}A_-E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\right\}\nn\\ &\hspace{-1em}\times E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)~.\nonumber \end{align} Using the $q$-BCH formula \eqref{eqBCH2} and simplifying, the middle term in brackets is found to be equal to \begin{align} e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)&q^{-A_0/2}A_-E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\nn\\ &=q^{-A_0/2}A_--\theta q^{-A_0}q^{B_0/2}B_+~. \end{align} One thus arrives at the following identity \begin{align} \label{eqUAmUd} U(\theta)q^{-A_0/2}A_-U^\dagger(\theta)=q^{-A_0/2}A_-\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{-A_0}}-\theta q^{-A_0}q^{B_0/2}B_+~. \end{align} The Hermitian conjugate of \eqref{eqUAmUd} gives a second one, which is also useful : \begin{align} \label{eqUApUd} U(\theta)A_+q^{-A_0/2}U^\dagger(\theta)=\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{-A_0}}A_+q^{-A_0/2}-\theta q^{-A_0}B_-q^{B_0/2}~. \end{align} \subsection{Complementary backward relation} A complementary backward relation is now derived as follows. It is seen that \begin{align} \hspace{-1em}\sqrt{1-q}\ {}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)q^{-A_0/2}A_-\ket{x}_{\beta-1}&=\sqrt{1-q^{x}}q^{-(x-1)/2}\xi_{n,x-1}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &\hspace{-12em}=\sqrt{1-q^{n+1}}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{-(n+1)}}q^{-n/2}\xi_{n+1,x}^{(\beta-1)}(\theta)-\theta\sqrt{1-q^{n+\beta-1}}q^{-n}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta-1)}(\theta)~, \end{align} using \eqref{eqUAmUd}. Applying \eqref{eqXii}, one obtains the desired result \begin{align} \label{eqDualBack} \hspace{-1em}\frac{q^{n+1}}{\theta^2}\frac{1-q^{-x}}{1-q^{\beta-1}}\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-(x-1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)=\mathcal{M}_{n+1}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-2},\theta^2;q\right)-\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-2},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} \subsection{Complementary forward relation} Here one starts from \begin{align} \sqrt{1-q}\ {}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)A_+q^{-A_0/2}\ket{x}_{\beta+1}&=\sqrt{1-q^{x+1}}q^{-x/2}\xi_{n,x+1}^{(\beta)}(\theta)\nn\\ &\hspace{-12em}=\sqrt{1-q^n}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{-n}}q^{-(n-1)/2}\xi_{n-1,x}^{(\beta+1)}(\theta)-\theta\sqrt{1-q^{n+\beta}}q^{-n}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta+1)}(\theta)~, \end{align} where \eqref{eqUApUd} has been used. Applying \eqref{eqXii}, one then obtains \begin{align} \label{eqDualFor} \theta^2q^n\left(1-q^\beta\right) \mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x+1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)&=\theta^2\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta},\theta^2;q\right)\nn\\ &-\left(q^n+\theta^2\right)\left(1-q^n\right)\mathcal{M}_{n-1}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} \subsection{Recurrence equation} The recurrence equation is found by combining the two previous relations. Note that \begin{align} &{}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)A_+ q^{-A_0}A_-\ket{x}_{\beta} = \frac{1-q^x}{1-q}q^{-(x-1)} \xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}\nn\\ &={}_{\beta}\bra{n}\left(\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{-A_0}}A_+q^{-A_0/2}-\theta q^{-A_0}B_-q^{B_0/2}\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{13em}\times\left(q^{-A_0/2}A_-\sqrt{1+\theta^2 q^{-A_0}}-\theta q^{-A_0}q^{B_0/2}B_+\right)U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}~. \nonumber \end{align} This leads to the following relation for the matrix elements \begin{align} \left(1-q^x\right)q^{-(x-1)}\xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}&=\left[\left(1-q^n\right)\left(1+\theta^2q^{-n}\right)q^{-n+1} + \theta^2 q^{-2n}\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right)\right] \xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}\nn\\ &-\theta q^{-3n/2} \sqrt{1-q^{n+1}}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{-n-1}}\sqrt{1-q^{n+\beta}} \xi_{n+1,x}^{(\beta)}\nn\\ &-\theta q^{-3(n-1)/2} \sqrt{1-q^n}\sqrt{1+\theta^2q^{-n}}\sqrt{1-q^{n+\beta-1}} \xi_{n-1,x}^{(\beta)}~, \end{align} and calling upon \eqref{eqXii}, the recurrence relation \cite{rf2010_Koekoek_Lesky_Swarttouw_hypergeometric} is finally obtained : \begin{align} \label{eqReccRel} \hspace{-2em}q^{2n+1} \left(1-q^{-x}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right) &= q\left(1-q^n\right)\left(q^n+\theta^2\right) \mathcal{M}_{n-1}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right) \nn\\ &\hspace{-3em}-\left[q\left(1-q^n\right)\left(q^n+\theta^2\right) + \theta^2\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right)\right] \mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right) \nn\\ &\hspace{-3em}+\theta^2\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right) \mathcal{M}_{n+1}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} \section{Duality} \label{sec:duality} The following relation expresses the property of the $q$-Meixner polynomials under an exchange of the degree and the variable : \begin{align} \label{eqDualMeix} \hspace{-2em}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)&={}_{2} \phi_1\left({{q^{-n},q^{-x}} \atop {q^\beta}} \middle\| q;-\frac{q^{n+1}}{\theta^2} \right)\nn\\ &={}_{2} \phi_1\left({{q^{-x},q^{-n}} \atop {q^\beta}} \middle\| q;-\frac{q^{x+1}}{\theta^2 q^{x-n}} \right)=\mathcal{M}_x\left(q^{-n};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2 q^{x-n};q\right)~. \end{align} In terms of matrix elements, this amounts to \begin{align} \label{eqDualXi} \xi_{n,x}^{(\beta)}(\theta)=\sqrt{q^{n-x}}\ \xi_{x,n}^{(\beta)}(-\theta q^{(x-n)/2})~. \end{align} Using this duality property, other relations can be derived in a simple way. For example, starting from the recurrence relation \eqref{eqReccRel} and applying the above relation, one obtains \begin{align} \hspace{-2em}q^{2n+1}\left(1-q^{-x}\right)\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q^{x-n};q\right)&=\theta^2\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right)\mathcal{M}_{n+1}\left(q^{-x},q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q^{x-(n+1)};q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-7em}-\left[q\left(1-q^{n}\right)\left(q^{n}+\theta^2\right)+\theta^2\left(1-q^{n+\beta}\right)\right]\mathcal{M}_{n}\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q^{x-n};q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-7em}+q\left(1-q^{n}\right)\left(q^{n}+\theta^2\right)\mathcal{M}_{n-1}\left(q^{-x},q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q^{x-(n-1)};q\right)~. \end{align} Exchanging $x\leftrightarrow n$ and then taking $\theta^2\to\theta^2q^{x-n}$, one gets \begin{align} \hspace{-2em}q^{x+1}\left(1-q^{n}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)&=-q\left(1-q^x\right)\left(q^n+\theta^2\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x-1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q;q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-6em}+\left[q\left(1-q^x\right)\left(q^n+\theta^2\right)+\theta^2\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right) \right]\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)\nn\\ &\hspace{-6em}-\theta^2\left(1-q^{x+\beta}\right)\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-(x+1)};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2q^{-1};q\right)~. \end{align} Note that this relation is not exactly the difference equation \eqref{eqDiffRel} because the parameters $\theta^2$ are affected by a factor $q$ in some of the polynomials. The same process can be applied to the other relations that were derived to obtain new relations, but again these relations will have their parameters $\theta^2$ modified by some factors of $q$, which means that those relations will differ from the usual ones. A list of these ``dual'' relations is included in \autoref{app:AppendixA}. \section{Generating functions} \label{sec:genfct} Two generating functions are now obtained from the algebraic picture : one with respect to the degrees and the other with respect to the variables. \subsection{Generating function with respect to the degrees} A useful identity that is proved from \eqref{eqIdeee} is the following \begin{align} \label{eqExp24} E_q(\gamma A_-B_-)e_q(\delta A_+B_+)=e_q\left(\frac{\gamma\delta q^{-B_0-1}}{(1-q)^2}\right)e_q(\delta A_+B_+)E_q(\gamma A_-B_-)E_q\left(\frac{-\gamma\delta q^{A_0}}{(1-q)^2}\right)~. \end{align} Now introduce the operator \begin{align} V(\theta,t)=E_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right) \end{align} and let $\mathcal{F}_1={}_{\beta}\bra{n}V(\theta,t)U(\theta)\ket{0}_{\beta}$. The generating function will be arrived at by obtaining two expressions for $\mathcal{F}_1$. Acting first with $V(\theta,t)$ on the left leads to \begin{align} \mathcal{F}_1&={}_{\beta}\bra{0}E_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}\nn\\ &=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}{}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2\right)\left(-\theta^2q^{-n}\right)_n^{1/2}\sqrt{q^{\binom{n}{2}}\frac{\left(q^\beta;q\right)_n}{(q;q)_n}}t^n~. \end{align} This corresponds to a sum of $q$-Meixner polynomials. Indeed, using \eqref{eqXii}, we obtain \begin{align} \label{eqF1_1} \mathcal{F}_1=E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2\right)(-\theta)^x{x+\beta-1 \brack x}^{\frac12}\sqrt{\frac{q^{\binom{x}{2}}}{\left(-\theta^2;q\right)_{x+\beta}}} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(\theta t)^n\frac{\left(q^\beta;q\right)_n}{(q;q)_n}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} The other way to express $\mathcal{F}_1$ is to use \eqref{eqExp24} to write \begin{align} V(\theta,t)U(\theta)&=E_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\nn\\ &\quad\times E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right) E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)\nn\\ &=e_q\left(\theta tq^{-A_0}\right)e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)E_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)\nn\\ &\quad\times E_q\left(-\theta tq^{B_0+1}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{B_0+1}\right)~, \end{align} which then leads to \begin{align} \hspace{-2em}\mathcal{F}_1&=e_q(\theta t)E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2q^{x+\beta}\right) \nn\\ &\times{}_{\beta}\bra{0}E_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q\left(-\theta tq^{B_0+1}\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)\ket{x}_{\beta}~. \end{align} Expanding the $q$-exponentials and recalling the orthogonality of the basis vectors, one obtains \begin{align} \label{eqF1_2} \mathcal{F}_1=\frac{E_q^{1/2}\left(\theta^2\right)}{\left(-\theta^2;q\right)_{x+\beta}^{1/2}}\frac{(-\theta)^x}{(\theta t;q)_\beta}{x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q^{\frac12}\sqrt{q^{\binom{x}{2}}}\ {}_{1}\phi_{1}\left({q^{-x}} \atop {\theta t q^\beta} \middle\| q;-\frac{t q}{\theta} \right)~. \end{align} Performing the change of variable $z=\theta t$ and equating the RHS of \eqref{eqF1_1} and \eqref{eqF1_2} yield the following generating function with respect to the degrees : \begin{align} e_q(z)\,E_q\left(-zq^{\beta}\right){}_{1}\phi_{1}\left({q^{-x}} \atop {zq^\beta} \middle\| q;-\frac{zq}{\theta^2} \right)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}z^n\frac{\left(q^\beta;q\right)_n}{(q;q)_n}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} This generating function seems new to the best of our knowledge; it is also valid in general when $q^{\beta-1}$ is replaced by $b$ for $(0<b<1)$. \subsection{Generating function with respect to the variables} A generating function where the sum is over the variables is obtained in a fashion similar to what was done in the last subsection. Introduce \begin{align} W(\theta,t)=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2 q^{B_0+1}\right)e_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right) \end{align} and let $\mathcal{F}_2={}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)W(\theta,t)\ket{0}_{\beta}$. From the definition of the $q$-exponentials \eqref{eqqExp}, one has \begin{align} \mathcal{F}_2&={}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2 q^{B_0+1}\right)e_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\ket{0}_{\beta}\nn\\ &=\sum_{x=0}^\infty{}_{\beta}\bra{n}U(\theta)\ket{x}_{\beta}e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2\right)\sqrt{\left(-\theta^2;q\right)_{x+\beta}q^{-\binom{x}{2}}}{x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q^{\frac12} t^x~. \end{align} In view of \eqref{eqXii}, one obtains \begin{align} \label{eqF2_1} \hspace{-2em}\mathcal{F}_2&=e_q^{1/2}\!\left(-\theta^2\right)\sqrt{\frac{q^{-\binom{n}{2}}}{\left(-\theta^2q^{-n};q\right)_n}}{n+\beta-1 \brack n}_q^{\frac12}\!\!\!\theta^n \sum_{x=0}^{\infty}(-\theta t)^x{x+\beta-1 \brack x}_q\!\!\!\!\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} Meanwhile, using \eqref{eqExp24} we obtain \begin{align} U(\theta)&W(\theta,t)=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right) e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\nn\\ &\quad\times E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right) e_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\nn\\ &=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-A_0}\right)e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)e_q\left(-\theta t q^{-A_0}\right)\nn\\ &=e_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)E_q\left(-\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_-B_-\right)E_q\left(\theta tq^{B_0+1}\right)~. \end{align} Then, \begin{align} \mathcal{F}_2&=e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2q^{-n}\right)E_q\left( \theta tq^{\beta}\right)\nn\\ &\times {}_{\beta}\bra{n}e_q\left(\theta(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)e_q\left(-\theta t q^{-A_0}\right)e_q\left(t(1-q)q^{\frac{B_0-A_0+1}{2}}A_+B_+\right)\ket{0}_{\beta}~. \end{align} Expanding the $q$-exponentials and using the orthogonality of the basis vectors lead to \begin{align} \label{eqF2_2} \mathcal{F}_2&=\frac{e_q^{1/2}\left(-\theta^2\right)}{\left(-\theta^2q^{-n};q\right)_n^{1/2}}\frac{\theta^n}{(-\theta t;q)_\beta}{n+\beta-1 \brack n}_q^{\frac12}\sqrt{q^{-\binom{n}{2}}}\ {}_{2}\phi_{1}\left({q^{-n},0} \atop {-\frac{q}{\theta t}} \middle\| q;-\frac{q^{n+1}}{\theta^2} \right)~. \end{align} Effecting the change of variables $z=-\theta t$ and equating the RHS of \eqref{eqF2_1} and \eqref{eqF2_2} leads to \begin{align} \frac{1}{(z;q)_\beta}{}_{2}\phi_{1}\left({q^{-n},0} \atop {q/z} \middle\| q;-\frac{q^{n+1}}{\theta^2} \right)=\sum_{x=0}^{\infty}z^x\frac{\left(q^\beta;q\right)_x}{(q;q)_x}\mathcal{M}_n\left(q^{-x};q^{\beta-1},\theta^2;q\right)~. \end{align} \section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion} Summing up, we have provided an interpretation of the univariate $q$-Meixner polynomials where they arise as matrix elements of unitary $q$-pseudorotation representations on $q$-oscillator states. The unitarity of the representations was observed to imply the orthogonality relations for the polynomials and the structure relations were given a useful algebraic underpinning. A duality property has been presented and observed to lead to a new set of relations for the polynomials. Generating functions of two different types were obtained in this $\mathcal{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(1,1))$ framework. Now that this understanding of the univariate $q$-Meixner polynomials has been elaborated, it should be possible to develop an algebraic interpretation of the multivariate $q$-Meixner polynomials, similar to what was done for the multivariate $q$-Krawtchouk polynomials \cite{rf2016_Genest_Post_Vinet_algebqkraw}. It is expected that the $d$-dimensional $q$-Meixner polynomials will appear as matrix elements of unitary $(d+1)$-dimensional $q$-pseudorotation representations on $(d+1)$ $q$-oscillator states. The authors plan to report on this matter in future work. \subsection*{Acnowledgments} The authors would like to thank V. X. Genest, T. Koornwinder, M. E. H. Ismail, and A. Zhedanov for useful remarks and helpful discussions. J. G. holds an Alexander-Graham-Bell Graduate Scholarship from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada. The research of L. V. was supported in part by the NSERC.
\section{ Spin-orbital physics } Spin-orbital physics was initiated by Kugel and Khomskii \cite{Kug82} who realized that orbital operators contribute to superexchange in Mott insulators in a similar way as spins, so both degrees of freedom contribute jointly to spin-orbital superexchange \cite{Ole05}. While the spin part has SU(2) symmetry, the orbital part has remarkable orbital fluctuations \cite{Kha05} and a much lower cubic symmetry in the perovskite systems where it is intrinsically frustrated \cite{Ole12}. This frustration is frequently released by spin order which coexists with orbital order following the Goodenough-Kanamori rules \cite{Gee96}, and phases arise with alternating orbital (AO) order along ferromagnetic (FM) bonds coexisting with ferro-orbital (FO) order along antiferromagnetic (AF) bonds. Well known examples are spin-orbital orders in LaMnO$_3$ \cite{Fei99}, LaVO$_3$ \cite{Kha04}, and Ca$_2$RuO$_4$ \cite{Cuo06} where spin-orbit coupling plays a role \cite{Fiona} --- the latter two examples (V, Ru) involve $t_{2g}$ orbitals. Indeed, a rather unique example of a spin-orbital system are perovskite vanadates, where a challenging competition between two types of spin-orbital order was observed \cite{Fuj10}. But a different scenario is also possible --- frustrated spin-orbital interactions may lead to the collapse of long-range order, as for instance in LiNiO$_2$ \cite{Rei05}. Another possibility is a spin-orbital liquid emerging from frustration \cite{Nor08,Karlo}. Doping of Mott insulators leads to several remarkable phenomena. Recently short-range charge density wave called stripe phase was reported in doped cuprates \cite{Cam15}. When coupled to spins it arises as self-organization of charge and spin degrees of freedom \cite{Tra96}. It has been suggested that the critical charge, orbital, and spin fluctuations near the quantum critical point provide the pairing interaction \cite{Bia00} and the spectral properties of stripe phases may be seen as a signature of their stability \cite{Fle01}. In manganites hole doping generates orbital polarons that emerge in an AF system by double-exchange mechanism \cite{Kil99}, responsible for a change from AF insulator to FM metal with $e_g$ orbital liquid \cite{Fei05}. As in doped cuprates, the holes doped in $e_g$ orbitals are mobile in LaMnO$_3$, or in Kugel-Khomskii system \cite{Tan09}, as well as in $t_{2g}$ stripe phases with orbital polarons \cite{Wro10}. More complex phenomena are found in doped vanadates where a $t_{2g}$ hole may hop only in two cubic directions \cite{Dag08}, and robust $C$-type AF ($C$-AF) coexists with $G$-type AO ($G$-AO) order \cite{Fuj08}. Doping generates finite spectral weight within the Mott-Hubbard gap already at low $x\simeq 0.02$ Ca doping in Y$_{1-x}$Ca$_x$VO$_3$ \cite{Ave13}, while at higher doping the system remains insulating and develops a kinetic gap \cite{Ave15}. The purpose of this paper is to consider the consequences of \textit{immobile holes} in a ruthenate due to transition metal ions with a lower valence which are substituted for Ru ($d^4$) ions. As an experimental motivation we mention that: ($i$) dilute Cr doping for Ru reduces the temperature of the orthorhombic distortion and induces FM order in Ca$_2$Ru$_{1-x}$Cr$_x$O$_4$ (with $0<x<0.13$) \cite{Qi10}, and ($ii$) Mn-substituted single crystals of Sr$_3$Ru$_{2-x}$Mn$_x$O$_7$ reveal an unusual $E$-type AF structure at $x=0.16$ \cite{Mes12}. Therefore we consider: ($i$) \textit{orbital dilution} by $3d^3$ (Mn$^{4+}$, Cr$^{3+}$) impurities in (Ca,Sr)$_2$RuO$_4$ \cite{Brz15}, and ($ii$) \textit{charge dilution} due to $3d^2$ doping which generates hole-doublon interactions. These findings motivate the theoretical search for the consequences of both orbital and charge dilution. We show that spin-orbital order may even be globally changed and dictated by defects in case of orbital dilution with $x=1/4$ \cite{Brz16}. Note that in contrast to orbital dilution in cuprates \cite{Tan09} where holes remove both spin and orbital degree of freedom, the present doping ($i$) removes the orbital doublon but increases spin from $S=1$ to $S=3/2$, while in ($ii$) spins $S=1$ stay unchanged but a doublon is replaced by a hole in an orbital (holon). \section{ Orbital dilution } The spin-orbital model for Ca$_2$RuO$_4$ Mott insulator is equivalent by an electron-hole transformation to that introduced some 15 years ago for vanadates \cite{Kha01}. Thus we consider an interplay between $S=1$ spins and the $t_{2g}$ orbital doublet $T=1/2$ for a doublon active along a given cubic axis. For instance, the doublon involves $\{yz,zx\}$ active orbitals along the $c$ axis, while $xy$ orbitals are filled by one electron each. The model is isomorphic to the vanadate $d^2$ model \cite{Kha04}, with doublons transforming into empty orbitals (occupied by two holes). We label $t_{2g}$ orbitals by index $\gamma$ when a given orbital is inactive along a cubic axis $\gamma\in\{a,b,c\}$: \begin{equation} \left\|a\right\rangle\equiv\left\|yz\right\rangle, \hskip .5cm \left\|b\right\rangle\equiv\left\|xz\right\rangle, \hskip .5cm \left\|c\right\rangle\equiv\left\|xy\right\rangle. \label{eq:or_defs} \end{equation} \begin{figure}[t!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=16.1cm]{fig1b} \end{center} \caption{ Top --- Doping by transition metal ions in a spin-orbital system with $C$-AF and $G$-AO $\{a,c\}$ order found in Mott insulators with $d^2$ (vanadates) or $d^4$ (ruthenates) ionic configuration: (a) orbital dilution with $a$ orbital removed by the $d^3$ impurity with $S=3/2$ spin, and (b) charge dilution with gray orbital indicating an orbital hole at the $d^2$ impurity with $S=1$ spin. Host $S=1$ spins interacting by $J_{\rm host}$ are shown by red/black arrows and doublons in $t_{2g}$ orbitals ($a$ and $c$) are shown by green symbols. Here doping occurs at $a$ doublon site and spins are coupled by $J_{\rm imp}$ along hybrid (red) bonds. Bottom left --- (c) phase diagram for a single $d^3$ impurity replacing a doublon in $c$ orbital in the $C$-AF host \cite{Brz15}; dashed boxes indicate change in the orbital order around the impurity by the orbital flip $a\rightarrow b$. Bottom right --- Orbital fluctuations promoted on $d^2$-$d^4$ hybrid bonds with: (d) AF, and (e) FM spin correlations. In the latter case (e) the terms $\propto J_2$ couple doublons at two orbitals in excited states (doublon and hole in ovals), and one obtains orbital flips $\propto T_i^-T_j^+$ together with Ising terms $\propto T_i^zT_j^z$, while double excitations $\propto T_i^+T_j^+$ occur on AF bonds (d) even in the absence of Hund's exchange (at $J_2=0$) and are amplified by finite $\{J_1,J_2\}$. Splittings between degenerate $t_{2g}$ orbitals serve only as guides for the eye. } \label{fig:bond} \end{figure} We consider a two-dimensional (2D) RuO$_2$ $ab$ plane in Ca$_2$RuO$_4$ (SrRuO$_3$), with Ru ions connected via $2p_{\pi}$ oxygen orbitals. For this plane $\|a\rangle$ ($\|b\rangle$) orbitals are active along the $b$ ($a$) axis, while $\|c\rangle$ orbitals are active along both $a$ and $b$ planar axes. The superexchange for the host bonds $\langle ij\rangle$ along the $\gamma\in\{a,b\}$ axis \cite{Cuo06}, \begin{equation} {\cal H}_{d^4-d^4}=J_{\rm host}\sum_{\langle ij\rangle\parallel\gamma} \left\{J_{ij}^{(\gamma)}(\vec{S}_{i}\!\cdot\!\vec{S}_{j}+1)J_{ij} +K_{ij}^{(\gamma)}\right\}, \label{eq:Hhost} \end{equation} is $\propto J_{\rm host}$ and stabilizes $C$-AF phase for the realistic parameters of Ca$_2$RuO$_4$, see Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(a). The above generic form \cite{Ole12} follows from charge excitations, $4d^4_i4d^4_j\Rightarrow 4d^5_i4d^3_j$ --- the interactions depend on the intraorbital Coulomb $U_2$ element and Hund's exchange $J_2$ in the host. The orbital operators, $J_{ij}^{(\gamma)}$ and $K_{ij}^{(\gamma)}$, are defined by active $t_{2g}$ orbital along the axis $\gamma$ \cite{Cuo06}. For a bond $\langle ij\rangle\parallel\gamma$ it may be rewritten in the orbital-only form by taking average over spin degrees of freedom, i.e., \begin{equation} {\cal H}_{d^4-d^4}^{\langle ij\rangle\parallel\gamma}= \left\{A_{\gamma}^{}T_i^zT_j^z+ \frac12 C_{\gamma}^{}\left(T_i^+T_j^-+T_i^-T_j^+\right)\right\}^{(\gamma)}, \label{eq:H44} \end{equation} with orbital operators $(T_i^{\alpha})^{(\gamma)}$ defined by the axis $\gamma$ and with coefficients $A_{\gamma}$ and $C_{\gamma}$ depending on spin average $\langle\vec{S}_i\!\cdot\!\vec{S}_j\rangle$ on a bond $\langle ij\rangle$. For the $d^3$-$d^4$ hybrid bonds charge $3d^3_i4d^4_j\Rightarrow 3d^4_i4d^3_j$ excitations with the lowest energy do not generate an extra doublon but simply move it from $4d$ to $3d$ ion. We use the convention that $i=1$ stands for the impurity site and $i=2$ for its host neighboring ion. The energy involved in the charge excitation is, \begin{equation} \Delta=I_{e}+3(U_{1}-U_{2})-4(J_{1}-J_{2})\,. \label{Delta} \end{equation} where $U_i$ and $J_i$ are the respective Coulomb and Hund's elements. In addition it depends on the ionic energy $I_e$, i.e., the mismatch between the energy levels of the two atoms. For Mn or Cr impurities in ruthenates $\Delta>0$ and plays a role of charge-transfer energy. The energy $\Delta$ (\ref{Delta}) defines two parameters which characterize the interactions along the hybrid $d^3$-$d^4$ bonds \cite{Brz15}: \begin{equation} J_{\rm imp}=\frac{t^{2}}{4\Delta}, \hskip 1.2cm \label{eq:etai} \eta_{\rm imp} =\frac{J_{1}}{\Delta}. \label{eq:imp} \end{equation} The spin-orbital interaction on hybrid bond has the generic form similar to Eq. (\ref{eq:Hhost}), but the orbital operators are now defined only by the host site, and the spin operators are for $S=1$ on host and $S=3/2$ on impurity ion. A more transparent form of the impurity-host bond couples the impurity spin $\vec{S}_i$ with the neighboring host spin $\vec{S}_j$ --- it can be written as follows \cite{Brz15}, \begin{equation} {\cal H}_{d^3-d^4}^{\langle ij\rangle\parallel\gamma}\simeq \left\{J_{S}(D_j^{(\gamma)})(\vec{S}_i\!\cdot\!\vec{S}_j) + E_D^{\gamma} D_j^{(\gamma)}\right\}. \label{eq:H123} \end{equation} Here the spin exchange couplings $J_S(D_j^{(\gamma)})$ depend on doublon projection operator $D_j^{(\gamma)}$ at host site $j$, and the doublon energy $E_D^{\gamma}$ depends on Hund's exchange $\eta_{\rm imp}$ Eq. (\ref{eq:imp}). It can be shown \cite{Brz15} that the latter is the dominant energy scale, so for a single $d^3$-$d^4$ bond the doublon avoids the inactive ($\gamma$) orbital and spins couple with $J_{S}(D_j^{(\gamma)}=0)$ which can be either AF if $\eta_{\rm imp}<0.43$, or FM if $\eta_{\rm imp}>0.43$. The sign change at $\eta_{\rm imp}^c\simeq 0.43$ marks a quantum phase transition from AF to FM spin correlations, see Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(c). Similar to the 2D Kugel-Khomskii model \cite{Brz12}, this sign change leads here to rather exotic phases with nearly frustrated spins for several doping levels $x\in[1/9,1/5]$ \cite{Brz15}. A single $d^3$ impurity at site $i$ modifies the spin-orbital order at its nearest neighbors (NNs) $j\in{\cal N}(i)$, while second NNs are little affected and thus they typically follow the $C$-AF/$G$-AO order in the host. In particular, the impurity spin reorients within the orbital polaron at $\eta_{\rm imp}^c$ which marks a transition from AF to FM regime. Both for a single impurity and at low $x\le 1/8$ doping, the $d^3$-$d^4$ bonds influence strongly spin-orbital order \cite{Brz15}. For a higher periodic doping $x=1/4$ when half of the superexchange bonds are $d^3$-$d^4$ hybrid bonds, the overall spin-orbital order is dictated by them \cite{Brz16}. One finds that only every second undoped vertical line $\parallel b$ is FM, as in the $C$-AF host phase, and host spins are inverted on any other vertical line and the doublon flips from orbital $a$ to $b$. Such a modification of the orbital order stabilizes the FM interactions for $c$-$a$ doublon pairs on the horizontal bonds by double-exchange, in analogy to a doped $t_{2g}$ system \cite{Wro10}. In the phase diagram at $x=1/4$ doping \cite{Brz16} one finds a broad region of parameters where impurity spins are also frustrated. Frustration is released by quantum fluctuations which stabilize impurity spin orientation opposite to that expected in the host. At sufficiently large $\eta_{\rm imp}$ (\ref{eq:imp}), FM spin order takes over and $G$-AO order is then the same as in the undoped host. Thus, the most interesting novel spin-orbital phases are indeed found at the crossover from AF to FM interactions along hybrid bonds. \begin{figure}[t!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2} \end{center} \caption{ Orbital patterns obtained at $x=1/8$ charge dilution (with periodic cluster of $N=8$ sites) in two AF phases in an $ab$ plane: left --- $C$-AF phase with FM vertical ($\parallel b$) lines, and right --- N\'eel AF phase (shown by arrows for $B^{'}=0$). Orbital fluctuations on the bonds around the impurity at site $i=8$ are $\propto B'$ (\ref{eq:H24}) and increase from top to bottom. Bottom right --- color convention for an orbital occupied by a doublon at host sites and a hole at impurity site (red circles), as well as the cluster of $N=8$ sites (dotted square) with the periodic boundary conditions on outer (red) bonds.} \label{fig:of} \end{figure} \section{ Charge dilution } Doping a spin-orbital $t_{2g}^4$ system by $t_{2g}^2$ ions is even more challenging. In this case the impurity itself has another orbital degree of freedom, a hole (holon) in place of a doublon. A particular feature of $d^2$ ions is that they promote orbital fluctuations in case when $c$ orbital ($xy$) is filled by one electron at all sites, and the other two $\{a,b\}$ ($\{yz,zx\}$) fluctuate along the $c$ axis, see Eqs. (\ref{eq:or_defs}). This supports FM spin order even in the absence of Hund's exchange \cite{Kha01}. It is thus challenging to consider such ions within a ruthenate where similar orbital fluctuations are also expected. The generic form of spin-orbital superexchange (\ref{eq:Hhost}) applies as well to the hybrid $d^2$-$d^4$ bonds where charge $3d^2_i4d^4_j\Rightarrow 3d^3_i4d^3_j$ excitations may generate an extra doublon in intermediate states at a $3d$ ion for AF bonds (not shown), or instead they create a high-spin state along FM bonds, see Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(d). As a result, the spin-orbital interactions are here quite complex and include several terms, so we do not reproduce them here. They are controlled again by the charge-transfer energy and the same effective parameters as for orbital dilution, see Eqs. (\ref{eq:imp}). Again, the spin exchange depends on whether the doublon at the host ion is in the active or inactive orbital on the considered $d^2$-$d^4$ bond. It also depends on the configuration at the impurity site, i.e., whether the holon is in an active or inactive orbital. The derivation of spin-orbital superexchange for the hybrid $d^2$-$d^4$ bonds demonstrates a remarkable difference to the orbital dilution on $d^3$-$d^4$ bonds discussed above. Consider first the AF spin bond shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(d). Charge excitations, $3d^2_i4d^4_j\Rightarrow 3d^3_i4d^3_j$, create, \textit{inter alia}, two high-spin configurations which generate novel orbital quantum fluctuations, $\propto T_i^+T_j^+$, which go beyond those found in the host \cite{Kha01}. In addition, a doublon may be created at the $3d$ impurity ion and such configurations have to be combined with others to obtain eigenstates at both sites at finite $\{J_1,J_2\}$. As a result, the fluctuations $\propto T_i^+T_j^+$ are amplified. They are accompanied by Ising orbital exchange terms and the usual fluctuations $\propto T_i^+T_j^-$ activated by finite Hund's exchange (not shown). For a FM spin configuration the doublon gets a partner empty orbital at the host site and again, orbital quantum fluctuations $\propto T_i^-T_j^+$ arise at finite $J_2$, see Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(e). Altogether, after averaging spin correlations, the purely orbital superexchange is, \begin{eqnarray} {\cal H}^{\langle ij\rangle\parallel\gamma}_{d^2-d^4}&=& \left\{A_{\gamma}^{'}T_i^zT_j^z+ \frac12 C_{\gamma}^{'}\left(T_i^+T_j^-+T_i^-T_j^+\right)\right. \nonumber\\ &+&\left.\frac12 B_{\gamma}^{'}\left(T_i^+T_j^++T_i^-T_j^-\right) \right\}^{(\gamma)}, \label{eq:H24} \end{eqnarray} with orbital operators $(T_i^{\alpha})^{(\gamma)}$ defined by the bond direction and the coefficients $A_{\gamma}^{'}$, $B_{\gamma}^{'}$, and $C_{\gamma}^{'}$. As these parameters for the present hybrid bond are similar to those in the host (\ref{eq:H44}), we use below, \begin{equation} A_{\gamma}^{'}=A_{\gamma}, \quad B_{\gamma}^{'}\equiv B^{'}, \quad C_{\gamma}^{'}=C_{\gamma}, \label{ABC} \end{equation} i.e., we characterize the orbital superexchange on the hybrid bonds by the parameter $B^{'}$ which stands for double excitations in Fig. \ref{fig:bond}(d). Due to such terms the orbital quantum number ${\cal T}^z$ is not conserved. A more complete analysis of charge dilution and the resulting phase diagrams will be presented elsewhere. Here we focus on the consequences of orbital fluctuations $\propto B^{'}$, both in $C$-AF and N\'eel AF spin configurations in the $ab$ plane, see Fig. \ref{fig:of}. Quantum fluctuations in the spin subsystem are small for $S=1$ spins and we neglect them. For realistic Hund's exchange in the host and at the holon ion one expects $C$-AF order. Its orbital pattern at $B^{'}=0$ has equal orbital densities in $a$ and $c$ orbitals, see left column in Fig. \ref{fig:of}. Indeed, this configuration guarantees maximal doublon fluctuations along the $b$ axis where the order is FM, as in the vanadium perovskites with holon fluctuations involving $a$ and $b$ orbitals along the $c$ axis \cite{Kha01}. Increasing orbital fluctuations gradually destroy this optimal state and favor AO order along vertical FM columns, with enhanced $a$ or $c$ holon density at every other site. For small $B^{'}=1/2$ the $T_i^+T_j^+$ term is active only along $b$-bonds and consequently there is no admixture of $b$ orbitals in the ground state. At larger $B^{'}=1$ we see the appearance of the $b$ orbital polarization at the impurity site and two neighboring host sites along $a$ axis which goes together with a severe change of the global orbital order. At $B^{'}=2$ a new state appears with almost complete separation into horizontal chains of $a$ ($c$) orbitals and a small admixture of $b$ orbital density. Holon site has a similar orbital density distribution, with somewhat enhanced $b$ character. We suggest that the orbital fluctuations of alternating $a$ and $c$ orbitals along the vertical bonds replace here double exchange to stabilize FM spin order, while such fluctuations for the same orbitals along the horizontal bonds support AF spin order. Actually, FO order in the $ab$ plane supports AF N\'eel state following the Goodenough-Kanamori rules \cite{Gee96}, see the right column in Fig. \ref{fig:of}. This state is more robust and almost unchanged by double excitations $\propto T_i^+T_j^+$ with a realistic $B^{'}=1$, and only at a high value of $B^{'}=10$ one finds increased $a$ or $b$ orbital densities following the checkerboard pattern around the impurity. This effect seems to be purely local because already the second neighbors of the impurity in the host are unaffected even for such a large value of $B^{'}$. Unlike in $C$-AF spin order, we see that the defects in the orbital configurations are strongly localized or screened by the host. This screening has an interesting geometrical mechanism: if we look around the impurity we see that the up and down neighbors get an admixture of the $a$ orbitals from the $\propto T_i^+T_j^+$ terms induced by the impurity. These $a$-orbital defects cannot however delocalize in the $a$ direction (along two such bonds). The defects can only move up, to the site number $7$ in the cluster (see bottom right of Fig. \ref{fig:of}). On the other hand, the horizontal neighbors of the impurity are in analogical situation with $b$-orbital defects which for the same reason can only go to the same site number $7$. Finally, at this site one expects a destructive interference of the $a$-orbital defects going from the top and bottom bonds and the $b$-orbital defects going from the left and right ones as it exhibits only the initial $c$-orbital polarization. It is thus possible that for a different distribution of impurities we would observe a much weaker localization of the defects. \section{ Discussion and summary } Orbital (charge) dilution plays a role in several Mott insulators with spin-orbital order doped by transition metal ions with either $d^3$ or $d^2$ electron configuration. We have shown that the orbital order around such impurities changes in general, so even in the dilute limit one may expect observable effects such as islands of reversed spins or doublon fluctuations. We argue that the general trends reported here are generic and a meaningful insights into phase diagrams of systems with orbital dilution may be gained by investigating classical phase diagrams as quantum fluctuations are small \cite{Brz15}. Double exchange leads to local or global changes of spin-orbital order, similar to orbital polarons \cite{Kil99} or dimensional crossover with a change from $G$-AF to $C$-AF order in electron doped manganites \cite{Ole11}. Doping may also generate novel spin-orbital-charge modulated patterns reported recently for $t_{2g}$ systems \cite{Prl15}. Summarizing, this study highlights the role played by orbital or charge dilution by transition metal ions in cubic spin-orbital systems and provides new insights necessary for theoretical understanding of (Mn,Cr)-doped layered ruthenates and related systems. Previous studies \cite{Brz15} have shown that $d^3$ impurities change radically spin-orbital order, and we expect an even stronger impact of $d^2$ impurities on spin-orbital order in the $d^4$ host --- the changes may be strongly centered around the impurity sites, as shown in the FO case, or completely smeared out by the host's fluctuations, as in the $C$-AF case. The theoretical studies of this doping are under way. It is challenging to investigate the consequences of enhanced orbital fluctuations in experimental systems. \begin{acknowledgements} Open access funding provided by Max Planck Society. W.B. acknowledges support by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 655515. We acknowledge support by Narodowe Centrum Nauki (NCN, National Science Center), Project 2012/04/A/ST3/00331. \end{acknowledgements}
\section{Introduction} Consumer demand for mobile video services is growing at an unprecedented rate. This trend is expected to continue in the coming years driven by the proliferation of mobile devices with high quality display capabilities, and the explosion of high data rate multimedia contents available online. The majority of video traffic today is generated through ``video surfing'', i.e., streaming of video files stored in large databases, e.g., YouTube, Hulu, Dailymotion, BBC iPlayer, etc. Such video traffic is dominated by a relatively small number of viral contents that remain popular over a certain period of time, and downloaded repeatedly by many users, sometimes connected through the same access point, creating a huge amount of repetitive traffic both on the core and the radio access networks. Caching has long been used in the Internet to reduce traffic, as well as latency (see \cite{fan2000summary}, and references therein). More recently, research on content caching has regained popularity, targeting mainly wireless networks (see \cite{golrezaei2012femtocaching,AlmerothCacing, Gregori2015multi}, and references therein). While content caching at the evolved packet core, or at the radio access network, can reduce traffic and latency on the backhaul links~\cite{golrezaei2012femtocaching, wang2014cache}, caching contents directly at user devices can bring further benefits \cite{Gregori2015multi, maddah2014fundamental}. The latter strategy is called \textit{proactive caching} since caching at a user device requires predicting the demand, and delivering the content even before it is requested by the user. Since mobile data traffic at wireless access points exhibits a high degree of variation across time, exploiting the radio resources during low traffic periods through proactive caching will also reduce the peak traffic rates; and therefore, improve the quality-of-experience (QoE) for users, and reduce infrastructure costs for network providers. Feasibility of proactive caching in future wireless networks is further supported by the low-cost and abundance of storage space in today's mobile devices. In the proactive caching model considered here, users fill their caches during the off-peak traffic period, referred to as the \textit{placement phase}. Each user's cache content at the end of the \textit{placement phase} is a function of the whole database. User requests, one file per user, are revealed during the peak traffic period, and satisfied simultaneously during the \textit{delivery phase}. Conventional \textit{uncoded caching} schemes store contents, partially or fully, at each user's cache, and utilize orthogonal unicast transmissions during the delivery phase. The gain from uncoded caching for each user depends only on the local cache capacity. Recently, Maddah-Ali and Niesen introduced a novel model for cache networks \cite{maddah2014fundamental}, particularly appropriate for proactive caching in wireless networks, in which the delivery phase is carried out over a shared link, modeling the broadcast nature of wireless communications. They show that \textit{centralized coded caching}, in which coded bits, rather than plain bits of the available contents in the database, are cached and delivered, achieves significant gains compared to uncoded caching. This gain is realized by jointly optimizing the placement and the delivery phases to create multicasting opportunities even among distinct requests~\cite{maddah2014fundamental}. In contrast to the \textit{centralized setting} in~\cite{maddah2014fundamental}, where the active users are known in advance, \cite{maddah2013decentralized} considers the so-called \textit{decentralized setting}, in which, during the \textit{placement phase}, the server has no prior knowledge on the number and identity of users that will participate in the \textit{delivery phase}. It is shown that the multicasting opportunities still appear even if users randomly cache bits of files \cite{maddah2013decentralized}. Numerous papers followed \cite{maddah2014fundamental} and \cite{maddah2013decentralized} in order to further improve the \textit{coded caching} gain, and to apply it to various other network models. Chen et al.~\cite{chen2014fundamental} achieve the optimal delivery rate for small buffer sizes by placing coded contents into users' caches during the \textit{placement phase}. When the number of users is larger than the number of files, improved delivery rates are obtained in~\cite{mohammadqian2016large, PabloCaching}. Pedarsani et al. introduce a coded least-recently sent delivery and update rule that replaces the cache content during the delivery phase for online caching systems~\cite{pedarsani2014online}. A multi-layer caching system, in which user terminals, proxies, base stations are all equipped with cache memories, is considered in~\cite{karamchandani2014hierarchical}. A distributed caching system is investigated in~\cite{Caire2015distributing} with single-hop device-to-device communication, which shows that coded caching has the same scaling law as the spatial reuse of user caches. Delivery over a noisy broadcast channel is considered in~\cite{TimoErasureChannel,amirierasure2018Tcom, amirigaussian2018, EliawirelessBC}. Similarly, delivery of contents over an interference channel is considered in~\cite{Maddahaliinterference, joan2017icc, Simeonecacheaided, Meitxrx}, where both the transmitters and receivers have caches. Common to the aforementioned works and most of the other follow-up papers in the literature, is the assumption that the files in the database have fixed sizes, and each user requests one of these files in whole. However, in practice, video contents are usually downloaded at different quality levels by users, which may be due to their viewing preferences, or the display and processing capabilities of their devices. For example, a laptop may require high quality descriptions of requested files, whereas a mobile phone is satisfied with much lower resolution. In current video coding standards, diverse reconstruction capacities and demands of users is handled through scalable video coding (SVC). The H.264/MPEG-4 standard~\cite{stockhammer2011dynamic, schwarz2007overview} allows temporal (frame rate), spatial (picture size) or SNR/quality scalability. This is achieved by encoding the videos into multiple bit streams, i.e., substreams, such that the more substreams users receive, the higher the corresponding resolution is. In this work, we consider users with heterogeneous quality-of-service (QoS) requirements, that is, each user, instead of requesting a file in the database in full, may request a lower resolution copy. Accordingly, we exploit scalable compression of the files available in the database. This provides flexibility to the server not only in supporting the multiple quality levels requested by the users, but also in exploiting the different cache capacities of the users. In particular, we consider the lossy version of the coded caching problem, such that each user has a preset average distortion requirement. This distortion target is user-dependent, and is the same for any file the user may request. In centralized caching, it is assumed that the server knows the distortion requirements of all the users in the system during the \textit{placement phase}, whereas no such knowledge is needed in decentralized caching. Given the cache capacities and the distortion requirements of the users, the objective of the server is to design the placement and the delivery phases jointly, in order to minimize the delivery rate while guaranteeing that all possible demand combinations can be satisfied at the required distortion levels. The main contributions of this paper can be summarised as follows: \begin{itemize} \item The model studied in this paper generalizes the original proactive caching model introduced in \cite{maddah2014fundamental} in two directions: the users are equipped with cache memories of different capacities, and each user may have a different QoS requirement, which translates into a different average distortion target. \item We derive a theoretical lower bound on the delivery rate based on cut-set arguments. \item For the centralized lossy caching problem, we characterize the optimal delivery rate for the two-file two-user case when the underlying distribution of the files is successively refinable for the desired distortion measure. \item We propose a centralized coded caching scheme for the case with two users and an arbitrary number of files, which is proven to be optimal for a successively refinable distribution, when the cache capacities of the users are the same, and the number of files is a multiple of $3$. \item For the general case, we propose a coded caching algorithm based on scalable coding of the files in the database into as many layers as the number of different distortion requirements. We then divide the problem into two subproblems: the lossless caching problem of each layer with heterogeneous cache sizes, and the cache allocation problem among different layers. The first subproblem is formulated as an optimization problem using the achievable delivery rates available in the literature \cite{maddah2014fundamental, mohammadqian2016large, chen2014fundamental}, and solved numerically. Then, two cache allocation algorithms, i.e., \textit{proportional cache allocation} and \textit{ordered cache allocation}, are proposed, and their performances are compared with each other and the theoretical lower bound through numerical simulations. \item We propose a coded caching scheme for the \textit{decentralized} lossy caching problem, and derive its delivery rate. \end{itemize} The most related work to this paper is~\cite{hassanzadeh2015distortion}, which exploits the decentralized coded caching scheme proposed in \cite{mingyue2015orderoptimal}, and optimizes the allocation of cache capacities to minimize the average distortion across users, constrained by the delivery rate over the shared link and the cache capacities of the users. Scalable coding of the contents is also considered in~\cite{hassanzadeh2015distortion}. Instead of scalable coding, Cacciapuoti et al. consider multiple description coding in \cite{cacciapuoti2016speeding}, where the reconstruction quality depends solely on the number of received descriptions, irrespective of the order of these descriptions. The authors introduce a channel-aware caching scheme where the reconstruction qualities across users are decided according to the cache configuration and channel states. In \cite{timo2015rate}, Timo et al. also consider lossy caching, taking into account the correlation among the available contents, based on which the tradeoff between the compression rate, reconstruction distortion and cache capacity is characterized for a single-user scenario, as well as some special cases of the two-user scenario. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We present the system model and the problem formulation in Section~II. Centralized coded caching is studied in Section~III, and a theoretical lower bound as well as achievable schemes are proposed. Decentralized lossy coded caching is considered in Section~IV. Numerical results are presented in Section~V. Finally, we conclude the paper in Section VI, followed by the appendices. \section{System Model}\label{sec1} We consider a server holding $N$ independent source sequence, $S^n_1$, ..., $S^n_N$, which may correspond to $N$ video files. Each $S^n_i$ sequence consists of $n$ independent and identically distributed (i.i.d) source samples $(S_{i,1}, ..., S_{i,n})$, for $i=1, ..., N$. There are $K$ users in the system that may request any of the files from the server. The operation of the caching system consists of two distinct phases: \emph{placement phase} and \emph{delivery phase}. In the \emph{placement phase}, users pre-fetch bits from the server to fill their caches. In \textit{centralized caching}, active users that will participate in the \emph{delivery phase} are known in advance during the \emph{placement phase}, enabling coordination of cache placement across users. On the contrary, in \textit{decentralized caching}, users fill their caches from different servers through different access points, and equivalently, the server has no prior knowledge of the active users that will participate in a particular delivery phase. Therefore, the cache placement of each user is conducted independently. We assume that each user is equipped with a cache of size $M_kn$ bits, $k=1, ..., K$, and denote by $Z_k$ the contents of the cache of user $k$ at the end of the \emph{placement phase}. The \emph{delivery phase} starts after users reveal their demands, denoted by $\mathbf{d}\triangleq(d_1, ..., d_K)$, where $d_k\in \{1, ..., N\}$ denotes the demand of user $k$. During this phase, a single message $X^n_{(d_1, ..., d_K)}$ of size $nR$ bits is sent by the server over the shared link depending on all the users' requests and cache contents. User $k$ reconstructs its requested file by combining $Z_k$ and $X^n_{(d_1, ..., d_K)}$. An $(n, M_1, ..., M_K, R)$ ``caching code'' consists of $K$ cache placement functions: \begin{equation} f^n_{k}: \underbrace{\mathbb{R}^n \times \cdots \times \mathbb{R}^n}\limits_{N~files} \rightarrow \{1, ..., 2^{nM_k}\}~~\mbox{for}~~k=1, ..., K, \end{equation} one delivery function: \begin{equation} g^n: \underbrace{\mathbb{R}^n \times ... \times \mathbb{R}^n}\limits_{N~files} \times \underbrace{\{1, ..., N\}^K}\limits_{K~requests} \rightarrow \{1, ..., 2^{nR}\}, \end{equation} where $Z_k^n=f_k^n(S_1^n, ..., S_N^n)$, $X^n_{(d_1, ..., d_K)}=g^n(S_1^n, ..., S_N^n, d_1, ..., d_K)$, and $K$ decoding functions: \begin{equation} h_k^n : \{1, ..., N\}^K \times \{1, ..., 2^{nM_k}\} \times \{1, ..., 2^{nR}\} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n, \end{equation} where $\hat{S}_{k}^n = h_k^n(\mathbf{d}, Z_k^n, X^n)$. Note that, in this formulation the demand vector $\mathbf{d}$ is known by all the users. The distortion between the original sequence $S^n_i$ and its reconstruction $\hat{S}^n_i$ is measured by the same distortion function $d(\cdot, \cdot)$ at all receivers: \begin{equation} d(S^n_i, \hat{S}^n_i)=\frac{1}{n}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} d(S_{ij}, \hat{S}_{ij}), \end{equation} where $d: \mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R} \rightarrow [0, \infty)$ is a per-letter distortion measure. We assume that each user has a preset distortion requirement $D_k$, $k=1, ..., K$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $D_1 \geq D_2 \geq \cdots \geq D_K$. We emphasize that the distortion tuple $\mathbf{D}\triangleq(D_1, ..., D_K)$ is known during the \emph{placement phase}, while the demand realization, $\mathbf{d}$, is unknown. \begin{Definition} A distortion tuple $\mathbf{D}$ is \textit{achievable} if there exists a sequence of caching codes $(n, M_1, ..., M_K, R)$, such that \begin{equation} \limsup_{n \rightarrow \infty} \mathbb{E}\Big[d(S^n_{d_k}, \hat{S}^n_{d_k})\Big] \leq D_k,~~k=1, 2, ..., K, \end{equation} holds for all possible request combinations $\mathbf{d}$, where the expectation is with respect to the distribution of $S_{d_k}$. \end{Definition} \begin{Definition} For a given distortion tuple $\mathbf{D}\triangleq(D_1, ..., D_K)$, the \textit{cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff} is defined as follows: \begin{align}\label{eq2} R^\star(M_1, ..., M_K) \triangleq \inf\{R: \mathbf{D}~\mbox{is~achievable}\}. \end{align} \end{Definition} For ease of exposure, we assume that all the files in the library follow the same distribution such that the compression rate for a fixed distortion target, that is, the rate-distortion function, is identical for all the files. We denote by $r^_k$ the minimum compression rate that achieves an average distortion of $D_k$, which is given as follows, in a single-letter form, \begin{equation} r^_k\triangleq R(D_k)= \min\limits_{\mathbb{E}\left[d(S_{i}, \hat{S}_{i})\right] \leq D_k}I(S_{i}, \hat{S}_{i}),~~~~~\forall i. \end{equation} Our goal in this paper is to characterize the \textit{cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff} for a caching system with $N$ files and $K$ users with arbitrary distortion requirements for both the centralized and decentralized scenarios. \begin{Remark} We note here that, when all the users have the same distortion target, our problem reduces to the classical setting of \cite{maddah2014fundamental} and \cite{maddah2013decentralized}, in which users request files in their entirety. We can consider that files are stored in the server in their compressed form. We also highlight that, in addition to allowing requests at different QoS levels, we extend \cite{maddah2014fundamental} and \cite{maddah2013decentralized} in another direction by allowing different cache capacities at the users. \end{Remark} \begin{Remark} To illustrate the richness of this model, consider the special case of a library with a single file, and two users, where only one user is equipped with a cache memory. This is equivalent to the well-known successive refinement problem, where the delivery phase corresponds to the base layer, while the placement phase, i.e., the cache content corresponds to the refinement layer. \end{Remark} To further simplify the problem, we will assume that the server employs scalable coding, also known as successive refinement \cite{equitz1991successive}; that is, each source sequence is encoded into multiple layers, each layer targeting a reduced distortion requirement. The base layer contains the least amount of details which enables a lowest-quality reconstruction of each video, while the following layers, referred to as the \textit{enhancement layers}, can refine the quality of reconstruction successively. We remark that an enhancement layer is useful to a user only if this user has all the preceding enhancement layers and the base layer. Equivalently, a scalable code maps the required QoS level of each user to a different code layer, where the first layer of each source sequence, consisting of $r_1$ bits per source sample (bpss) and referred to as \textit{$r_1$-description}, provides an average distortion of $D_1$ when decoded successfully, while the $k$th layer, $k=2, ..., K$, consists of $r_k-r_{k-1}$ bpss, and having received the first $k$ layers, referred to as \textit{$r_k$-description}, a user achieves an average distortion of $D_k$. \begin{Remark} Here we assume for simplicity that all the files in the database have the same distribution, which, in turn, leads to all the compressed files for a fixed distortion target to have the same rate, i.e., the same size. While this greatly simplifies the exposition, extension of the results to the more general scenario with files with different distributions is possible by zero-padding shorter codewords before multicasting, similarly to \cite{ZhangCaching}. \end{Remark} \begin{Remark} We remark here that with scalable coding we may not be able to meet the optimal rate-distortion function at each layer, that is, in general, $r^_k\neq r_k$, since scalable coding may introduce coding overheads to allow various trade-offs among the rates of different layers. However, for some sources and under certain distortion measures scalable coding does not introduce rate loss, called successive refinability. For example, any finite alphabet source with Hamming distortion and Gaussian sources with square-error distortion are examples of successive refinable source and distortion measure pairs~\cite{equitz1991successive, hassanzadeh2015distortion}. \end{Remark} \section{Centralized Coded Caching With Distortion Requirements}\label{section:3} In this section, we investigate the lossy caching problem in the centralized setting. We start by presenting a theoretical lower bound on the delivery rate of the caching system described in Section~\ref{sec1}. We will then consider achievable lossy caching schemes, first for the two-user two-file ($N=K=2$) scenario, then for the general two-user scenario, and finally for an arbitrary number of users and files. \subsection{Theoretical Lower Bound} We provide a lower bound on the delivery rate for the general setting ($K$ users and $N$ files) based on the cut-set arguments in Theorem 1. \begin{Theorem}(Cut-set Bound) For the lossy caching problem described in Section~\ref{sec1}, the optimal achievable delivery rate is lower bounded by \begin{align} &R^\star(M_1, ..., M_K)\nonumber\\ &\geq \operatorname{max}\limits_{s\in \{1,...,\min\{N, K\}\}} \operatorname{max}\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c} \mathcal{U} \subset \{1,...,K\}\\ \|\mathcal{U}\|=s \end{subarray}}\left(\sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} r^_{k}-\frac{\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal{U}}M_k}{\lfloor N/s\rfloor}\right). \end{align} \begin{proof} The proof can be found in Appendix A. \end{proof} \end{Theorem} It is known that the cut-set bound is not tight in general for the centralized coded caching problem~\cite{maddah2014fundamental}. We present another bound for the two-user case ($K=2$), which, together with the cut-set bound, provides a tight lower bound on the delivery rate in certain scenarios. \begin{Theorem} For the lossy caching problem described in Section~\ref{sec1} with $K=2$, we have \begin{align} R^\star(M_1, M_2) \geq \frac{r^_1}{2}+r^_2-\frac{(M_1+M_2)}{2\lfloor N/2 \rfloor}. \end{align} \begin{proof} The proof can be found in Appendix B. \end{proof} \end{Theorem} \subsection{Optimal Lossy Caching: Two Users and Two Files $(N=K=2)$}\label{section:2a} In this section, we characterize the optimal cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff for the lossy caching problem with two users ($K=2$) and two files ($N=2$), assuming that the underlying source distribution is \textit{successively refinable}. We first present the lower bound on the delivery rate for given $M_1$ and $M_2$ in this particular scenario, followed by the coded caching scheme achieving this lower bound. \begin{Corollary}\label{lemma_NK2} For the lossy caching problem with $N=K=2$, a lower bound on the cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff is given by \begin{align} R^\star (M_1, M_2) \geq R_c(&M_1, M_2)\triangleq \max\{r^_1-M_1/2,\nonumber\\ &r^_2-M_2/2, r^_1+r^_2-(M_1+M_2),\nonumber\\ & r^_1/2+r^_2-(M_1+M_2)/2, 0\}. \label{eq444} \end{align} \end{Corollary} The first three terms in RHS of (\ref{eq444}) are derived from the cut-set bound in Theorem 1, and the forth term follows from Theorem 2. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{division_r1.png} \caption{Illustration of the five distinct cases of the cache capacities, $M_1$ and $M_2$, depending on the distortion requirements of the users, $r_1$ and $r_2$ ($N=K=2$).} \end{figure} Now we consider the achievability, assuming that a scalable code is employed to compress each file into two layers, where the first layer of rate $r_1$ allows achieving a distortion of $D_1$, while the second layer of rate $r_2-r_1$, together with the first layer results in distortion $D_2$. We denote by $A(B)$ the source codeword of length $nr_2$ bits that can achieve a distortion of $D_2$ for file $S^n_1(S^n_2)$. We refer to the first $nr_1$ bits as the \textit{base layer}, and the remaining $n(r_2-r_1)$ bits as the \textit{refinement layer}. We consider the following five cases depending on the cache capacities of the users, illustrated in Fig.~1: \textit{Case i}, $M_1 + M_2\leq r_1$;\textit{Case ii}, $M_1 + M_2>r_1$, $M_1 \leq r_1$, $M_2 \leq 2r_2-r_1 $; \textit{Case iii}, $M_1>r_1$, $M_2 \leq 2r_2$, $M_2-M_1 \leq 2r_2-2r_1$; \textit{Case iv}, $M_1\leq 2r_1$, $M_2 > 2r_2-r_1$, $M_2-M_1 > 2r_2-2r_1$; \textit{Case v}, $M_1>2r_1$, $M_2>2r_2$. Before presenting the caching and delivery schemes for each of the above cases in detail, we briefly review two different techniques that have been considered in the literature for loseless coded caching systems. Assume that there are two files $W_1$ and $W_2$ in the library, and each of the two users requests one of these files fully. In the placement phase we divide each file into two equal-size non-intersecting sub-files, i.e., we have $W_1=(W_{11}, W_{12})$ and $W_2=(W_{21}, W_{22})$. When the cache sizes of the users are small, the users can cache XORed subfiles. For example, user 1 caches $W_{11}\oplus W_{21}$, while user 2 caches $W_{12}\oplus W_{22}$. Now, consider that user $i$ requests file $W_i$, $i=1, 2$. To satisfy the demands, the server transmits $W_{21}$ and $W_{12}$, which are simultaneously useful to both users. Note that, for cache capacities $M_1=M_2=1/2$, we achieved a delivery rate of $R=1$. This method, referred to as \textit{coded placement}, is first proposed in \cite{maddah2014fundamental} for $N=K=2$, and then generalized by \cite{chen2014fundamental}. Alternatively, if the users have larger caches, e.g., $M_1=M_2=1$, they can cache disjoint subfiles. For example, user 1 caches $W_{11}, W_{21}$, while user 2 caches $W_{12}, W_{22}$. The same demand combination as above can be satisfied by simply transmitting $W_{21} \oplus W_{12}$ to the users which again benefits both users. This method, also proposed by Maddah-Ali and Niesen in~\cite{maddah2014fundamental}, is referred to as \textit{coded delivery}. The optimal caching scheme for the two-user two-file scenario for the lossless caching problem with the same cache sizes, i.e, $M_1=M_2$, has been derived by memory sharing between these two methods and the two extreme cases corresponding to no user cashes ($M_1=M_2=0$) and users caching both files ($M_1=M_2=2$). For the lossy caching problem studied in this paper, where the two users have different distortion requirements and different cache sizes, to fully exploit these two methods, we divide the first layers of codewords $A$ and $B$ into six disjoint parts denoted by $A_1$, $\ldots$, $A_6$ and $B_1$, $\ldots$, $B_6$, respectively, where the XORed combination of $A_1$ and $B_1$, i.e., $A_1 \oplus B_1$, is cached by user 1, the XORed combination of $A_2$ and $B_2$, i.e., $A_2 \oplus B_2$, is cached by user 2, $A_3$ and $B_3$ are cached exclusively by user 1, $A_4$ and $B_4$ are cached exclusively by user 2, $A_5$ and $B_5$ are cached by both user 1 and user 2, and $A_6$ and $B_6$ are cached by none of the users. Since only user 2 requires the refinement layers, we divided the refinement layers of $A$ and $B$ into two disjoint parts denoted by $A_7$, $A_8$ and $B_7$, $B_8$, respectively, where $A_7$ and $B_7$ are cached by user 2, and $A_8$ and $B_8$ are not cached by any user. Overall, user 1 caches $Z_1=\left(A_1\oplus B_1, A_3, B_3, A_5, B_5\right)$, while user 2 caches $Z_2=\left(A_2\oplus B_2, A_4, B_4, A_5, B_5, A_7, B_7\right)$. Let $\|A_i\|=\|B_i\|$ for $i=1, ..., 8$, and $\|A_3\|=\|A_4\|$ where $\|X\|$ denotes the length of the binary sequence $X$ (normalized by $n$). \begin{table} \label{table1} \centering \caption{Illustration of Cache Placement For $N=K=2$} \begin{tabular}{\|l\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|c\|} \hline & \multicolumn{6}{c\|}{Base Layer} & \multicolumn{2}{c\|}{Refinement Layer} \\ \hline $S_1$ & $A_1$ & $A_2$ & $A_3$ & $A_4$ & $A_5$ & $A_6$ & $A_7$ & $A_8$ \\ \hline $S_2$ & $B_1$ & $B_2$ & $B_3$ & $B_4$ & $B_5$ & $B_6$ & $B_7$ & $B_8$ \\\hlinewd{1.2pt} Case i & $M_1$ & $M_2$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $r_1-M_1-M_2$ & $0$ & $r_2-r_1$ \\ \hline Case ii & $M_1$ & $r_1-M_1$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $\frac{M_1+M_2-r_1}{2}$ & $r_2-r_1-\frac{M_1+M_2-r_1}{2}$ \\ \hline Case iii & $r_1-l_1-2l_2$ & $0$ & $l_2$ & $l_2$ & $l_1$ & $0$ & $l_3$ & $r_2-r_1-l_3$ \\ \hline Case iv & $0$ & $r_1-M_1$ & $M_1/2$ & $M_1/2$ & $0$ & $0$ & $r_2-r_1$ & $0$ \\ \hline Case v & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $r_1$ & $0$ & $r_2-r_1$ & $0$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} Table~I illustrates the placement of contents into users' caches for the five cases by specifying the size of each portion in each case. For example, the forth row implies that in \textit{Case i}, $\|A_1\|=\|B_1\|=M_1$, $\|A_2\|=\|B_2\|=M_2$, $\|A_6\|=\|B_6\|=r_1-M_1-M_2$, $\|A_8\|=\|B_8\|=r_2-r_1$, and the sizes of all other portions are equal to $0$, which is equivalent to dividing $A(B)$ into four portions $A_1(B_1)$, $A_2(B_2)$, $A_6(B_6)$ and $A_8(B_8)$. Thus, in the placement phase, user 1 caches $Z_1=A_1\oplus B_1$, and user 2 caches $Z_2=A_2 \oplus B_2$ so that $\|Z_1\|=M_1$ and $\|Z_2\|=M_2$, which meets the cache capacity constraints. For \textit{Case ii}, as presented in the fifth row, $\|A_1\|=\|B_1\|=M_1$, $\|A_2\|=\|B_2\|=r_1-M_2$, $\|A_7\|=\|B_7\|=\frac{M_1+M_2-r_1}{2}$, $\|A_8\|=\|B_8\|=r_2-r_1-\frac{M_1+M_2-r_1}{2}$, and the sizes of all other portions are equal to $0$, which is equivalent to dividing $A(B)$ into four portions $A_1(B_1)$, $A_2(B_2)$, $A_7(B_7)$ and $A_8(B_8)$. Thus, user 1 caches $Z_1=A_1\oplus B_1$, and user 2 caches $Z_2=\{A_2 \oplus B_2, A_7, B_7\}$ so that $\|Z_1\|=M_1$ and $\|Z_2\|=M_2$, which meets the cache capacity constraints. The cache placements for the other three cases are presented in a similar manner in Table~I. Next, we focus on the delivery phase, and identify the minimum delivery rate in each case to satisfy the demands, $\mathbf{d}=(S^n_1, S^n_2)$. Other demand combinations can be satisfied similarly, without requiring higher delivery rates. \textit{Case i} ($M_1 + M_2\leq r_1$): The server sends $B_1$, $A_2$, $A_6$, $B_6$ and $B_8$. Thus, the delivery rate is $R(M_1, M_2)= r_1+r_2-(M_1+M_2)$. \textit{Case ii} ($M_1 + M_2>r_1$, $M_1 \leq r_1$, $M_2 \leq 2r_2-r_1 $): The server sends $B_1$, $A_2$ and $B_8$. We have $R(M_1, M_2)= \frac{r_1}{2}+r_2-\frac{M_1+M_2}{2}$. \textit{Case iii} ($M_1>r_1$, $M_2 \leq 2r_2$, $M_2-M_1 \leq 2r_2-2r_1$): The values of $l_1$, $l_2$ and $l_3$ in Table I are given as: \begin{subequations} \begin{equation} l_1=\max\{0,\min\{M_1-r_1, M_2/2-(r_2-r_1)\}\};\end{equation} \begin{equation}l_2=\max\{0, M_2/2-(r_2-r_1)-l_1\};\end{equation} \begin{equation}l_3=\min\{r_2-r_1, M_2/2\}.\end{equation} \end{subequations} The server sends $B_1$, $B_3\oplus A_4$ and $B_8$, which results in $R(M_1, M_2)= r_2-\frac{M_2}{2}$. \textit{Case iv}~($M_1\leq 2r_1$, $M_2 > 2r_2-r_1$, $M_2-M_1 > 2r_2-2r_1$): The server sends $B_2$, $B_3\oplus A_4$ and we have $R(M_1, M_2)=r_1-\frac{M_1}{2}$. \textit{Case v} ($M_1>2r_1$, $M_2>2r_2$): The cache capacities of both users are sufficient to cache the required descriptions for both files. Thus, any request can be satisfied from the local caches at the desired distortion levels, and we have $R(M_1, M_2)=0$. \begin{Theorem}\label{theorem_NK2} For $N=K=2$, and a successively refinable source distribution, we have $R^(M_1, M_2)=R_c(M_1, M_2)$, i.e., the proposed coded caching scheme meets the lower bound in Corollary \ref{lemma_NK2}; and hence, it is optimal. \begin{proof} Theorem~\ref{theorem_NK2} follows by setting $r_1=r^_1$ and $r_2=r^_2$ in the above achievable scheme. We note that the achieved delivery rates match those of the lower bound in Corollary~\ref{lemma_NK2} for each of the five cases. \end{proof} \end{Theorem} \begin{Remark} The optimality of the proposed scheme arises from the maximization of the multicasting opportunities in the discussed five cases. For example, in Case i, by placing disjoint XORed contents from the base layers into the caches of both users, $M_1+M_2$ bits sent in the delivery phase is simultaneously useful to both users regardless of any demand combination. This corresponds to the maximal multicasting opportunities that can be created by any caching scheme as validated by the lower bound on the cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff given in Corollary 1. \end{Remark} \begin{Remark} In the special case of identical distortion requirements at the two users, i.e., when $D_1=D_2$, Theorem \ref{theorem_NK2} generalizes the optimal delivery rate result of \cite{maddah2014fundamental} for $N=K=2$ to different cache capacities. \end{Remark} \subsection{Lossy Caching: Two Users and $N$ Files ($K=2, N>2$)}\label{section:2b} Next, we investigate the more general case with two users and an arbitrary number of files, i.e., $K=2, N>2$. We first present a lower bound on the delivery rate, in Lemma 1, and then present a coded caching scheme, followed by the analysis of the gap between the two. \begin{Lemma} \label{lemma_N3K2} For the lossy caching problem with $K=2$ and $N>2$, a lower bound on the cache capacity-delivery rate tradeoff is given by \begin{align}\label{eq45} R^\star &(M_1, M_2) \geq R_c(M_1, M_2)\triangleq \max\left\{r^_1-\frac{M_1}{N}, r^_2-\frac{M_2}{N}, \right.\nonumber \\ &~\left.\frac{r^_1}{2}+r^_2-\frac{M_1+M_2}{2\lfloor N/2 \rfloor}, r^_1+r^_2-\frac{M_1+M_2}{2\lfloor N/3 \rfloor}, 0\right\}. \end{align} \end{Lemma} The first two terms in RHS of (\ref{eq45}) follow from the cut-set bound in Theorem 1, while the third term from Theorem 2. The proof of the forth term can be found in Appendix C. Next, we present a coded caching scheme for this scenario. Similarly to Section~\ref{section:2a}, we employ scalable coding to compress the files. We denote by $W_j$ the source codeword of length $nr_2$ bits that leads to a distortion of $D_2$ for file $S^n_j$, $j=1, ..., N$. First $nr_1$ bits of $W_j$ corresponds to the base layer that would provide a distortion level of $D_1$ if received. Note that, since $N>K$, \textit{coded placement}, which places XORed contents into users' caches as described in Section III-B, no longer creates multicasting opportunities in this scenario. Hence, we exploit only \textit{coded delivery}, where users cache distinct uncoded subfiles, and XORed subfiles are sent in the delivery phase as described in Section III-B. Accordingly, we divide the base layer of $W_j$, i.e., the first $nr_1$ bits, into four disjoint parts, denoted by $W_{j1}$, $W_{j2}$, $W_{j3}$, and $W_{j4}$, and let user $1$ cache $W_{j1}$ and $W_{j2}$, while user $2$ caches $W_{j2}$ and $W_{j3}$, $j=1, ..., N$. Hence, in the delivery phase, for any demand pair, the server sends $W_{d_13}\bar{\oplus}W_{d_21}$, $W_{d_14}$, $W_{d_24}$, to enable both users to obtain the base layers of their required files. Here $\bar{\oplus}$ represents the bitwise XOR operation, where the arguments are first zero-padded to the length of the longest one. The refinement layer, i.e., the remaining $n(r_2-r_1)$ bits of $W_j$, is divided into two disjoint parts, denoted by $W_{j5}$, $W_{j6}$, $j=1, ..., N$. User 2 caches $W_{j5}$, while user 1 does not cache any part of the refinement layers. In the delivery phase, the server sends $W_{d_26}$ to enable user 2 to obtain the second layer of its requested file. Let the size of each part be the same for all the files, e.g., $\|W_{ik}\|=\|W_{jk}\|$, $\forall i, j \in \{1, ..., N\}$, for $k=1, ..., 6$. To conclude, we have $Z_1=\bigcup\limits_{j=1}^N \{W_{j1}, W_{j2}\}$ and $Z_2=\bigcup\limits_{j=1}^N \{W_{j2}, W_{j3}, W_{j5}\}$. By sending $W_{d_13}\bar{\oplus}W_{d_21}$, $W_{d_14}$, $W_{d_24}$, and $W_{d_26}$, for any possible demand pair $(d_1, d_2)$, in the delivery phase, both users can achieve their target distortion values. In the following, we specify the size of each portion depending on the cache capacities $M_1$ and $M_2$, and derive the corresponding delivery rate. We note that the multicasting opportunities only come from $W_{j1}$ and $W_{j3}$ (by sending $W_{d_13}\bar{\oplus}W_{d_21}$ in the delivery phase as described above). Hence, our goal is to maximize $W_{d_13}\bar{\oplus}W_{d_21}$ in order to minimize the delivery rate. We consider three cases: \textit{Case i} ($M_1 + M_2\leq Nr_1$): We let: $\|W_{j1}\|=M_1/N$; $\|W_{j2}\|=0$; $\|W_{j3}\|=M_2/N$; $\|W_{j4}\|=r_1-M_1/N-M_2/N$; $\|W_{j5}\|=0$; $\|W_{j6}\|=r_2-r_1$. The delivery rate is $R(M_1, M_2)= r_1+r_2-\frac{2(M_1+M_2)}{N}+\frac{\max\{M_1, M_2\}}{N}$. \textit{Case ii} ($M_1 + M_2 > Nr_1$, $M_1 \leq Nr_1$): We let: $\|W_{j1}\|=\max\{\min\{r_2-M_2/N, M_1/N\}, 0\}$; $\|W_{j2}\|=\max\{M_1/N+M_2/N-r_2,0\}$; $\|W_{j3}\|=r_1-M_1/N$; $\|W_{j4}\|=0$; $\|W_{j5}\|=\min\{M_1/N+M_2/N-r_1, r_2-r_1\}$; $\|W_{j6}\|=\max\{r_2-(M_1/N+M_2/N), 0\}$. We have $R(M_1, M_2)= \max\{r_2-(M_1+M_2)/N, 0\}+\max\{\min\{r_2-M_2/N, M_1/N\}, r_1-M_1/N\}$. \textit{Case iii} ($M_1 > Nr_1$): Let $\|W_{j1}\|=r_1-\min\{M_2/N, r_1\}$; $\|W_{j2}\|=\min\{M_2/N, r_1\}$; $\|W_{j3}\|=0$; $\|W_{j4}\|=0$; $\|W_{j5}\|=\max\{0, \min\{r_2, M_2/N\}-r_1\}$; $\|W_{j6}\|=\min\{r_2-r_1, \max\{0, r_2-M_2/N\}\}$. It yields $R(M_1, M_2)= \max\{0, r_2-M_2/N\}$. We can summarize the achievable delivery rate as follows: \begin{align}\label{eq44} &R(M_1, M_2)\nonumber\\ &=\begin{cases} r_1+r_2-2M_1/N-M_2/N, &\mbox{if}~~(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_1,\\ r_1+r_2-M_1/N-2M_2/N, &\mbox{if}~~(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_2,\\ r_1-M_1/N, &\mbox{if}~~(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_3,\\ r_2-M_2/N, &\mbox{if}~~(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_4,\\ 0, &\mbox{if}~~(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_5, \end{cases} \end{align} where $\mathcal{M}_1$, $\mathcal{M}_2$, $\mathcal{M}_3$, $\mathcal{M}_4$ and $\mathcal{M}_5$, illustrated in Fig. 2, are specified as follows: \begin{figure}[t!] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{division_r2.png} \caption{Illustration of the five distinct cases of the cache capacities, $M_1$ and $M_2$, depending on the distortion requirements of the users, $r_1$ and $r_2$ ($K=2, N>2$).} \end{figure} \begin{subequations} \begin{align} \mathcal{M}_1=&\{(M_1, M_2) \| 0 \leq M_1 \leq Nr_1/2, M_1 + M_2\leq Nr_2,\nonumber\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad M_1 \leq M_2\};\\ \mathcal{M}_2=&\{(M_1, M_2) \| M_1 + M_2\leq Nr_1, M_1> M_2, M_2\geq 0\};\\ \mathcal{M}_3=&\{(M_1, M_2)\|0 \leq M_1 \leq Nr_1, M_1 + M_2> Nr_2, \nonumber\\ &\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad M_2-M_1> N(r_2-r_1)\};\\ \mathcal{M}_4=&\{(M_1, M_2)\|M_1>Nr_1/2, 0 \leq M_2 \leq Nr_2,\nonumber\\ &~~M_1 + M_2>Nr_1, M_2-M_1\leq N(r_2-r_1)\};\\ \mathcal{M}_5=&\{(M_1, M_2) \| M_1 >Nr_1, M_2>Nr_2\}. \end{align} \end{subequations} If the underlying source distribution is successively refinable, i.e., $r_1=r^_1$ and $r_2=r^_2$, comparing (\ref{eq45}) with (\ref{eq44}), we can conclude that for $(M_1, M_2) \in \mathcal{M}_3 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_4 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_5$, the achieved delivery rate meets the lower bound in Lemma 1. We analyse the optimality of the achieved delivery rate for $(M_1, M_2) \in \mathcal{M}_1 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_2$ in the following, assuming successive refinability, i.e., $r_1=r^_1$ and $r_2=r^_2$. Consider three cases: $N=3c+i$, for $i=0, 1, 2$ and $c \in \mathbb{Z}^+$. \textit{Case 1} ($N=3c$): The last term of (\ref{eq45}) can be rewritten as $r^_1+r^_2-\frac{3(M_1+M_2)}{2N}$.Thus, $\Delta R \triangleq R(M_1, M_2)-R_c(M_1, M_2) = \left\|\frac{M_1-M_2}{2N}\right\|$for any $(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_1 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_2$. Note that when $M_1=M_2$, $\Delta R=0$, that is, the achieved delivery rate meets the lower bound. \textit{Case 2} ($N=3c+1$): We can rewrite the last term of (\ref{eq45}) as $r^_1+r^_2-\frac{3(M_1+M_2)}{2(N-1)}$. We have $\Delta R = \left\|\frac{M_1-M_2}{2(N-1)}\right\|+\frac{\max\{2M_1+M_2, 2M_2+M_1\}}{N(N-1)}$, for any $(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_1 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_2$. \textit{Case 3} ($N=3c+2$): The last term of (\ref{eq45}) equals to $r_1+r_2-\frac{3(M_1+M_2)}{2(N-2)}$. We have $\Delta R = \left\|\frac{M_1-M_2}{2(N-2)}\right\|+\frac{2\max\{2M_1+M_2, M_1+2M_2\}}{N(N-2)}$, for any $(M_1, M_2)\in \mathcal{M}_1 \bigcup \mathcal{M}_2$. \begin{Corollary} For $K=2$, when $N$ is divisible by $3$ and the cache capacities of the users are identical, i.e., $M_1=M_2$, if the underlying source is successively refinable, the proposed coded caching scheme meets the lower bound in Lemma \ref{lemma_N3K2}; and hence, it is optimal, i.e., $R^(M_1, M_2)=R_c(M_1, M_2)$. \end{Corollary} \begin{Remark} When $D_1=D_2$, Corollary 2 generalizes the optimal delivery rate result of \cite{maddah2014fundamental} for $N=K=2$ to all $N$ values that are multiples of $3$. \end{Remark} \subsection{General Case}\label{sec2c} In this section, we tackle the general scenario with $N$ files and $K$ users. As before, we denote by $r_k$ the compression rate by the used scalable code that achieves an average distortion of $D_k$, $k=1, ..., K$, where $D_1 \geq D_2 \geq \cdots \geq D_K$. We remind the reader that scalable code provides a layered structure of descriptions for each file, where the first layer consists of $nr_1$ bits, and achieves distortion $D_1$ when decoded successfully. The $k$th layer, $k=2, ..., K$, consists of $n(r_{k}-r_{k-1})$ bits, and having received the first $k$ layers, a user achieves a distortion of $D_k$. The examples studied in Sections~\ref{section:2a} and~\ref{section:2b} illustrate the complexity of the lossy content caching problem; we had to consider five cases even with two users and two files. The problem becomes intractable quickly with the increasing number of files and users. However, note that, only users $k, k+1, ..., K$, whose distortion requirements are lower than $D_k$, need to decode the $k$th layer for the file they request, for $k=1, ..., K$. Therefore, once all the contents are compressed into $K$ layers based on the distortion requirements of the users employing scalable code, we have, for each layer, a lossless caching problem. However, each user also has to decide how much of its cache capacity to allocate for each layer. Hence, the lossy caching problem under consideration can be divided into two subproblems: the lossless caching problem of each source coding layer, and the cache allocation problem among different layers. In general, the optimal delivery rate achieved by this layered algorithm can be found by jointly optimizing the cache capacity allocated by each user to each layer, and the caching and delivery scheme to be used for each layer to minimize the corresponding delivery rate. However, we first note that the optimal delivery rate remains an open problem even in the case of equal cache capacities. Therefore, we are bound to use achievability results. Moreover, these achievability results are often characterized as piecewise linear functions, and memory-sharing among multiple schemes may be required, further complicating the identification of the minimal delivery rate. Therefore, we are not able to provide a low complexity algorithm that can optimize all the system parameters jointly. Indeed, we will propose heuristic cache allocation schemes at the users, and provide a suboptimal caching and delivery algorithm for given cache capacities. \subsubsection{Coded Lossless Caching of Each Layer} We first assume that the cache allocation at the users for each layer is already fixed, and focus on the first subproblem of centralized lossless caching with heterogeneous cache sizes. This problem has previously been studied in \cite{wang2015heterogeneouscachesizes} and \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes} in the decentralized setting, while, to the best of our knowledge, it has not been considered in the centralized setting. Consider, for example, the $k$th refinement layers of all the files. There are only $L_k\triangleq K-k+1$ users (users $k, k+1, ..., K$) who may request these layers. Let user $j$, $j\in \{k, ..., K\}$, allocate $M_{j, k}$ (normalized by $n$) of its cache capacity for this layer. Without loss of generality, we order users $k, ..., K$ according to the cache capacities they allocate, and re-index them, such that $M_{k, k}\leq M_{k+1, k}\leq \cdots \leq M_{K, k}$. We would like to have symmetry among allocated cache capacities to enable multicasting to a group of users. Based on this intuition, we further divide layer $k$ into $L_k$ sub-layers, and let each user in $\{k, ..., K\}$ allocate $M_{k}^1=M_{k, k}$ of its cache for the first sub-layer, and each user in $\{k+i-1, ..., K\}$ allocate $M_{k}^i=M_{k+i-1, k}-M_{k+i-2, k}$ of its cache for the $i$th sublayer, for $i=2,\ldots, L_k$. Overall, we have $L_k$ sub-layers, and users $k+i-1, k+i, ..., K$ allocate $M_k^i$ of their caches for sub-layer $i$, whereas no cache is allocated by users $k, k+1, ..., k+i-2$. We denote by $r_k^i$ the size of the $i$th sub-layer of the $k$th refinement layer, and by $R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i,$ $ N)$ the minimum required delivery rate for this sub-layer. The rates, $r_k^i$, $i=1, ..., L_k$, should be optimized jointly in order to minimize the total delivery rate for the $k$th layer. The optimization problem can be formulated as follows: \begin{subequations}\label{eq:optim} \begin{equation}\min \limits_{r_k^1, ..., r_k^{L_k}} \sum_{i = 1}^{L_k} R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)\end{equation} \begin{equation}\mathrm{s. t.} \sum_{i = 1}^{L_k} r_k^i=r_k-r_{k-1}.\end{equation} \end{subequations} We consider achievable $R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)$ values based on \textit{coded delivery} and \textit{coded placement}, outlined in Section III-B, as well as the group-based centralized caching (GBC) scheme proposed in \cite{mohammadqian2016large}. In \textit{GBC} the user is grouped according to their demands in the delivery phase, i.e., users with the same demand are placed in the same group, and then contents are first exchanged within the same group and then across different groups.For the lossless caching problem, \textit{GBC} is shown to achieve a lower delivery rate compared to memory-sharing between the \textit{coded delivery} and \textit{coded placement} schemes, when each user has a cache capacity of $N/K$ (normalized by the file size). We consider two cases: Case 1) $L_k < N$. In this case, in the worst case when users $\{k, ..., K\}$ request distinct files, \textit{GBC} and \textit{coded placement} provide no caching gain; thus, we employ \textit{coded delivery}. Focus on the $i$th sub-layer: users $k+i-1, ..., K$ each allocate $M_{k}^i$ of cache capacity, while users $k$ to $k+i-2$ allocate no cache for this sublayer. If $r_k^i \in \mathcal{P}_{MAN}\triangleq \{0, M_{k}^i/N, M_{k}^iL_k^i/((L_k^i-1)N), M_{k}^iL_k^i/((L_k^i-2)N), ..., M_{k}^iL_k^i/N\}$, where $L_k^i=L_k+1-i$, we have \begin{align} \label{eq3} R_{MAN}(&L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)=(i-1)\cdot r_k^i\nonumber\\ &+r_k^iL_k^i\cdot(1- M_{k}^i/r_k^iN)\cdot\frac{1}{1+M_{k}^iL_k^i/r_k^iN}. \end{align} The first term on the right hand side is due to unicasting to users $k$ to $k+i-2$, while the second term is the \textit{coded delivery} rate to users $k+i-1$ to $K$ given in \cite{maddah2014fundamental}. Based on the memory sharing argument, any point on the line connecting two points, $(r_1', R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_1', N))$ and $(r_2', R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_2', N))$, is also achievable, i.e., if $r_k^i \in [0, M_{k}^iL_k^i/N]$ and $r_k^i \notin \mathcal{P}_{MAN}$, then we have \begin{align} \label{eq4} R(L_k, &i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i , N)\nonumber\\ =&\min\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c} r_1 \in \mathcal{P}_{MAN},~r_1 < r_k^i\\ r_2 \in \mathcal{P}_{MAN},~r_1 > r_k^i\end{subarray}}\left\{\frac{r_k^i-r_1'}{r_2'-r_1'}R(K_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_1', N)\right.\nonumber\\ &\qquad\qquad\quad\left.+\frac{r_2'-r_k^i}{r_2'-r_1'}R(K_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_2', N)\right\}, \end{align} and if $r_k^i > M_{k}^iL_k^i/N$, we have \begin{align} \label{eq5} R(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)=&(i-1)\cdot r_k^i+\frac{M_{k}^iL_k(L_k-1)}{2N}\nonumber\\ &+r_k^iM_{k}^iL_kL_k^i/N. \end{align} Case 2) $L_k \geq N$. In this case, \textit{coded placement} achieves a lower delivery rate than \textit{coded delivery} when $r_k^i\geq M_{k}^iL_k^i$ \cite{chen2014fundamental}. If $L_k^i>N\geq 3$, \textit{GBC} outperforms \textit{coded delivery} at point $r_k^i= M_k^iL_k^i/N$ \cite{mohammadqian2016large}. Note that for the $i$th sub-layer, there are $i-1$ users with no cache allocation. If $i-1 \geq N$, there will be no gain with any of the schemes. When $i-1 < N$ and $r_k^i \geq M_{k}^iL_k^i$, the delivery rate of \textit{coded placement} is \begin{equation} \label{eq6} R_{CFL}(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)=Nr_k^i-(N-i+1)M_{k}^i. \end{equation} If $i-1 < N$, $L_k^i>N\geq 3$ and $r_k^i = M_{k}^iL_k^i/N$, the delivery rate provided by \textit{GBC} is given by \begin{align} \label{eq7} R_{GBC}(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N)=&(i-1)\cdot r_k^i +Nr_k^i\nonumber\\ &-\frac{N(N+1)r_k^i}{2L_k^i}. \end{align} When $0\leq r_k^i\leq M_{k}^iL_k^i$, the delivery rate is given by the lower convex envelope of points $(M_{k}^iL_k^i, R_{CFL}(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, M_{k}^iL_k^i, N))$ given by (\ref{eq6}), $(M_{k}^iL_k^i/N, R_{GBC}(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, M_{k}^iL_k^i/N, N))$ given by (\ref{eq7}), and $(r_k^i, R_{MAN}(L_k, i, M_{k}^i, r_k^i, N))$; and for $r_k^i \in \mathcal{P}_{MAN}\setminus\{M_k^iL_k^i/N\}$, given by (\ref{eq3}). \theoremstyle{definition} \newtheorem{exmp}{Example} \begin{exmp} Consider $N=2$ files and $K=3$ users. We focus on the caching and delivery of the first layers by applying the above coded lossless caching scheme. Note that all three users require the base layer of their requested file, such that $L_1=3$. Assume that $r_1=3$ and the allocated cache capacities for this layer by the users are given by $M_{1, 1}=0.5$, $M_{2, 1}=1$, $M_{3, 1}=1.5$, respectively. The first layer of each file is thus divided into $L_1=3$ disjoint sub-layers. All the three users allocate a cache capacity of $M_{1}^1=0.5$ to cache the first sub-layers; user 2 and user 3 allocate a cache capacity of $M_{1}^2=0.5$ to cache the second sub-layers; and user 3 allocates $M_{1}^3=0.5$ of its cache capacity to cache the third sub-layers. The rates of these three sub-layers, $r_1^1, r_1^2, r_1^3$, are optimized in order to minimize the total delivery rate as given by \eqref{eq:optim}. By solving \eqref{eq:optim} numerically, we obtain the optimal partition of the first layer given by $r_1^1=1.5$, $r_1^2=1.0$, and $r_1^3=0.5$. The delivery rates of these three sub-layers are $2$, $1$, $1$, respectively, which results in a total delivery rate of $4$. \end{exmp} \subsubsection{Allocation of Cache Capacities} Next, we propose two algorithms for cache allocation among layers: \textit{proportional cache allocation} (PCA) and \textit{ordered cache allocation} (OCA), which are elaborated in Algorithms~1 and~2, respectively, where $r_k$ is as defined earlier, and $r_0=0$. \begin{algorithm}\label{alg33} \caption{Proportional Cache Allocation (PCA)} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \State{\textbf{Require:} $\mathbf{r}={r_1, ..., r_K}$} \For{$k=1, ..., K$} \For{$i=1, ..., k$} \State{user $k$ allocates $\frac{r_i-r_{i-1}}{r_k}M_k$ to layer $i$} \EndFor \EndFor \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} \begin{algorithm}\label{alg44} \caption{Ordered Cache Allocation (OCA)} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \State{\textbf{Require:} $\mathbf{r}={r_1, ..., r_K}$} \For{$k=1, ..., K$} \State{user $k$ allocates all of its cache to the first $i$ layers, where $r_{i-1} < \frac{M_k}{N} \leq r_{i}$} \EndFor \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} PCA allocates each user's cache among the layers it may request proportionally to the sizes of the layers, while OCA gives priority to lower layers. The server can choose the one resulting in a lower delivery rate. Numerical comparison of these two cache allocation schemes together with the delivery scheme proposed above will be presented in Section V. \begin{Remark} As stated earlier, when the QoS requirements of the users are identical, i.e., $D_1=D_2=\cdots=D_N$, the lossy caching problem considered here is equivalent to the loseless coded caching problem with distinct cache capacities. Therefore, the centralized coded caching scheme proposed in this section is also the first centralized caching scheme that generalizes the centralized caching problem in \cite{maddah2014fundamental} to heterogeneous cache capacities. \end{Remark} \section{Decentralized Coded Caching With Distortion Requirements} In this section, we consider the lossy coded caching problem in the \textit{decentralized setting}; that is, the server is assumed to have only the set of possible distortion values that may be requested by the users, but has no prior knowledge of the number of users and their target distortion requirements. Accordingly, in decentralized caching, the \emph{placement phase} is conducted locally and independently for each user since coordination among users is not possible. We note that the server needs to know the possible distortion values that can be requested by the users in advance in order to compress the files in the database using an appropriate successive refinement source code. In the \textit{placement phase} of the proposed coded caching scheme, \textit{user k randomly caches $M_kn/N$ bits of the $r_k$-description of each file, for $k=1, ..., K$.} Recall that the $r_k$-description corresponds to the codeword of length $nr_k$ bits by scalable code, which achieves an average distortion of $D_k$ when decoded. As mentioned in the previous section, scalable code provides a layered structure of descriptions for each file; that is, $r_k$-distortion corresponds to the first $nr_k$ bits of the $r_{k+1}$-description. Different layers of each file are cached by a different subset of users, and cached contents of each layer occupy different sizes of memory due to heterogeneous distortion requirements and heterogeneous cache sizes. To illustrate the achievable delivery rate, we first present an example with two users and two files $(K=N=2)$, and then extend our analysis to the general scenario. \begin{Remark} Here we assume that the server has the knowledge of all possible distortion values that may be requested by the users. This is needed for the server to employ scalable coding with the desired number of layers. Note that the server does not know either the number or the identity of the active users in advance; however, in practice, the number of layers, or equivalently, the number of QoS levels that can be requested will be limited either by the compression scheme employed, or due to the limited variety of devices available, and will be much smaller than the number of users in the system. \end{Remark} \subsection{Two Users and Two Files $(K=N=2)$} Here we consider the same system model as in Section~\ref{section:2a} with two users and two files $(N=K=2)$. User 1 has a cache of size $M_1$, while user 2 has a cache of size $M_2$. In the \textit{placement phase}, user 1 randomly caches $M_1n/2$ bits from the $r_1$-description of each file; while user 2 randomly caches $M_2n/2$ bits from the $r_2$-description of each file. We denote by $A^i_{\mathcal{U}}$ $(B^i_{\mathcal{U}})$ the bits of the $i$th layer of file $S_1$ $(S_2)$ that are cached exclusively by the subset $\mathcal{U}$, where $\mathcal{U}\subset\{1, 2\}$ and $i=1, 2$. For example, $A^1_{1,2}$ denotes the part of the base layer of file $S^n_1$ cached by both users, while $B^2_{2}$ is the segment of bits from the second refinement layer of file $S^n_2$ cached only by user 2. We list the expected size of each segment in Table~\ref{table2} (normalized by $n$), where $t_i$ denotes the probability of any bit from the $r_i$-description of each file cached by user $i$. We have $t_i=\min\{1, \frac{M_i}{2r_i}\}$, $i=1, 2$. \begin{table} \centering \caption{Illustration of Cache Placement} \label{table2} \begin{tabular}{\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|l\|} \hline & \multicolumn{4}{\|l\|}{First layer} & \multicolumn{2}{l\|}{Second layer} \\ \hline Segment & $A^1_{\emptyset}(B^1_{\emptyset})$ & $A^1_{1}(B^1_{1})$ & $A^1_{2}(B^1_{2})$ & $A^2_{1,2}(B^2_{1,2})$ & $A^2_{\emptyset}(B^2_{\emptyset})$ & $A^2_{2}(B^2_{2})$ \\ \hline Size &$r_1(1-t_1)(1-t_2)$&$r_1t_1(1-t_2)$&$r_1t_2(1-t_1)$& $r_1t_1t_2$&$(r_2-r_1)(1-t_2)$&$t_2(r_2-r_1)$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table} In the \textit{delivery phase}, for demand pair $(S^n_1, S^n_2)$, the server sends $A^1_{\emptyset}$, $B^1_{\emptyset}$, $B^2_{\emptyset}$ and $A^1_{2} \bar{\oplus} B^1_{1}$ to satisfy both requests. Note that $A^1_{2}$ and $B^1_{1}$ may be of different sizes. We employ the bitwise XOR operation $\bar{\oplus}$. Any other demand combination can be satisfied in a similar manner. Hence, the worst-case delivery rate is given by \begin{align} R=&2r_1(1-t_1)(1-t_2)+(r_2-r_1)(1-t_2)\nonumber\\ &+\max\{r_1t_1(1-t_2), r_1t_2(1-t_1)\}. \end{align} \begin{figure}\label{decenN2K2} \centering \includegraphics[width=1.05\linewidth]{decenN2K2.png} \caption{Achievable delivery rate for $r_1=1-\alpha$ and $r_2=1+\alpha$, $\alpha \in [0, 1]$, $N=2$, $K=2$.} \end{figure} Similarly to centralized coded caching, multicasting is possible only for the delivery of the first layer that is requested by both users. In Fig.~3, we plot the achievable delivery rate for different cache capacity pairs $(M_1, M_2)$, and different distortion requirement pairs $(D_1, D_2)$, such that $r_1=1-\alpha$ and $r_2=1+\alpha$. The value of $\alpha$ varies from $0$ to $1$. The difference between the distortion requirements of the users becomes more significant as $\alpha$ increases, while the sum of the requested rates remains the same. When $\alpha=0$, the users have the same distortion target, and the delivery rate increases with the difference between the cache capacities even though the total cache capacity remains the same. We observe that the pair $(M_1, M_2)$ that achieves the minimum delivery rate at a certain $\alpha$ has the closest ratio between $M_1$ and $M_2$ to the ratio between $r_1$ and $r_2$. For instance, when $\alpha=0.2$, i.e., $r_1=0.8$ and $r_2=1.2$, $(M_1, M_2)=(0.8, 1.2)$ minimizes the delivery rate among the eight cache memory size pairs considered. Similarly, it can be observed that the delivery rate is smaller if the user with the lower distortion requirement has a larger cache capacity. We also observe that $(M_1, M_2)=(2,0)$ always has the highest delivery rate since only one user has cache capacity. Finally, We observe from the $(M_1, M_2)=(1,1)$ curve that, when the two users have the same cache capacity, a larger $\alpha$, i.e., users with more divergent QoS requirements, results in a higher delivery rate. \subsection{General Case} \begin{algorithm}\label{alg3} \caption{Decentralized Coded Caching Scheme with Lossy Distortion Requests} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Statex \Procedure{PLACEMENT}{} \For{$k=1, ..., K$} \For{$j=1, ..., N$} \State{User $k$ randomly caches $M_kn/N$ bits of the $r_k$-description of file $j$} \EndFor \EndFor \EndProcedure \Procedure{DELIVERY1 $(d_1, ..., d_K)$}{} \For{$k=1, ..., K$} \For{$\mathcal{S} \subset \{1, ..., K\}$: $\|\mathcal{S}\|=k$} \State{Send $X_{\mathcal{S}}=\bar{\oplus}_{s\in \mathcal{S}}W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$} \EndFor \EndFor \EndProcedure \Procedure {DELIVERY2 $(d_1, ..., d_K)$}{} \For{$i = 1, \ldots, N$} \State {server sends enough random linear combinations of the bits of the compressed version of file $S^n_{i}$ to enable all the users demanding it to decode it at their desired distortion levels.} \EndFor \EndProcedure \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} We present a decentralized coded caching scheme for the general scenario in Algorithm~3, based on the decentralized caching scheme of \cite{maddah2013decentralized}, where the parameters $r_k$ are as defined in Section~\ref{sec2c}, and $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$ denotes the part of the description of the file $d_s$ requested by user $s$ at distortion level $D_s$, that is cached exclusively by the subset of users $\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}$. Algorithm~3 contains two delivery procedures, DELIVERY1 and DELIVERY2, and according to the information on the active users received at the beginning of the delivery phase, the server can choose the delivery procedure with a lower delivery rate. The following lemma provides the expected size of each segment $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$. \begin{Lemma}According to the placement phase of Algorithm~3, as the blocklength $n$ goes to infinity, by the law of large numbers, we have \begin{align}\label{eq:4-1} \frac{\|W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}\|}{n}\rightarrow \sum\limits_{i=1}^{\inf \mathcal{S}} (r_{i}-r_{i-1})p^i_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}, \end{align} with probability $1$, where $\|W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}\|$ denotes the size of segment $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$. We also have $r_0=0$, and \begin{align} p^i_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}=&\left(1-\frac{M_s}{Nr_s}\right)\prod\limits_{u\in\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}\frac{M_u}{Nr_u}\cdot\nonumber\\ &\qquad\qquad\prod\limits_{u\in\{i, ..., K\}\setminus\mathcal{S}}\left(1-\frac{M_u}{Nr_u}\right). \end{align} \begin{proof} Based on Algorithm~3, user $k$ caches $M_kn/N$ bits from the $r_k$-description of each file, which implies that each bit of the $r_k$-description is cached by user $k$ with probability $M_k/Nr_k$, and no bit from the higher layers is cached by user $k$. We define $m(\mathcal{S})$ as the user with the smallest index in set $\mathcal{S}$, i.e., $m(\mathcal{S})=\min\{s: s\in \mathcal{S}\}$. Then, each bit in $r_{m(\mathcal{S})}$-description is cached by user $u$, $u\in \mathcal{S}$, with probability $M_u/Nr_u$. Since $D_1 \geq D_2\geq \cdots \geq D_K$, we have $D_{m( \mathcal{S})} \geq D_{u}$, i.e., $r_{m( \mathcal{S})} \leq r_{u}$, for any $u \in \mathcal{S}$. The file segment $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$ contains bits only from the $r_{m(\mathcal{S})}$-description of file $S^n_{d_s}$. Note that user $k$ caches bits only from the first $k$ layers, i.e., the $k$th layer is exclusively cached by users $k, k+1, ..., K$. For the $i$th layer, $i=1, ..., m(\mathcal{S})$, which is cached by users $i, ..., K$, every bit in the $i$th layer of file $d_s$ is exclusively cached by users in subset $\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}$ with probability $p^i_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$. Since the total rate of the $i$th layer is $r_i-r_{i-1}$, the expected number of bits from the $i$th layer in $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$ is $ n(r_{i}-r_{i-1})p^i_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$. As $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$ has bits from the first $m(\mathcal{S})$ layers, we sum up the expected rate of all these layers, which yields (\ref{eq:4-1}). \end{proof} \end{Lemma} Since $\frac{M_k}{Nr_k}$ are not identical for $k=1, .., K$, in the delivery phase, for the multicast subset $\mathcal{S}$, the sizes of the corresponding segments, $W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$, $s\in\mathcal{S}$, will be different. Therefore, we apply the $\bar{\oplus}$ operation. Hence, the size of the multicasted segment for subset $\mathcal{S}$ is given by \begin{subequations}\label{eq:4-2} \begin{align} \|X_{\mathcal{S}}\|&=\max\limits_{s\in\mathcal{S}}\|W_{(d_s, D_s),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}\|\\ &=\|W_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{ r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{ r'(\mathcal{S})\}}\|\\ &=n\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m( \mathcal{S})} (r_{i}-r_{i-1})p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}. \end{align} \end{subequations} where $ r'(\mathcal{S})=\argmin\limits_{s\in\mathcal{S}}\frac{M_s}{Nr_s}$, which is the index of the user in subset $\mathcal{S}$ with the smallest $\frac{M_s}{Nr_s}$. \begin{algorithm}\label{alg4} \caption{Layered Content Delivery 1 (LCD1)} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Statex \Procedure {DELIVER $(d_1, ..., d_K)$}{} \For {$i=1, ..., K$} \Procedure {delivery $i$th layer of files $(d_i, ..., d_K)$ to users $\{i, ..., K\}$}{} \For {$k=1, ..., K+1-i$} \For {$\mathcal{S} \subset \{i, ..., K\}$: $\|\mathcal{S}\|=k$} \State{Send $X^i_{\mathcal{S}}=\bar{\oplus}_{s\in \mathcal{S}}W^i_{d_s,\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$} \EndFor \EndFor \EndProcedure \EndFor \EndProcedure \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} Using (\ref{eq:4-2}), the delivery rate of Algorithm 3 can be derived. \begin{Theorem} For the decentralized coded caching system described above, Algorithm 3 achieves a delivery rate given by \begin{align}\label{eq:4-3} R(M_1, &..., M_K)=\min\left\{\sum\limits_{i=1}^K (r_{i}-r_{i-1})\right.\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i+1}\prod\limits_{k=1}^l(1-t^i_k), \nonumber\\ &~~\left. \sum\limits_{i=1}^{\min\{N, K\}} r_{K-i+1}- \min\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{1, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=\min\{N, K\}}}\sum\limits_{k \in \mathcal{S}}\frac{M_k}{N}\right\}, \end{align} where $\{t^i_1, t^i_2,..., t^i_{K-i+1}\}$ is an ordered permutation of $\left\{\frac{M_{i}}{Nr_{i}}, \frac{M_{i+1}}{Nr_{i+1}}, ..., \frac{M_{K}}{Nr_{K}}\right\}$ such that $t^i_1\leq t^i_2 \leq \cdots \leq t^i_{K-i+1}$, $i\in\{1, ..., K\}$. \begin{proof} We first prove the first term in (\ref{eq:4-3}), which is provided by DELIVERY 1. We sum up the rates corresponding to all possible multicasting subsets, $\mathcal{S}\subset\{1, ..., K\}$. From (\ref{eq:4-2}), we have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} R(M_1, ..., M_K)&=\sum\limits_{k=1}^K&\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{1, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k}}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m( \mathcal{S})} (r_{i}-r_{i-1})\cdot\nonumber\\ &&p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}\label{rate11}\\ &=\sum\limits_{i=1}^K& \sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{i, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k}} (r_{i}-r_{i-1})\cdot\nonumber\\ && p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}, \label{rate22} \end{align} \end{subequations} where $k$ denotes the cardinality of subsets, for $k=1, ..., K$. Note that $n \cdot(r_{i}-r_{i-1}) p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}$ denotes the number of bits from the $i$th layer in $\|X_{\mathcal{S}}\|$. The above equation implies that it is equivalent to delivering each layer separately. We present DELIVERY1 as the layered content delivery approach in Algorithm 4, where $W^i_{d_s,\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}}$ denotes the set of bits from the $i$th layer of file $d_s$ that are cached exclusively by users in the subset $\mathcal{S}\setminus\{s\}$. Hence, \begin{equation} \|X^i_{\mathcal{S}}\|=n\cdot (r_{i}-r_{i-1}) p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}. \end{equation} We focus on the delivery of the $i$th layer to users $\{i, ..., K\}$ in the following. For this layer, we order and re-index users $\{i, ..., K\}$ with $\{1, .., K-i+1\}$ such that $\frac{M_k}{Nr_k}=t^i_k$, for $k=1, ..., K-i+1$. Based on this re-indexing, we have \begin{align}\label{eq:4-4} \sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{i, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k}}& p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}\nonumber\\ &=\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i+1}\prod\limits_{k=1}^l(1-t^i_k), \end{align} which yields the first term in (\ref{eq:4-3}). A detailed proof of (\ref{eq:4-4}) can be found in Appendix D. Now, we continue with analysis of the DELIVERY2 procedure in Algorithm 3. Note that the message sent at step 17 of Algorithm 3 is targeted at a group of users requesting file $S_i^n$, for $i=1, ..., N$. Let $\mathcal{S}_i$ denote the set of users requesting file $S_i^n$, $i=1, ..., N$. Since each user $k \in \mathcal{S}_i$ has $nM_k/N$ bits of file $S_i^n$ stored in its caches, with the fact stated in \cite[Appendix A]{maddah2013decentralized}, at most \begin{equation} n\left\{\max\limits_{k \in \mathcal{S}_i}r_k-\min\limits_{k \in \mathcal{S}_i}\frac{M_k}{N}\right\} \end{equation} random linear combinations need to be sent for all those users in $\mathcal{S}_i$ to decode file $S_i^n$ at their desired distortion values. If $N\geq K$, the worst case demand combination corresponds to each user requesting a distinct file. There are at most $K$ files requested, which yields a delivery rate of \begin{equation}\label{ngkrandom} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{K} \left\{r_{i}- \frac{M_i}{N}\right\} \end{equation} for the DELIVERY2 procedure. If $N< K$, the worst case demand combination occurs when the $N$ users with the lowest distortion requirements, i.e., the $N$ largest $r_k$ values, $k=1, ..., K$, and the $N$ users with the smallest cache capacities are in different groups $\mathcal{S}_i$, $i=1, ..., N$, that is, they request $N$ distinct files. Since $D_1 \geq D_2 \geq \cdots \geq D_k$, i.e., $r_1\leq r_2\leq \cdots \leq r_K$, for this case, the DELIVERY2 procedure achieves a delivery rate of \begin{equation}\label{nlkrandom} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{N} r_{K-i+1}- \min\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{1,., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=N}}\sum\limits_{k \in \mathcal{S}}\frac{M_k}{N}. \end{equation} Combing (\ref{ngkrandom}) and (\ref{nlkrandom}), we have the second term in (\ref{eq:4-3}). This completes the proof. \end{proof} \end{Theorem} We remark that Eqn. (\ref{eq:4-4}) denotes the probability of any bit of the $i$th layer to be sent in the delivery phase. Note that (\ref{eq:4-4}) has a similar form to the expression of the achievable delivery rate in the lossless coded caching problem with heterogeneous cache sizes presented in \cite[Theorem 3]{wang2015heterogeneouscachesizes}. This implies that, with the \textit{ placement phase} carried out as in Algorithm 3, the delivery rate is equivalent to the lossless coded caching scheme proposed in \cite{wang2015heterogeneouscachesizes} for each layer. \begin{algorithm}\label{alg5} \caption{Layered Content Delivery 2 (LCD2)(Based on Algorithm 1 in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes})} \begin{algorithmic}[1] \Statex \Procedure {DELIVER $(d_1, ..., d_K)$}{} \For {$i=1, ..., K$} \Procedure {delivery $i$th layer of files $(d_i, ..., d_K)$ to users $\{i, ..., K\}$}{} \State{Define $K_j$ as the number of users in $\{i, ..., K\}$ that requests file $j$, for $j=1, ..., N$;} \State{Reorder and reindex users $\{i, ..., K\}$ such that $d_k=j$, for $j=1, ..., N$, and $k=S_{j-1}+1, ..., S_j$ where $S_0=i-1$ and $S_j=\sum\limits_{l=1}^j K_l$;} \State{\textbf{Part 1}: Delivering bits that are not in the cache of any user} \For {$j = 1, 2, \ldots, N$} \State{$X^i_1=\left( W^i_{d_{S_{j-1} + 1},\left\{ \emptyset \right\}} \right)$} \EndFor \Statex \State{\textbf{Part 2}: Delivering bits that are in the cache of only one user} \State{\begin{align}X^i_{21}=\left( {\bigcup\limits_{j = 1}^N {\bigcup\limits_{k = {S_{j - 1}} + 1}^{{S_j} - 1} {\left( {{W^i_{j,\left\{ k \right\}}} \bar \oplus {W^i_{j,\left\{ k + 1 \right\}}}} \right)} } } \right)\nonumber\end{align}} \State{\begin{align}~~~~~X^i_{22}=\bigcup\limits_{j = 1}^{N - 1}& \bigcup\limits_{h = j+ 1}^N \left( \bigcup\limits_{k = {S_{h - 1}} + 1}^{{S_h} - 1} {\left( {{W^i_{j,\left\{ k \right\}}} \bar \oplus {W^i_{j,\left\{ {k + 1} \right\}}}} \right)},\right.\nonumber\\&\left.\bigcup\limits_{k = {S_{j - 1}} + 1}^{{S_j} - 1} {\left( {{W^i_{h,\left\{ k \right\}}} \bar \oplus {W^i_{h,\left\{ {k + 1} \right\}}}} \right)} \right)\nonumber\end{align}} \State{\begin{align}X^i_{23}=\left( \bigcup\limits_{j = 1}^{N - 1} \bigcup\limits_{h = j + 1}^N W^i_{j,\left\{S_{h-1}+1\right\}} \bar \oplus W^i_{h,\left\{S_{j-1}+1\right\}} \right)\nonumber\end{align}} \Statex \State{\textbf{Part 3}: Delivering bits that are in the cache of more than one user} \For{$j = i, \ldots, K - 2$ } \For{$h = 2, 3, \ldots, K - i$ } \For{$V \subset \left[ {j + 1:K} \right]: \left\| V \right\| = h$ } \State{\begin{align}{X^i_3} = \left( {\left( {\mathop {\bar \oplus }\limits_{v \in V} {W^i_{{d_v},\left\{ {V,j} \right\}\backslash \left\{ v \right\}}}} \right)\bar \oplus {W^i_{{d_j},V}}} \right)\nonumber\end{align}} \EndFor \EndFor \EndFor \EndProcedure \EndFor \EndProcedure \Statex \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} For the decentralized lossless coded caching problem with distinct cache capacities, \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes} further exploits the multicasting gain among users requesting the same file, which achieves a lower delivery rate when the number of users is larger than the number of files, compared to \cite{wang2015heterogeneouscachesizes}. Here, in Algorithm 5, we employ a caching strategy similar to \cite[Algorithm 1]{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes}. Based on \cite[Theorem 1]{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes}, we have Theorem 5 specifying the delivery rate achieved by Algorithm 5. \begin{Theorem} For the decentralized coded caching system described above, Algorithm 5 achieves a delivery rate given by \begin{align}\label{eq:4-6} &R(M_1, ..., M_K)\nonumber\\ &=\sum\limits_{i=1}^K (r_{i}-r_{i-1})\left(\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i+1}\prod\limits_{k=1}^l(1-t^i_k)-\Delta {R_i^1}-\Delta {R_i^2}\right), \end{align} where $t_k^i$ is defined as in Theorem 1, for $k\in \{1, ..., K-i+1\}$ and $i \in \{1, ..., K\}$, and \begin{subequations} \label{DeltaR} \begin{align}\label{DeltaRone} &\Delta {R_i^1}=\begin{cases} \left( {L_i-N} \right)\prod\limits_{l = 1}^{L_i} {\left( {1 - t_l^i}\right)},~~~~~~~~~~~&\mathrm{if}~~~~L_i>N\\ 0,~~~~~~~~~~~~&\mathrm{if}~~~~L_i\leq N \end{cases}\\ &\Delta {R_i^2} =\begin{cases} \left[ {\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{L_i- N} {\left( {\frac{ (k-1) t_{k+N}^i}{{1 - t_{k+N}^i}}} \right)} } \right]\prod\limits_{l = 1}^{L_i} {\left( {1 - t_l^i}\right)},&\mathrm{if}~~~~L_i>N\\ 0,&\mathrm{if}~~~~L_i\leq N \end{cases} \label{DeltaRtwo} \end{align} \end{subequations} and $L_k=K-i+1$. \end{Theorem} We can see that if $K\leq N$, $L_i\leq N$ holds for $i=1, ..., K$, thus (\ref{eq:4-6}) is equivalent to (\ref{eq:4-3}), that is, LCD2 has the same performance with LCD1. For the case $K>N$, we have $L_i> N$ for $i=1, ..., K-N$, and LCD2 results in a reduction in the delivery rate for these layers, quantified by $\Delta {R_i^1}$ and $\Delta {R_i^2}$, in (\ref{DeltaRone}) and (\ref{DeltaRtwo}), respectively. Numerical comparison of the performance of these two content delivery algorithms, LCD1 and LCD2, is presented in Section~\ref{sec5.2}. \section{Numerical results}\label{sec5.2} In this section, we numerically compare the delivery rates of the proposed centralized and decentralized coded lossy caching schemes. We particularly consider two different cases depending on the relative numbers of users and files in the system, i.e., $N\geq K$ and $N<K$, as the proposed caching schemes exhibit different behaviors in these cases. In the first scenario, we consider a caching system with a server containing $N=10$ files serving $K=10$ users. The target distortion levels of the users are given by $(D_1, D_2, ..., D_{10})$, which we assume to be achievable by a scalable code with rates $(r_1, r_2, ..., r_{10})= (1, 2, ..., 10)$. To compare the achievable rates with the lower bound, we assume the underlying source distribution is successively refinable, that is, $r_k=r^_k$, $k=1, ..., K$. We consider two cases for the cache sizes: the first one with identical cache capacities, i.e., $M_1=M_2=\cdots=M_{10}=M$, and the second one with heterogeneous cache capacities, where $M_k=0.2kM$, for $k=1, ..., 10$. The results for these two scenarios for both the centralized and decentralized caching are plotted in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.05\linewidth]{comparison7.png} \caption{Comparison of the achievable delivery rates with identical cache capacities, i.e., $M_1=M_2=\ldots=M_K$, for $N=10$, $K=10$.} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.018\linewidth]{comparison8.png} \caption{Comparison of the achievable delivery rates with heterogeneous cache capacities, i.e., $M_k=0.2kM$, $k=1, ..., K$, for $N=10$, $K=10$.} \end{figure} In Fig. 4, we observe that the centralized coded caching scheme with OCA achieves the best delivery rate when the cache capacities are very small but its performance approaches that of the uncoded caching scheme as $M$ increases. This implies that when the cache capacity is small, it should be allocated mainly to the first layer, which is requested by all the users. Since the cache capacities are identical, coded caching of the same layer across users creates more multicasting opportunities, which better exploits the limited cache capacity. On the other hand, for medium to large cache capacities, PCA significantly outperforms OCA. This is because, when there is sufficient cache capacity, caching higher layers creates new multicasting opportunities, which further reduces the delivery rate. The black line in the figure is achievable by memory sharing between the two caching schemes, OCA and PCA, further reducing the delivery rate for moderate cache capacities. In Fig. 5, a network with heterogeneous cache capacities is considered, and it is observed that PCA outperforms OCA for all values of $M$, since PCA is capable of exploiting the additional cache capacity of users to meet the requirements of reduced distortion target, retaining the symmetry among the amount of cache allocated to each layer across different users. We remark that, since $N=K$, decentralized caching with LCD1 and LCD2 have the same performance as characterised in Theorem 4. For very small cache capacities, the decentralized scheme achieves almost the same performance as the centralized scheme with PCA. This is because, when cache capacities are very small, users will cache distinct bits from their required layers with high probability despite random placement, which is similar to the cache placement phase used by the centralized scheme with PCA. The performance improvement of centralized caching becomes more pronounced as $M$ increases since the collaboration between users during the placement phase will fully exploit the cache capacities to create the maximum number of multicasting opportunities. We observe that, despite lack of cache coordination across users, decentralized caching still achieves a performance not far from the best centralized caching scheme. In both Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, it is observed that a significant improvement can be achieved by coded caching. We also remark that the total cache capacity across the whole network is $10M$ and $11M$ for the settings considered in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively. However, we can notice that the delivery rate achieved in Fig. 4 is significantly higher in both the centralized and decentralized scenarios. This is due to the distribution of the cache capacity across the users. In the latter scenario, the users with lower distortion requirements have larger cache capacities, allowing them to achieve their desired QoS targets without increasing the delivery rate. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.98\linewidth]{comparison11.png} \caption{Comparison of the achievable delivery rates with identical cache capacities, i.e., $M_1=M_2=\ldots=M_K$, for $N=10$, $K=15$.} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=0.98\linewidth]{comparison16.png} \caption{Comparison of the achievable delivery rates with heterogeneous cache capacities, i.e., $M_k=0.125kM$, $k=1, ..., K$, for $N=10$, $K=15$.} \end{figure} In the second scenario, we consider a server with $N=10$ files serving $K=15$ users. The target distortion levels are such that $(r_1, r_2, ..., r_{15})= (1, 2, ..., 15)$. As in the first scenario, we consider two cases: identical cache sizes, i.e., $M_1=M_2=\cdots=M_{15}=M$, plotted in Fig. 6; and heterogeneous cache sizes, i.e., $M_k=0.125kM$, for $k=1, ..., 15$, plotted in Fig. 7, such that the total cache capacity across the network for both scenarios is $15M$. We observe that, for centralized coded caching, PCA outperforms OCA in both Fig. 6 and Fig. 7. This implies that it is always better for each user to distribute its cache capacity to all the layers it may require, rather than to allocate it only to the first layer. Since $N<K$, the number of users requesting the first layer is larger than the number of files. There are at least two users requesting the same file, which creates multicasting opportunities even with uncoded caching, reducing the gain of coded caching over uncoded caching. Allocating the cache capacities to other layers will better exploit coded caching. In decentralized caching, we see that, LCD1 has the same performance as uncoded caching for small cache capacities. However, Fig. 6 shows a larger range of cache capacities where LCD1 and uncoded caching have the same performance, since when the cache capacities are identical, for each layer, the expected number of bits cached by each user is distinct, which reduces the gain from coded delivery. It is observed in both figures, LCD2 greatly outperforms LCD1, but the gap between two schemes reduces with the cache capacity. This is because, the improvement of LCD2 over LCD1 derives from more effectively delivering the bits that are cached by at most one user. When the cache capacity increases, the number of such bits reduces, hence, the performance of LCD2 approaches that of LCD1. Although the total cache capacity across the network is the same for the scenarios considered in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, it is observed that in both the centralized and decentralized settings, the rates achieved in Fig. 7 are significantly lower, similar to the $N=K$ scenario, since the larger cache capacities can be exploited to improve the QoS of users by the proposed layered caching approach. We also observe that in all the figures, the gain of coded caching, both in centralized and decentralized settings, becomes more significant as the cache capacity, $M$, increases. We also note that there is a relatively large gap between the best achievable delivery rates and the cut-set lower bound, but part of this gap is potentially due to the looseness of the cut-set bound, as also suggested in \cite{maddah2014fundamental}. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.08\linewidth]{comparison_alpha.png} \caption{Comparison of achievable delivery rates versus $\alpha$, $\alpha \in [0, 1]$, $M_1=M_2=\cdots=M_{10}=5$, for $N=10$, $K=10$.} \end{figure} Next, we consider a server with $N=10$ files serving $K=10$ users, with identical cache capacities, i.e., $M_1=M_2=\cdots=M_{10}=5$. The target distortion levels of the users, $(D_1, D_2, \ldots, D_{10})$, are given by $r_k=5+(k-5.5)\alpha$, for $k=1, ..., 10$ and $\alpha \in [0, 1]$. In this scenario, the average value of $r_k$ is $5$, i.e., $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{10} r_k/10=5$, independent of the value of $\alpha$. As $\alpha$ increases, the distortion requirements of users become more diverse. The delivery rates of the proposed caching schemes, in centralized and decentralized setting, are shown in Fig. 8, compared with \textit{uncoded caching} and cut-set bound. We emphasize that the delivery rate of the centralized caching scheme in Fig. 8 is the lower one of the delivery rates achieved by PCA and OCA. We observe that, while the delivery rate of \textit{uncoded caching} remain the same, the delivery rates of both centralized and decentralized coded caching schemes increase with $\alpha$, which indicates the loss of coded caching gain due to the diversity of distortion requirements. \begin{figure}[t] \centering \includegraphics[width=1.09\linewidth]{comparison_beta.png} \caption{The achievable delivery rates versus $\beta$, $\beta \in [0, 1]$, $r_1=r_2=\cdots=r_{15}$, for $N=10$, $K=15$.} \end{figure} Finally, we consider a server with $N=10$ files, and $K=15$ users with identical QoS requirements, i.e., $D_1=D_2=\cdots=D_{15}$, such that $r_1=r_2=\cdots=r_{15}=2$. The cache size of each user is given by $M_k=8+(k-8)\beta$, for $k=1, ..., 15$ and $\beta \in [0, 1]$. The larger $\beta$, the more skewed the cache size distribution is. This setting is equivalent to a lossless coded caching problem with distinct cache capacities. The state-of-art decentralized coded caching scheme for this setting is presented in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes}. In Fig. 9, we compare the best achievable rates by the proposed centralized and decentralized coded caching schemes with the one proposed in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes}. Our decentralized coded caching scheme is shown to achieve the same performance as the scheme proposed in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes}. This is because we adopt the scheme proposed in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes} for each layer. Since there is only one layer in this scenario, it is equivalent to applying the scheme proposed in \cite{Amiri2016heterogeneouscachesizes} to this layer. For all the three schemes, the gain from coded caching becomes more pronounced as $\beta$ becomes small, i.e., as the cache capacities of users become more similar. \section{Conclusions}\label{sec5} We have considered coded caching and delivery of contents in wireless networks, taking into account the heterogeneous distortion requirements of users, in both centralized and decentralized settings. The caching and delivery schemes considered here exploit the specific properties of lossy reconstruction of contents by users. In particular, we have exploited scalable coding, which allowed us to cache contents incrementally across users depending on their cache capacities and distortion requirements. In the \textit{centralized} setting, for a simple setting of two users and two files, we have derived the optimal coded caching scheme that achieves the information-theoretic lower bound when the underlying source distribution is successively refinable. We have further explored the case with two users and an arbitrary number of files. The proposed scheme is proven to be optimal for successively refinable sources when the cache capacities of the two users are the same and the number of files in the database is divisible by $3$. Then, assuming that the server employs scalable coding to compress all the files in the database at the required distortion levels, we tackled the general case with $K$ users and $N$ files in two steps: delivery rate minimization, which finds the minimum delivery rate for each layer separately, and cache capacity allocation among layers. We proposed two algorithms for the latter, namely, PCA and OCA. In the decentralized setting, since the number and identity of the active users are not known during the \textit{placement phase}, we have employed random cache placement. We have proved that a layered delivery scheme, which delivers each layer separately, is without loss of optimality, compared to joint delivery across layers. We have applied the existing coded caching scheme for the lossless caching problem with heterogeneous cache capacities to the delivery of each layer, together with the analysis on the achievable delivery rate. We have validated the improvement of the proposed coded caching schemes compared to uncoded caching through numerical results. However, there is still a remarkable gap between the best achieved delivery rate and the cut-set lower bound in all the scenarios considered in Section V. We have derived a tighter bound for a special scenario with two users, which was then used to prove the optimality of the proposed coded caching scheme for this scenario. Extending the tighter lower bounds for the lossless caching problem proposed in \cite{SenguptaCaching, GhasemiCachingLowerBound} to the lossy caching problem studied here is currently under consideration to better understand the optimal performance. \appendices \section{Proof of Theorem 1} Let $s\in \{1, ..., \min\{N, K\}\}$, and consider a set of users $\mathcal{U}$ with $\|\mathcal{U}\|=s$. There exists a demand combination and a corresponding message over the shared link, say $X^n_1$, such that $X^n_1$ and $\{Z^n_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$ allow the reconstruction of files $S^n_1, ..., S^n_s$, each at the required distortion level from $\{D_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$. Similarly, there exists an input to the shared link, say $X^n_2$, such that $X^n_2$ and $\{Z^n_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$ allow the reconstruction of files $S^n_{s+1}, ..., S^n_{2s}$, each at the required distortion level from $\{D_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$, and so on so forth. We can continue in the same manner considering messages $X^n_3$, ..., $X^n_{\lfloor N/s\rfloor}$ for further demand combinations. Hence, with $X^n_1$, ..., $X^n_{\lfloor N/s\rfloor}$ and $\{Z^n_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$, each user $k \in \mathcal{U}$ should be able to reconstruct a distinct set of $\lfloor N/s\rfloor$ files at the corresponding distortion level $D_k$. By considering a cut separating $X^n_1$, ..., $X^n_{\lfloor N/s\rfloor}$ and $\{Z^n_k\mid k\in \mathcal{U}\}$ from the corresponding users, we have \begin{align}\label{theo1:proof1} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{\lfloor N/s\rfloor} \|X^n_i\|+\sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} \|Z_k\| \geq \lfloor N/s\rfloor \sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} R(D_k), \end{align} according to the cut-set bound\cite[Theorem 14.10.1]{cover2012elements}. From the definition of $R^{}(M_1,..., M_K)$, we have $R^{}(M_1,..., M_K) \geq \|X^n_i\|$, for $i=1, ..., \lfloor N/s\rfloor$. We also have the cache capacity constraints $M_k \geq \|Z_k\|$, for $k \in \mathcal{U}$. Plugging these into \eqref{theo1:proof1}, we obtain \begin{align} \lfloor N/s\rfloor R^{}(M_1,..., M_K)+\sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} M_k\geq \lfloor N/s\rfloor \sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} R(D_k). \end{align} Since this inequality must hold for all possible choices of $s$, and corresponding subset of users $\mathcal{U}$ with $\|\mathcal{U}\|=s$, we can obtain the folowing cut-set bound by substituting $r^_k=R(D_k)$: \begin{align} &R^{}(M_1,..., M_K) \geq R_{C}(M_1,..., M_K)\nonumber\\ &\triangleq \operatorname{max}\limits_{s\in \{1,...,\min\{N, K\}\}} \operatorname{max}\limits_{\mathcal{U}\subset \{1,...,K\}, \|\mathcal{U}\|=s}\left(\sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}} r^_{k}-\frac{\sum\limits_{k\in \mathcal{U}}M_k}{\lfloor N/s\rfloor}\right). \end{align} \section{Proof of Theorem 2} We consider two groups of demands, i.e., $\{(2i+1,2i+2)\| i=0, 1, ..., \lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1\}$ and $\{(2i+2,2i+1)\| i=0, 1, ..., \lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1\}$. We define the vector of channel inputs corresponding to these demand combinations as follows $\bar{X}^n_{12}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} X^n_{(2i+1,2i+2)}$, and $\bar{X}^n_{21}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} X^n_{(2i+2,2i+1)}$. Then, for any $(n, M_1, M_2, R)$ caching code that achieves the distortion tuple $(D_1, D_2)$, we have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} 2\lfloor N/2 \rfloor nR+&nM_1+nM_2\nonumber\\ &\geq H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)+ H(\bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2)\\ &= H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_1)+ H(\bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_1)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2)\\ &\geq H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1, \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_1)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2)\\ &\geq I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1, \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_1)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)+ I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2) \label{eq:9} \end{align} \end{subequations} where $\bar{S}^n_1=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} S^n_{2i+1}$ and $\bar{S}^n_2=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} S^n_{2i+2}$. We denote by $\hat{S}^n_{i,k}$ the reconstruction of $S^n_i$ at user $k$, for $i=1, ..., N$ and $k=1, 2$. Let $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{2i+1,1}$, $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{12}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{2i+1,2}$ and $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{2i+2,2}$. We have \begin{subequations}\label{rd1} \begin{align} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)&{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11})\label{labela}\\ &{\geq}\sum\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1}I(S^n_{2i+1}; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11})\label{labelb}\\ &{\geq}\sum\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1}I(S^n_{2i+1}; \hat{S}^n_{2i+1,1})\\ &{\geq}\lfloor N/2 \rfloor nR(D_1),\label{labelc} \end{align} \end{subequations} where the inequality \eqref{labela} follows from the data processing inequality since $\bar{S}^n_1-(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)-\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11}$ forms a Markov chain; \eqref{labelb} holds due to the independence of files. Since the reconstruction of $S^n_{2i+1}$ at user $1$, i.e., $\hat{S}^n_{2i+1,1}$, is required to be within distortion $D_1$, the inequality \eqref{labelc} follows from the definition of the rate distortion function \cite{equitz1991successive}. Similarly, we have \begin{subequations}\label{rd2} \begin{align} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2)&{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{12})\\ &{\geq}\sum\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1}I(S^n_{2i+1}; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{12})\\ &{\geq}\sum\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor-1}I(S^n_{2i+1}; \hat{S}^n_{2i+1,2})\\ &{\geq}\lfloor N/2 \rfloor nR(D_2). \end{align} \end{subequations} Finally, also using the data processing inequality due to the Markov chain, $(\bar{S}^n_1, \bar{S}^n_2)-(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)-\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}$, we can write \begin{subequations} \begin{align} I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1,\bar{X}^n_{21}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_1)&{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_1)\\ &{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_2; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}\|\bar{S}^n_1)\\ &{=} I(\bar{S}^n_2; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}, \bar{S}^n_1)\label{prove1}\\ &{=}I(\bar{S}^n_2; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}){\geq}\lfloor N/2 \rfloor nR(D_2),\label{rd3} \end{align} \end{subequations} where (\ref{prove1}) holds since $\bar{S}^n_2$ is independent $\bar{S}^n_1$; and \eqref{rd3} follows from the definition of the rate-distortion function. Substituting inequalities (\ref{rd1}), (\ref{rd2}), (\ref{rd3}) into (\ref{eq:9}) and replacing $R(D_k)$ with $r^_k$, $k=1, 2$, we obtain \begin{equation} R\geq r^_1/2+r^_2-\frac{(M_1+M_2)}{2\lfloor N/2 \rfloor}. \end{equation} \section{Lower Bound of Lemma 2} We consider two groups of $\lfloor N/3 \rfloor$ demands, i.e., $\{(3i+1,3i+2)\| i=0, 1, ..., \lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1\}$ and $\{(3i+2,3i+3)\| i=0, 1, ..., \lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1\}$. Similarly to the proof of Theorem 2, we define the vector of channel inputs corresponding to these demand combination as $\bar{X}^n_{12}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} X^n_{(3i+1,3i+2)}$, and $\bar{X}^n_{23}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} X^n_{(3i+2,3i+3)}$. Then for any $(n, M_1, M_2, R)$ caching code that achieves the distortion tuple $(D_1, D_2)$, we have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} 2\lfloor &N/3 \rfloor nR+nM_1+nM_2\nonumber\\ &\geq H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)+ H(\bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)\\ &= H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2\|\bar{S}^n_2)+ H(\bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_2)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)\\ &\geq H(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_2)+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)\\ &\geq I(\bar{S}^n_1, \bar{S}^n_3; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_2)\nonumber\\ &~~+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)+ I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1) \label{eq:5} \end{align} \end{subequations} where $\bar{S}^n_1=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} S^n_{3i+1}$, $\bar{S}^n_2=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1}S^n_{3i+2}$, and $\bar{S}^n_3=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1}S^n_{3i+3}$. We remind that $\hat{S}^n_{i,k}$ denotes the reconstruction of $S^n_i$ at user $k$, for $i=1, ..., N$ and $k=1, 2$. We define $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{3i+1,1}$, $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{21}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{3i+2,1}$, $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{3i+2,2}$ and $\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{32}=\bigcup\limits_{i=0}^{\lfloor N/3 \rfloor-1} \hat{S}^n_{3i+3,2}$. Following the similar arguments as in (\ref{rd1}) and (\ref{rd2}), we have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} &I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2)\nonumber\\ &~~ \geq I(\bar{S}^n_2; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{22}) \geq n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor R(D_2)=n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor r^_2, \label{eq:6}\\ &I(\bar{S}^n_2; \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)\nonumber\\ &~~ \geq I(\bar{S}^n_2; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{21}) \geq n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor R(D_1)=n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor r^_1. \label{eq:7} \end{align} \end{subequations} We also have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} &I(\bar{S}^n_1, \bar{S}^n_3; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_2)\nonumber\\ & {\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_1, \bar{S}^n_3; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)-I(\bar{S}^n_1, \bar{S}^n_3; \bar{S}^n_2)\\ &{\geq}I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1)+I(\bar{S}^n_3; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_2, \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_1\|\bar{S}^n_1)\label{f}\\ &{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)+I(\bar{S}^n_3; \bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_2)\label{g}\\ &{\geq} I(\bar{S}^n_1; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11})+I(\bar{S}^n_3; \hat{\bar{S}}^n_{32})\label{h}\\ &{\geq} n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor R(D_1)+n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor R(D_2)\label{i}\\ &{=}n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor r^_1+n\lfloor N/3 \rfloor r^_2, \label{eq:8} \end{align} \end{subequations} where (\ref{f}) follows since $\bar{S}^n_1$, $\bar{S}^n_2$ and $\bar{S}^n_3$ are independent; (\ref{g}) follows due to the nonnegativity of mutual information; and inequality (\ref{h}) is due to the data processing inequality and the fact that $\bar{S}^n_1-(\bar{X}^n_{12}, Z^n_1)-\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{11}$ and $\bar{S}^n_3-(\bar{X}^n_{23}, Z^n_2)-\hat{\bar{S}}^n_{32}$ are both Markov chains. Substituting inequalities (\ref{eq:6}), (\ref{eq:7}) and (\ref{eq:8}) into (\ref{eq:5}), we obtain \begin{equation} R\geq r^_1+r^_2-\frac{(M_1+M_2)}{2\lfloor N/3 \rfloor} \end{equation} \section{Proof of (\ref{eq:4-4})} Here, we prove Eqn.~(\ref{eq:4-4}). We have \begin{subequations} \begin{align} &\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{i, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k}} p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}\nonumber\\ &{=}\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{1, .., K-i+1\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k}} p^i_{(d_{m(\mathcal{S})}, D_{m(\mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{m(\mathcal{S})\}}\label{j}\\ &{=}\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i-k+2}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k-1}} p^i_{(d_l, D_l),\mathcal{S}}\label{k}\\ &{=}\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i-l+2}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k-1}} p^i_{(d_l, D_l),\mathcal{S}}\label{l}\\ &{=}\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K-i+1}\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i-l+2}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k-1}}\prod\limits_{s=1}^l(1-t^i_s)\cdot\nonumber\\ &~~~~\prod\limits_{s\in \{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\setminus \mathcal{S}}(1-t^i_s)\prod\limits_{s\in \mathcal{S}}t^i_s\label{m}\\ &{=}\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K+1-i}\prod\limits_{s=1}^l(1-t^i_s)\cdot\left[\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K-i-l+2}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=k-1}}\right.\nonumber \\ &\left.~~~~~~~\prod\limits_{s\in \{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\setminus \mathcal{S}}(1-t^i_s)\prod\limits_{s\in \mathcal{S}}t^i_s\right]\label{n}, \end{align} \end{subequations} where equality (\ref{j}) holds by ordering and re-indexing users \{i, ..., K\} to \{1, ..., K+1-i\} such that $\frac{M_k}{Nr_k}=t^i_k$, for $k= 1, ..., K+1-i$; equality (\ref{k}) comes from iterating the smallest index in the multicasting set from $1$ to $K-i-k+2$, which is the maximum that the value of the smallest index could be in a multicasting set with cardinality equals to $k$; equality (\ref{l}) is derived by switching the order of summations regarding to $l$ and $k$; equality (\ref{m}) is obtained by expressing $p^i_{(d_l, D_l),\mathcal{S}}$ as a function of $t^i_s$; since $\prod\limits_{s=1}^l(1-t^i_s)$ is independent of the value of $k$ and subset $\mathcal{S}$, equality (\ref{n}) holds. Since $\sum\limits_{j=1}^{K-i-l+2}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=j-1}}\prod\limits_{s\in \{l+1, .., K+1-i\}\setminus \mathcal{S}}(1-t^i_s)\prod\limits_{s\in\mathcal{S}}t^i_s=1$, we have \begin{align} &\sum\limits_{j=1}^{K+1-i}\sum\limits_{\substack{\mathcal{S}\subset\{i, ..., K\}\\\|\mathcal{S}\|=j}} p^i_{(d_{r'(\mathcal{S})}, D_{r'( \mathcal{S})}),\mathcal{S}\setminus\{r'(\mathcal{S})\}}\nonumber\\ &=\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K+1-i}\prod\limits_{s=1}^l(1-t^i_s)=\sum\limits_{l=1}^{K+1-i}\prod\limits_{k=1}^l(1-t^i_k), \end{align} which yields (\ref{eq:4-4}). \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\section{Introduction} Type Ia supernovae are used as standard candles to measure the expansion history of the Universe. Since the discovery of the accelerated expansion of the Universe \citep{Riess:1998uy,Perlmutter:1999tu}, enormous effort has been dedicated to obtaining larger samples of SNe Ia with high quality light-curves. Second-generation surveys such as SNLS and SDSS-II \citep{Betoule:2014ui} have obtained such samples using spectroscopic classification of the SN type. However, in the era of large surveys such as DES \citep{Bernstein:2011zf} and LSST \citep{Abell:2009aa}, spectroscopic resources are insufficient for complete candidate follow-up and classification, making purely photometric classifications necessary. The SNLS deferred photometric pipeline can be separated in two parts: i) the detection of SN-like events, and ii) their classification as type Ia SNe \cite{Bazin:2011em} or core-collapse SNe \cite{Bazin:2009mp}. In the analysis of the 3-year SNLS data (SNLS3), this pipeline provided a sample of $486$ photometrically identified SNe Ia, almost twice the number of spectroscopically identified type Ia SNe found by the SNLS real-time analysis pipeline. Classification in the deferred pipeline included the use of host-galaxy photometric redshifts. Redshifts were assigned by matching SNe to host-galaxies with photometric redshifts in the \textit{Ilbert} catalog \citep{Ilbert}. This assignment had an efficiency of $83\%$. Events without a photometric redshift could not be classified in that analysis and were subsequently removed. This paper presents a new photometric classification of SNLS SNe based on supervised learning, with redshifts derived directly from SN light-curves. The redshift algorithm was trained on SNLS3 data and has better average precision and fewer catastrophic errors than the host galaxy photometric redshift catalog used in the previous analysis. It provides redshifts for all SNe and is independent of cosmological parameters. The redshift algorithm is described in more detail in \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}. In order to exploit all the available information and to optimize classification, we take advantage of machine learning algorithms, notably Boosted Decision Trees (BDTs). BDTs are supervised learning methods where the algorithm learns from a known ``training sample" before classifying unidentified data. Supervised learning methods have been previously used for photometric SN classification, e.g. the SuperNova Photometric Classification Challenge \citep{Kessler:2010wk}, with good results \citep{Kessler:2010qj,Karpenka:2012pm,Ishida:2012cf,Lochner:2016hbn}. In this work, the performance of the supervised learning classification is estimated not only with simulated SNe but also with the large type Ia photometric sample obtained in the previous SNLS3 analysis \citep{Bazin:2011em}. This work therefore sets a precedent for the application of machine learning methods to the classification of real SN data. The outline of the paper is as follows: the SNLS data and simulations are presented in Section 2. In Section 3, we describe the measurement of light-curve parameters as well as the selection of light-curves of sufficient quality to be treated for classification. In Section 4, we introduce the classification algorithms used in this work and the metrics used for evaluation. We compare different classification algorithms in Section 5 using simulated, photometric and spectroscopic SN samples. Our best performing method is studied in detail in Section 6. We summarize and conclude this work in Section 7. \section{SNLS data and SN simulation} SNLS is part of the Deep Synoptic Survey conducted at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). Using a rolling-search strategy, it targeted four one square degree fields during 5 to 7 consecutive lunations per year over a period spanning five years using four different broadband filters $g_M$, $r_M$, $i_M$ and $z_M$ \citep{Regnault2009}. Two independent analysis pipelines processed SNLS data. The first, which we refer to as the real-time pipeline, relies on the spectroscopic follow-up of detected SN candidates for classification and redshift determination \citep{Guy:2010bp}. The second is the deferred photometric pipeline. This work is based on the deferred photometric pipeline. It is independent of the real-time analysis and requires only photometric information. In this pipeline, transient events are detected in one filter and multi-band light-curves are processed for all detections. Then, a set of cuts described in \cite{Bazin:2011em} is applied to reject spurious objects and obtain a sample of events whose light-curves are consistent in shape with that expected from SNe, hereafter referred as SN-like events. Classification of these SN-like events is the subject of this work. We will classify SNe into two types: type Ia SNe with correct redshifts (``the signal") and ``the background" which consists of other types of SNe or type Ia SNe with inaccurate redshifts. In this work, redshifts are considered accurate if, when compared to the generated (spectroscopic) redshift for simulations (data), they satisfy $\|\Delta z\|/(1+z) < 0.1$, inaccurate redshifts exceed $0.15$. More details on the deferred photometric pipeline can be found in \cite{Bazin:2011em}. \subsection{SN simulation} To set up the classification procedure, we use synthetic type Ia and core-collapse SNe that were generated for the SNLS3 analysis in \cite{Bazin:2011em}. This allows for a more direct comparison between this work and the method used in \cite{Bazin:2011em}. Synthetic light-curves of SNe Ia within the redshift range $(0,1.2]$ were produced in \cite{Bazin:2011em} with SALT2 \citep{Guy:2007dv} assuming a flat Universe with $\Omega_m =0.23$. Simulated SNe Ia were generated assuming a constant co-moving volumetric rate. Values of the SALT2 color and $X_1$ parameters ($X_1$ is related to the light-curve width) were randomly selected from Gaussian distributions that match the distributions of the spectroscopically identified SNe Ia. To represent the SNIa population before selection effects, only SNe Ia with $z<0.7$ were used to parametrize the distributions \citep{Perret2010}. For each synthetic SN, a random position in the SNLS fields was assigned, Milky Way dust extinction corrections were applied and detection effects were simulated. From the original list of $20,000$ simulated SNe Ia, $49\%$ were detected and passed the SN-like selection cuts. The majority of the lost supernovae had low signal-to-noise ratios. To increase the number of events, we chose not to impose the detection criteria in \cite{Bazin:2011em}. This allows a larger number of faint events to be used in the classification. We keep selection cuts for consistency. In total $10,522$ SNIa synthetic light-curves are used in this work. Core-collapse supernovae (CC SNe) can be separated into those that have a plateau in the light-curve after maximum light, and those that do not. Synthetic light-curves were generated for both CC types in the redshift range $0<z<1.2$ assuming a constant co-moving volumetric rate. A light-curve model \cite{Bazin:2011em} was constructed based on the sample of 117 SNLS CC SNe at $z<0.4$ \citep{Bazin:2009mp}. From 40,000 synthetic light curves, 20,000 of each type, only $10.5\%$ were detected and selected as SN-like. The efficiency is very low because of the low luminosity of CC SN compared to SNIa. As for synthetic type Ia SNe, for our classification we chose not to impose the detection criteria used in \cite{Bazin:2011em} and obtain a sample of $~5000$ simulated core-collapse SNe. \subsection{SNLS3 data}\label{section:SNLS3_data} To evaluate the performance of our classification, we use not only simulated events but also SNe that have been identified from the first 3 years of SNLS (hereafter referred to as SNLS3). These SNe were identified photometrically or spectroscopically by independent analyses. The photometric and spectroscopic samples contain a number of events in common as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:venn_spe_photo}. As previously mentioned, in the SNLS deferred photometric pipeline, classification is performed on events that are first detected as transients and then selected as SN-like. This SN-like sample is the starting point of our classification and consists of $1483$ events. \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/venn_Ia_spe_photo.png} \caption{SNe Ia: 175 common events.}\label{fig:venn_Ia_spe_photo} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/venn_CC_spe_photo.png} \caption{CC SNe: 29 common events.}\label{fig:venn_CC_spe_photo} \end{subfigure} \caption{Venn diagrams of spectroscopically and photometrically identified type Ia (\ref{fig:venn_Ia_spe_photo}) and CC (\ref{fig:venn_CC_spe_photo}) from the SNLS3 classification. Supernovae common to both samples are shown in beige.}\label{fig:venn_spe_photo} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Type Ia SNe} The spectroscopically and photometrically identified type Ia samples are shown in Table \ref{table:SNLS3}. Events common to both samples are illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:venn_Ia_spe_photo}. In SNLS3, $486$ events were photometrically classified as SNe Ia with an estimated purity of $94.4\pm 0.5\%$ \citep{Bazin:2011em}. In this work, we consider two sub-classes of spectroscopic SNe Ia, split according to the confidence index (CI) of the spectroscopic identification: certain SNIa are denoted ``SNIa" (corresponding to $CI=4$ and $CI=5$ in the classification scheme of \citep{Howell}) and probable SNIa ($CI=3$) are labeled ``SNIa". Further details about these indices can be found in \citep{Howell}. A photometrically classified sample of 18 subluminous SNe Ia at $z<0.6$ was obtained in \citep{GonzalezGaitan:2010iw}. The SN-like sample contains 16 of these 18 subluminous SNe Ia. SNLS also detected 8 SNe Ia that were spectroscopically classified as peculiar. This sample includes super-Chandrasekhar and 1991T-like SN events \citep{Balland:2009ka,Bronder:2007hp,Ellis:2007hx,Howell:2006vn}. \subsubsection{Core-collapse SNe} In the SNLS3 SN-like sample, $55$ events were identified spectroscopically as core-collapse SNe \citep{Bazin:2011em}. A photometric classification based on the deferred pipeline identified $117$ events as core-collapse SNe with an estimated purity of $97\%$ \citep{Bazin:2009mp}. Common events between both samples are illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:venn_CC_spe_photo}. \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{\|c \| c \|c \| c \|} \hline SNLS3& \multicolumn{3}{\|c\|}{SNe Ia} \\ & \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{spectroscopic} & photometric \\ \hline SN-like & \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{278} & 486 \\ & \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{ } & \\ CI & SNIa & SNIa &\\ & 213 & 65 & \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Type Ia SNe in SNLS3. The number of events identified spectroscopically (photometrically) in the SN-like sample are shown. For spectroscopic SNe Ia, we further divide the sample using the confidence indices (CI) as defined in \citep{Howell}. } \label{table:SNLS3} \end{table} \section{Light-curve analysis before classification} Before classification, all SN-like events are processed. First, photometric SN redshifts are obtained by using the algorithm described in Section \ref{Section:SN_photo_z}. Then, selection cuts are applied on the photometric SN redshift quality and the light-curve quality as determined by a SALT2 fit. Finally, events are fitted with a general light-curve fitter. Only the photometric SN redshift and the general light-curve fitter parameters are used in the classification. The complete procedure is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:flow_chart}. In the following we introduce the algorithms and selection cuts used in our analysis. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{figures/flow_chart.pdf} \caption{Flow chart showing the selection and classification steps used in this work. The SN samples are shown as solid lines. $SN photo z$ stands for photometric SN redshifts.}\label{fig:flow_chart} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Photometric SN redshifts}\label{Section:SN_photo_z} We use the algorithm elaborated in {\it Palanque-Delabrouille et al.} \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}, trained with SNLS3 data, to obtain redshifts for each SN-like event. These redshifts will be hereafter called photometric SN redshifts. The algorithm obtains the redshift of type Ia SNe using the SALT2 light-curve fitter in a iterative procedure. In the first iteration, successive values of redshift are fit while color and stretch SALT2 parameters are constrained by priors. When a solution if found, another scan is done around the fitted redshift with free color and stretch parameters. The precision of the redshifts for SNe in the SNLS3 sample was reported in \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}. The average precision was defined as $\sigma_{\Delta z/(1+z)}\equiv 1.48 \times$ median $[\|\Delta z\| / (1+z)]$, where $\Delta z$ is the difference between the real and the photometric SN redshift. The rate of catastrophic errors, $\eta$, was defined as the proportion of events with $\|\Delta z\|/(1+z) > 0.15$. For the SNLS3 sample an average precision of $\sigma_{\Delta z/ 1+z}=0.022$ up to $z\sim1$ was found, while for $z < 0.45$ it was $0.006$. The precision degrades with redshift due to low flux, first in the $g$ band and then in the $r$ band as redshift increases. This degradation is irregular as seen in Fig. 4 and described in Section 5 in \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}. Catastrophic errors were found to be under $1.4\%$ for type Ia SNe passing color and stretch cuts. When restricting the test sample to spectroscopically confirmed SNe Ia the catastrophic errors fell to $0.4\%$. The authors found a net bias on the fitted redshift of 0.008 on average. Further details can be found in \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}. The algorithm can be used for obtaining redshifts for all SN-like events. In Figure \ref{fig:sim_SN_zpho_gz}, we plot the light-curve redshift against the real redshift for simulated type Ia and core collapse SNe. Since the algorithm assumes that all events are SNIa, redshifts obtained for core-collapse SNe are usually inaccurate. However, there are some core-collapse SNe that have redshifts that are close to correct. These events have colors that are consistent with type Ia SNe. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{figures/XGB/gz_zpho_by_SN_types.png} \caption{Photometric SN redshift vs. the real redshift for simulated SNe. We plot type Ia SNe with yellow circles and core-collapse SNe with blue triangles.}\label{fig:sim_SN_zpho_gz} \end{center} \end{figure} The photometric SN redshift algorithm provides not only the redshift, but also the reduced $\chi_\nu^2$ of the agreement in color and width between the processed light-curve and the expected light-curve of an SNIa at the determined redshift. In the following we will refer to the reduced chi-square, which is defined as $\chi^2_\nu = \chi^2/N_{dof}$, there $N_{dof}$ is the number of degrees of freedom. \subsection{Selection cuts}\label{Section:selectioncuts} Before classification, we apply selection cuts to ensure meaningful photometric redshifts and reliable light-curves, and to mitigate the number of non-SN events still present in the SN-like sample. Indeed, since the identification of SN-like events in the photometric pipeline was designed to be sensitive to different types of SNe and to faint ones, non-SNe are probably still present and may bias the classification. We thus restrict the sample further by applying cuts more focused on type Ia events. \subsubsection{Photometric SN redshift quality} We assess the quality of photometric SN redshifts through the goodness of the light-curve fit. The photometric SN redshifts algorithm performs iterative fits and in each passing total $\chi^2$ and contributions to the total $\chi^2$ by the priors can be obtained. More details can be found in \citep{PalanqueDelabrouille:2009ng}. To investigate possible cuts, we visually inspected a subset of the light curves that are outliers in a number of diagnostic plots, such as the plot shown in Fig. \ref{fig:non-physical}. In particular, the $\chi^2_\nu$ of the total multi-band fit was found to be sensitive to non SN-like events. We chose to exclude events with a total $\chi^2_\nu$ greater than four. Cuts were also derived for other output variables of the photometric SN redshift algorithm such as the $\chi^2_\nu$ of the redshift, color and stretch. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/paper_czed_zpho.png} \caption{The contribution of the redshift prior to the total reduced $\chi^2_\nu$ for SNLS3 SN-like events. Events classified as type Ia are in light (dark) green for spectroscopically confirmed (photometrically identified) supernovae. Core-collapse SNe are in bright red left-pointing (dark red right-pointing) triangles for spectroscopic (photometric) sample. Orange (yellow) dots stand for events whose light-curves were visually inspected and found not to be compatible with a SN-like signal (compatible with long declining events similar to SNe II). Beige dots are events with incompatible photometric and spectroscopic redshifts. All other SN-like events of unknown type are in blue. SNe with a total $\chi^2_\nu$ that is greater than four are excluded from our selection.}\label{fig:non-physical} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Light-curve quality} With the redshift fixed to the photometric redshift we now assess the quality of our light-curves. For this, we fit our light-curves with SALT2. The output of this fit is used only to remove events with insufficient light-curve coverage and events with poor fits. It provides a fitted date of maximum light as well as color, stretch and peak magnitudes. It is not used in the classification since SALT2 was already used for obtaining photometric SN redshifts. We require: \begin{itemize} \item Minimal sampling of the light-curve before and after the SALT2 fitted time of maximum in rest frame, $\tau$: \begin{itemize} \item at least one measurement in the range $-10<\tau<+5$ days, \item at least one measurement in the range $+5<\tau<+20$ days for a reasonable shape evaluation, \item at least one measurement in each band from a pair selected from $(g-i)$, $(r-z)$ or $(i-z)$ must be within the range $-10<\tau<+35$. \end{itemize} \item SALT2 convergence: events for which the SALT2 fit did not converge are discarded. \end{itemize} \subsection{Light-curve fitter}\label{Section:feature_extraction} To parameterize the light-curve shape we use the functional form \citep{Bazin:2011em}: \begin{equation} f^{k} (t)=A^k \frac{\exp{-(t-t_0^k)/\tau^k_{fall}}}{1+\exp{-(t-t_0^k)/\tau^k_{rise}}} + c^k \; , \label{eq:sn-like_var} \end{equation} where $A^k$ sets the normalization, $\tau^k_{fall}$ ($\tau^k_{rise}$) defines the fall (rise) time, $t_0^k$ is related to the date of maximum as $t^k_{max}= t^k_0 + \tau^k_{rise} \ln (\tau^k_{fall}/\tau^k_{rise} -1)$ and $c^k$ is a constant. First, the flux in each filter, $k$, is fitted. Then, we impose that all fits share the same $t_0$ from the $i$ band \footnote{Some SNe have different maximum dates for different filters. This requirement was set for consistency between fits. It is not expected that this affects the classification.}. A second fit is done using Gaussian priors from the first fit. The fitting procedure provides the amplitude, rise and fall times for each filter. These are relevant features to characterize a SN light-curve and are the ones used for the following SN classification. \section{Classification with Machine Learning} Our goal is to select type Ia SNe from a SN sample. This can be reduced to a problem of predicting the type for each event. Machine learning algorithms provide an automated way of classifying events. In particular, supervised learning algorithms can learn from data in order to make predictions. The features available for the classification are: the photometric SN redshift, the color and stretch obtained from the redshift fit and their $\chi^2_\nu$, the values for the general light-curve fit in each band (amplitudes, rising and falling times) and the $\chi^2_\nu$ of the general light-curve fits. In this section, we will first introduce the machine learning algorithms used in this work.\footnote{We rely on the Python package scikit-learn \citep{scikit-learn} for implementation.} Then, we will introduce our model validation technique, cross-validation. Performance is evaluated using metrics that will be described in Section \ref{section:metrics}. \subsection{Boosted Decision Trees (BDTs)} BDTs are supervised classification methods that perform well with large data sets and are adapted to classify high-dimensional data. From the \textit {training sample} they learn a mapping function that allows them to classify other data points (\textit {classification sample}). Their output is a \textit{prediction}: the probability of an object to belong to a given class (BDT response). A decision tree (DT) makes successive rectangular cuts in the parameter space to classify data. Binary splits separate the data into subsamples (``leaf nodes") which at the end of the tree are given a probability to be classified as signal or background (prediction). At each split, the algorithm determines the variable that gives the best separation to discriminate between signal and background (in terms of classification error). Often, trees are too complex and do not generalize to other samples (they ``overfit"). To avoid this, trees can be combined to improve generalizability and stability. Two main approaches for combining trees are averaging and boosting methods. Averaging methods construct several estimators (decision trees). The final prediction is an average of all the DTs prediction. Such methods are: \begin{itemize} \item Random Forest (RF): $n$ decision trees are constructed from a sample drawn with replacement (an event can be drawn multiple times) from the training set. In the learning process, the feature to be used at each binary split is picked from a random subset of the features (which can include or not the best available feature). This is done to obtain a better model where variance is decreased. The final prediction contains an average of all probabilistic predictions in different trees. \item Bagging: decision trees are built from random subsets of the training set. For each event, the final prediction is the sum of the predictions from all trees. \end{itemize} Boosting methods build a model iteratively. They combine ``weak" classifiers as small decision trees on modified versions of the training data. We will use: \begin{itemize} \item AdaBoost (AB): iteratively constructs an additive model for the data. At each iteration, the data set is classified and each individual event is given a weight which represents its importance in the classification. The weight of individual events on the training sample is modified at each iteration. Those events that were incorrectly predicted at the previous step have their weights increased and those that were correctly predicted have their weights decreased. In this sense, misclassified events are the focus of the next iteration. All predictions are combined by a weighted sum to produce the final prediction. \item XGBoost (XGB): constructs an additive model while optimizing a loss function. The loss function accounts for the inaccuracy of predictions in the classification. The performance is given by an objective function that contains both a loss function and a regularization term (controls complexity of the model). This is a more refined version of GradientBoosting which is accurate and has shown good performance in classification challenges \citep{xgb} \footnote{http://xgboost.readthedocs.org/}. \end{itemize} Although we separate here the different methods for combing trees, from now on AdaBoost, XGBoost and Random Forest will be referred to as BDTs. \subsection{Cross-validation} Cross-validation is a technique that allows us to assess how a classification generalizes to an independent data set. The idea behind cross-validation is to partition the data into independent subsets, training with one set while evaluating with the other. This can be done several times (number of folds) which allows one to train and measure the success rate of the classifier with the different samples ensuring that one is using information that is available in the entire simulation. In this work, we choose to do a 3-fold cross-validation which is enough to avoid over-fitting and to have a robust assessment of our model validity while maintaining a large training sample. \subsection{Evaluating the classifier}\label{section:metrics} The classification results in each SN being classified as a SNIa with the correct redshift or as a SNCC or SNIa with an inaccurate redshift. SNIa in the first group constitute the ``signal'' and those in the second group the ``background''. The performance of a classifier can be evaluated using different metrics introduced in this section (e.g.~AUC). Since our goal is to obtain a large and reliable SNIa sample, it is natural to use purity and efficiency as indicators. The latter will also allow us to set a criterion for choosing a probability threshold. For efficiency and purity studies we will use a subset of the simulation to train and another independent subset to classify and therefore estimate the performance of the classifier. \subsubsection{ROC curve} Our problem is a binary one: events are either signal or background and are classified in these categories. A metric that is commonly used as an evaluation method for dichotomic classifications, is the AUC metric. AUC stands for Area Under Curve, where the curve is the ROC curve (Receiver Operating Characteristic). The ROC curve illustrates the performance of a binary classifier by plotting the true positive rate (efficiency) against the false positive rate (contamination). While the ROC curve represents the performance of a model in two-dimensions, the AUC simplifies this into a number. A perfect model would score an AUC of 1 while a random classification would score $0.5$. \subsubsection{Purity and efficiency}\label{Section:pur_and_eff} For a classified sample, purity and efficiency can be used as metrics. This requires a choice of the BDT response threshold. Our goal in the classification of SN-like events is to obtain a sample of type Ia SNe with correct redshifts separated from other types of SNe or type Ia SNe with inaccurate redshifts. Redshifts are considered accurate if, when compared to the generated redshift for simulations, they satisfy $\|\Delta z\|/(1+z) < 0.1$, inaccurate redshifts exceed $0.15$. SNe Ia with inaccurate redshifts are not suitable for cosmological analysis. We define our efficiency or true positive rate as: \begin{equation} \epsilon_{Ia}=\frac{n^{true}_{Ia}}{N^{total}_{Ia}} \label{eq:true_positive} \end{equation} where $n^{true}_{Ia}$ are type Ia supernovae that have the correct redshift and are correctly classified and $N^{total}_{Ia}$ contain all synthetic SNIa before classification. In order to use the statistics of different cross-validation folds, we define the total efficiency as the weighted sum of each fold efficiency. We make a distinction between: {\it total efficiency}, which is includes the detection, selection and classification steps; the {\it SN-like efficiency} which evaluates only the effect of selection cuts and classification; and the {\it classification efficiency}, which assesses our machine learning classification methods only. The purity of the SNIa sample is defined as: \begin{equation} P_{Ia}=\frac{n^{true}_{Ia}}{n^{true}_{Ia}+ n^{false}_{Ia}} \end{equation}\label{eq:purity} where $n^{true}_{Ia}$ is defined above and $n^{false}_{Ia}$ are either core-collapse that were classified as type Ia SNe, or type Ia supernovae with inaccurate redshifts. Contamination by core collapse or SNe Ia with inaccurate redshifts is defined as: \begin{equation} C_i=\frac{n^{false \;i}_{Ia}}{n^{true}_{Ia}+ n^{false}_{Ia}} \label{eq:false_positive} \end{equation} where $i$ is the contaminating type. Since our Ia and CC light-curve simulations are volumetric ones, SN rates are accounted for by weighting events when computing efficiencies and purity. We take volumetric rates for type Ia and core-collapse SNe from \citep{Pritchet:2008np} and \citep{Bazin:2009mp}, respectively. \subsection{Parameter setting and feature selection} Learning algorithms have a set of chosen parameters, referred to as hyperparameters. In this work we implemented an automated search of hyperparameters using a grid of possible parameter values evaluated on our cross-validated sample with an appropriate score for each classifier (e.g. RF: mean accuracy, XGB: log loss). Using available scikit-learn tools to select hyperparameters and rank feature importance \citep{scikit-learn}. Inefficient features were identified by measuring the impact of each feature in the model score. They were discarded in our classification. To avoid biasing this selection we used an iterative procedure where the order of evaluation of each feature was permuted at each round. For each classification method a different ranking of features was obtained. However, some features were selected as efficient for all methods. These were: photometric SN redshift, the $\chi^2_\nu$ of the agreement in color and width of the redshift fit, the rise time for $i$, $r$ and $g$ filters, the fall time for $i$ and $r$ filters, the $\chi^2_\nu$ of the general light-curve fit for $i$ and $r$ filters and the amplitude in $g$ for the general light-curve fitter. \section{Comparison of different classification methods} \subsection{Application on simulated SNe} Three classification methods are examined: Random Forest, AdaBoost and XGBoost Decision Trees. We evaluate the performance of the different methods using the AUC metric from the ROC curve shown in Figure \ref{fig:ROC}. All methods obtain an AUC metric above $0.95$ and are therefore considered as excellent classifiers. This curve shows the trade-off between having a high positive rate (equivalent to classification efficiency) and a low false positive rate (equivalent to contamination). In the following, we study, the differences between methods and their impact on both simulated and real data. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/superimposed_ROC.png} \caption{Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for different classification methods applied on synthetic SNe. True and false positive rates are given by Equations \ref{eq:true_positive} and \ref{eq:false_positive} respectively. Each curve represents a different algorithm: Random Forest RF (dotted black), AdaBoost Decision Tree AdaBDT (dashed blue) and Extreme Gradient Boosting XGB (solid yellow). The AUC score (area under the curve) is shown in the legend.}\label{fig:ROC} \end{center} \end{figure} We classify synthetic SNe to estimate efficiencies and purities. For each classifier, a BDT response threshold must be chosen. This choice results from a trade-off between purity and efficiency of the classified sample. For our three methods, we plot in Figure \ref{fig:eff_pur_NN} total efficiency (as defined in Section \ref{Section:pur_and_eff}) against purity of the classified sample for different BDT response thresholds. The performance of each algorithm is in agreement with the AUC metric ranking. It is clear that the trade-off between efficiency and purity is more favorable for the XGB algorithm. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/95/eff_pur_color_NN_plot_95.png} \caption{Total efficiency (Equation \ref{eq:true_positive}) versus purity (Equation \ref{eq:purity}) for different choices of the BDT response cut for the 3 classification methods. The plot has been constructed for the simulated sample. The results for the XGB, RF and Ada classifiers are shown as circles, triangles, and squares respectively. The gray dashed line indicates a purity of $95\%$. The gray cross shows the performance of previous SNLS photometric classification (using host-galaxy redshifts \citep{Bazin:2011em}) with the efficiency renormalized upwards to account for the effect of redshift assignment ($83\%$).}\label{fig:eff_pur_NN} \end{center} \end{figure} To compare the three algorithms, we set the BDT response threshold such that the estimated purity is $95\%$. Total efficiencies and purities for these samples can be seen in Table \ref{table:global_eff_pur}. The algorithm with highest efficiency for our set purity is found to be XGB. \subsubsection{Efficiency evolution with redshift} The total efficiency as a function of redshift is shown in Figure \ref{fig:superimposed_efficiencies} for all classification methods. The higher efficiency at low redshift can be attributed to higher quality light-curves for nearby SNe Ia. The SNIa classification efficiency varies from one algorithm to the other, XGB being the best performing method over the whole redshift range. Interestingly AdaBoost and XGB differences are quite homogeneous which can be attributed to the similarities of their optimization methods. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/95/all_efficiencies_gz_superimposed_95.png} \caption{Total efficiency from synthetic SNIa light-curves as a function of the real simulated redshift for different classification methods with the purity set to ~$95\%$. Random Forest (RF) points are plotted with black dotted error bars, AdaBoost Decision Tree (Ada) with dashed blue and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) with solid yellow. Note that the total efficiency of XGB is higher than the other two methods at all redshifts.}\label{fig:superimposed_efficiencies} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Evolution of purity with redshift} Figure \ref{fig:pur_z} shows the evolution of purity and contamination as a function of real and photometric SN redshifts for each algorithm. The contamination by type CC SNe is higher at lower real redshift but remains small (below $15\%$) whatever the method. Comparing the contaminations as a function of real redshift and photometric SN redshift, there is a migration of low-$z$ events towards higher redshifts. This is attributed to inaccurate photometric SN redshifts for some core-collapse events, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:sim_SN_zpho_gz}. \afterpage{% \begin{figure} \centering \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_zpho_Ia.png} \caption{\footnotesize SNIa purity} \label{fig:pur_zpho_Ia} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_gz_Ia.png} \caption{\footnotesize SNIa purity} \label{fig:pur_gz_Ia} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_zpho_CC.png} \caption{\footnotesize CC contamination} \label{fig:pur_zpho_CC} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_gz_CC.png} \caption{\footnotesize CC contamination} \label{fig:pur_gz_CC} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_zpho_Ia_badz.png} \caption{\footnotesize SNIa inaccurate z contamination} \label{fig:pur_zpho_Ia_badz} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/superimposed_pur_gz_Ia_badz.png} \caption{\footnotesize SNIa inaccurate z contamination} \label{fig:pur_gz_Ia_badz} \end{subfigure} \caption{ SNIa purity and background contamination from simulated SN light-curves as a function of redshift for different methods with a given purity of $95\%$. Left column : photometric SN redshift, right column : real redshift. Same color code as in Figure \ref{fig:superimposed_efficiencies}. Note how the CC SNe that are incorrectly classified as SNe Ia tend to have an assigned photometric SN redshift that is much higher than their real redshift.}\label{fig:pur_z} \end{figure} \clearpage } The contamination by type Ia SNe with inaccurate photometric SN redshift increases with higher redshift, but the overall contamination stays well below $1\%$. \subsection{Application on SNLS3 data} Classification is also evaluated on SNLS3 selected data with the purity set to $95\%$. In Figure \ref{fig:venn_methods} we show a Venn diagram with the events classified as type Ia SNe by each method. The large number of common events shows the coherence between the three algorithms. For each method, Table \ref{table:photo_sample} gives the number of events classified as type Ia for the selected sample and the sub-samples of photometrically and spectroscopically identified type Ia and core-collapse SNe. XGB has the largest number of spectroscopically and photometrically classified type Ia supernova. However, since these two samples share common events we visualize the superposition of these samples in Figure \ref{fig:venn_methods_Ia}. XGB continues to have the largest common sample. For RF, all classified core-collapse events had an inaccurate photometric SN redshift. For AdaBoost, one event was found to have inaccurate photometric SN redshift. The other event, common to both spectroscopic and photometric samples, is a spectroscopically classified type II event whose light-curve is incomplete because it was observed at the end of a season. For XGB classification 4 core-collapse (2 spectroscopic and 2 photometric) events had an inaccurate photometric SN redshift. Four events had correct photometric SN redshifts (1 spectroscopic, 2 photometric and one common to both samples). One last event was classified photometrically, therefore no spectroscopic redshift was available. The XGB method selects more CC events than the other two algorithms. Given the expected CC contaminations (see Table \ref{table:global_eff_pur}) and photometric sample sizes (see Table \ref{table:photo_sample}), we expect XGB to classify $20$ to $40\%$ more CC events than the other two methods, less than what we observe in data on the two test-samples of CC events that we have at our disposal. This might be a statistical fluctuation, or a reflection of the incompleteness of the CC test-samples or an indication that our photometric samples are still contaminated by residual non SN-backgrounds that make our expected CC contaminations only indicative. All classified samples contain the same spectroscopically confirmed SNIa with inaccurate photometric SN redshift when compared to its spectroscopic redshift. Using Tables \ref{table:global_eff_pur} and \ref{table:photo_sample}, the total number of type Ia SNe with inaccurate redshifts is expected to be between $1.5$ and $4$ events depending on the algorithm. This is in reasonable agreement with what we see in data on the sub-sample of spectroscopically identified SNe Ia for which we have both redshifts. To check the agreement between expectations and data with the three methods, we compare the SNIa efficiency ratio between any two methods with the ratio of the classified sample sizes for the same two methods. The expected and observed ratios based on XGB and RF compare well. The two ratios defined with respect to AdaBoost are found to be higher in data than expected. This discrepancy remains unexplained. It may indicate that the XGB and RF samples are contaminated, in the same way, by non-SN backgrounds. \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{\|c c \| c\| c \|c \|} \hline & & AdaBoost & Random Forest & XGBoost\\ \hline total efficiency& Ia &$36.9\pm 0.6$& $32.4\pm 0.7$ &$41.1\pm 0.7$\\ purity & Ia & $95.6\pm 0.5$ & $95.6 \pm 0.4$& $95.3 \pm 0.4$\\ contamination& Ia inaccurate z & $0.53\pm0.09$& $0.29 \pm 0.07$ & $0.60 \pm 0.09$ \\ contamination& CC &$3.9\pm0.4$& $4.1 \pm 0.4$ & $4.0 \pm 0.4$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Estimated total efficiency, purity and contamination from simulated SNe for different methods with a given purity of ~$95\%$.} \label{table:global_eff_pur} \end{table} \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/95/venn_methods.png} \caption{Venn diagram for SNLS3 data photometrically classified by three different algorithms with the purity set to $95\%$. Color code as follows : overlap between the three methods in mauve, overlap between RF and XGB (Ada) in beige (light blue), between XGB and Ada in purple, pure RF in green, XGB in pink and Ada in dark blue. The total number of classified events for each method are given in Table \ref{table:photo_sample}.}\label{fig:venn_methods} \end{center} \end{figure} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{\| c \| c\| c \|c \|} \hline & AdaBoost & Random Forest & XGBoost\\ \hline photometric sample & 478 & 549 & 670\\ \hline spectroscopic Ia & 166 &198 & 223\\ photometric Ia & 318 & 364& 444\\ spectroscopic CC & 2 & 2 & 3\\ photometric CC & 1& 1& 6\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Events classified as SNe Ia by the three methods with purity set at ~$95\%$. The first line gives the numbers found from SNLS3 and the next four lines give the numbers for the spectroscopically and photometrically identified subsamples \citep{Guy:2010bp}, \citep{Bazin:2011em}, \citep{Bazin:2009mp}.} \label{table:photo_sample} \end{table} \begin{figure} \centering \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/venn_XGB_spe_pho.png} \caption{\footnotesize XGB} \label{fig:pur_zpho_Ia} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/venn_RF_spe_pho.png} \caption{\footnotesize Random Forest } \label{fig:pur_gz_Ia} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/95/venn_ada_spe_pho.png} \caption{\footnotesize AdaBoost} \label{fig:pur_zpho_CC} \end{subfigure} \caption{ Venn diagrams for each classification algorithm, showing the intersection between events classified by our methods and the photometric and spectroscopic classifications. Dark blue and green regions correspond to events in those samples missed by our classification. }\label{fig:venn_methods_Ia} \end{figure} \subsubsection{Comparison with the SNLS3 subluminous and peculiar SNIa samples}\label{section:sub_pec} The SN-like sample (the starting point of our classification) contains 11 photometrically identified subluminous events and 5 spectroscopically identified peculiar events. For all classification methods, the same 3 peculiar events are contained in our photometrically classified sample. None of them exhibit any sign of peculiarity in their light-curves. The super-Chandrasekhar type Ia and the 1991T-like object are not classified as type Ia SNe by any of our methods. Subluminous supernovae are found in our classified samples. In the case of Random Forest and AdaBoost classifications, 4 events are in the classified sample while 8 are included in the XGB sample. Despite our methods not being trained for disentangling normal type Ia and subluminous SNe, our photometric classification appears to have some efficiency in detecting subluminous SNe Ia as well. \subsubsection{Effect of spectroscopic confidence index}\label{section:CI_95} In Section \ref{section:SNLS3_data} we split the spectroscopically confirmed type Ia SNe according to the confidence level of the spectroscopic identification. Table \ref{table:CI_95} shows the percentage of events correctly classified for each method and sub-class. All three methods in this work have a larger classification efficiency for SNe Ia with the highest confidence index. \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{\| c \| c\| c \|c \|} \hline & AdaBoost & Random Forest & XGBoost\\ \hline $\%$ SNIa ($CI=4$ or $5$) & $74 \pm 3 $ & $87 \pm 3$ & $96 \pm 2$ \\ \hline $\%$ SNIa* ($CI=3$) &$58 \pm 6$ & $73 \pm 6$ & $88 \pm 4$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Classification efficiency for our three methods when compared with the confidence index of the spectroscopic classification in \citep{Howell}.} \label{table:CI_95} \end{table} \section{Choosing a method: XGB with high purity $98\%$} The best performing algorithm was found to be XGB with high achievable purity and efficiency. We chose to select a sample with a purity of $98.0 \pm 0.3\%$. The corresponding total efficiency is $34.7 \pm 0.7 \%$. We now study this sample in detail. \subsection{Effect of selection cuts and classification} The impact of the selection cuts and the classification is shown for data and synthetic SNe Ia in Table \ref{table:sel_cuts_data}. The selection cuts (defined in Section \ref{Section:selectioncuts}) are shown to reduce the spectroscopic and photometric type Ia subsamples by $3.3\%$ and $1\%$ respectively. The core-collapse SNe are mainly discarded through classification. The two core-collapse events remaining after classification have inaccurate photometric SN redshifts. The classified sample contains 6 subluminous and 3 peculiar type Ia SNe from samples introduced in Section \ref{section:sub_pec}, and a spectroscopic type Ia that is classified with an inaccurate photometric SN redshift. \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{\|c \| c \| c \| c \|c\| c \|c\|} \hline cut & SNLS3 events & \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{spectroscopic} & \multicolumn{2}{\|c\|}{photometric} & simulated \\ &in sample & Ia & CC & Ia & CC & Ia$\%$ \\ \hline SN-like & 1483 & 246 & 42 & 486 & 109 & 50\\ selected & 1193 & 238 & 30 & 481 & 77 & 47\\ classified & 529 & 205 & 1 & 374 & 1 & 35\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Effect of selection cuts and classification (XGB) using SNLS3 data and synthetic type Ia. The classifier threshold is adjusted so that the purity is $98\%$.} \label{table:sel_cuts_data} \end{table} \subsection{Classification and photometric SN redshifts} We investigate the impact the accuracy of the fitted photometric SN redshifts has on the classification. Figure \ref{fig:gz_zpho} shows the comparison between spectroscopic and photometric SN redshifts for events in the classified sample when both redshifts are available. Contamination by core-collapse SNe is mostly due to events that have an inaccurate photometric SN redshift. Interestingly, those core-collapse SNe that were assigned correct photometric SN redshifts were not classified as type Ia SNe by our method. A core-collapse event that has the correct photometric SN redshift is an event that has colors and photometry consistent with a type Ia supernova (photometric SN redshifts are obtained under the hypothesis that the object is a SNIa, see Section \ref{Section:SN_photo_z}). We highlight this rejection by our classification of core-collapse SNe with properties similar to SNe Ia and attribute it to the features obtained using the general SN fitter (see Section \ref{Section:feature_extraction}). \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/gz_zpho.png} \caption{synthetic SNe in our photometric sample}\label{subfig:sim_SN_classified} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/gz_zpho_data.png} \caption{SNLS3 SNe in our photometric sample}\label{subfig:data_SN_classified} \end{subfigure} \caption{Photometric SN redshift versus real redshift for synthetic SNe (left) and SNLS3 data (right). All SNe in the SNLS3 selected sample are shown as gray dots. Events classified as type Ia with the XGB method at $98\%$ purity are shown as yellow circles. Blue triangles indicate core-collapse SNe classified as type Ia by our method.}\label{fig:gz_zpho} \end{center} \end{figure} The photometric SN redshift distribution of classified events peaks at higher redshifts when compared to the spectroscopically identified sample (Figure \ref{subfig:histo_new_spe}). There is a large overlap between events in both samples and no particular trend over photometric SN redshift is seen. The distribution of the SN-photometric redshift for the photometric sample classified in \citep{Bazin:2011em} and the one of this work are shown in Figure \ref{subfig:histo_new_SNLS3}. The new classification provides a larger number of $z>0.7$ events while maintaining the number of events at lower redshift, and therefore a large fraction of the spectroscopic and photometric samples. \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/histo_zpho_spe_new_sample.png} \caption{comparison with spectroscopic sample}\label{subfig:histo_new_spe} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/histo_zpho_SNLS3_new_sample.png} \caption{comparison with photometric sample}\label{subfig:histo_new_SNLS3} \end{subfigure} \caption{Photometric SN redshift distribution of the XGB classified SNLS3 sample in yellow (solid line) compared with spectroscopically (\ref{subfig:histo_new_spe}) and photometrically (\ref{subfig:histo_new_SNLS3}) identified test samples. Common events between samples are indicated. The photometric test sample is that obtained in \citep{Bazin:2011em} using host-galaxy redshifts.}\label{fig:histo_zpho} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{Efficiency evolution: classification, selection and total} In Figure \ref{fig:sup_eff_pur} we evaluate the efficiency-purity diagram taking into account: classification only, classification and selection cuts of Section \ref{Section:selectioncuts} and the complete pipeline. Our machine learning classification can achieve a $100\%$ efficiency at the expense of selecting a photometric sample with purity of at most $70\%$. The effect of adding selection cuts (necessary to ensure light-curve quality and reduction of non-SN backgrounds) is to reduce the maximum achievable efficiency to $80\%$. When accounting for the rest of the pipeline (detection and SN-like cuts) the maximum achievable efficiency drops to $45\%$. Despite a $\sim 20\%$ reduction in the maximum achievable efficiency between classification only and classification with selection cuts, we emphasize the importance of these cuts that reduce other possible non SN-like events. This is of great importance since our algorithms have been trained to disentangle type Ia from core-collapse SNe only. \begin{figure}[h!] \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/XGB/superimposed_eff_pur_color_NN_plot.png} \caption{Efficiency versus purity for XGB classification of simulated SNe. We show the trade-off between efficiency and purity when considering only classification effects (red dash-dot line), including selection cuts (purple dotted line) and taking into account the complete pipeline including detection (dashed green line). Circles indicate the evolution of efficiency and purity for the same BDT threshold (chosen such as to obtain a $98\%$ purity for the complete pipeline).}\label{fig:sup_eff_pur} \end{center} \end{figure} \subsection{The effect of the spectroscopic confidence index}\label{section:CI_98} Spectroscopically identified type Ia SNe in SNLS3 with high confidence index $CI=4$ or $5$ (as defined in Section \ref{section:SNLS3_data}) have a photometric classification efficiency of $90 \pm 2 \%$. Those events with a $CI$ of $3$ have an efficiency in our analysis of $75\pm6 \%$. SNe with $CI=3$, are on average more distant than those with $CI=4$ and $CI=5$, so the photometry (and spectroscopy) will be noisier. This leads to a lower classification efficiency. \subsection{The effect of light-curve quality} We studied the performance of our classifier according to the quality of the available light-curves for type Ia SNe. The quality of light-curves was assessed through the number of exposures in the $i$ and $r$ filters before and after maximum light. In Figure \ref{fig:quality_Ia}, we show the percentage of correctly classified type Ia SNe as a function of the number of exposures in the previously mentioned filters. For type Ia SNe, the larger the number of measurements after maximum, the higher the percentage of correctly classified events. This occurs for all redshift intervals. High redshift events require, as expected, better sampling to be correctly classified. \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{center} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/emcee_Ia_points_before_max_i.png} \caption{before maximum i filter} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/emcee_Ia_points_before_max_r.png} \caption{before maximum r filter} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/emcee_Ia_points_after_max_i.png} \caption{after maximum i filter} \end{subfigure} \begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth} \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/XGB/emcee_Ia_points_after_max_r.png} \caption{after maximum r filter} \end{subfigure} \caption{Percentage of simulated type Ia SNe correctly classified. The data is binned in redshift intervals (y axis) and the number of exposures before and after (top and bottom) maximum (left: i filter, right: r filter). The text indicates the percentage of correctly classified events in each bin with $1\sigma$ confidence intervals.}\label{fig:quality_Ia} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Conclusions} In this paper, we presented a new method for photometrically classifying type Ia supernovae using photometric redshifts derived from SN light-curves and machine learning techniques. This work is the first time that machine learning has been used to classify high redshift supernovae from photometry alone. We show that a sample of SNIa can be photometrically classified with a purity that is greater than $95\%$. Compared to previous work using external host photometric redshifts and sequential cuts, we obtain a purer sample at an equivalent efficiency. We studied three different supervised learning algorithms for classification: Random Forest, and Decision Trees boosted using AdaBoost and XGBoost algorithms. We compared the results of the three classifiers using both simulated and real SN data. For a purity of $95\%$, we find that total efficiencies can vary by $10\%$ from one algorithm to the other, which may be linked to their optimization procedures. The XGB algorithm has the best performance both in terms of the AUC score (with a score of 0.98, with 1 being the perfect score) and the estimated efficiency when compared to other methods. When applied to real data, we obtain photometrically classified samples that are double the size of the spectroscopically confirmed sample in SNLS3. The coherence between the three algorithms can be seen from the large number of common classified events. The best performing classification algorithm was found to be XGBoost. When trained with our synthetic SNe, it is able to provide a sample of $98\%$ purity and satisfactory efficiency. Core-collapse contamination is shown to be dominated by events with inaccurate redshifts. Interestingly, core collapse events with correct redshifts are properly classified as background by our method. These events have colors and photometry consistent with type Ia SNe and therefore should be harder to disentangle. This highlights the performance of our classification using features from a general SN light-curve fitter and the XGB algorithm. In a real SN survey, efficiency is affected by different stages of the pipeline. In other classification studies, efficiencies and purities are computed directly from generated SN light-curves without taking into account selection cuts. These cuts are fundamental for the selection of a sample where non-modeled backgrounds are limited. The impact of selection cuts will vary with the pipeline and must be studied case by case. We find that selection cuts are fundamental for supernova photometric classification with supervised learning. An algorithm is only as good as its training set. Therefore if other backgrounds are present in the sample, the algorithm will perform less well. We argue that if the goal is SN classification, a substantial study must be done to ensure that non-modeled backgrounds are strongly reduced, and the extracted features are meaningful. We acknowledge that our study was limited by the number of simulated SNe. Although $20,000$ simulated core-collapse were generated, when applying selection cuts to obtain the SN-like sample (the starting point of our classification) only a small percentage of core-collapse pass them. We expect a low number of core-collapse events at this stage, but it would be advisable to have a larger number to be used as training and for estimating efficiency and purity. This paper is a first step towards classification of real SN data using supervised learning and we will address this limitation in future work. This work demonstrates for the first time the feasibility of machine learning classification in a high-redshift SN survey with application to real SN data. We have successfully classified a high-purity type Ia photometric supernova sample in the SNLS survey. An analysis of the impact on cosmology coming from the use of supervised learning techniques to produce SN samples will be subject of a future work. Additionally, this classification will be applied to the SNLS 5-year photometric analysis that will be the subject of a forthcoming paper. \acknowledgments Part of this research was conducted by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO), through project number CE110001020. AM thanks B. Schmidt, F. Yuan and B. Tucker for useful discussions. This work was done based on observations obtained with MegaPrime/MegaCam, a joint project of CFHT and CEA/IRFU, at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) which is operated by the National Research Council (NRC) of Canada, the Institut National des Science de l’Univers of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) of France, and the University of Hawaii. This work is based in part on data products produced at Terapix available at the Canadian Astronomy Data Centre as part of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey, a collaborative project of NRC and CNRS. \bibliographystyle{JHEP}
\section{This is an unnumbered first-level section head} \section{Introduction} Hochschild (co)homology was first introduced in 1945 by Hochschild in \cite{MR0011076}. Since then, mathematicians have found Hochschild (co)homology to be incredibly useful for a variety of applications. In the past couple decades, energy has been placed into generalizing Hochschild's construction. One generalization, higher order Hochschild homology was introduced by Pirashvili in \cite{MR1755114}. This construction assigns a chain complex to any simplicial set, provided the algebra is commutative and the bimodule is symmetric. More recently, the author has worked to generalize Pirashvili's construction to work with multimodules, modules who have more than one action (see \cite{MR3338542}). It is the aim of the present paper to further generalize this construction to noncommutative algebras. In particular, we aim to determine a list of all simplicial sets whose Hochschild (co)homology is defined even when working over noncommutative algebras. We do so by finding the ``maximal'' algebraic structure allowed by each simplicial set $X_\bullet$. The main result found here is that the Hochschild (co)homology of $X_\bullet$ is defined over a noncommutative algebra $A$ if and only if $X_\bullet$ is a one dimensional simplicial set. Given a field, $k$, $k$-algebra, $A$ and an $A$-bimodule, $M,$ we can associate a chain complex $C_{\bullet}(A,M),$ whose homology was introduced by Hochschild in \cite{MR0011076} and is referred to as the Hochschild homology of $A$ with coefficients in $M.$ To define $C_{\bullet}(A,M),$ let $$C_n(A,M)\colon = M\otimes A^{\otimes n}$$ and differentials be given by $$\delta_n = \sum_{i=0}^n (-1)^id_i$$ where $d_i \colon M\otimes A^{\otimes n} \rightarrow M\otimes A^{\otimes n-1}$ are defined as follows: $$d_i(m\otimes a_1 \otimes a_2 \otimes \cdots \otimes a_n)= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} ma_1\otimes a_2\otimes \cdots \otimes a_n & i=0\\ m\otimes a_1\otimes \cdots \otimes a_i a_{i+1} \otimes \cdots \otimes a_n & 1\leq i \leq n-1\\ a_nm\otimes a_1 \otimes \cdots \otimes a_{n-1} & i=n \end{array} \right.$$ It can be observed that the construction above describes a simplicial $k$-module associated to a simplicial model of $S^1$. Furthermore, Pirashvili illustrated in \cite{MR1755114} that we can start with any arbitrary finite simplicial set and construct a simplicial $k$-module whose associated homology (of the complex given by alternating face maps) gives a generalization of Hochschild homology, known as higher order Hochschild homology. For this construction we start with the assumptions that $A$ is a commutative $k$-algebra and $M$ is a symmetric $A$-bimodule. These assumptions are necessary as we will see from Theorem \ref{MAIN}. For example $S^2$ (with the minimal simplicial decomposition) requires that $A$ be commutative (see Proposition \ref{SPHERE}). For higher order Hochschild homology, consider the Loday functor $L(A,M)$ from the category of finite pointed sets, $\Gamma$ to the category of $k$-modules, $k\textrm{-mod}$ (see \cite[6.4.4]{MR1217970} and \cite{MR1755114}), given by $$L(A,M)\colon \Gamma \rightarrow k\textrm{-mod}$$ $$m_+ \rightarrow M\otimes \bigotimes_{\{i\in m_+ \|i\neq 0\}} A$$ for objects $m_+=\{0,1,\cdots,m\}\in \Gamma.$ (where $0$ is the fixed element). For morphisms $\varphi\colon m_+ \rightarrow n_+ \in \Gamma$ let $$L(A,M)\varphi(m\otimes a_1\otimes \cdot \otimes a_m)=(b_0m\otimes \cdots \otimes b_n)$$ where $$b_i=\prod_{\{j\in m_+\|j\neq 0, \varphi(j)=i \}}a_j.$$ Similarly we have a functor \cite{MR2383113} $$\mathcal{H}(A,M) \colon \Gamma \rightarrow k\textrm{-mod}$$ $$m_+ \rightarrow \hom (\bigotimes_{\{i\in m_+ \|i\neq 0\}} A,M)$$ where for a map $\varphi \colon m_+ \rightarrow n_+$ and map $f\colon \bigotimes_{\{i\in n_+ \|i\neq 0\}} A\rightarrow M$ we have $$\mathcal{H}(A,M)\varphi (f)( a_1 \otimes \cdots \otimes a_m)=b_0f(b_1\otimes \cdots \otimes b_n)$$ where $$b_i=\prod_{\{j\in m_+ \|j\neq 0, \varphi(j)=i\}}a_j.$$ It was realized by Pirashvili in \cite[3.1]{MR1755114} that for any finite simplicial set $X_\bullet ,$ we can consider the chain complex (after defining differentials to be the sums of alternating face maps) $$\Delta^{op}\xrightarrow{X_\bullet}\Gamma\xrightarrow{L(A,M)}k\textrm{-mod}$$ or similarly the cochain complex (see \cite{MR2383113}) $$\Delta^{op}\xrightarrow{X_\bullet}\Gamma\xrightarrow{\mathcal{H}(A,M)} k\textrm{-mod}.$$ The resulting homologies are referred to as higher order Hochschild homology and higher order Hochschild cohomology respectively. To see how this generalizes traditional Hochschild (co)homology we consider the minimal simplicial decomposition of the pointed simplicial set $S^1_\bullet \colon \Delta^{op}\rightarrow \Gamma$ (with one non-degenerate $1$-simplex). We have a simplicial $k$-module $$\Delta^{op}\xrightarrow{S_\bullet^1} \Gamma \xrightarrow{L(A,M)} k\textrm{-mod}$$ which gives the Hochschild chain complex. The associated cochain complex $\Delta^{op}\xrightarrow{S_\bullet^1}\Gamma \xrightarrow{\mathcal{H}(A,M)} k\textrm{-mod}$ is the Hochschild cochain complex. The resulting homologies are known as Hochschild homology of $A$ with coefficients in $M$ and Hochschild cohomology of $A$ with coefficients in $M$ respectively. Hochschild (co)homology and higher order Hochschild (co)homology have been shown to be incredibly useful tools for a variety of concepts. Hochschild cohomology and higher order Hochschild cohomology have been used to study deformations of algebras and modules (for example see \cite{MR0161898}, \cite{MR0171807}, \cite{MR981619}, \cite{MR551624}, \cite{MR1217970}, \cite{MR3465889} and \cite{MR2153227}). The ability to use higher order Hochschild cohomology for additional deformations is a primary inspiration for this work. One has to wonder if deformations of noncommutative algebras would be possible in the higher order setting and this paper seeks to provide those studying deformation theory with an answer about the types of algebras allowed. In addition to being useful in studying deformation theory, in 1976 Dennis developed a map from K-theory to Hochschild homology which was benefited by the introduction of topological Hochschild homology in \cite{bokstedt} by B{\"o}kstedt in 1985 as an answer to Goodwillie's conjecture (see \cite{MR3013261}). In addition, the algebraic structures of Hochschild (co)homology, which include the Deligne conjecture, have been of great interest (see a treatment by Tradler and Zeinalian for example \cite{MR2184812} and \cite{MR2353864}). One thing that can be noticed when considering the history of Hochschild cohomology is that traditional Hochschild (co)homology is of any associative $k$-algebra, $A$ with coefficients in any $A$-bimodule, $M,$ however higher order Hochschild (co)homology was restricted to commutative $k$-algebras with coefficients in symmetric $A$-bimodules. In \cite{MR3338542} the author generalizes the higher order Hochschild construction to have coefficients in not necessarily symmetric multimodules (see Definition \ref{multimodule}). The modules able to be used depend heavily on the simplicial sets that the (co)chain complexes are built over. In this paper we aim to generalize higher order Hochschild (co)homology to work with not necessarily commutative algebras and not necessarily symmetric multimodules. In particular, we will show that simplicial sets allow such a generalization to noncommutative algebras if and only if they are one dimensional. We will do so by demonstrating the best case scenario for each simplicial set. Our construction for all arbitrary simplicial sets is in line with Pirashvili and Richter's construction in \cite{MR1899698} (see Subsection \ref{PR}) where they gave a description of a simplicial noncommutative circle as a functor from the simplicial category, $\Delta^{op}$ to the category of finite noncommutative sets, which allowed them to construct Hochschild (co)homology (as well as other homologies of functors) with not necessarily commutative algebras and not necessarily symmetric bimodules. While this paper is focused on simplicial sets and Pirashvili's generalization, it is worth mentioning that there are additional equivalent generalizations. In particular, Lurie's topological chiral homology (see \cite{MR2555928}), which is equivalent to Francis's factorization homology (see \cite{MR3040746}) is a generalization of Hochschild homology, which associates to a n-framed manifold $N$ and little n-cubes algebra $A,$ a chain complex. When $N$ is $S^1,$ and $A$ is an associative algebra, it has been shown by both Lurie and Francis that the chain complex is equivalent to the traditional Hochschild chain complex. Furthermore, Ginot, Tradler and Zeinalian have shown in \cite{MR3173402} that for a commutative algebra $A$ and n-framed manifold $N,$ factorization/topological chiral homology is equivalent to the higher order Hochschild chain complex. For direct constructions of these chain complexes, see \cite{Markarian}. In \cite{MR3431668}, Ayala and Francis have even shown that there is an equivalence between the category of little n-cubes algebras and homology theories of n-framed manifolds via factorization homology. \subsection{Organization of Paper} In Section \ref{BACK}, we provide background knowledge about the authors previous work on coefficient modules. In Section \ref{notnec} we describe how to construct the higher order Hochschild cohomology cochain complex for algebras which are not necessarily commutative. We do so by describing the necessary characteristics a simplicial set must have in order to work with noncommutative algebras, which amounts to considering orderings on fibers of face maps. Our main Theorem is provided in Section \ref{SSTHATWORK}. It determines that the only simplicial sets that can work with noncommutative algebras are one dimensional. In Section \ref{second} we note that the construction in this paper can be extended to higher order Hochschild cohomology of pairs of simplicial sets from \cite{MR3566502}. \section{Background} \label{BACK} In this paper we fix a field $k$ and denote $\otimes_k$ by $\otimes$. We assume that the reader is familiar with simplicial sets and has some familiarity with Hochschild (co)homology. We hope that the introduction along with an extra explanation below provide a sufficient description of Hochschild (co)homology. \subsection{Higher Order Hochschild Cohomology} If we consider the definition of higher order Hochschild homology we notice that the action of $A$ on $M$ tells us what happens in the $M$ tensor factor of the codomain. The reason $M$ is not allowed to be a nonsymmetric bimodule is because it would be difficult in general to determine which of the two actions of $A$ on $M$ to choose for each face map. In addition, to get a simplicial $k$-module it is easier to satisfy the composition laws by choosing one action (which is forced to be both a left and right action since $A$ is commutative). In \cite{MR3338542} the author constructs a generalized version of higher order Hochschild cohomology which allows multimodule coefficients. In order to allow more actions for the coefficient modules and still get a cosimplicial $k$-module, we need to make action identifications. Before proceeding with the main Theorem from \cite{MR3338542}, we provide a definition of multimodules. \begin{definition} \label{multimodule} Let $A$ be a $k$-algebra. A \emph{left} $n$-\emph{multimodule} is an abelian group $M$ with $n$ distinct left $A$-module structures $\iota_i$ which commute in the sense that $\iota_i(a_i)\iota_j(a_j)m=\iota_j(a_j)\iota_i(a_i)m$ for all $a_i, a_j \in A, m \in M, 1\leq i \neq j \leq n.$ Similarly, a \emph{right} $n$-\emph{multimodule} is an abelian group $M$ with $n$ distinct right $A$-module structures $\rho_i$ which commute in the sense that $m \rho_i(a_i)\rho_j(a_j)=m\rho_j(a_j)\rho_i(a_i)$ for all $a_i, a_j \in A, m \in M, 1\leq i \neq j \leq n.$ Lastly, a \emph{left/right} $(l,r)$-\emph{multimodule} is an abelian group $M$ which has a left $l$-multimodule structure as well a right $r$-multimodule structure, where left and right actions commute in the sense that $(\iota_i(a_i)m)\rho_j(a_j)=\iota_i(a_i)(m\rho_j(a_j))$ for all $a_i, a_j \in A, m \in M, 1\leq i \leq n, 1\leq j \leq n.$ \end{definition} We will usually drop the $n$ or $(l,r)$ from our notation and simply call $M$ a multimodule. \begin{remark} There are times when the type of action (left/right) will be unknown. In these situations we let $\Lambda_i$ denote an action and we work to determine the type of action when the setting is clear. \end{remark} \begin{example} An $A$-bimodule $M$ has a left action and a right action so $M$ is an example of an $A$ left/right (1,1)-multimodule with two actions. \end{example} We now provide the main Theorem of \cite{MR3338542} which tells us how many actions each simplicial set is allowed by identifying certain actions. Note that when $A$ is commutative, any left action also satisfies the definition of a right action. The module below is just assumed to be a multimodule. \begin{theorem} \cite[1.1]{MR3338542} \label{higher} Let $A$ be a commutative $k$-algebra. Given a pointed simplicial set $X_{\bullet}$, there exists a cosimplicial $k$-module $(M,X)^{\bullet}$ associated to an $A$-module $M$ given by $$(M,X)^n= \hom_k (k \otimes_k \bigotimes\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_n\\ \sigma \neq \ast}}} A,M)$$ with coface and codegeneracy maps given by $$d_n^i f(1\otimes_k \bigotimes\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_{n+1}\\ \sigma \neq \ast}}}a_{\sigma})=\prod\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_{n+1}\\ d_i (\sigma)=\ast}}} (\Lambda_{(i,n)}^{\sigma}(a_{\sigma}))\cdot f(1\otimes_k \bigotimes\limits_{{\substack{\Omega\in X_n \\ \Omega \neq \ast}}} \prod\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_{n+1} \\ d_i(\sigma)=\Omega}}}a_{\sigma})$$ and $$s_n^i f(1\otimes_k \bigotimes\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_{n+1}\\ \sigma\neq\ast}}}a_{\sigma})=f(1\otimes_k\bigotimes\limits_{{\substack{\Omega \in X_{n+1} \\ \Omega \neq\ast}}} 1\cdot \prod\limits_{{\substack{\sigma \in X_n\\ s_i(\sigma)=\Omega}}}a_{\sigma})$$ if the actions $\Lambda_{(-,-)}^-$ on $M$ satisfy the following for simplices $\sigma, \Omega$ and $\mu$: \begin{itemize} \item[i)] $\Lambda_{(j,n+1)}^{\sigma} = \Lambda_{(i,n+1)}^{\sigma}$ if $\sigma \neq \ast , d_i (\sigma)=d_j(\sigma)=\ast$ and the dimension of $\sigma$ is at least 2 and $i<j.$ \item[ii)] $\Lambda_{(j,n+1)}^{\sigma}=\Lambda_{(j-1),n}^{\Omega}$ if $d_i(\sigma)=\Omega , d_j(\sigma)=\ast , d_{j-1}(\Omega)=\ast$ and the dimension of $\sigma$ is at least 2. \item[iii)] $\Lambda_{(i,n)}^{\Omega}=\Lambda_{(j-1,n)}^{\mu}$ if $d_i(\Omega)=\ast , d_{j-1}(\mu)=\ast$ and there exists a $\sigma$ of dimension at least 2 where $d_j(\sigma)=\Omega$, $d_i(\sigma)=\mu$ and $i<j.$ \item[iv)] $\Lambda_{(i,n)}^{\Omega}=\Lambda_{(i,n+1)}^{\sigma}$ if $d_i(\sigma)=\ast , d_i(\Omega)=\ast , d_j(\sigma)=\Omega$ and the dimension of $\sigma$ is at least 2. \end{itemize} where $\Lambda_{(i,n)}^\sigma (a)$ represents the $\Lambda_{(i,n)}^\sigma$ action of $a \in A$ whenever $0\leq i\leq 1,$ $\sigma \in X_{n+1}$ and $d_i(\sigma)=\ast$. \end{theorem} \section{Not Necessarily Commutative Algebras} \label{notnec} We would like to develop higher order Hochschild (co)homology to accept non-commutative algebras, but in order to do so we need to provide an order in which to multiply elements in the equation from Theorem \ref{higher}. In the following section we will determine algebras and modules allowed for higher order Hochschild cohomology and leave it to the reader to check that the same holds for homology. \begin{definition} Given a simplicial set $X_\bullet$ and a map $f\colon X_n\rightarrow X_m$, for an $f$-fiber $S=\{\sigma_i\| f(\sigma_i)=\tau\}$ for some $\tau \in X_m$ we refer to an ordering on $S$ as an \emph{f-ordering} of $S$. \end{definition} Now if we consider all $d_i$-orderings on the corresponding subsets of $X_n$ we see that this gives a way to multiply elements of our algebra for each $d_i$ if $A$ is not necessarily commutative (where products of elements in each tensor factor are multiplied with elements represented by smaller simplices on the left and elements represented by larger simplices on the right). The main issue is that in order for the associated cosimplicial $k$-module to satisfy the cosimplicial identities, we need the $d_i$-orderings to have some compatibilities. We start with the following remark. \begin{remark} For an two maps $f\colon X_n \rightarrow X_m$ and $g\colon X_m\rightarrow X_k$ we have two associated orders on $gf$-fibers. We have the $gf$-ordering, but we also have \emph{composition induced} orderings. In particular, if $\sigma_i$ and $\sigma_j$ are simplices in $X_n$ then $\sigma_i < \sigma_j$ in the composition induced ordering if and only if $\sigma_i < \sigma_j$ in the $f$-ordering or $f(\sigma_i)<f(\sigma_j)$ in the $g$-ordering otherwise $\sigma_j < \sigma_i$ in the composition induced ordering. \end{remark} \begin{definition} Given a simplicial set $X_\bullet$ with a choice of simplicial orderings for each composition of face maps. We say that $X_\bullet$ admits a \emph{not necessarily commutative multiplicative ordering} (which we denote NNCMO) if for each composition of face maps $f=d_{i_k}\cdots d_{i_1}\colon X_n\rightarrow X_{n-k}$ and $g=d_{i_{j+k}}\cdots d_{i_{k+1}}\colon X_{n-k}\rightarrow X_{n-j-k}$ the composition induced ordering from $gf$ agrees with the $gf$-ordering for all $gf$-fibers whose image under $gf$ is not the basepoint. \end{definition} We now have the following Theorem. \begin{theorem} Given a simplicial set $X_\bullet$, non-commutative algebra $A$ and $A$-multimodule (whose left actions can also be considered as right actions) $M,$ the Hochschild cosimplicial $k$-module $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ exists if and only if $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} From \cite{MR3338542} we see that if $A$ is a commutative algebra, then $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ exists. To see that $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ still exists when $A$ is not necessarily commutative and $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO, we first notice that the orderings of $X_\bullet$ give an ordering for the multiplication in each tensor factor for each coface map in $(A,M,X)^\bullet.$ It is straightforward to see that the compatibility of orderings, coming from the fact that $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO forces the composition of coface maps to be well defined with respect to the order in which elements in each tensor factor are to be multiplied. For the other direction, notice if $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ exists, then each coface map provides an ordering for the associated face maps in $X_\bullet.$ We see that these orderings must be compatible for $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ to be a well defined cosimplicial $k$-module, which implies that $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO. \end{proof} \begin{remark} It should be noted that this construction is not functorial. From the Theorem above, we see that higher order Hochschild cohomology with noncommutative algebras only works if the simplicial set that it is built over admits an NNCMO. \end{remark} \subsection{Relationship to Pirashvili and Richter's construction} \label{PR} In \cite{MR1899698}, Pirashvili and Richter use a similar approach when defining functor homology. Starting with the categories of noncommutative finite sets, $\mathcal{F}(as)$ and pointed noncommutative finite sets $\Gamma (as),$ they show that the traditional Hochschild chain complex is given by the composition of functors $$L(A,M)\circ \hat{C}\colon \Delta^{op}\rightarrow \Gamma (as)\rightarrow k\textrm{-mod}$$ where $\mathcal{F}(as)$ and $\Gamma (as)$ are defined to be the categories of finite sets $\mathcal{F}$ and pointed finite sets $\Gamma$ with the property that maps have a total ordering on preimages and $\hat{C}$ is a lifting of the pointed simplicial circle $C\colon \Delta^{op}\rightarrow \Gamma.$ This construction is very similar to the way the current paper considers simplicial sets which admit an NNCMO. In fact, any simplicial set $X_\bullet$ which has a lifting to $\hat{X}_\bullet \colon \Delta^{op}\rightarrow \Gamma (as)$ has the property that $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ is a cosimplicial $k$-module for any associative algebra $A.$ The main difference between the approach in \cite{MR1899698} and the approach here is that it is conceivable that $X_\bullet$ can admit an NNCMO without inducing $f$-orderings on the subsets of $X_n$ whose image is the basepoint. This does not guarantee a lifting $\hat{X}_\bullet \colon \Delta^{op}\rightarrow \Gamma (as).$ We show that the absence of an $f$-ordering on such subsets requires $M$ to have a specific type of action in the next subsection. In addition, the main goal of Pirashvili and Richter was to construct a generalization of Hochschild and cyclic homology, while the goal in the present paper is to provide a description of simplicial sets which still work with noncommutative algebras. We determine an exact list of simplicial sets in Section \ref{SSTHATWORK} by using this approach. \begin{remark} The category $\mathcal{F}(as)$ is isomorphic to the category $\Delta S$ of Fiedorowicz and Loday in \cite{MR998125} \end{remark} \subsection{Module actions} Before getting to the main Theorem which determines precisely which simplicial sets allow noncommutative algebras, we will consider what multimodule actions arise if $A$ is noncommutative. For a commutative algebra $A$ and $A$-module $M,$ it can be seen that any left action is also by definition a right action (we will denote such an action as an \emph{lr action}), but for noncommutative algebras, coefficient modules need not have lr actions. To see what actions on coefficient modules need not be lr actions we consider the following proposition. \begin{proposition} For the cosimplicial $k$-module $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ suppose there exists $\sigma < \tau \in X_n$ with $d_{i_k}\cdots d_{i_1}(\sigma)=d_{i_k}\cdots d_{i_1}(\tau)=\omega \neq \ast$ with $d_{i_r}\cdots d_{k+1} (\omega)=\ast$ and $d_{r-1}\cdots d_{k+1} (\omega)\neq \ast$ then $\Lambda_{(i_r,n-r)}^{d_{r-1}\cdots d_{k+1}(\omega)}$ is a \begin{itemize} \item left action if there exists a set of maps $d_{j_r}\cdots d_{j_1}=d_{i_r} \cdots d_{i_1}$ with the property that $d_{j_{r-l}}\cdots d_{j_{1}}(\tau)=\ast$ but $d_{j_{r-l}}\cdots d_{j_{l}}(\sigma)\neq\ast$ for some $l<r.$ \item right action if there exists a set of maps $d_{j_r} \cdots d_{j_1}=d_{i_r}\cdots d_{i_1}$ with the property that $d_{j_{r-l}}\cdots d_{j_{l}}(\sigma)=\ast$ but $d_{j_{r-l}}\cdots d_{j_{l}}(\tau)\neq\ast$ for some $l<r.$ \item lr action if $\Lambda^{d_{j_{r-1}}\cdots d_{j_{k+1}}(\omega)}_{(i_r,n-r)}$ is both a right and left action. \end{itemize} \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Let $\sigma , \tau$ and $\omega$ be the simplicies from the proposition above. We will prove the proposition for a left action, but note that an analogous proof works for right actions. We can assume that there exists $1\leq t <s <r$ and $1\leq w <r$ so that $$d_{j_s}\cdots d_{j_1}(\sigma)=\ast$$ $$d_{j_{s-1}}\cdots d_{j_{1}}(\sigma)\neq \ast$$ $$d_{j_t}\cdots d_{j_1}(\tau)=\ast$$ $$d_{j_{t-1}}\cdots d_{j_{1}}(\tau)\neq \ast$$ and from \cite{MR3338542} $\Lambda^{d_{j_{s-1}}\cdots d_{j_{1}}(\sigma)}_{(j_s,n-s)}=\Lambda^{d_{j_{t-1}}\cdots d_{j_{1}}(\tau)}_{(j_t,n-t)}=\Lambda^{d_{j_{r-1}}\cdots d_{j_{k+1}}(\omega)}_{(i_r,n-r)}$ which we will simply denote as $\Lambda ,$ but $\delta^{j_1}\cdots \delta^{j_r}f(-)=\delta^{i_1}\cdots \delta^{i_r}f(-)$ and among other elements, we see that on the left we have $a_\tau$ acting of $f(-)$ followed by $a_\sigma$ acting on $a_\tau \cdot f(-)$ and on the right we have $a_\sigma a_\tau$ acting on $f(-)$ so we have $a_\sigma(a_\tau f(-) = (a_\sigma a_\tau )f(-)$ so $\Lambda$ is a left action. \end{proof} This gives whether an action $\Lambda$ is left/right or an lr action from the perspective of each simplex. Recall from \cite{MR3338542} that there are many action identifications so to determine if $\Lambda$ need only be left/right we need to actually consider all action identifications i.e. if $\Lambda^\sigma =\Lambda^\tau$ and $\Lambda^\sigma$ is a left action while $\Lambda^\tau$ is a right action, then they are both the same lr action. \begin{theorem} Let $X_\bullet$ be a simplicial set with an NNCMO. Let $A$ be a not necessarily commutative algebra and $M$ be an $A$-multimodule. Let $C$ be the set of possible distinct actions by $X_\bullet$ (with whether the action is left or right or lr indicated) and $D$ be the set of actions of $A$ on $M.$ Let $f\colon C \rightarrow D$ be a map of sets which preserves action type, then $(A,M,X)^\bullet$ exists where each action $\Lambda^\sigma$ of $A$ on $M$ is determined by $f.$ \end{theorem} The proof of this is a straight forward check that the cosimplicial identities hold so it is left to the reader. \section{Simplicial sets that work} \label{SSTHATWORK} In general, given a simplicial set $X_\bullet,$ it seems that it should be a daunting task to determine if $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO. Unfortunately, it turns out that very few simplicial sets admit an NNCMO. We start by showing which simplicial sets do not. For a motivating example, we consider a simplicial model for $S^2$ \begin{proposition} \label{SPHERE} The minimal simplicial decomposition of $S^2$ with one nondegenerate $0$-simplex and one nondegenerate $2$-simplex does not admit an NNCMO. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} Consider the $4$-simplices $[00112], [00122], [01122], [01112].$ Each of these simplices is carried to the $2$-simplex $[012]$ by the composition of face maps $d_2d_1=d_1d_3.$ We have a $d_1$-ordering for the sets $\{[00112],[01112]\}$ and $\{[00122],[01122]\}$, but there is also a $d_3$-ordering for the sets $\{[00112],[00122]\}$ and $\{[01122],[01112]\}.$ It can be seen that no ordering of these four simplicies for $d_2d_1=d_1d_3$ will agree with both the $d_3$-ordering and the $d_1$-ordering. \end{proof} One might guess that if $S^2$ does not admit an NNCMO, then it may not be possible for any simplicial set of dimension equal or greater than 2 to admit an NNCMO. This brings us to the main Theorem. \begin{theorem} \label{MAIN} Let $X_\bullet$ be a finite simplicial set, then $X_\bullet$ admits an NNCMO if and only if $X_\bullet$ is a one dimensional simplicial set, so $HH_{X_\bullet}^\ast(A,M)$ exists when $A$ is noncommutative if and only if the simplicial sets are one dimensional. \end{theorem} Before proving Theorem \ref{MAIN}, let us consider examples of some one dimensional simplicial sets which do admit an NNCMO. We start by describing a ``nicer" ordering on fibers of face maps. \begin{definition} We say that a pointed simplicial set $X_\bullet$ has a cyclic ordering if for every $n\geq 1,$ each set $X_n \smallsetminus \{\ast\}$ has an ordering with the property that if $\sigma , \tau \in X_n \smallsetminus \{\ast\}$ ($n\geq 2$) with $\sigma <\tau$ then $d_i(\sigma) \leq d_i(\tau)$ for all $0\leq i \leq n$ \end{definition} \begin{remark} It is an easy check to see that any set $X_\bullet$ which admits a cyclic ordering also admits an NNCMO, furthermore whether an action is left or right is also simple to see. \end{remark} To motivate a proof that all one dimensional simplicial sets admit an NNCMO, we start with the following. \begin{proposition} Let $X_\bullet$ be the minimal simplicial decomposition of $\bigvee_{i\in I} S^1,$ then $X_\bullet$ has a cyclic ordering. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} First notice that $X_\bullet$ has one $1$-simplex for each copy of $S^1$ and one degenerate $1$-simplex for the basepoint $\ast.$ The $1$-simplices of $X_1 \smallsetminus \{\ast\}$ can be ordered in any way, so all we need to do is order $X_n$ for larger $n.$ This can be done by giving a cyclic ordering for each sub-simplicial set $S_\bullet^1.$ One such ordering is $$S_1^1 : [01]$$ $$S_2^1 : [001]<[011]$$ $$S_3^1 : [0001]<[0011]<[0111]$$ $$S_4^1 : [00001]<[00011]<[00111]<[01111]$$ \end{proof} We call the ordering above a cyclic ordering because we can actually order all of the $S^1$ $n$-simplices (including $\ast$ clockwise around a circle as is done in Figure \ref{fig:cyclic} (starting with $\ast =[0...0]=[1...1]$) and see that face maps $d_i$ have the property that $d_i(\sigma)=d_i(\tau)$ if and only if $\sigma$ and $\tau$ are in the $n+1-i$ and $n+2-i$ places around the circle. From this, we can imagine that face maps essentially squeeze adjacent simplices together and do not change the order. \begin{remark} In the above ordering, $\Lambda^{[0...01]}$ is a right action, while $\Lambda^{[01...1]}$ is a left action. This demonstrates a fact that we are already aware of--traditional Hochschild cohomology has the ability to work with non-commutative algebras and not necessarily symmetric bi-modules as coefficient modules. \end{remark} \begin{figure} \centering \begin{tikzpicture} \draw (8,0.2) circle [radius=0.2]; \draw (8,1.7) circle [radius=0.5]; \draw (8,4.4) circle [radius=0.8]; \draw (8,7.7) circle [radius=1.1]; \node at (8,0) [below] {[0]=[1]}; \node at (8,1.2) [below] {[00]=[11]}; \node at (8,2.2) [above] {[01]}; \node at (8,3.6) [below] {[000]=[111]}; \node at (7.3,4.8) [left] {[001]}; \node at (8.7,4.8) [right] {[011]}; \node at (8,6.6) [below] {[0000]=[1111]}; \node at (8,8.8) [above] {[0011]}; \node at (6.9,7.7) [left] {[0001]}; \node at (9.1,7.7) [right] {[0111]}; \end{tikzpicture}\caption{Cyclic ordering for $S_\bullet^1$} \label{fig:cyclic} \end{figure} We now proceed with the proof of Theorem \ref{MAIN}. \begin{proof}[of Theorem \ref{MAIN}] Suppose $X_\bullet$ is $n$-dimensional where $n\geq 2$ and let $\sigma$ be a nondegenerate simplex whose dimension is greater than or equal to 2. Following a similar argument to the one in the proof of Proposition \ref{SPHERE} we see that the simplices $s_2s_0\sigma , s_3s_0 \sigma , s_3s_1 \sigma , s_1s_1 \sigma $ are carried to $\sigma$ via $d_2d_1 =d_1d_3.$ We have a $d_1$-ordering for the sets $\{s_2s_0\sigma , s_1s_1 \sigma\}$ and $\{s_3s_0\sigma , s_3s_1\sigma\}$ but we also have a $d_3$-ordering for the sets $\{s_2s_0\sigma ,s_3s_0\sigma \}$ and $\{s_3s_1\sigma ,s_1s_1\sigma\}.$ As in the proof of Proposition \ref{SPHERE} we see that this will not allow $X_\bullet$ to admit an NNCMO. Now to see that any one dimensional simplicial set admits an NNCMO, we actually show that any one dimensional simplicial set has a cyclic ordering. Notice that we can represent any simplex as the composition of degeneracy maps on a $1$-simplex. Let us denote each simplex as follows: let $s_0s_3s_1s_1\sigma$ be denoted by $[001111]_\sigma$ if $\sigma$ is a nondegenerate $1$-simplex and $[000000]_\sigma$ otherwise. By ordering the $1$-simplices, we can induce an order on the $n$-simplices by first ordering by subscript, so $[---\cdots-]_\sigma <[---\cdots-]_\tau$ if $\sigma <\tau$ in $X_1.$ We then order alphabetically. For example, if $\sigma <\tau$ in $X_1$ then $[001]_\sigma <[011]_\sigma <[001]_\tau <[011]_\tau$ in $X_2.$ It is straight forward that this provides $X_\bullet$ with a cyclic ordering. \end{proof} \section{Secondary Hochschild cohomology and pairs of simplicial sets} \label{second} In \cite{MR3465889} Staic introduced secondary Hochschild cohomology which was used to study $B$-algebra structures on $A[t]$ given $k$-algebras $A$ and $B$ with a map $\varepsilon \colon B \rightarrow A.$ In \cite{MR3566502} the author and Staic show that secondary Hochschild cohomology is a version of higher order Hochschild cohomology by generalizing Hochschild cohomology to pairs of simplicial sets $X_\bullet \subseteq Y_\bullet.$ To extend noncommutativity to pairs of algebras $A$ and $B$ we first consider the simplicial set $Y_\bullet.$ If $Y_\bullet$ is one dimensional, then $A$ and $B$ can both be non-commutative. If $Y_\bullet$ is not one dimensional $B$ must be commutative. In the second case, we then consider the simplicial set $X_\bullet.$ If $X_\bullet$ is one dimensional, then $A$ need not be commutative, however $\varepsilon (B)$ must be in the center of $A.$ For module coefficients, we simply consider where the action comes from in the simplicial set. \section*{Acknowledgments} I would like to thank Andrew Salch and Mihai Staic for conversations concerning this research. I would also like to thank my family for their continued support; in particular, I am grateful to my loving wife Kendall, son Amos and daughter Flora.
\section{Introduction} Securing data remains a concern for every individual and every organization on the globe. In telecommunication, cryptography is one of the studies that permits the secure transfer of information \cite{IEEE_standard} over the Internet. Prime numbers have special properties that make them of fundamental importance in cryptography. The core of the Internet security is based on protocols, such as SSL and TSL \cite{rescorla2001ssl} released in 1994 and persist as the basis for securing different aspects of today's Internet \cite{clark2013sok}. The Rivest-Shamir-Adleman encryption method \cite{rivest1978method}, released in 1978, uses asymmetric keys for exchanging data. A secret key $S_{k}$ and a public key $P_{k}$ are generated by the recipient with the following property: A message enciphered by $P_{k}$ can only be deciphered by $S_{k}$ and vice versa. The public key is publicly transmitted to the sender and used to encipher data that only the recipient can decipher. RSA is based on generating two large prime numbers, say $P$ and $Q$ and its security is enforced by the fact that albeit the fact that the product of these two primes $n = P \times Q $ is published, it is of enormous difficulty to factorize $n$. A semiprime or (2 almost prime) or ( pq number) is a natural number that is a product of 2 primes not necessary distinct. The semiprime is either a square of prime or square free. Also the square of any prime number is a semiprime number. Mathematicians have been interested in many aspect of the semiprime numbers. In \cite{ishmukhametov2014distrubution} authors derive a probabilistic function $g(y)$ for a number $y$ to be semiprime and an asymptotic formula for counting $g(y)$ when $y$ is very large. In \cite{doss2013approximation} authors are interested in factorizing semiprimes and use an approximation to $\pi(n)$ the function that counts the prime numbers $\leq n$. While mathematicians have achieved many important results concerning distribution of prime numbers. Many are interested in semiprimes properties as to counting prime and semiprime numbers not exceeding a given number. From \cite{weisstein2003semiprime,conway2008counting,goldston2009small}, the formula for $\pi ^{(2)}(N)$ that counts the semiprime numbers not exceeding $N$ is given by (\ref{eq:spc}). \begin{equation} \label{eq:spc} \pi ^{(2)}(N)=\sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left( \sqrt{N}\right) }\left[ \pi \left( \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right) -i+1\right] \end{equation} \noindent This formula is based on the primes P$_{1}$,P$_{2},....,$P$_{\pi \left( \sqrt{N} \right) }\leq \sqrt{N}$ . Our contribution is of several folds. First, we present a formula to test the semiprimality of a given integer, this formula is used to build a new function $\pi ^{(2)}(N)$ that counts the semiprimes not exceeding a given integer $N$ using only P$_{1}$,P$_{2},....$P$_{\pi \left( \sqrt[3]{N}\right) }\leq \sqrt[3]{N}$. Second, we present an explicit formula that identify the $n^{th}$ semiprime number. And finally we give a formula that finds the next semiprime to any given number. \section{Semiprimality Test} \label{sec:spt} With the same complexity ${O}(\sqrt{x})$ as the Sieve of Eratosthenes to test a primality of a given number $x$, we employ the Euclidean Algorithm and the fact that every prime number greater than 3 has the form $6k \pm 1$ and without previous knowledge about any prime, we can test the primality of $x \geq 8$ using the following procedure : Define the following functions \begin{equation} T_{0}(x)=\left\lfloor \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\lceil \frac{x}{2} -\left\lfloor \frac{x}{2}\right\rfloor \right\rceil +\left\lceil \frac{x}{3} -\left\lfloor \frac{x}{3}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right) \right\rfloor \end{equation} \begin{equation} T_{1}(x)=\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{x}}{6} \right\rceil }\sum_{k=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{x}}{6}\right\rceil}\left\lceil \frac{x}{6k-1}-\left\lfloor \frac{x}{6k-1}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right\rfloor \end{equation} \begin{equation} T_{2}(x)=\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{x}}{6} \right\rceil }\sum_{k=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{x}}{6}\right\rceil }\left\lceil \frac{x}{6k+1}-\left\lfloor \frac{x}{6k+1}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right\rfloor \end{equation} \begin{equation} T(x)=\left\lfloor \frac{T_{0}+T_{1}+T_{2}}{3}\right\rfloor \end{equation} where $\left\lfloor x\right\rfloor $ and $\left\lceil x\right\rceil $ are the floor and the ceiling functions of the real number $x$ respectively. We have the following theorem which is analog to that appeared in \cite{kaddoura2012formula} with slight modification and the details of the proof are exactly the same . \begin{theorem} \label{th:1} Given any positive integer $x > 7$, then \begin{enumerate} \item $x$ is prime if and only if $T(x) =1$ \item $x$ is composite if and only if $T(x) = 0$ \item For $x >7$ \begin{equation} \label{eq:1} \pi (x)=4+\sum_{j=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{x-7}{6} \right\rceil} T(6j+7) +\sum_{j=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{x-5}{6} \right\rceil } T(6j+5) \end{equation} \end{enumerate} counts the number of primes not exceeding $x$. \end{theorem} Now we proof the following Lemma: \begin{lemma} \label{l:1} If $N$ is a positive integer with at least 3 factors, then there exist a prime $p$ such that: \begin{equation} p\leq \sqrt[3]{N} \mbox{ and $p$ divides $N$} \end{equation} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $N$ has at least 3 factors then it can be represented as : $N=a.b.c$ with the assumption $1<a\leq b\leq c$, we deduce that $N\geq a^{3}$ or $a\leq \sqrt[3]{N}$ . By the fundamental theorem of arithmetic, $\exists $ a prime number $p$ such that $p$ divides $a$. That means $\ p\leq a\leq \sqrt[3]{N},$ but $p$ divides $a$ and $a$ divides $N$, hence $p$ divides $N$ with the property $p\leq \sqrt[3]{N}.$ \end{proof} Lemma \ref{l:1} tells that, if $N$ is not divisible by any prime $p\leq \sqrt[3]{N}$, then $N$ has at most 2 prime factors, i.e., $N$ is prime or semiprime . Using the proposed primality test defined by $T(x)$ we construct the semiprimality test as follows: For $x \geq 8$, define the functions $K_{1}(x)$ and $K_{2}(x)$ as follows: \begin{eqnarray} K_{1}(x) &=&\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor )}\sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right \rfloor \right ) }\ \left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil -\frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil \right\rfloor \\ K_{2}(x) &=&\left\lceil \frac{1}{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor ) }\sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor \right ) }\left\lfloor \frac{x}{p_{i}}-\left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T\left( \frac{x}{p_{i}} \right ) \right\rceil \end{eqnarray} where $\pi (x)$ is the classical prime counting function presented in (\ref{eq:1}), $T(x)$ is the same as in Theorem \ref{th:1}. Obviously $T(x)$ is independent of any previous knowledge of the prime numbers . \begin{lemma} \label{l:2} If $K_{1}(x)=0$, then $x$ is divisible by some prime $p_i \leq \sqrt[3]{x}$ . \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For $K_{1}(x)=0$ ,we have $\left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}} \right\rceil -\frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil =0$ \ for some $p_{i}$, then $x$ is divisible by $p_{i}$ for some $p_{i}$ $\leq \sqrt[3]{x}$. \end{proof} \begin{lemma} \label{l:3} If $K_{1}(x)=1$ ,then $x$ has at most 2 prime factors exceeding $\sqrt[3]{x}.$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $K_{1}(x)=1$, then $\left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil - \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil =1$ for all $p_{i}$ $\leq \sqrt[3]{x}$ therefore by lemma \ref{l:1}, $x$ is not divisible by any prime $p_{i}$ $\leq \sqrt[3]{x},$ therefore $x$ has at most two prime factors exceeding $\sqrt[3]{x}.$ \end{proof} \begin{lemma} If $T(x)$ $=0$ and $K_{1}(x)$ $=1,$ then x is semiprime and $K_{2}(x)$ $=0.$ \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $K_{1}(x)=1$ , then $x$ has at most 2 prime factors but $T(x)=0$ which means that $x$ is composite, hence $x$ has exactly two prime factors and both factors are greater than $\ \sqrt[3]{x}$ and $\left\lfloor \frac{x}{p_{i}}-\left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor =0$ for each prime $p_{i} \leq \sqrt[3]{x}$, therefore $K_{2}(x)=0$. \end{proof} \begin{lemma} If $T(x)=0$ and $K_{1}(x)=0$ , then $x$ is a semiprime number if and only if $K_{2}(x)=1$. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} If $T(x)=0$ and $K_{1}(x)=0$ then $x$ divides a prime $p \leq \sqrt[3]{N}$, but $x$ is semiprime that means $x =pq$ and $q$ is prime number hence for prime $p_{i}=p$ and $x=pq$ we have: \begin{equation} \left\lfloor \frac{x}{p_{i}}-\left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T \left( \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}} \right\rceil \right)=\left\lfloor \frac{pq}{p}-\left\lceil \frac{pq}{p}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T\left( \left\lceil \frac{pq}{p}\right\rceil \right)=1 \end{equation} consequently $K_2(x) = 1$ because at least one of the terms is not zero. conversely , if $K_{2}(x)=1$ then $\left\lfloor \frac{x}{p_{i}}-\left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T \left( \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}} \right\rceil \right)$ is not zero for some $i$ and then $x = p_{i}q$ and $T \left( \left\lceil \frac{x}{p_{i}}\right\rceil \right)=1$ for some prime $p_{i}\leq \sqrt[3]{x}$ \ then $T \left( \left\lceil \frac{p_{i}q}{p_{i}} \right\rceil \right) =T(q)=1$ hence $q$ is a prime number and $x$ is a semiprime number . \end{proof} We are now in a position to prove the following theorem that characterize the semiprime numbers. \begin{theorem} \label{th,2} ( Semiprimality Test ): Given any positive integer $x >7$, then $x$ is semiprime if and only if: \begin{enumerate} \item $T(x)=0$ and $K_{1}(x)=1$ \\ or \item $T(x)=0$, $K_{1}(x)=0$ and $K_{2}(x)=1$ \end{enumerate} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} If $x$ is semiprime then $x =pq$ where $p$ and $q$ are two primes . If $p$ and $q$ both greater than $\sqrt[3]{x}$ then $T(x)=0$ and \begin{equation} K_{1}(pq)= \left\lfloor \frac{1}{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{pq}\right\rfloor \right ) } \sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{pq}\right\rfloor \right ) }\ \left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{pq}{p_{i}} \right\rceil -\frac{pq}{p_{i}}\right\rceil \right\rfloor = \left\lfloor \frac{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{pq}\right\rfloor \right ) }{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{pq} \right\rfloor \right ) } \right\rfloor=1 \end{equation} if $x=p\textprime q\textprime$ where $p\textprime$ and $q\textprime$ are two primes such that $p\textprime \leq \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor$ and $q\textprime > \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor$ then $T(x)=0$ and \begin{equation} K_{1}(p\textprime q\textprime)=\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{p\textprime q\textprime} \right\rfloor \right ) } \sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{p\textprime q\textprime }\right\rfloor \right ) }\ \left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime} \right\rceil -\frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime}\right\rceil \right\rfloor =0 \end{equation} because $\left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime} \right\rceil -\frac{\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime}\right\rceil =0$ and \begin{equation} K_{2}(p\textprime q\textprime)=\left\lceil \frac{1}{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{p\textprime q\textprime} \right\rfloor \right ) } \sum_{i=1}^{\pi \left ( \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{p\textprime q\textprime} \right\rfloor \right ) }\left\lfloor \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime}-\left\lceil \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime} \right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T(\frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime})\right\rceil =1 \end{equation} because $\left\lfloor \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime}-\left\lceil \frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime} \right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T(\frac{p\textprime q\textprime}{p\textprime})= \left\lfloor q\textprime -q\textprime +1\right\rfloor T(q\textprime)=1.$ The converse can be proved by the same arguments. \end{proof} \begin{corollary} A positive integer x $>7$ is semiprime if and only if $K_{1}(x)+K_{2}(x)-T(x)=1.$ \end{corollary} \begin{proof} A direct consequence of the previous theorem and lemmas. \end{proof} \section{Semiprime Counting Function} \label{sec:spcf} Notice that the triple $(T(x), K_{1}(x), K_{2}(x))$ have only the following 4 possible cases only: \begin{description} \item[Case 1:] \ \ $(T(x),K_{1}(x),K_{2}(x))=(1,1,0)$ indicates that $x$ is prime number. \item[Case 2:] \ \ $(T(x),K_{1}(x),K_{2}(x))=(0,1,0)$ indicates that $x$ is semiprime in the form $x=pq$ where $p$ and $q$ are primes such that $\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor < p \leq \left\lfloor \sqrt[2]{x}\right\rfloor $ and $q \geq \left\lfloor \sqrt[2]{x}\right\rfloor$. \item[Case 3:] \ \ $(T(x),K_{1}(x),K_{2}(x))=(0,0,1)$ indicates that $x$ is semiprime in the form $x=pq$ where $p$ and $q$ are primes such that $p\leq\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x}\right\rfloor $ and $q=\frac{x}{p}\geq \frac{x}{\sqrt[3]{x}} \geq \left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{x^{2}}\right\rfloor$. \item[Case 4:] \ \ $(T(x),K_{1}(x),K_{2}(x))=(0,0,0)$ indicates that $x$ has at least 3 prime factors . \end{description} Using the previous observations, lemmas as well as Theorem \ref{th,2} and corollary, we prove the following theorem that includes a function that counts all semiprimes not exceeding a given number N . \begin{theorem} For $N \geq 8$ then \begin{equation} \pi ^{(2)}(N)=2+\sum_{x=8}^{N}(K_{1}(x)+K_{2}(x)-T(x)) \end{equation} is a function that counts all semiprimes not exceeding $N$. \end{theorem} \section{$N^{th}$ Semiprime Formula} The first few semiprimes in ascending order are $sp_{1}=4, \ sp_{2}=6, \ sp_{3}=9, \ sp_{4}=10, \ sp_{5}=14, \ sp_{6}=15, \ sp_{7}=21, \ etc$ We define the function $G(n,x)=\left\lfloor \frac{2n}{n+x+1}\right\rfloor $ where $n = 1, 2, 3... $ and $x = 0, 1, 2, 3...$ clearly \begin{equation} G(n,x)=\left\lfloor \frac{2n}{n+x+1}\right\rfloor =\left\{ \begin{array}{cc} 1 & x<n \\ 0 & x\geq \end{array \right. \end{equation} knowing that the bound of the $n^{th}$ prime is $P_{n}\leq 2n\log n$ \cite{robin1983estimation} , we can say that \\ the $n^{th}$ semiprime $sp_{n} \leq 2$ $P_{n}\leq 4n\log n$ \begin{theorem} For $x \geq 8$ and $n > 2$, $sp_{n}$ the $n^{th}$ semiprime is given by the formula \end{theorem} \begin{equation} sp_{n}=8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln n \right\rfloor }\left\lfloor \frac{2 }{n+1+\pi ^{(2)}(x)}\right\rfloor =8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln n \right\rfloor }\left\lfloor \frac{2n}{n+3+\sum \limits_{m=8}^{x} \left (K_{1}(m)+K_{2}(m) - T(m) \right )} \right\rfloor \end{equation} The formula in full is given by : \begin{equation} \resizebox{.9\hsize}{!} {$ sp_{n}=8+\sum \limits_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln n\right\rfloor }\left\lfloor \frac{2 }{n+3+\sum \limits_{m=8}^{x} \left (\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{m \right\rfloor )}\sum \limits_{i=1}^{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{m}\right\rfloor )}\ \left\lceil \left\lceil \frac{m}{p_{i}}\right\rceil -\frac{m}{p_{i} \right\rceil \right\rfloor +\left\lceil \frac{1}{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{ }\right\rfloor )}\sum \limits_{i=1}^{\pi (\left\lfloor \sqrt[3]{m}\right\rfloor )}\left\lfloor \frac{m}{p_{i}}-\left\lceil \frac{m}{p_{i}}\right\rceil +1\right\rfloor T(\frac{m}{p_{i}})\right\rceil -T(m) \right)}\right\rfloor $} \end{equation} where $T(m)$ is given by \begin{dmath} T(m)=\left\lfloor \frac{T_{0}(m)+T_{1}(m)+T_{2}(m)}{3}\right\rfloor =\left\lfloor \frac{1}{3} \left ( \left\lfloor \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\lceil \frac{ }{2}-\left\lfloor \frac{m}{2}\right\rfloor \right\rceil +\left\lceil \frac{ }{3}-\left\lfloor \frac{m}{3}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right) \right\rfloor +\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{m}}{6 \right\rceil }\sum_{k=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{m}}{6}\right\rceil }\left\lceil \frac{m}{6k-1}-\left\lfloor \frac{m}{6k-1}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right\rfloor +\left\lfloor \frac{1}{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{m }{6}\right\rceil }\sum_{k=1}^{\left\lceil \frac{\sqrt{m}}{6}\right\rceil }\left\lceil \frac{m}{6k+1}-\left\lfloor \frac{m}{6k+1}\right\rfloor \right\rceil \right\rfloor \right ) \right\rfloor \end{dmath} \begin{proof} For the $n^{th}$ semiprime $sp_{n}$, $\pi ^{(2)}(sp_{n})=n$ and for $x< sp_{i}$, $pi^{(2)}(x) < pi^{(2)}(sp_i) = i \\ \forall \; i = 1 , 2 , 3 , ...., n$. Using the properties of the function $G(n,x)=\left\lfloor \frac{2n}{n+x+ }\right\rfloor =\left\{ \begin{array}{cc} 1 & x<n \\ 0 & x\geq \end{array \right. $ \end{proof} we compute \begin{dmath} 8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln \right\rfloor }\left\lfloor \frac{2n} n+1+\pi ^{(2)}(x)}\right\rfloor =8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln \right\rfloor }G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(x)) =8 + G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(8))+G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(9))+G(n,\pi^{(2)}(10))+...+G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(P_{n-1}))+.... \\ +G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(P_{n-1}+1))+........G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(P_{n})+G(n,\pi^{(2)}(P_{n}+1)+...\\ =8+1+1+1+...1+0+0+0+...=sp_{n} \end{dmath} where the last 1 in the summation is the value of $G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(sp_{n-1}))$ and then followed by $G(n,\pi ^{(2)}(sp_{n})=G(n,n)=0$ followed by zeros for the rest terms of the summation, hence \begin{equation} sp_{n}=8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln n\right\rfloor }G(n,\pi ^{2}(x))=8+\sum_{x=8}^{\left\lfloor 4n\ln n\right\rfloor }\left\lfloor \frac 2n}{n+1+\pi ^{(2)}(x)}\right\rfloor . \end{equation} As an example, computing the $5^{th}$ semiprime number gives $sp_{5}=8+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 14$ as shown in Table \ref{table:5th}. \begin{table}[h!] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|r \| r\|} \hline $\pi^2(8)=2 $&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(8)) = 1 $ \\ $\pi^2(9)=3 $&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(9)) = 1 $ \\ $\pi^2(10)=4$&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(10)) = 1$ \\ $\pi^2(11)=4$&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(11)) = 1 $ \\ $\pi^2(12)=4$&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(12)) = 1$ \\ $\pi^2(13)=4$&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(13)) = 1$ \\ $\pi^2(14)=5$&$ G(5 ,\pi^2(14)) = 0$ \\\hline \end{tabular} \caption{Computing the $5^{th}$ semiprime} \label{table:5th} \end{table} \section{Next Semiprine} In our previous work \cite{kaddoura2012formula}, we introduced a formula that finds the next prime to a given number. In this section, we use an enhancement formula to find the next prime to a given number and we introduce a formula to compute the next semiprime to any given number. Recall that the integer $x\geq 8$ is a semiprime number if and only if K_{1}(x)+K_{2}(x)-T(x)=1$ and if $x$ is not semiprime then $\ K_{1}(x)+K_{2}(x)-T(x)=0.$ Now we introduce an algorithm that computes the next semiprime to any given positive integer $N$. \begin{theorem} If $N$ is any positive integer greater than 8 then the next semiprime to $N$ is given by: \begin{equation} NextSP(N)=N+1+\sum_{i=1}^{N}\left( \prod\limits_{x=N+1}^{x=N+i} \left (1+T(x)-K_{1}(x)-K_{2}(x) \right)\right) \end{equation} where $T(x),K_{1}(x),K_{2}(x)$ are the functions defined in Section \ref{sec:spt} \end{theorem} \begin{proof} We compute the summation: \begin{dmath} \sum_{i=1}^{N}\left( \prod\limits_{x=N+1}^{x=N+i}(1+T(x)-K_{1}(x)-K_{2}(x))\right) \\ =\sum_{i=1}^{NextSP(N)-N-1}\left( \prod\limits_{x=N+1}^{x=N+i}(1+T(x)-K_{1}(x)-K_{2}(x))\right) +\sum_{i=NextSP(N)-N}^{N}\left( \prod\limits_{x=N+1}^{x=N+i}(1+T(x)-K_{1}(x)-K_{2}(x))\right) \\ =\sum_{i=1}^{NextP(N)-N-1}(1)+\sum_{i=NextP(N)-N}^{N}(0)=NextSP(N)-N-1 \end{dmath} hence \begin{equation} NextSP(N)=N+1+\sum_{i=1}^{N}\left( \prod\limits_{x=N+1}^{x=N+i}(1+T(x)-K_{1}(x)-K_{2}(x))\right) \end{equation} \end{proof} \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|r r r\|} \hline $x$ & $\pi^2(x)$ & Time in seconds \\ \hline \hline 10 & 4 & 0.00 \\ 100 & 34 & 0.01 \\ 1000 & 299 & 0.1 \\ 10000 & 2625 & 3.0 \\ 100000 & 23378 & 50\\ 1000000 & 210035 & 1091\\ 10000000 & 1904324 & 22333\\ 100000000 & 17427258 & 508840\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Testing on $\pi^{(2)}(x)$} \label{table:pie2(n)} \end{table} \section{Results} We implemented the proposed functions using MATLAB and complete the testing on an Intel Core i7-6700K with 8M cache and a clock speed of 4.0GHz. Table \ref{table:pie2(n)} shows the results related to $\pi^2(x)$ for some selected values of $x$. We have also computed few $n^{th}$ semiprimes as shown in Table \ref{table:nthsp}. \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|r r r\|} \hline $n$ & $sp_n$ & Time in seconds \\ \hline \hline 100 & 314 & 0.07\\ 200 & 669 & 0.24 \\ 300 & 1003 & 0.49 \\ 400 & 1355 & 0.86 \\ 500 & 1735 & 1.22 \\ 600 & 2098 & 1.89 \\ 700 & 2474 & 2.39 \\ 800 & 2866 & 3.40 \\ 900 & 3202 & 3.78 \\ 1000 & 3595 & 4.91\\ 5000 & 19643 & 105.72 \\ 10000 & 40882 & 579.01\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Testing on $n^{th}$ semiprimes} \label{table:nthsp} \end{table} And finally we show the next semiprimes to some selected integers in Table \ref{table:nextsp}. \begin{table}[ht!] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|r r r\|} \hline $n$ & $NextSP(n)$ & Time in seconds \\ \hline \hline 100 & 106 & 0.01\\ 200 & 201 & 0.02 \\ 300 & 301 & 0.04 \\ 400 & 403 & 0.07 \\ 500 & 501 & 0.09 \\ 1000 & 1003 & 0.31 \\ 5000 & 5001 & 5.92 \\ 10000 & 10001 & 22.38\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Testing on $NextSP(n)$ semiprimes} \label{table:nextsp} \end{table} \section{Conclusion} In this work, we presented new formulas for semiprimes. First, $\pi^{(2)}(n)$ that counts the number of semiprimes not exceeding a given number $n$. Our proposed formula requires knowing only the primes that are less or equal $\sqrt[3]{n}$ while existing formulas require at least knowing the primes that are less or equal $\sqrt[2]{n}$. We also present a new formulas to identify the $n^{th}$ semiprime and finally, a new formula that gives the next semiprime to any integer. \section{References} \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Introduction} Consider a measure preserving dynamical system $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$, where $\mathcal{X}\subset\mathbb{R}^d$, $f:\mathcal{X}\rightarrow \mathcal{X}$ is a measurable transformation, and $\mu$ is an $f$-invariant probability measure supported on $\mathcal{X}$. Given a measurable (observable) function $\phi:\mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ we consider the stationary stochastic process $X_1, X_2, \dots$ defined as \begin{equation}\label{eq:phi_o_f} X_i =\phi \circ f^{i-1}, \quad i \geq 1, \end{equation} and its associated maximum process $M_n$ defined as \begin{equation} \label{eq:max-process} M_n = \max(X_1,\dots,X_n). \end{equation} Under appropriate assumptions on the system $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$, there exist scaling constants $a_n>0$ and $b_n\in\mathbb{R}$ and a non-degenerate limit function $G(u)$ for which \begin{equation}\label{eq.Mn-limit} \lim_{n\to\infty}\mu\{x\in\mathcal{X}:\, a_n(M_n(x)-b_n)\leq u\}=G(u). \end{equation} Beyond the distributional limit established in \eqref{eq.Mn-limit}, here we consider the continuous time process $\{Y_n(t):t\geq 0\}$ defined by \begin{equation}\label{eq.Y-process} Y_n(t)= \begin{cases}a_n(M_{[nt]}-b_n) & t\geq 1/n;\\ a_n(X_1-b_n) & 0<t<1/n. \end{cases} \end{equation} For each $n\geq 1$, $Y_n(t)$ is a random graph with values in the Skorokhod space $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. Under suitable hypotheses on $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ we prove existence of a non-degenerate limit process $Y(t)$ so that $Y_n(t)\overset{{\small d}}{\to}Y(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ with respect to the Skorokhod $J_1$ metric. Here, $\overset{{\small d}}{\to}$ denotes weak convergence (or convergence in distribution). The limit process $Y(t)$ will be the so called \emph{extremal process} which we now define. \subsection{Extremal processes and weak convergence.} Consider a general probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{B},\mu)$, where $\mathcal{B}$ is the $\sigma$-algebra of sets in the sample space $\Omega$. If $X:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$ is a random variable, we let $F(u):=\mu\{X\leq u\}$, and define finite dimensional distributions: \begin{equation} F_{t_1,\ldots,t_k}\left(u_1,\ldots,u_k\right)= F^{t_1}\left(\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k}\{u_i\}\right) F^{t_2-t_1}\left(\bigwedge_{i=2}^{k}\{u_i\}\right)\cdots F^{t_k-t_{k-1}}(u_k), \end{equation} with $t_1<t_2<\cdots<t_k$, and $\wedge$ denoting the minimum operation. Suppose that $Y_{F}(t)$ is a stochastic process with these finite dimensional distributions, i.e. \begin{equation} \mu\{Y_F(t_1)\leq u_1,\ldots Y_F(t_k)\leq u_k\}=F_{t_1,\ldots,t_k}(u_1,\ldots,u_k). \end{equation} By the Kolmogorov extension theorem such a process exists and is called an \emph{extremal-$F$ process}. A version can be taken in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$, i.e. continuous to the right with left hand limits. It turns out that $Y_F(t)$ is a Markov jump process, see \cite{Embrechts, Res_weak, Resnick3}, and further properties include: \begin{itemize} \item For all $t,s>0$, $\mu\{Y_F(t+s)\leq x\mid Y_F(s)=y\}= F^t(x)\cdot 1_{\{x\geq y\}}$. \item For all $t,s>0$, $\mu\{Y_F(t+s)=Y_F(t)\mid Y_F(s)=y\}= F^t(y)$. Setting $Q(y)=-\log F(y)$ implies that the holding time in state $y$ is given by an exponential distribution with parameter $Q(y)$. \item If $\{t_i\}$ denotes the sequence of jump times (or points of discontinuity) for $Y_F(t)$ then \begin{equation} \mu\{Y_F(t_{i+1})\leq x\mid Y_F(t_i)=y\}= \begin{cases} 1-Q(x)/Q(y) & x>y;\\ 0 & \text{if $x<y$}. \end{cases} \end{equation} \end{itemize} Our main result is to show that for certain chaotic dynamical systems the process $Y_n(t)$ in \eqref{eq.Y-process} converges (weakly) to an extremal-$G$ process $Y_G(t)$. This is the first time extremal processes have been used in the dynamical systems context. The mode of convergence to the extremal process is in distribution on $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ with respect to the Skorokhod $J_1$-topology. To be precise, let $\mu_n=\mu\circ Y^{-1}_{n}(t)$, so that for all measurable $A\subset\mathbb{R}$, $Y^{-1}_n(t)(A)=\{\omega\in\Omega:Y_n(t)(\omega)\in A\}$. Then $Y_n(t)\overset{{\small d}}{\to}Y(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ if for all bounded continuous functions $\varphi$ on $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$, $$\int_{(0,\infty)}\varphi(x)d\mu_n\to\int_{(0,\infty)}\varphi(x)d\mu.$$ The space $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ consists of right continuous functions, with existence of limits to the left (cadlag functions) \cite{Skorokhod}. To overview the construction of the Skorokhod $J_1$-topology consider first the space $\mathbb{D}[a,b]$, and let $\\|\cdot\\|$ denote the uniform norm on $[a,b]$, so that $\\|\varphi\\|=\sup_{a\leq t\leq b}\|\varphi(t)\|$. Then a metric on $\mathbb{D}[a,b]$ is given by: $$d_{a,b}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2):=\inf_{h\in\Lambda}\left\{\\|\varphi_1\circ h-\varphi_2\\|\vee\\|h-\mathrm{id}\\|\right\},$$ where $\Lambda$ is the set of strictly increasing, continuous functions $h:[a,b]\to[a,b]$ such that $h(a)=a$ and $h(b)=b$. The function $\mathrm{id}$ is the identity mapping. This metric is not complete, but an equivalent (complete) metric can be constructed by a homeomorphism, see \cite{Resnick3, Skorokhod}. The construction carries over to $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ by use of the following metric: let $r_{a,b}\varphi(x)$ denote the restriction of $\varphi(x)$ to the interval $[a,b]$, and define $$d_{0,\infty}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2):=\int_{0}^{1}\int_{1}^{\infty}e^{-t}(1\wedge d_{s,t}(r_{s,t}\varphi_1, r_{s,t}\varphi_2))\,dt\,ds.$$ Then convergence $\varphi_n\to\varphi$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ holds in the $J_1$ metric if $d_{0,\infty}(\varphi_n,\varphi)\to 0$ at each continuity point of $\varphi$. We remark that similar metrics can be constructed on $\mathbb{D}(-\infty,0)$ and $\mathbb{D}(-\infty,\infty)$. \section{Main results: weak convergence to an extremal process.} As noted above, the heart of this paper is to prove that the process $Y_n$ converges to a certain extremal process. In this section we give the main results in this direction after defining the relevant short-term and long-term mixing conditions that guarantee this convergence. In the next section these results will then be interpreted in terms of record times and record values via the Continuous Mapping Theorem. We consider $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ a measure preserving system, and assume that $\mu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue $m$ with density $\rho$ (note that this condition could be removed in line with \cite{FFT_rough}). Within this article, unless otherwise stated we consider observable functions of the form $\phi(x)=\psi(\mbox{dist}(x,\tilde{x}))$. Here $\tilde{x}$ is a chosen point in $\mathcal{X}$, and $\psi:[0,\infty)\to\mathbb{R}$ is a measurable function with $\sup_{v\in[0,\infty)}\psi(v)=\psi(0)$. \subsection{Probabilistic mixing and recurrence conditions} Let $\mathcal{S}$ denote the semi-ring of subsets whose elements are intervals of type $[a,b)$ for $a,b\in\mathbb{R}^+$, and let $\mathfrak{R}$ denote the ring generated by $\mathcal{S}$. So for every $A\in\mathfrak{R}$, there exists $k\in\mathbb{N}$, and intervals $I_1,\ldots, I_k\in\mathcal{S}$ such that $A=\cup_j I_j$. To fix notation, for any $\alpha\in\mathbb{R}$ and $I=[a,b)\in\mathcal{S}$ we have $\alpha I=[\alpha a,\alpha b)$, and $I+\alpha=[a+\alpha,b+\alpha)$. This notation extends in a natural way to any $A\in\mathfrak{R}$. For $A\in\mathfrak{R}$, we let $$M(A)=\max\{X_i,i\in A\cap\mathbb{Z}\}.$$ In the case $A=[0,n)$, we have $M(A)=M_n$. Given this setup, the probabilistic condition we define first concerns that of mixing and asymptotic independence of maxima in different blocks. We make this precise as follows. Given $0<x_1\leq x_2\leq\cdots\leq x_r$, suppose that $u^{(1)}_{n}\geq u^{(2)}_{n}\geq\cdots\geq u^{(r)}_{n}$ are such that \begin{equation}\label{eq.u-kn} n\mu\{X_1>u_{n}^{(k)}\}\to x_k,\quad\forall k\leq r. \end{equation} \begin{defn} We say that condition ${\mathcal{D}}_r(u_n^{(k)})$ holds, if for any disjoint collection of sets $\mathcal{A}_1,\ldots, \mathcal{A}_r\in \mathfrak{R}:$ \begin{multline* \left\|\mu\left(\{X_1>u_{n,0}\}\cap\{M(\mathcal{A}_1+t)\leq u_{n,1},\ldots, M(\mathcal{A}_r+t)\leq u_{n,r}\}\right)\right.\\ \left. -\mu\left(\{X_1>u_{n,0}\}\right)\mu\left(\{M(\mathcal{A}_1)\leq u_{n,1},\ldots, M(\mathcal{A}_r)\leq u_{n,r}\}\right)\right\| \leq\gamma(n,t), \end{multline} where $n\gamma(n,t)\to 0$ for some integer sequence $t_n=o(n)$, and for each $i$, $u_{n,i}$ denotes any one of the $u^{(k)}_{n}$, $(1\leq k\leq r)$. \end{defn} In the next definition, we consider the frequency of exceedances of the $X_j$ (in a probabilistic sense) over a threshold sequence $\{u_n\}$. \begin{defn} We say that condition $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds for a sequence $\{u^{(k)}_n\}$ if \begin{equation} \lim_{k\to\infty}\limsup_{n\to\infty} n\sum_{j=2}^{n/k}\mu\left(\left\{X_1>u^{(k)}_n,X_j>u^{(k)}_n\right\}\right)=0. \end{equation} \end{defn} In the case where it is known that \eqref{eq.Mn-limit} holds for given sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ and non-degenerate distribution function $G(u)$ we can usually take \begin{equation}\label{eq.un_rep} u^{(k)}_n( x_k)=a_n^{-1}G^{-1}(e^{ -x_k})+b_n \end{equation} in the above definitions. This is certainly true in the i.i.d case, and for a wide class of dynamical systems. In fact when this scaling rule applies it is more natural to re-write \eqref{eq.u-kn} and assume the representation \begin{equation}\label{eq.G_rep} n\mu\{X_1>u/a_n+b_n\}\to-\log G(u), \end{equation} i.e. to replace $x_k$ by $-\log G(u)$ for some $u\in\mathbb{R}$. The limit relation \eqref{eq.Mn-limit} becomes a consequence of \eqref{eq.G_rep} (rather than the converse) and is known as the \emph{Poisson approximation}, see \cite{Embrechts}. We briefly compare our conditions with previous ones. In the classical probability literature there were conditions $D$ and $D'$, see \cite{Leadbetter}, but Freitas and Freitas \cite{FF, FFT1}, inspired by Collet \cite{Collet} converted these to conditions more straightforwardly checkable in a dynamical context. In conjunction with \eqref{eq.G_rep} these conditions are then used to imply the limit law in \eqref{eq.Mn-limit}. Condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ is very similar to $D_3(u_n)$ used in \cite[Section 4]{FFT1} (itself similar to $D(u_n)$ in that paper): the only difference being the multiple thresholds $u_n^{(k)}$ for each given $n$ leading to a slightly stronger condition on the mixing. Also $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ is nearly identical to $D'(u_n)$ in \cite{FFT1}, but in this case the different thresholds do not add any real strength to the condition since they are each checked independently. The similarities between the conditions here and in \cite{FFT1} are strong enough that by examining the proofs (most importantly of the $D$ condition), any dynamical system to which the old conditions have been shown to apply can quite easily be seen to satisfy our new conditions. \begin{thm}\label{thm.Y-process} Suppose that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ is a measure preserving dynamical system, and suppose that there exist sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ and a non-degenerate function $G(u)$ such that \eqref{eq.G_rep} holds. Suppose that for any $r\geq 1$, and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$, condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. Then the process $Y_n(t)=a_n(M_{[nt]}-b_n)$ converges weakly to an extremal-$G$ process $Y_G(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ (endowed with the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology). \end{thm} We make several remarks about Theorem \ref{thm.Y-process}. First note that the hypotheses on $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ as stated are quite weak. However to check conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ in specific applications we usually require absolute continuity of $\mu$ and estimates on the recurrence time statistics (e.g. ergodicity and/or decay of correlation estimate). We discuss this in Section \ref{sec.applications}. A further remark is that conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ are sufficient conditions to ensure convergence to $Y_G(t)$. In the i.i.d case, existence of the limit \eqref{eq.Mn-limit} alone is enough to ensure convergence, see \cite{Resnick3}. Thus in certain situations we might expect the conclusion of Theorem \ref{thm.Y-process} to hold under weaker hypotheses. We discuss this further in Section \ref{sec.discussion}. Equation \eqref{eq.G_rep} in itself imposes regularity conditions on the invariant density of $\mu$ and on the form of the observable $\phi(x)=\psi(\mbox{dist}(x,\tilde{x}))$. For linear scaling sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ there turn out to be three non-degenerate types for the distribution function $G$, namely Gumbel, Fr\'echet and Weibull \cite{Embrechts}. We make the following remark detailing how these types can arise, and for the precise computations see e.g. \cite{HNT}. \begin{rmk Suppose that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ is a measure preserving system, for given $\tilde{x}\in\mathcal{X}$ the invariant density $\rho(\tilde{x})$ lies in $(0, \infty)$ and for any $r\geq 1$, and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$ condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. We have the following cases. \begin{itemize} \item[(i)] If $X_n=-\log(\mbox{dist}(f^{n-1}(x),\tilde{x}))$, then $Y_n(t)=M_{[nt]}-\log n$ converges weakly to the extremal-$G$ process $Y_G(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. In this case $G(u)=e^{-2\rho(\tilde{x})e^{-u}}$. \item[(ii)] If $X_n=\mbox{dist}(f^{n-1}(x),\tilde{x})^{-\alpha}$ for $\alpha>0$, then $Y_n(t)=n^{-\alpha}M_{[nt]}$ converges weakly to the extremal-$G$ process $Y_G(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. In this case $G(u)=e^{-2\rho(\tilde{x})u^{-\alpha}}$. \item[(iii)] If $X_n=C-\mbox{dist}(f^{n-1}x,\tilde{x})^{\alpha}$ for $\alpha>0$, then the process $Y_n(t)=n^{\alpha}(M_{[nt]}-C)$ converges weakly to the extremal-$G$ process $Y_G(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. In this case $G(u)=e^{-2\rho(\tilde{x})(-u)^{\alpha}}$. \end{itemize} In each case, $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ is endowed with the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology. \end{rmk} Given the extremal process $Y_G(t)$ its (path) inverse is defined by: $$Y^{\leftarrow}_G(t)=\inf\{x:Y(x)>t\},$$ where the domain of $Y^{\leftarrow}_G$ is the left and right end-points of $G$. Given $Y_n(t)=a_n(M_{[nt]}-b_n)$, denote the inverse path process by $Y^{\leftarrow}_n(t)$. We have the following result. \begin{thm}\label{thm.Y-inv.process} Suppose that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ is a measure preserving dynamical system, and suppose that there exist sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ and a non-degenerate function $G(u)$ such that \eqref{eq.G_rep} holds. Suppose that for any $r\geq 1$, and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$ condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. Then the process $Y^{\leftarrow}_n(x)$ converges weakly to the inverse extremal-$G$ process $Y^{\leftarrow}_G(t)$ in $\mathbb{D}(E)$, (endowed with the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology), where $E\subset\mathbb{R}$ is the domain of definition of $G$. \end{thm} For example, in Theorem \ref{thm.Y-inv.process} we take $E=(-\infty,\infty)$ in the case of the Gumbel distribution. For the Fr\'echet and Weibull distributions we take $E=(0,\infty)$ and $E=(-\infty,0)$ respectively. \section{The distribution of record times and record values} Given the processes $Y_G(t)$ and $Y_{G}^{\leftarrow}(t)$, we describe next the distribution of their jump values, i.e. the locations of their discontinuities. This has natural application to the theory of record times and record values which we describe as follows. Consider the original processes $\{X_n\}$, $\{M_n\}$, and let $\tau_1=1$. Define a strictly increasing sequence $\{\tau_k\}$ via: \begin{equation}\label{eq.time-to-record} \tau_k=\inf\{j>\tau_{k-1}:X_j>M_{j-1}\}. \end{equation} Then this sequence $\{\tau_k\}$ forms the \emph{record times} associated to the process $M_n$, namely the times where $M_n$ jumps. The corresponding record values are given by the $X_{\tau_k}=M_{\tau_k}$. For the process $Y_n(t)=a_n(M_{[nt]}-b_n)$, we see that the jumps of $Y_n(t)$ occur precisely at the times $t_k=\tau_k/n$ where $\tau_k$ is a record time. The jump values $Y_n(t_k)$ are then the (normalised) record values $a_n(X_{\tau_k}-b_n).$ We shall use point process theory to describe the distributional behaviour of these jump times and jump values. \subsection{Overview of point process theory} To study extremal processes and their corresponding jump processes we use a point process approach. We recall some general properties of point processes, see \cite[Chapter 3]{Resnick3}. Let $(\Omega,\mathcal{B},\mu)$ be a probability space, where $\mathcal{B}$ is a $\sigma$-algebra of subsets of $\Omega$. Let $E\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ be a state space, with Borel $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{E}$. The set $E$ is the region in which points will be defined. Given a sequence of (vector-valued) random variables $X_i:\Omega\to E$, consider the quantity $\xi=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\delta_{X_i}$, where $\delta_x$ is the Dirac measure at $x$. Then $\xi:(\Omega,\mathcal{B},\mu)\to (M_{p}(E), \mathcal{M}_p(E))$ defines a point process. The set $M_{p}(E)$ is the collection of point (counting) measures $m$ on $E$, with $m(A)<\infty$ if $A\subset E$ is compact. The set $\mathcal{M}_p(E)$ is the corresponding $\sigma$-algebra of subsets of $M_p(E)$. Thus given $A\subset E$, $\xi(A)\in\mathbb{N}$ is itself a random variable associated to the sequence $\{X_i\}$, i.e., given $\omega\in\Omega$, and $A\subset E$, $$\xi:=\xi(A,\omega)=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\delta_{X_i(\omega)}(A) =\sharp\{i:X_i(\omega)\in A\}.$$ Of interest to us are the special class of point processes known as \emph{Poisson random measures} (PRM). We say that a point process $\xi$ is a PRM with mean measure $\lambda$ if the following hold: \begin{enumerate} \item For all $A\in\mathcal{E}$, $$\mu(\xi(A, \cdot)=k)=\frac{\lambda(A)^ke^{-\lambda(A)}}{k!}.$ \item If $A_i\cap A_j=\emptyset$ for all $i,j\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$, and all $m\geq 1$ then $\xi(A_1),\ldots,\xi(A_m)$ are independent random variables. \end{enumerate} The mean (or \emph{intensity}) measure $\lambda$ satisfies $\lambda(A)=\mathbb E(\xi(A))$ for all $A\in\mathcal{E}$. If we can write $\lambda=\int_{A}\gamma(t)\,dt$, then we call $\gamma(t)$ the intensity of the process $\xi$. We now consider convergence of a sequence of point processes. A sequence $\{\xi_n\}$ of point processes converges in distribution (or converges weakly) to a point process $\xi$ in $M_p(E)$ if for any finite collection $B_1,\ldots,B_m$ of bounded Borel sets in $E$ with $\mu(\xi(\partial B_i)=0)=1$, $$(\xi_n(B_1),\xi_n(B_2),\ldots, \xi_n(B_m)) \to (\xi(B_1),\xi(B_2),\ldots, \xi(B_m)).$$ To prove such convergence for sequences of (simple) point processes it suffices to check the following criteria due to Kallenberg \cite{Kallenberg}: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a)] $\mathbb E(\xi_n(B))\to \mathbb E(\xi(B))$, where $B$ is a semi-closed rectangle in $E$. \item[(b)] $\mu\{\xi_n(B)=0\}\to\mu\{\xi(B)=0\}$ for all finite unions of semi-closed rectangles $B\subset E$. \end{enumerate} In the definition above, we take semi-closed (and disjoint unions) of intervals of the form $(a,b]$ for subsets of $\mathbb{R}$, while in $\mathbb{R}^2$ we take semi-closed (and disjoint unions of) rectangles of the form $(a,b]\times (c,d]$. Next we discuss vague convergence of measures, and convergence of certain transformations of measures. These concepts will be used in Section \ref{sec.extreme_process}. We say that a sequence of measures $\{\mu_n\}$ convergences vaguely to $\mu$ (written $\mu_n\overset{\small{v}}{\to}\mu$), if $\int g\, d\mu_n\to\int g\,d\mu$ for all continunuous functions $g$ that are compactly supported. In general vague convergence does not imply weak convergence, e.g. $\mu_n=\delta_n$ (the Dirac mass at $n\in\mathbb{N}$) converges vaguely to $\mu=0$, but not weakly. For point processes, there exists a vague metric which makes $M_p(E)$ a complete metric space. To study weak convergence of certain functionals of point process we will make use of the \emph{Continuous Mapping Theorem} (CMT). Consider metric spaces $M$ and $M'$ and let $\mu$ be a probability measure. A function $h: M\to M'$ is a.s. continuous if the set of discontinuities of $h$ has $\mu$-measure zero. Suppose that $\xi_n\overset{\small{d}}{\to} \xi$ in $M$, then the Continuous Mapping Theorem asserts that $h(\xi_n)\overset{\small{d}}{\to} h(\xi)$ in $M'$ provided $h$ is a.s.\ continuous. \subsection{The record time and record value point processes } We now state distributional results for the record-time and record-value jump processes. For the process $Y_n(t)=a_n(M_{[nt]}-b_n)$, recall that $t_k=\tau_k/n$ are the jump times. i.e. where $X_{\tau_k}>M_{\tau_k-1}$. The jump values are given by $Y(t_k)$. We consider the following two point processes (defined on subsets of $\mathbb{R}$): \begin{equation} \mathcal{R}_n:=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\delta_{\frac{j}{n}}\cdot 1_{\{X_j>M_{j-1}\}},\quad \mathcal{V}_n:=\sum_{\tau_k}\delta_{Y_n(\tau_k/n)}, \end{equation} the former is the \emph{record time process} and the latter is the \emph{record value process}. \begin{thm}\label{thm.records} Suppose that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ is a measure preserving dynamical system, and suppose that there exist sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ and a non-degenerate function $G(u)$ such that \eqref{eq.G_rep} holds. Suppose that for any $r\geq 1$ and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$ condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. We have the following cases: \begin{enumerate} \item The point process $\mathcal{R}_n$ converges weakly to the point process $\mathcal{R}$ on state space $(0,\infty)$. The process $\mathcal{R}$ is a PRM with intensity $\gamma(t)=1/t$. i.e. for any $0<a<b<\infty$: $$\lim_{n\to\infty}\mu\{\mathcal{R}_n(a,b)=k\}= \frac{(\log(b/a))^k}{k!}\cdot\frac{a}{b}.$$ \item The point process $\mathcal{V}_n=\sum_{\tau_k}\delta_{Y(\tau_k/n)}$ converges weakly to the point process $\mathcal{V}$ on state space $E\subset\mathbb{R}$ (the domain of $G$), where $\mathcal{V}$ is a PRM with intensity measure $\lambda_{V}$ given by $\lambda_V([a,b])=-\log(-\log G(b))+\log(-\log G(a))$. \end{enumerate} \end{thm} Hence Theorem \ref{thm.records} implies that the process $\mathcal{R}_n$ converges to a PRM $\mathcal{R}$ on $E=(0,\infty)$ with intensity $\gamma(t)=1/t$ irrespective of the underlying distribution function $G$. We remark that if item (1) of the Theorem \ref{thm.records} holds for a particular observable $\phi:\mathcal{X}\to\mathbb{R}$, then $\mathcal{R}_n\overset{{\small d}}{\to}\mathcal{R}$ holds for any injective and monotone increasing transformation of $X_1$. By contrast, the limit process $\mathcal{V}_n$ does depend on $G$, and hence on the form of $\phi$. We do not consider all possibilities, but remark that in the case of $G$ being the Gumbel distribution, $$\lim_{n\to\infty}\mu\{\mathcal{V}_n(a,b)=k\}= \frac{(b-a)^ke^{-(b-a)}}{k!}.$$ This would apply to the dynamical process $X_n=-\log\mbox{dist}(f^{n-1}(x),\tilde{x})$. We remark further that the process $\mathcal{V}_n$ determines the jump \emph{times} for inverse process $Y_{G}^{\leftarrow}(t)$. \section{Application of Results}\label{sec.applications} In this section we give an overview of dynamical system models that fit within our assumptions, namely $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. As mentioned above, conditions of this type have been considered in many recent papers. In most applications it is the short-range condition which is hardest to prove, and as noted above, once the usual short range condition is proved, $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ follows immediately. Checking that the long-range mixing condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds follows almost exactly as usual, namely via decay of correlations: We say that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \nu)$ has decay of correlations in Banach spaces $\mathcal{B}_1$ versus $\mathcal{B}_2$, (DC), if there exists a monotonically decreasing sequence $\Theta(j)\to 0$ such that for all $\varphi_1\in\mathcal{B}_1$ and all $\varphi_2 \in\mathcal{B}_2$: \[ \left\|\int \varphi_1 \cdot \varphi_2\circ f^j d \nu -\int \varphi_1 d \nu \int \varphi_2 d\nu\right\| \leq \Theta(j) \\|\phi_1\\|_{\mathcal{B}_1} \\|\phi_2\\|_{\mathcal{B}_2}, \] where $\\|\cdot\\|_{\mathcal{B}}$ denotes the norm in space $\mathcal{B}$. If this condition holds and ${\mathcal B}_2$ contains indicator functions on balls with norm of order the measure of the ball, and $\Theta(j)$ decays fast enough then it is easy to prove $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$. When this doesn't happen, there are approximation arguments (eg. \cite{Gupta}) to derive the same result. In checking condition $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ the form of the observable is of significance, and in most applications observables take the form $\phi(x)=\psi(\mbox{dist}(x,\tilde{x}))$ with $\mbox{dist}(\cdot,\cdot)$ the Euclidean metric. Checking $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ is then reduced to understanding the recurrence statistics for asymptotically shrinking balls. For other types of observables with general level set geometries, checking $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ (and its variant) becomes a much harder problem. We will list a set of dynamical systems to which our results apply, where the details of how to check our mixing conditions are essentially the same as in the references given. \subsection{Expanding interval maps} The simplest example is the tent map $f(x)=1-\|1-2x\|$, defined for $x\in[0,1]$. In this case $\nu=\mathrm{Leb}$, and the system has exponentially decaying $\Theta(j)$ as defined in condition (DC) for $\mathcal{B}_1=\mathrm{Lip}$ and $\mathcal{B}_2=L^{\infty}$. The much more general case of Rychlik maps was considered in \cite{FFT1}: here $\mathcal{B}_1=BV$ and $\mathcal{B}_2=L^1$. \subsection{Non-uniformly expanding maps: rapid mixing} Consider the quadratic map $f(x)=ax(1-x)$, defined for $x\in[0,1]$ and parameter set $a\in[0,4]$. For a positive measure set of parameters it is known that $\nu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure and condition (DC) holds for $\Theta(n)=\theta^{n}_0$, (some $\theta_0<1$). Our conditions can be shown to hold using ideas from \cite{Collet}. \subsection{Intermittent maps with polynomial decay of correlations} Consider the class of intermittent type maps $f:[0,1]\to[0,1]$ which take the form \begin{equation}\label{eq.intermittent} f(x) = \begin{cases} x(1 + 2^{\alpha} x^{\alpha}) &\text{if } 0 \leqslant x < \frac{1}{2};\\ 2x-1 &\text{if } \frac{1}{2} \leqslant x \leqslant 1, \end{cases} \end{equation} with $\alpha\in(0,1)$. This system admits an absolutely continuous invariant measure $\nu$ and condition (DC) applies, with $\Theta(n)=O\left(n^{1-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\right)$, see \cite{Young2}. Our conditions hold as in \cite{HNT}, namely there is an explicit value $\alpha_0\in(0,1)$ such that conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ hold for all $\alpha\in [0, \alpha_0)$. We remark that it is the methodology used in the actual checking of the conditions that leads to the permissible range of $\alpha$, and the bound $\alpha_0$. It is a conjectural on whether we can take $\alpha_0=1$, see Section \ref{sec.discussion}. \section{Generating extremal and jump processes from point processes}\label{sec.extreme_process} Our approach to proving Theorems \ref{thm.Y-process}, \ref{thm.Y-inv.process} and \ref{thm.records} is to consider weak convergence of point processes $\xi_n$ (defined on subsets of the plane) and apply the CMT. As before we suppose that there exist constants $a_n, b_n$ and a non-degenerate function $G$ such that $n\mu\{X_1>u/a_n+b_n\}\to -\log G(u)$, and therefore have in mind a dynamical system $(\mathcal{X},f, \mu)$ with absolutely continuous invariant measure $\mu$, and observable function $\phi(x)=\psi(\mbox{dist}(x,\tilde{x}))$, with $\psi:\mathbb{R}^+\to\mathbb{R}$ regularly (or slowly) varying. The key tool is the following theorem. \begin{thm}\label{thm.plane} Suppose that $(\mathcal{X},f,\mu)$ is a measure preserving dynamical system, and suppose that there exist sequences $\{a_n\}, \{b_n\}$ and a non-degenerate function $G(u)$ such that \eqref{eq.G_rep} holds. Suppose that for any $r\geq 1$, and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$ condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. Then the point process $\xi_n=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\delta_{z(i,n)}$ with $z(i,n)=(\frac{i}{n},a_n(X_i-b_n))$ converges weakly to a PRM in state space $E=[0,\infty)\times\mathbb{R}$ whose intensity measure $\lambda=\mathrm{Leb}\times\lambda_G$ with $\lambda_{G}([a,b])=\log G(b)-\log G(a)$. \end{thm} We shall postpone the proof of this theorem to Section \ref{sec.proof.thm.plane} as it relies heavily on conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. We now show how the main theorems follow from Theorem \ref{thm.plane} and the CMT. Our approach follows that of \cite{Res_weak, Resnick3} and an outline is as follows. Let $M$ and $M'$ be two metric spaces with associated metrics $d$ and $d'$ (resp.). A main difficulty is showing when a given map $h:M\to M'$ is a.s.\ continuous. An element $\xi\in M$ is a discontinuity of $h$ if there exists a sequence $\{\xi_n\}$ with $d(\xi_n,\xi)\to 0$ but $d'(h(\xi_n),h(\xi))\not\to 0$. The map is a.s.\ continuous if the set of discontinuities $\xi\in M$ has $\mu$-measure 0. This agrees with the usual notion of (dis)continuity, although we must keep track of the underlying metrics being used. For definiteness, consider the case where $M=M_p(E)$ for some $E\subset\mathbb{R}^m$, $(m\geq 1)$, and $M'=\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. We take $d$ to be the vague metric and take $d'$ to be the Skorokhod $J_1$ metric. To show a.s.\ continuity of $h$ , we must show that $d'(h(\xi_n),h(\xi))\to 0$ for all sequences $\xi_n$ with $\xi_n\overset{v}{\to}\xi$, and for $\mu$-a.e. $\xi\in M$. Applying the CMT will then imply that $h(\xi_n)\overset{d}{\to}h(\xi)$ for all such sequences $\xi_n\overset{d}{\to}\xi$. \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.Y-process}] Given the planar point process $\xi:=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\delta_{(t_i,y_i)}$, let $H_1:M_p((0,\infty)\times\mathbb{R})\to \mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ be the real valued function defined by $H_1(\xi)(t)=\sup\{y_i: t_i\leq t\}.$ Then $H_1$ maps point processes to $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. If $\xi$ is a PRM then as is shown in \cite[Chapter 4]{Resnick3} the map $H_1$ is a.s.\ continuous with respect to $\xi$. This is achieved by taking any sequence $\{\xi_n\}$ with $\xi_n\overset{v}{\to}\xi$ (i.e. converging vaguely) and showing that $d_{a,b}(h(\xi_n)(t),h(\xi)(t))\to 0$ for any $0<a<b<\infty$. Checking the latter is sufficient to prove convergence in $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. In the case where $\xi$ is a PRM with intensity measure $\lambda=\mathrm{Leb}\times\lambda_G$, (where $\lambda_{G}([a,b])=\log G(b)-\log G(a)$), then $H_1(\xi)(t)$ has finite dimensional distributions which coincide with that of an extremal-G process $Y_G(t)$. Hence for the process $\xi_n$ defined in Theorem \ref{thm.plane}, the CMT asserts that $H_1(\xi_n)(t)\overset{d}{\to} H_1(\xi)(t)$, and so $Y_n(t)$ converges weakly to an extremal-G process $Y_{G}(t)$. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.Y-inv.process}] Given a planar point process $\xi:=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\delta_{(t_i,y_i)}$ consider the function $H_2$ defined by $H_2(\xi)(t)=\inf\{t_i:y_i>t\}$. This function is again a.s.\ continuous with respect to a PRM $\xi$ \cite[Chapter 4]{Resnick3}. If in particular $\xi$ is a PRM with intensity measure $\lambda=\mathrm{Leb}\times\lambda_G$, (and $\lambda_{G}([a,b])=\log G(b)-\log G(a)$), then $H_2(\xi)(t)$ has finite dimensional distributions equivalent to those of $Y^{\leftarrow}_G(t)$ (the inverse of $Y_G(t)$). Hence for the process $\xi_n$ defined in Theorem \ref{thm.plane}, the CMT asserts that $H_2(\xi_n)(t)\overset{d}{\to} H_2(\xi)(t)$, and so $Y^{\leftarrow}_n(t)$ converges weakly to $Y^{\leftarrow}_G(t)$. We remark that it is tempting to apply $H_1$ and then a mapping $\tilde{H}$ with $\tilde{H}(y)=y^{\leftarrow}$ for $y\in\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. However this latter map is not continuous on $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.records}] We first consider item (1), and the process $\mathcal{R}_n$. Consider the subset $\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)$ of $\mathbb{D}(0,\infty)$ consisting of functions which are constant between isolated jumps (i.e., the jumps do not accumulate anywhere in $(0, \infty)$). For an element $Y(t)\in\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)$, let $H_3:\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)\to M_p(0,\infty)$ be the counting function: $H_3(Y(t))=\sum_i\delta_{t_i}(0, t)$, where $t_i$ are jump times for $Y(t)$. As shown in \cite{Resnick3} the function $H_3$ is a.s.\ continuous when restricted to functions on $\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)$. This is achieved by taking a sequence $y_n\in\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)$ converging to $y\in\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(0,\infty)$ (with respect to $J_1$ metric), and then showing that $H_3(y_n)\to H_3(y)$ in the vague metric on $M_p(0,\infty)$. The basic observation here is that closeness of the graphs of $y_n$ and $y$ (in the $J_1$ sense) implies that their discontinuities are close. Hence the corresponding point masses of $H_3(y_n)$ and $H(y)$ are close (in the vague metric sense). If $Y_G(t)$ is an extremal-G process, then $H_3(Y(t))$ is a PRM on $(0,\infty)$ with intensity $\gamma(t)=1/t$. Hence to get the required convergence result for $\mathcal{R}_n$ we apply the composition $H_3\circ H_1$ to the planar point process and then the CMT. Now consider item (2), and the process $\mathcal{V}_n$. As in the proof of item (1), we again consider the function $H_3$, but this time apply it to elements of $Y^{\leftarrow}_G(t)\in\widetilde{\mathbb{D}}(-\infty,\infty)$. The corresponding process $H_3(Y^{\leftarrow}_G)(t)=\sum_{i}\delta_{Y(t_i)}$ is a PRM with mean-measure $\lambda([a,b])=-\log(-\log G(b))+\log(-\log G(a))$. Hence to get the required convergence result for $\mathcal{V}_n$, we apply the composition $H_3\circ H_2$ to the planar point process sequence $\{\xi_n\}$. This composition is a.s.\ continuous with respect to the PRM $\xi$, and hence we apply the CMT. \end{proof} \section{Discussion}\label{sec.discussion} In this article we have developed a general approach to prove convergence to extremal processes for chaotic dynamical systems. We have also established consequential results such as determining the statistics of record events. We now make several remarks about the wider applicability of our results and scope for future investigations. Firstly our results apply to dynamical systems that satisfy the $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ conditions. For a wide class of non-uniformly expanding dynamical systems, such as those considered within \cite{Collet, FFT1, HNT} our results apply. We note that these conditions are sufficient for our results. If these conditions fail to hold then it is possible that the conclusions of our results still hold. This might be the case for certain non-mixing systems, such as suspended flows considered in \cite{HNT}. Furthermore, we might ask on whether it is possible to by-pass the checking of conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ to obtain our convergence results. An assumption on the existence of an extreme distribution such as \eqref{eq.Mn-limit} is still expected to be required. However, our results would then apply to a broader class of systems where a link between extremes and return time statistics is known, see \cite{FFT1}. For hyperbolic systems with attractors (i.e. those that support Sinai-Ruelle-Bowen (SRB) measures) then we expect similar conclusions to hold on the existence of an extremal process. For related results on extremes for hyperbolic systems, see \cite{CC, GHN, Licheng}. To study extremal processes and records for these systems further work is required. Particular issues include the actual checking of the conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$, and controlling the regularity of the SRB measure $\mu$ (or regularity of the observable function) to ensure existence of a non-degenerate limit function $G$. It is possible to investigate further situations where $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ fails, for example in the case of observable functions maximised at periodic points. For such observables the limit function $G$ in \eqref{eq.Mn-limit} incorporates an extra parameter known as an \emph{extremal index}, and for dynamical systems this has been recently studied, for example in \cite{FFT_EI}. To ensure convergence to a corresponding extremal process, alternative conditions to $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ would need to be formulated. The results we have stated about extremal processes and records are not exhaustive. Combining Theorem \ref{thm.plane} with the CMT we can obtain results about the distribution of inter-record times (i.e. $t_{i+1}-t_i$), the jump sizes ($Y(t_{i+1})-Y(t_{i})$), and the distributions governing the maximum inter-record times/jump sizes, see \cite{Res_weak,Res_inv, Resnick3}. For systems that satisfy conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ the joint asymptotic distribution of maxima can also be derived, see \cite[Section 5.6]{Leadbetter}. In other directions beyond the scope of this work, we should mention that planar convergence of point processes to a PRM (i.e. conclusions similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm.plane}) have been used in the study of convergence to Levy processes for certain dynamical systems, see \cite{Ty}. Finally we note that our results are all on distributional convergence. In the i.i.d case almost sure convergence results for records is known. For an i.i.d process $\{X_n\}$, let $\tau_n$ denote the time to the $n$'th record (as in \eqref{eq.time-to-record}), and $W_n$ the number or records observed up to time $n$. Then almost surely we have $(\tau_n)^{1/n}\to e$ and $W_n/\log n\to 1$. For dynamical systems we conjecture that similar results hold. For the maximum process, recent work on almost sure convergence is established in \cite{HNT2}. In the i.i.d case, almost sure convergence for records is proved by embedding the maximum process $M_n$ into the extremal process $Y(t)$ for $t\in\mathbb{N}$. However, for dependent processes driven by dynamical systems new ideas are required. \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.plane}}\label{sec.proof.thm.plane} It remains to prove Theorem \ref{thm.plane} and we do this as follows. In the first instance we show in Proposition \ref{prop.dr_un} how conditions $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $D_r(u_n)$ can be used to obtain asymptotic independence of blocks of maxima on disjoint intervals. Using this result, we then apply the criteria of Kallenberg to prove the theorem via a thinning construction as used in \cite{Leadbetter}. \subsection{Asymptotic independence of maxima on disjoint intervals} We need to show that the behaviour of maxima in disjoint intervals is approximately independent. For dynamical systems, condition $D_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ as used in \cite{Leadbetter} is not readily verifiable, and hence we propose condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ instead, inspired by \cite{FFT1}. As mentioned in Section \ref{sec.applications}, such a condition can be easily checked for dynamical systems once information on decay of correlations is known. However we must show that this condition leads to the same conclusion in order to apply the thinning constructions of \cite{Leadbetter}, which is the conclusion of the following result. \begin{prop}\label{prop.dr_un} Suppose that $p\in{\mathbb N}$ and $A=\cap_{j=1}^{p}I_j$, where $I_j=[a_j,b_j)$. Let $ x_k>0$ for $k=1,\ldots, p$ and for each $1\leq k\leq p$, $(u_{n}^{(k)})_n$ be such that $n\mu(X_0>u_{n}^{(k)})\to x_k$. Assume that conditions $\mathcal{D}_p'(u_n^{(k)})$ and ${\mathcal{D}}_p(u_n^{(k)})$ hold. Then $$\mu\left(\bigcap_{j=1}^{p}\{M(nI_j)\leq u_{n}^{(j)}\}\right)\to\prod_{j=1}^{p} e^{- x_j(b_j-a_j)}.$$ \end{prop} The proof of this proposition is technical and extends the ideas presented in \cite[Section 4]{FFT1}. We postpone the proof until Section \ref{sec.proof.prop.dr_un}. \subsection{Thinning constructions for point processes.} As a first step we consider the notion of an independent thinning of a Poisson point process $\xi$, see \cite[Section 5.5]{Leadbetter}. We say that a process $\hat{\xi}$ is an independent thinning of $\xi$ with parameter $p\in(0,1)$, if for every point of $\xi$, there is a probability $p$ that this point is retained in $\hat{\xi}$. An elementary argument shows that if $\xi$ has intensity 1, then $\hat{\xi}$ has intensity $p$. Suppose now that the sequence $ x_1<\cdots< x_r$ is defined, and $u^{(k)}_{n}$ is such that $n\mu\{X_1>u^{(k)}_n\}\to x_k$. Then $u^{(1)}_n>\cdots> u^{(r)}_n$. Fix horizontal lines $L_1,\ldots, L_r$ in the plane, and define $\delta^{(k)}_{j/n}$ to be the Dirac mass concentrated at the point on $L_k$ whose horizontal coordinate is $j/n$. The actual position of each $L_k$ is not important provided their (vertical) order is preserved as described below. Given $k\leq r$, we let $\xi^{(k)}_n$ denote the point process \begin{equation}\label{eq.pt-line} \xi^{(k)}_n=\sum_{j=1}^{n}\delta^{(k)}_{j/n}\cdot1_{\{X_j>u^{(k)}_n\}}, \end{equation} and let $\tilde{\xi}_n=\sum_{k=1}^{r}\xi^{(k)}_n.$ Notice that for each $k$, if a $\tilde{\xi}^{(k)}_n$ has a point at location $j/n$, then each $\xi^{(l)}_n$ has a points at $j/n$ too (for all $l\geq k$). This follows by the ordering of $u^{(k)}_n$. We next define the point process $\tilde{\xi}=\sum_{k=1}^{r}\xi^{(k)}$, where $\{\xi^{(k)}\}$ is a sequence of (independently) thinned Poisson point processes, each having points on respective lines $L_k$, with $L_1>L_{2}>\cdots>L_r$ (ordered in vertical height), and with corresponding intensity parameter $ x_k$. In particular, for each $k$, $\xi^{(k)}$ is an independent thinning of $\xi^{(k+1)}$ with probability parameter $p= x_k/ x_{k+1}$. We have the following result: \begin{prop}\label{prop.lines} Suppose that $(\mathcal{X}, f, \mu)$ is a measure preserving system. Suppose for any $r\geq 1$, and any sequence $\{ x_i,i\leq r\}$ condition $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ holds together with $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$. Then the point process $\tilde{\xi}_n$ defined on lines $\{L_k\}_{k=1}^{r}$ (as described above) converges weakly to the point process $\tilde{\xi}$ on $(0,1]\times\mathbb{R}$. \end{prop} \begin{rmk} For ease of exposition we prove convergence on $(0,1]\times\mathbb{R}$. The method of proof extends to versions converging on state space $(0,\infty)\times\mathbb{R}$. In this case we require the $\mathcal{D}_r(u^{(k)}_n)$ and $\mathcal{D}_r'(u^{(k)}_n)$ conditions to hold for sequences of the form $\{u^{(k)}_n(mx_k)\}$, (for all $m\geq 1$). Here $\{u^{(k)}_n(x_k)\}$ is the sequence defined in \eqref{eq.u-kn}. \end{rmk} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop.lines}] Using the criteria of Kallenberg it is sufficient to check the following: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a)] $\mathbb E(\tilde{\xi}_n(B))\to \mathbb E(\tilde{\xi}(B))$, where $B$ is of the form $(a,b]\times(c,d]$, for $c<d$, $0<a<b$, and $b\leq 1$. \item[(b)] $\mu\{\tilde{\xi}_n=0\}\to\mu\{\tilde{\xi}=0\}$ for all $B=\cup_j (A_j\times C_j)$, where $A_j$, $C_j$ are semi-closed intervals as described in (a) above, and with $A_j\times C_j$ disjoint. \end{enumerate} Checking these conditions follows \cite[Section 5.5]{Leadbetter} as applied to dependent processes. In particular checking part (a) is straightforward and is done as follows. We suppose that $B:=(a,b]\times(c,d]$ intersects lines $L_s,\ldots, L_t$ for $1\leq s\leq t\leq r$. Then $\tilde{\xi}_n(B)=\sum_{k=s}^{t}\xi^{(k)}_n((a,b])$ and $\tilde{\xi}(B)=\sum_{k=s}^{t}\xi^{(k)}((a,b])$. The expectation of the latter is $(b-a)\sum_{k=t}^{s} x_k$. Taking expectations of the former we obtain: \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathbb E(\tilde{\xi}_n(B)) &=\sum_{k=1}^{r}E\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n}\delta^{(k)}_{j/n}(B)\cdot1_{\{X_j>u^{(k)}_n\}} \right) =([nb]-[na])\sum_{k=s}^t\mu\{X_1>u^{(k)}_n\}\\ &\sim n(b-a)\sum_{k=s}^{t}\frac{ x_k}{n}\to \mathbb E(\tilde{\xi}(B)). \end{split} \end{equation} We now check part (b) where Proposition \ref{prop.dr_un} is used. Write $B=\cup_j (A_j\times C_j)$, with $A_j=(a_j,b_j]$, and $C_j=(c_j,d_j]$. By a rearrangement, we can express $B$ as $\cup_j (a_j, b_j]\times D_j$, with $(a_j,b_j]$ disjoint, and $D_j$ a finite union of semi-closed intervals. Hence $$\{\tilde{\xi}_n(B)=0\}=\bigcap_j\{\tilde{\xi}_n(E_j)=0\},$$ where $E_j=(a_j,b_j]\times D_j$. For each $j$, we take $L_{k_j}$ to be the lowest line intersecting $E_j$. By the thinning construction of $\tilde{\xi}_n$, $$\{\tilde{\xi}_n(E_j)=0\}=\{\xi^{(k_j)}_n((a_j,b_j])=0\}.$$ This corresponds to the set $\{M(([a_jn],[b_jn]))\leq u_{k_j}\}.$ We can now immediately apply Proposition \ref{prop.dr_un} to conclude that \begin{equation} \mu\{\tilde{\xi}_n(B)=0\}\to\exp\left\{-\sum_j(b_j-a_j) x_{k_j}\right\}=\mu\{\tilde{\xi}(B)=0\}. \end{equation} \end{proof} \subsection{Concluding the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.plane}} Given Proposition \ref{prop.lines}, we now show that the process $\xi_n=\sum_{i\geq 1}\delta_{z(i,n)}$ converges to a Poisson process on the plane with intensity measure $\lambda=\mathrm{Leb}\times\lambda_G$, with $\lambda_G[a,b]=\log G(b)-\log G(a)$. The argument is purely probabilistic and follows \cite[Section 5.7]{Leadbetter}. We give the main steps. It is convenient to work with the process $\hat{\xi}_n=\sum_{i\geq 1}\delta_{w(i,n)}$ with $w(i,n)=\left(\frac{i}{n},u^{-1}_n(X_i)\right)$. Recall that the function $u_n(x)$ is determined via the limit relation $n\mu\{X_1>u_n(x)\}\to x$ (from \eqref{eq.u-kn}), and hence if \eqref{eq.un_rep} applies then $w(i,n)=\left(\frac{i}{n},-\log G(a_n(X_i-b_n))\right)$. We show that $\hat\xi_n$ converges to a Poisson process $\hat{\xi}$ in state space $(0,\infty)\times(0,\infty)$, with Lebesgue as the intensity measure. A simple change of measure argument then shows that $\xi$ is a PRM with the corresponding intensity measure $\lambda$. Continuing with the proof, and by Kallenberg's criteria it is sufficient to check items (a), and (b) as specified in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.lines} (for a suitable collection of disjoint semi-closed rectangles). If $B=(a,b]\times[c, d)$, then \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mathbb E(\hat{\xi}_n(B))&=E\left(\sum_{j\geq 1}\delta_{w(j,n)}(B)\right) =([nb]-[na])\mu\{c\leq u^{-1}_n(X_1)<d\}\\ &\sim n(b-a)\mu\{u_n(c)\leq X_1\leq u_n(d)\}\sim (b-a)(d-c)=\mathbb E(\hat{\xi}(B)). \end{split} \end{equation} To show (b), we consider the event $\{\hat{\xi}_n(B)=0\}$, where (as before) $B=\cup_j (A_j\times C_j)$, with $A_j=(a_j,b_j]$, $C_j=[c_j,d_j)$, and $A_j\times C_j$ forming a disjoint collection. By a rearrangement, we can express $B$ as $\cup_j (a_j, b_j]\times D_j$, with $(a_j,d_j]$ disjoint, and $D_j$ a finite union of semi-closed intervals. Indeed we can also make the simplifying assumption that $B=\cup_j\left( A\times D_j\right)$ for $A=(a,b]$, since the proof essentially is the same otherwise. So writing $B=\bigcup_{j=1}^{m}\left(A\times D_j\right)$, with $D_j=[ x_{2j-1}, x_{2j}]$, for all $j\leq m$, and some sequence $ x_1<\cdots< x_{2m}$, \begin{equation}\label{eq.noentry} \{\hat{\xi}_n(B)=0\}= \bigcap_{j=1}^{m}\left\{\xi^{(2j-1)}_n(A)=\xi^{(2j)}_n(A)\right\}, \end{equation} where $\xi^{(j)}_n(A)=\sharp\{\ell\leq n:\,\ell/n\in A,\,u_n(x_j)<X_{\ell}\}$, i.e. $\xi^{(j)}$ counts the number of times of an exceedance $\ell\leqslant n$ of $u_n(x_j)$ where $\ell/n\in A$. The decomposition in \eqref{eq.noentry} corresponds to the fact that we cannot have any $X_{\ell}$ with $u_n(x_{2j})<X_{\ell}<u_n(x_{2j-1})$, and therefore an exceedance of $u_n(x_{2j})$ implies an exceedance of $u_n(x_{2j-1})$. The processes $\xi^{(j)}_n$ meet the criteria of the thinning processes used in Proposition \ref{prop.lines}, and so: $$(\xi^{(1)}_n(A),\ldots,\xi^{(2m)}_n(A))\to (\xi^{(1)}(A),\ldots,\xi^{(2m)}(A)),$$ where convergence is in distribution. The distributions $\xi^{(j)}$ ($1\leq j\leq 2m$) correspond to the successively thinned Poisson processes defined in Proposition \ref{prop.lines}, and we obtain \begin{equation}\label{eq.reduction} \mu\{\hat{\xi}_n(B)=0\}\to\mu\left(\bigcap_{j=1}^{m}\{\xi^{(2j-1)}(A)=\xi^{2j}(A)\} \right). \end{equation} To compute the right hand side of \eqref{eq.reduction}, we use the thinning properties of the $\xi^{(j)}$. Note first of all that \begin{equation} \begin{split} \mu\left(\xi^{(2m-1)}(A)=\xi^{(2m)}(A) \right) &= \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{( x_{2m}(b-a))^ke^{- x_{2m}(b-a)}}{k!}\left(\frac{ x_{2m-1}}{ x_{2m}}\right)^k\\ &=e^{-( x_{2m}- x_{2m-1})(b-a)}, \end{split} \end{equation} and by successive thinning we obtain for $j_{m-1}\leq j_m$: \begin{multline} \mu\left\{\left(\xi^{(2m-1)}(A)=\xi^{(2m)}(A)=j_m \right)\cap \left(\xi^{(2m-3)}(A)=\xi^{(2m-3)}(A)=j_{m-1} \right)\right\} =\\ \frac{( x_{2m}(b-a))^{j_m}e^{- x_{2m}(b-a)}}{j_m!} {{j_m}\choose{j_{m-1}}}\left(\frac{ x_{2m-3}}{ x_{2m-1}}\right)^{j_{m-1}}\left(1-\frac{ x_{2m-2}}{ x_{2m-1}} \right)^{j_m-j_{m-1}} \end{multline} Summing over all $0\leq j_{m-1}\leq j_{m}<\infty$, we obtain \begin{multline} \mu\left\{\left(\xi^{(2m-1)}(A)=\xi^{(2m)}(A)\right)\cap \xi^{(2m-3)}(A)=\xi^{(2m-3)}(A)\right)=\\ \exp\{-(b-a)( x_{2m}- x_{2m-1}+ x_{2m-2}- x_{2m-3})\} \end{multline} We can clearly iterate this, and a formula for the general case is given by: \begin{multline}\label{eq.reduction2} \mu\left\{\bigcap_{k=1}^{m}\left(\xi^{(2k-1)}(A)=\xi^{(2k)}(A)=j_k \right)\right\}=\\ \frac{( x_{2m-1}(b-a))^{j_m}e^{- x_{2m}(b-a)}}{k!}\prod_{k=2}^{m} {{j_k}\choose{j_{k-1}}}\left(\frac{ x_{2k-3}}{ x_{2k-1}}\right)^{j_{k-1}} \left(1-\frac{ x_{2k-2}}{ x_{2k-1}} \right)^{j_k-j_{k-1}} \end{multline} The probability of the event in \eqref{eq.reduction} is then obtained by summing together all probabilities in \eqref{eq.reduction2} with $0\leq j_1\leq j_2\leq\ldots\leq j_m$. By an iterative method we obtain $$\mu\left(\bigcap_{j=1}^{m}\{\xi^{(2j-1)}(A)=\xi^{2j}(A)\} \right) =\exp\{-\sum_{j=1}^{m}( x_{2j}- x_{2j-1})(b-a)\}=\exp\{-\mathrm{Leb}(B)\}.$$ This completes the proof. \section{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop.dr_un}}\label{sec.proof.prop.dr_un} We must first adapt \cite[Lemma 4.2]{FFT1}: \begin{lemma} \begin{enumerate} \item[(a)] Given sets $A_1, \ldots, A_w\subset [0, \infty)$ and $B_1\supset A_1$, let $\ell:=\#\{j\in {\mathbb N}:j\in B_1\setminus A_1\}$ and $(u_i)_{i=1}^w\subset {\mathbb R}$, \begin{align}&\left\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^w\{M(A_i)\leqslant u_i\}\right)-\mu\left( \{M(B_1)\leqslant u_1\}\cap \bigcap_{i=2}^w \{M(A_i)\leqslant u_i\}\right)\right\|\\ &\hspace{2cm}\leqslant \mu(M(A_1)\leqslant u_1)-\mu(M(B_1)\leqslant u_1)\leqslant\ell \mu(X>u_1), \end{align} \item[(b)] For $w\in {\mathbb N}$, assuming $\min\{x:x\in A_i, i=1, \ldots, w\}\geqslant r+t$, for $A_0=[0, r+t)$, for $u'>0$, \begin{align}&\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(A_0)\leqslant u'\}\cap\bigcap_{j=1}^w\{M(A_j)\leqslant u_j\}\right)-\mu\left(\bigcap_{j=1}^w \{M(A_j)\leqslant u_j\}\right)\\ &\hspace{6cm}+ \sum_{i=0}^{r-1}\mu\left(\{X>u'\}\cap\bigcap_{j=1}^w\{M(A_j-i)\leqslant u_j\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{5cm}\leqslant 2r\sum_{i=1}^{r-1}\mu\left(\{X>u'\}\cap\{X_i>u'\}\right)+t\mu(X>u'). \end{align} \end{enumerate} \label{lem:4.2} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} For the first part, the first equality is an elementary argument, while the final inequality follows from (4.1) in \cite[Lemma 4.2]{FFT1}. The second part follows as in (4.2) of \cite[Lemma 4.2]{FFT1}, itself a minor adaptation of \cite[Lemma 3.2]{FF}. \end{proof} \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop.dr_un}] We closely follow the proof of \cite[Proposition 1]{FFT1}. Let $h:=\inf_{j\in \{1,\ldots,p\}}\{b_j-a_j\}$ and $H:=\lceil\sup\{x:x\in A\}\rceil$. Take $k>2/h$ and $n$ sufficiently large. Note this guarantees that if we partition $n[0,H]\cap {\mathbb Z}$ into blocks of length $r_n:=\lfloor n/k\rfloor$, $J_1=[Hn-r_n,Hn)$, $J_2=[Hn-2r_n,Hn-r_n)$,\ldots, $J_{Hk}=[Hn-Hkr_n,n-(Hk-1)r_n)$, $J_{Hk+1}=[0,Hn-Hkr_n)$, then there is at least one of these blocks contained in $\ensuremath{n} I_i$. Let $S_\ell=S_\ell(k)$ be the number of blocks $J_j$ contained in $\ensuremath{n} I_\ell$ minus 1, that is, $$S_\ell:=\#\{j\in \{1,\ldots,Hk\}:J_j\subset \ensuremath{n} I_\ell\}-1.$$ So $S_\ell\ge0$ $\forall \ell\in \{1,\ldots,p\}$. Set $i_\ell:=\min\{j\in \{1,\ldots,k\}:J_j\subset \ensuremath{n} I_{\ell}\}.$ Then $J_{i_\ell},J_{i_\ell+1},\ldots,J_{i_\ell+S_\ell}\subset n I_\ell$. Now, fix $\ell$ and for each $ i\in \{i_{p-\ell +1},\ldots,i_{p-\ell +1}+S_{p-\ell+1}\}$ let $$ B_i:=\bigcup_{j=i_{p-\ell+1}}^i J_j,\; J_i^:=[Hn-ir_n, Hn-(i-1)r_n-t_n)\; \mbox{ and } J_i':=J_i-J_i^$$ for $t_n=o(n)$ given in $\tilde{\mathcal{D}}_r(u_n)$. Note that $\|J_i^\|=r_n-t_n$ and $\|J_i'\|=t_n$. See Figure~\ref{fig:notation} for more of an idea of the notation here. \begin{figure}[h] \includegraphics[scale=1]{notation3.eps} \caption{Notation}\label{fig:notation.pdf} \end{figure}\label{fig:notation} For the first part of the proof, we write $u_{n}^{(j)}=u_j$. Then for any $u'\in {\mathbb R}$ \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_i)\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u'))\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant \Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_i)\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{2cm}-\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{4cm}+r_n\mu(X>u')\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant \Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_i)\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{1cm}-\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{1cm}+\sum_{j=0}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu\left(\{X_{j+Hn-ir_n}>u'\}\cap\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap \left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\right)\Bigg\|\\ & \quad+\Bigg\|(r_n-t_n)\mu(X>u')\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{1.5cm} -\sum_{j=0}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu\left(\{X_{j+Hn-ir_n}>u'\}\cap \{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap \left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{8cm}+t_n\mu(X>u').\\ \end{align} \iffalse \begin{align} \|\mu(M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} & A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_n))\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\|\\ &=\Big\|\mu(M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)-\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\\&\qquad\qquad\quad+r_n \mu(X> u_n)\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1}) \leq u_n)\Big\|\\ & \leq \Big\|\mu(M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)-\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\\ &\qquad\qquad\quad+(r_n-t_n)\mu(X> u_n)\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1}) \leq u_n)\Big\|\\ &\quad+t_n\mu(X> u_n)\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1}) \leq u_n)\\ &\leq \Big\|\mu(M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)-\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\\ &\qquad\qquad\quad+\sum_{j=0}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu(\{X_{j+Hn-ir_n}>u_n\}\cap \{M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\}\Big\|\\ &\quad+\Big\|(r_n-t_n)\mu(X>u_n)\mu(M(B_{i-1}\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\\ &\qquad\qquad\quad-\sum_{j=0}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu(\{X_{j+Hn-ir_n}>u_n\}\cap \{M(B_i\cup \ensuremath{n} A_{\ell-1})\leq u_n)\}\Big\|\\&\quad+t_n\mu(X>u_n). \end{align} \fi We next apply Lemma~\ref{lem:4.2}(b) to the first sum in absolute value above. Since $B_i=J_i\cup B_{i-1}= J_i^\cup J_i'\cup B_{i-1}$, we can translate the sets in the first two terms here back by $Hn-ir_n$ and with $J_i-(Hn-ir_n)=[0, r_n)$ taking the place of $A_0$ in our lemma, and correspondingly shifting the terms in the sum there by $d_j=(j+Hn-ir_n)$. Then (also shifting terms in the second absolute value by $d_j$ and using the invariance of $\mu$), \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_i)\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{2cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u'))\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{5mm}\leqslant 2(r_n-t_n)\sum_{j=1}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu(\{X>u'\}\cap\{X_j>u'\}) +t_n\mu(X>u')\\ &\hspace{15mm}+\sum_{j=0}^{r_n-t_n-1}\Bigg\|\mu(X>u')\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{2cm} -\mu\left(\{X>u'\}\cap\{M(B_{i-1}-d_j)\leqslant u'\}\cap \left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1}-d_j)\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{10cm}+t_n\mu(X>u'). \end{align} Now using condition $\tilde{\mathcal{D}}_r(u_n)$, we obtain \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_i)\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u'))\mu\left(\{M(B_{i-1})\leqslant u'\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ & \leq 2(r_n-t_n)\sum_{j=1}^{r_n-t_n-1}\mu(\{X>u'\}\cap\{X_j>u'\}) +2t_n\mu(X>u')+(r_n-t_n)\gamma(n,t_n). \end{align} Set $$\Upsilon_{k,n}(u'):=2(r_n-t_n)\sum_{j=1}^{r_n-t_n-1} \mu(\{X>u'\}\cap\{X_j>u'\}) +2t_n\mu(X>u')+(r_n-t_n)\gamma(n,t_n).$$ By the definition of $u_j=u_{n, j}$, we may assume that $n$ and $k$ are sufficiently large so that $\frac{n}{k}\mu(X>u_j)<2$ and $\|1-r_n\mu(X>u_j)\|<1$ which implies \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{0.5cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}-1})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\qquad\leqslant\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1}), \end{align} and \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{0.3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^2\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}-2})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant \Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{0.5cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}-1})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\quad+\|1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1})\|\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}-1})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{0.7cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}-2})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant 2\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1}), \end{align} Inductively, we obtain \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{1cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+1}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\qquad\leqslant S_{p-\ell+1}\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1}). \end{align} Using Lemma~\ref{lem:4.2}(a), \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\\ &\hspace{1cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+1}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \\ &\hspace{2cm}-\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\quad+\Bigg\|\mu\left(\{M(B_{S_{p-\ell+1}})\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\\ &\hspace{1cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+1}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \\ &\hspace{2cm}-\mu\left(\left\{M\left(\cup_{i=i_\ell}^{S_{p-\ell+1}} J_i\right)\leqslant u_{p-\ell+1}\right\}\cap\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{8cm}+ S_{p-\ell+1}\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1})\\ & \leqslant 2r_n \mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1})+S_{p-\ell+1}\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1}). \end{align} For the next step we estimate \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \\ &\hspace{0.3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+1}}(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+2}))^{S_{p-\ell+2}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-2} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant \Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \\ &\hspace{3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+1}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{0.4cm}+\|1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+2})\|^{S_{p-\ell+2}}\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-1} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) \\ &\hspace{3cm}-(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1}))^{S_{p-\ell+2}}\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell-2} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right)\Bigg\|\\ &\leqslant 2r_n\left(\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+1})+\mu(X>u_{p-\ell+2})\right)+S_{p-\ell+1}\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+1})+S_{p-\ell+2}\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{p-\ell+2}) \end{align} Therefore, by induction, we obtain \begin{align} &\Bigg\|\mu\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^{\ell} \{M(nI_{p-i+1})\leqslant u_{p-i+1}\}\right) -\prod_{j=1}^p\left(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{j})\right)^{S_{j}}\Bigg\|\\ &\hspace{7cm}\leqslant 2r_n\sum_{j=1}^p\mu(X>u_j)+\sum_{j=1}^pS_j\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_j). \end{align} Now, it is easy to see that $S_j\sim k\|I_j\|$, for each $j\in\{1,\ldots,p\}$. Consequently, recalling $u_{n, j}=u_j$, \begin{align} &\lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty} \prod_{j=1}^p\left(1-r_n\mu(X>u_{j})\right)^{S_{j}}= \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty} \prod_{j=1}^p\left(1-\left\lfloor\frac{n}{k}\right\rfloor\mu(X>u_{j})\right)^{S_{j}}\\ &= \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty} \prod_{j=1}^p\left(1-\left\lfloor\frac{n}{k}\right\rfloor\mu(X>u_{j})\right)^{k\|I_{j}\|}= \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty} \prod_{j=1}^p\left(1-\frac{ x_j}{k}\right)^{k\|I_{j}\|}= \prod_{j=1}^p e^{- x_j\|I_{j}\|}\\ \end{align} To conclude the proof it suffices to show that \[ \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\left(2r_n\sum_{j=1}^p\mu(X>u_{n,j})+\sum_{j=1}^pS_j\Upsilon_{k,n}(u_{n,j})\right)=0. \] We start by noting that, since $n\mu(X>u_{n,j})\to x_j\geq 0$, \[ \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}2r_n \mu(X>u_{n,j})= \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty} \frac{2 x_j}{k}=0. \] Next we need to check that for each $j=1,\ldots, p$ \begin{multline} \lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty} 2k(r_n-t_n)\sum_{j=1}^{r_n-t_n-1} \mu(\{X>u_{n,j}\}\cap\{X_j>u_{n, j}\}) +2t_n\mu(X>u_{n, j}) \\+k(r_n-t_n)\gamma(n,t_n)=0. \end{multline} Recall that $t_n=o(n)$ is given by $\mathcal{D}_p(u_n^{(k)})$. Now, observe that for each $j=1, \ldots, p$ and every $k\in{\mathbb N}$, we have $ \lim_{n\to\infty}kt_n\mu(X>u_{n}^{(j)})=0 $. Finally, we use $\mathcal{D}_p(u_n^{(k)})$ and $\mathcal{D}_p'(u_n^{(k)})$ to prove that the two remaining terms also go to $0$. \end{proof} \section{Acknowledgements} The authors wish to thank J. Freitas, M. Nicol and D. Terhesiu for useful comments and discussions. This research was partially supported by the London Mathematics Society (Scheme 4, no. 41126), and both authors thank the Erwin Schr\"odigner Institute (ESI) in Vienna were part of this work was carried out. MH wishes to thank the Department of Mathematics, University of Houston for hospitality and financial support, and MT thanks Exeter University for their hospitality and support.
\section{Introduction} Making accurate predictions about nature requires a good model and precise knowledge about its parameters. Model selection \cite{burnhambook,akaike74,schwarz78} and parameter estimation are often considered as different goals but Bayesian inference \cite{sivia06} also provides a unified framework where these two tasks become parts of the same question. In this paper, we introduce simultaneous adaptive model selection and parameter estimation. As we explain below, this may be useful, e.g., for characterization of a qubit coupled to a bath of spurious two-level systems, a leading decoherence mechanism in the state-of-the-art superconducting qubits. In solid state devices one can {\it a priori} envision many different sources of decoherence and it is important to find systems where quantum information can be protected from decoherence. For a superconducting qubit, a popular early design was based on a Cooper-pair box \cite{nakamura99}, but it was very susceptible to charge noise, a decoherence mechanism that turned out to be extremely difficult to eliminate. Reengineering the design in a modified Cooper-pair box, a transmon qubit \cite{koch07}, it was, nevertheless, possible to circumvent the problem and considerably enhance the coherence times \cite{devoret13}. In modern transmon designs, experiments have provided considerably specific knowledge on the nature of decoherence. A body of experimental evidence suggests that a leading decoherence mechanism is due to a sparse bath of spurious incoherent two-level systems (TLSs) coupled to a qubit. This evidence consists, e.g., on studies of power \cite{schickfus77,martinis05,barends10} and frequency \cite{barends13} dependence of the dielectric loss as well as on the geometrical location of the TLSs \cite{gao08,wang09,barends10,wenner11,barends13}. Whereas the qubits with a larger junction area, e.g., phase qubits, often couple to TLSs where an excitation may coherently oscillate between the qubit and a TLS \cite{cooper04,shalibo10}, such coherent TLSs are rare in transmons \cite{barends13} where the junctions are smaller. Despite of these advances, the exact microscopic origin of TLSs is still uncertain, and it is important to gather information on different aspects \cite{palomaki10,lisenfeld10,grabovskij12,sarabi16} of individual TLSs. It is therefore useful to be able to efficiently characterize them. Knowing the TLS frequencies precisely also helps to avoid them in controlling the qubit frequency. Characterization of quantum systems often assumes that the form of the model is known and only its parameters are uncertain. However, there may also exist significant uncertainty even on the form of the model, i.e., on the number of parameters to be estimated. This is the case, for instance, when a qubit is coupled to TLSs whose number is initially unknown. Within Bayesian inference, model selection and parameter estimation may be carried out simultaneously. This fact is built in, e.g., in the recently introduced technique of model averaging \cite{ferrie14b}. In \cite{ferrie14b}, random, independently on data chosen, measurements were used for state estimation. While data-independent random controls are more easily realized experimentally and form, e.g., the basis of techniques such as randomized benchmarking \cite{emerson05,knill08,magesan11,magesan12}, it has been shown theoretically \cite{berry09,sergeevich11,huszar12,granade12,ferrie13,ferrie14a,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,granade15,stenberg15,stenberg16} and experimentally \cite{hannemann02,higgins07,xiang11,yonezawa12,kravtsov13,struchalin16} that in many situations adapting measurement settings during data collection can significantly speed up characterization. For adaptive measurements, the main task is to assign a set of rules, also called a policy, according to which the measurement settings can be chosen efficiently based on the data obtained. For concreteness, we present such a policy for characterization of a qubit and an initially unknown number of TLSs coupled to it. In the Bayesian framework, information on the previous measurements is, rather than revisiting all the previous data, encoded in the current Bayesian posterior probability distribution which can then for adaptive measurements be used for choosing the measurement settings efficiently. The sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) method \cite{west93,gordon93,liu01} has recently gained popularity in the quantum context \cite{huszar12,granade12,kravtsov13,ferrie13,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,ferrie14a,stenberg15,stenberg16,struchalin16} due to its computational efficiency. But as we explain below, the existing formulation of SMC does not work when the model is initially unknown. We generalize SMC to account simultaneously both for model selection and parameter estimation. Our approach is not limited to a particular physical system but may be used for a larger class of problems. \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig1} \caption{The background of the figure exhibits the swap spectrum of two incoherent TLSs coupled to a qubit in a numerically simulated experiment with the model parameters randomly chosen within the region described in Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}. The color scale for the swap spectrum represents the qubit excited state probability. The filled circles illustrate a simulated sequence of adaptive measurement settings (cf. Sec.~\ref{sec:adpol}) in the frequency--waiting time plane. The order of the measurement settings is denoted by their color (from black to white). For clarity, only every tenth measurement setting is shown. The frequencies are measured with respect to a reference frequency $\omega_0$, cf. Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}. Note the logarithmic scale on the time axis.} \label{fig:swap} \end{figure} \section{Modeling incoherent two-level systems coupled to a qubit} \label{sec:model} A qubit coupled to a bath of TLSs may be described by a master equation in the Lindblad form \cite{lindblad76} \begin{align} &\frac{d\hat{\rho}}{dt}=-\frac{i}{\hbar}[\hat{H}_{\rm JC},\hat{\rho}]+\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\rm d}}\sum_{k=1}^{4}\mathcal{D}[\hat{C}_{k}^{(j)}]\hat{\rho}, \label{eq:lindblad} \end{align} where $\hat{\rho}$ is the density matrix of the qubit and $n_{\rm d}$ is the number of TLSs coupling to the qubit. When $n_{\rm d}$ is initially unknown, we follow the terminology in the field of model selection and refer to the model as uncertain, even though the form of Eq.~(\ref{eq:lindblad}) is still assumed to be known. The coherent contribution to the time evolution is given by the Hamiltonian \cite{blais04} \begin{align} \hat{H}_{{\rm JC}}=&\hbar\omega_{\rm q}\left(\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}+\frac{1}{2}\right)\nonumber\\ &+\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\rm d}}\left[\frac{\hbar\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}}{2}\hat{\sigma}_{z}+\hbar g_{j}\left(\hat{\sigma}_{+}^{(j)}\hat{a}+\hat{\sigma}_{-}^{(j)}\hat{a}^{\dagger}\right)\right], \label{eq:JC} \end{align} where $g_j\ll\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$. Here, $\omega_{\rm q}$ is the frequency difference of the ground and the first excited state in the qubit (operators $\hat{a}^{(\dag)}$) that is assumed to be controllable in the experimental setup and $\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$ is the frequency difference between the two energy levels of the $j$th TLS ($\hat{\sigma}$ operators). The coupling strength between the qubit and the $j$th TLS is denoted by $g_j$. When the TLSs interact incoherently with the qubit, Markovian decoherence can be described by the Lindblad operator described in Appendix~\ref{app:lindblad}. A qubit coupled to incoherent TLSs undergoes frequency-dependent energy relaxation, so that its excited state probability decreases exponentially \cite{barends13} \begin{equation} P_{\rm e}=e^{-\frac{t}{T_1}}. \label{eq:groundstate_oc} \end{equation} The directly observable energy relaxation time $T_1$ of the qubit can be modeled through the frequency-independent energy relaxation time $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ and the decay rates $\Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)}$ due to different TLSs. For incoherent TLSs, their total contribution is obtained by adding the individual decay rates, and for $\frac{1}{T_{1,Q}}<g_j< \frac{1}{T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(j)}}$ one obtains \cite{barends13} \begin{equation} \frac{1}{T_{1}}=\frac{1}{T_{1,{\rm q}}}+\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\rm d}}\Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)},\quad \Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)}=\frac{2g_j^2}{1/T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(j)}+T_{2,\rm d}^{(j)}\Delta_j^2}. \label{eq:incohsum} \end{equation} Here, $T_{2,\rm d}^{(j)}$ is the coherence time of the $j$th defect and $\Delta_j=\omega_{\rm q}-\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$ is the frequency detuning. \section{Swap spectroscopy} The understanding of time resolved spectroscopy, referred to as swap spectroscopy \cite{cooper04,neeley08,shalibo10,mariantoni11a,mariantoni11b,barends13}, may be facilitated by a graphical illustration. Figure~\ref{fig:swap} exhibits a simulated swap spectrum of two incoherent TLSs. One starts by preparing the qubit in the excited state such that the TLSs are in their ground state. This can be done by setting $\omega_{\rm q}$ far from any $\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$ and then exciting the qubit with a microwave pulse. Once $\omega_{\rm q}$ has been fixed to a chosen value (horizontal axis in Fig.~\ref{fig:swap}), the system is allowed to evolve a time $t$ (vertical axis in Fig.~\ref{fig:swap}) after which the qubit is measured in the $\hat{\sigma}_{z}$ basis. The system is then reset to its ground state before the next measurement. The measurement is repeated at the same setting $(\omega_{\rm q},t)$ many, usually thousands of times, to approximate the qubit excited state probability (color scale of Fig.~\ref{fig:swap}). For coherent TLSs, chevron patterns in the swap spectrum can be used to identify the TLS frequency and the strength of its coupling with the qubit \cite{cooper04}. The conventional technique of doing this (for a detailed explanation, see, e.g. \cite{stenberg14}) is based on first finding the TLS frequency $\omega_{\rm d}$ and then deducing the coupling strength that is proportional to the frequency of coherent oscillations that the excitation undergoes between the qubit and the TLS. This conventional method does not require Bayesian inference but it is not equally efficient or precise than more sophisticated Bayesian schemes \cite{stenberg14,stenberg16}. Furthermore, reviewing the former technique shows that it does not work for incoherent TLSs because an excitation can not coherently oscillate between the qubit and the TLS. Instead, a more general approach based on Bayesian inference can still be applied. \section{Adaptive Bayesian inference scheme} An adaptive Bayesian inference scheme is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:bayesianinf}. The starting point is the initial prior probability distribution $P({\boldsymbol x}\|d_0)$, that describes the experimenters {\it a priori} conception or subjective belief about the values of the unknown parameters encoded in vector ${\boldsymbol x}$ and their uncertainties. In principle, assigning the initial prior does not require any data on the current sample, and one may denote $d_0=\emptyset$. When new data $d_{n+1}$ in the $(n+1)$th measurement setting is obtained, the updated probability distribution describing the unknown parameters may be obtained through Bayes' theorem \cite{sivia06} \begin{equation} P({\boldsymbol x}\|D_{n+1})=\frac{P(d_{n+1}\|{\boldsymbol x})P({\boldsymbol x}\|D_n)}{\int P(d_{n+1}\|{\boldsymbol x}') P({\boldsymbol x}'\|D_n) d {\boldsymbol x}'}. \label{eq:iter_bayes} \end{equation} We assume the measurement is repeated at a single setting $M_{\rm r}$ times, so that each $d_n$ denotes the outcome of $M_{\rm r}$ measurement shots. By a measurement shot we mean a single projective measurement with a binary outcome. The ordered set of measurement outcomes in $n-1$ settings is denoted by $D_n=(d_0,\ldots,d_n)$. The function $P(d_{n+1}\|{\boldsymbol x})$, referred to as likelihood, describes the probability for data $d_{n+1}$ prior to the experiment for different hypothetical parameter values ${\boldsymbol x}$. The likelihood of data $d={\rm e}$ (qubit excited state) is one of the key formulas for the adaptive scheme, and in the setup of this paper it is given by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:groundstate_oc}) and (\ref{eq:incohsum}). The role of the denominator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:iter_bayes}) is to ensure the normalization dictated by the conservation of probability. The purpose of applying Bayes' theorem is to obtain the quantity $P({\boldsymbol x}\|D_{n+1})$, referred to as the posterior, that describes the probability density for different ${\boldsymbol x}$ given data $D_{n+1}$. As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:bayesianinf}, the posterior may be assigned as the prior before the next measurement which makes iterative application of (\ref{eq:iter_bayes}) possible. The estimate is defined by the mean of the posterior $\hat{{\boldsymbol x}}=\int {\boldsymbol x}P({\boldsymbol x}\|D)d{\boldsymbol x}$. Here, the hat denotes an estimate rather than an operator, and we have omitted the subscript in $D$ for simplicity. Once a sufficient amount of data has been collected, the estimation scheme is terminated and the final estimate is extracted. \begin{figure}[h!] \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig2} \caption{Schematics of an adaptive Bayesian inference scheme with the notation used in the main text.} \label{fig:bayesianinf} \end{figure} \section{Adaptive detection and characterization of the defects} \label{sec:adpol} The Bayesian inference scheme reviewed in the previous section does not, {\it per se}, dictate how the measurement settings should be chosen. By terminology adopted from machine learning, the rules according to which such a choice is made are referred to as a policy. Note that a policy does not necessarily determine the next measurement setting deterministically but may only give a probability distribution from which the measurement setting is randomly picked. We now present a policy that performs both model selection and parameter estimation simultaneously. As explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:model}, we allow the number of spurious TLSs to be initially uncertain. Since characterizing different TLSs generally requires measurements with $\omega_{\rm q}$ set to different frequencies, this raises, e.g., a question, how should the measurements be allocated between different potential TLSs. For incoherent TLSs, we also need a different way of choosing the waiting times $t$ than those discussed, e.g., in \cite{stenberg14,stenberg16} where it was assumed that an excitation may undergo at least some coherent oscillations between the qubit and the TLS. To quantify the difference between coherent and incoherent TLSs, we note that it can be characterized by the ratio $\frac{g_{j}}{\Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)}}$. Incoherent TLSs couple incoherently to the qubit and one has $\frac{g_{j}}{\Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)}}\lesssim\frac{1}{4}$, implying the absence of coherent oscillations between the qubit and the TLS \cite{barends13}. In the absence of an explicit formula for choosing $({\omega_{\rm q}},t)$, an experimenter needs to resort to {\it ad hoc} decisions of his own. To choose $({\omega_{\rm q}},t)$ systematically, we propose the following policy \begin{align} & P_{\omega_{\rm q}}=\frac{P_{1,{\rm p}}P_{\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}}(\omega_{\rm q}\|D)+P_{2,{\rm p}}P_{\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}}(\omega_{\rm q}\|D)}{P_{1,{\rm p}}+P_{2,{\rm p}}},\nonumber\\ &t=r\hat{T_1},\quad r\in (0,1]. \label{eq:P_omega_q} \end{align} Here, $\omega_{\rm q}$ is chosen randomly following the probability distribution $P_{\omega_{\rm q}}$. The latter is a linear combination of posteriors $P_{\omega_{\rm d}}^{(j)}$ for the TLS frequencies $\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$. The prefactors $P_{1,{\rm p}}$ and $P_{2,{\rm p}}$ denote the prior probabilities for the presence of at least one and two defects, respectively, and the denominator ensures the conservation of probability. Note that if $P_{1,{\rm p}}+P_{2,{\rm p}}=0$, the value of $\omega_{\rm q}$ is irrelevant since by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:groundstate_oc}) and (\ref{eq:incohsum}), the qubit excited state probability does not depend on frequency. Moreover, $r$ is a uniform random variable on the interval $(0,1]$ and $\hat{T}_1$ denotes the mean over the posterior $\hat{T}_1=\int T_1 P({\boldsymbol x}\|D)d{\boldsymbol x}$, with $\boldsymbol{x}=(g_1,g_2,\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)},\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)},T_{1,{\rm q}})$ encoding all the unknown model parameters. The relaxation time $T_1$ at different parameter values is obtained through Eq.~(\ref{eq:incohsum}). In Fig.~(\ref{fig:swap}), the filled circles illustrate a simulated sequence of adaptive measurement settings, generated by the policy (\ref{eq:P_omega_q}), in the $\omega_{\rm q}$-$t$ plane. While the settings are initially uniformly distributed on the frequency interval, they later concentrate on the most relevant frequency ranges close to $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$ and $\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}$. This would not be possible with measurement settings chosen prior to data collection which tends to make such measurements less efficient. As directly implied by Eq.~(\ref{eq:P_omega_q}), the width of the range of waiting times $t$ is proportional to the expected $T_1$ at a given frequency. Without incorporating the current knowledge about $T_1$, one would tend to choose $t$ either too short or too long, rendering the measurement outcomes less sensitive to model parameters and leading to less accurate estimates. \section{Initial prior} \label{sec:iprior} To evaluate the performance of our policy, we have applied it to large numbers of simulated samples with the true number of defects $n_{\rm d}$ equal to 0, 1, and 2. The parameters characterizing a sample are chosen uniformly in random such that $g_1,g_2\in [0.34,0.46]$ MHz, $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)},\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}\in [\omega_0-60,\omega_0+60]$ MHz, $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)}\in [50,100]$ ns, and $T_{1,{\rm q}}\in [30,44]\ \mu s$. Note that the frequency $\omega_0$ denoting the mean of the interval does not play a role in the following discussion. The time interval for $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)}$ is chosen to be consistent with the experimental observations in \cite{martinis05,shalibo10,barends13}, and the interval for $T_{1,\rm q}$ is chosen to correspond typical values for Xmon qubits \cite{barends13}. The parameter region for the coupling strengths and the defect frequencies is such that it can contain 2 or a smaller number of defects in experiments with transmons \cite{barends13}. In the initial prior, the maximum number of defects is assumed to be 2 ($n_{\rm d}\le 2$), so that their number can be either 0, 1, or 2, each with the probability $\frac{1}{3}$. Given that the probabilistic information on the different quantities presented in the previous paragraph is everything that is known about a particular sample before data collection, the initial prior is chosen to be consistent with the probability distributions described above which uniquely determines the initial prior. We emphasize that we use the same initial prior for all the figures below, i.e., neither the true number of defects nor the values of any model parameters (except for $\hbar$) are assumed to be {\it a priori} known precisely. We label the defects such that the one with the higher (lower) $g$ is referred with the subscript 1 (2). In Figs.~\ref{fig:defects2} and \ref{fig:defects01}, all the curves are obtained by considering \mbox{10 000} simulated samples and in Fig.~\ref{fig:abspres} through 100 000 samples. \section{Sequential Monte Carlo method for simultaneous adaptive model selection and parameter estimation} \label{sec:extended} We implement the adaptive Bayesian inference scheme numerically through the sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) method \cite{west93,gordon93,liu01} that has, due to its computational efficiency, recently gained popularity in the context of quantum measurements \cite{huszar12,granade12,ferrie13,kravtsov13,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,granade15,stenberg15,stenberg16,struchalin16}. It approximates a continuous probability distribution $P({\boldsymbol x}\|D)$ through $N_{\rm p}$ moving grid points or ``particles'' that are characterized by their locations $\mathcal{S}=\{{\boldsymbol x_i}\}_{i=1}^{N_{\rm p}}$ in the parameter space and their relative probabilities, called weights, $\{w_i\}_{i=1}^{N_{\rm p}}$, that satisfy the normalization condition \begin{equation} \sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm p}}w_i = 1 \label{eq:normalization} \end{equation} due to conservation of probability. We perform the computations with $N_{\rm p}=40\ 000$. Once new data $d_{n+1}$ has been obtained, Bayes' theorem (\ref{eq:iter_bayes}) implies that the likelihood function may be used to update a weight $w_i$ to its new value $w_i'$ \begin{equation} w_i'\sim P(d_{n+1}\|{\boldsymbol x}_n)w_i. \end{equation} To cast this proportionality as an equality, an overall prefactor that is determined by the normalization condition (\ref{eq:normalization}) has to be assigned on the right-hand side. We note that the SMC scheme described, e.g., in \cite{west93,gordon93,liu01,huszar12,granade12,ferrie13,kravtsov13,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,granade15,stenberg15,stenberg16,struchalin16} assumes a fixed, known, number of parameters to be estimated, and does not therefore adequately apply to our problem where we intend to characterize an {\it a priori} unknown number of defects in a sample. To point where the problems would arise, let us briefly review the role of the so-called resampling of the particles in the algorithm. Resampling is an element of the SMC scheme but does not constitute the whole algorithm; for the complete presentation of the algorithm, we refer to \cite{liu00,granade12,stenberg16}. Resampling imposes on the particles artificial dynamics whose purpose is to ``smoothen'' the discrete representation of the probability distribution $P({\boldsymbol x}\|d_{n})$ and to collect the particles in the regions where the probability density is the highest, thus mitigating a limitation in accuracy that a fixed grid would cause. By construction, the artificial dynamics is constrained so that the expected mean and the covariances of the probability distibution are conserved. Resampling assigns a new particle position in three steps denoted by (i)-(iii) below. These steps are implemented for every particle, i.e., $N_{\rm p}$ times for each update of the posterior. First, in step (i), among the current particle positions $\mathcal{S}$, one is chosen randomly following the discrete probability distribution $\{w_i\}_{i=1}^{N_{\rm p}}$. Let us assume this is the $n$th choice we make in the current update of the posterior and denote the location by ${\boldsymbol x}_n$. In step (ii), the position of this particle is shifted slightly to define the mean ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}$ for the $n$th resampling distribution \begin{equation} {\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}=a{\boldsymbol x}_n+(1-a)\hat{\boldsymbol x}. \label{eq:shift} \end{equation} Here, the approximate mean $\hat{\boldsymbol x}$ of the particle locations, i.e., the current estimate of ${\boldsymbol x}$, is obtained through $\hat{\boldsymbol x}=\sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm p}}w_i{\boldsymbol x_i}$, and $0\le a\le 1$ is a parameter that determines the location of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}$ on a line connecting ${\boldsymbol x}_n$ and $\hat{\boldsymbol x}$. For the problem at hand, we obtain the best estimates with approximately $a=0.995$. The purpose of the second step is to ``compress'' the probability distribution to counteract the third step that increases the covariances. Finally, in step (iii), the new particle position is assigned by sampling from a (generally multidimensional) normal distribution \begin{equation} {\boldsymbol x}_n'\sim \mathcal{N}[{\boldsymbol \mu}_{n},{\boldsymbol \Sigma}] \label{eq:resampling} \end{equation} with the mean ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}$ and the covariance matrix ${\boldsymbol \Sigma}$. The matrix ${\boldsymbol \Sigma}$ is defined by \begin{equation} {\boldsymbol \Sigma}=(1-a^2){\rm Cov}[{\boldsymbol x}], \label{eq:sigmadef} \end{equation} where ${\rm Cov}[{\boldsymbol x}]$ is the covariance matrix calculated over the particle positions $\mathcal{S}$. In Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}), also ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}$ is a random variable since its value depends on the random variable ${\boldsymbol x}_n$, and the role of the prefactor $(1-a^2)\le1$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigmadef}) is to ensure that the covariances are conserved in resampling. In our example, we model a sample with two defects ($n_{\rm d}=2$) by a vector of the form $\boldsymbol{x}^{(2)}=(g_1,g_2,\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)},\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)},T_{1,{\rm q}})\in \mathbb{R}^7$. Since it is computationally convenient that all the particles are represented by vectors of the same length, we represent particles with $n_{\rm d}=1$ ($n_{\rm d}=0$) by vectors of the form $\boldsymbol{x}^{(1)}=(g_1,0,\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)},0,T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},0,T_{1,{\rm q}})$ [$\boldsymbol{x}^{(0)}=(0,0,0,0,0,0,T_{1,{\rm q}})$]. This yields the correct observables. We also introduce the following shorthand notation for the sets of vectors describing samples with 0,1, and 2 defects \begin{align} &\mathcal{S}^{(0)}=\{{\boldsymbol x}_n^{(0)}\in \mathcal{S}\|g_{1,n}=0,g_{2,n}=0\},\nonumber\\ &\mathcal{S}^{(1)}=\{{\boldsymbol x}_n^{(1)}\in \mathcal{S}\|g_{1,n}\neq 0,g_{2,n}=0\},\nonumber\\ &\mathcal{S}^{(2)}=\{{\boldsymbol x}_n^{(2)}\in \mathcal{S}\|g_{1,n}\neq 0,g_{2,n}\neq 0\}. \label{eq:Ssets} \end{align} Since we assume that the number of defects can only have the values $n_{\rm d}=0,1,2$, we trivially have $\mathcal{S}=\bigcup_{k=0}^{2}\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ and the intersection of the different sets is empty $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}\bigcap \mathcal{S}^{(j)}=\emptyset$, $k\neq j$. Let us now consider ${\boldsymbol x}^{(k)}_n$ ($k=0,1$) that initially belongs to $\mathcal{S}^{(0)}$ or $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$. We note that in resampling, shifting of the vector components in step (ii) through Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}) would generally move ${\boldsymbol x}^{(k)}_n$ to $\mathcal{S}^{(2)}$. This is clearly an incorrect outcome since steps (ii) and (iii) are merely an unphysical computational procedure. They should not generally immediately change $n_{\rm d}$ to its maximum value for all the particles, but this is what would happen if the standard formulation of SMC would be applied without any modifications. A logical conclusion is that in step (ii), the components $g_2,\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)},T_{2,{\rm r}}^{(2)}$ (components $g_1,g_2,\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)},\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)},T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)}$) of ${\boldsymbol x}^{(1)}_n\in\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ (${\boldsymbol x}^{(0)}_n\in\mathcal{S}^{(0)}$) should not be shifted at all. But if the SMC algorithm is modified this way, the rest of the scheme has to be modified too, in order to conserve the covariances of the probability distribution. We find that covariances may be conserved by modifying resampling as follows, treating probability distributions for different numbers of particles separately. In step (i) of the resampling, we pick randomly ${\boldsymbol x}_n\in \mathcal{S}$ as in the standard scheme. As explained above, ${\boldsymbol x}_n\in \mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ with exactly one $k$ such that we may denote ${\boldsymbol x}_n={\boldsymbol x}_n^{(k)}$. In step (ii), we replace Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}) by the equation ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}^{(k)}=a{\boldsymbol x}^{(k)}_n+(1-a)\hat{\boldsymbol x}^{(k)}$, where the superscript in ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}^{(k)}$ and $\hat{\boldsymbol x}^{(k)}$ signifies that they are evaluated over $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ rather than $\mathcal{S}$. In (iii), we replace Eq.~(\ref{eq:resampling}) by ${{{\boldsymbol x}'}_n^{(k)}}\sim \mathcal{N}[{\boldsymbol \mu}_{n}^{(k)},{\boldsymbol \Sigma}^{(k)}]$, with ${\boldsymbol \Sigma}^{(k)}=(1-a^2){\rm Cov}[{\boldsymbol x^{(k)}}]$ where ${\rm Cov}[{\boldsymbol x^{(k)}}]$ is the covariance matrix evaluated over $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ rather than $\mathcal{S}$. When the SMC algorithm is modified this way, steps (ii) and (iii) in resampling conserve the number of defects $n_{\rm d}$ as well as the expected means and covariances for each $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ with $k=0,1,2$ separately. Since the expected means and the covariances are conserved for each $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ separately, they are also conserved for $\mathcal{S}$ which satisfies our goal. For the reasons presented above, the computations with an unmodified resampling algorithm would be marred by severe numerical errors, but the modified resampling scheme mitigates these issues. To summarize, one can say that the idea of our generalized SMC scheme is to implement the standard scheme for different sets $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$ separately. Within our generalized SMC scheme, the probabilities $P_{k,{\rm p}}$ ($P_{k,{\rm a}}$) for the presence of at least $k$ defects (less than $k$ defects) in the sample may be approximated after counting the particles in $\mathcal{S}^{(k)}$, $k=0,1,2$. For instance, let us denote the set of indices of the particles in $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ by $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$ such that $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}=\{x_i\|i\in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}\}$. We can then approximate $P_{1,{\rm p}}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}\bigcup\mathcal{I}^{(2)}}w_i$. The probabilities $P_{k,{\rm a}}$ and $P_{k,{\rm p}}$ are discussed in the context of Fig.~\ref{fig:abspres}. The computations presented within this article apply the generalized SMC method described above and we carry them out with a computer program using Python and Fortan programming languages and NumPy \cite{ascher01} and SciPy \cite{jones01} software packages. \section{Results} \label{sec:results} Figure \ref{fig:defects2} presents the results for samples with exactly two defects ($n_{\rm d}=2$). Here, normalized median squared errors are plotted as a function of the number of estimates $N_{\rm est}$ obtained (one for the initial prior and one for each measurement setting). For each measurement setting, the measurement is repeated $M_{\rm r}=200$ times, such that the total number of measurement shots is $M=M_{\rm r} (N_{\rm est}-1)$. We find that the errors for $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$ and $\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}$ decrease monotonically over the range of $N_{\rm est}$ studied, but the errors for $g_1$, $g_2$, $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)}$,$T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)}$ saturate at $N_{\rm est}$ of the order of $\sim 10^2$. Typical observable relaxation times $T_1$ of a qubit (an example may be inferred from Fig.~\ref{fig:swap}) are at least an order of magnitude shorter than typical values of $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ (cf. Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}). Due to relative weakness of the corresponding signal, we are therefore unable to considerably improve the estimates of $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ from their initial values (not shown in the figure), but the uncertainty in $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ still allows us to improve the estimates of $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$ and $\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}$ which are experimentally the most relevant quantities. The samples with a single defect ($n_{\rm d}=1$) and with no defects ($n_{\rm d}=0$) are described in Fig.~\ref{fig:defects01}. A single defect can be characterized by the quantities $g_1$, $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$, and $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)}$ and the normalized median squared errors of the estimates of these quantities are here plotted as a function of $N_{\rm est}$. In the absence of any defects, the qubit relaxation is determined by the frequency-independent $T_{1,{\rm q}}$. At $N_{\rm est}\sim 10^2$, its median squared error is decreased to the level that with the given initial uncertainty corresponds to the uncertainty of approximately $\sim 1\mu s$, but with larger $N_{\rm est}$ the error saturates due to issues that we attribute to numerical accuracy. In the presence of a defect, similarly to Fig.~\ref{fig:defects2}, due to weakness of the signal, we are not able to considerably improve the estimates of $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ (not shown in the figure), but the remaining uncertainty in $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ nevertheless allows to decrease the error of $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$. Above, we have not yet shown how quickly the policy learns about the possible absence of defects in the samples. We find that when $M_{\rm r}=200$ as above, a single measurement settings is sufficient to find the absence or presence of the defects (not shown in the figures). To more precisely quantify this efficiency, we now reduce the number of repetitions of the measurements, and thereby the information gained, at a single setting and set $M_{\rm r}=1$ such that the number of measurement shots is simply $M=M_{\rm r} (N_{\rm est}-1)=N_{\rm est}-1$. In Fig.~\ref{fig:abspres}, we plot the median Bayesian probabilities for the three diffent pieces of knowledge describing the absence of defects. These are the probability for the absence of any defects $P_{1,{\rm a}}$, when the true number of defects is $n_{\rm d}=0$ (cyan curve with asterisks), as well as the probabilities for the absence of a second defect $P_{2,{\rm a}}$, with $n_{\rm d}=1$ (brown with `+' symbols) and with $n_{\rm d}=0$ (red with crosses). The figure also exhibits median Bayesian probabilities quantifying three diffent (correct) beliefs in the presence of defects. These are the probability for the existence of at least a single defect $P_{1,{\rm p}}$, with $n_{\rm d}=1$ (blue with circles) and with $n_{\rm d}=2$ (black solid), and the probability for the existence of a second defect $P_{2,{\rm p}}$, when $n_{\rm d}=2$ (magenta). The initial values of the probabilities are determined by the initial prior described in Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}. All the probabilities except $P_{2,{\rm a}}$ with $n_{\rm d}=1$ and $P_{2,{\rm p}}$ with $n_{\rm d}=2$ reach a level virtually indistinguishable from unity, i.e., certainty about a belief that is correct, after $M\sim$ 10 measurement shots whereas the latter reach such a value after $M\sim 10^2$ shots. Note that here, the distance to unity can be interpreted as error in model selection since it represents the Bayesian probability of the all the other models except the correct one. The initial prior and Bayes' theorem (\ref{eq:iter_bayes}) imply that the possible number of defects allowed in any posterior can not exceed 2. Comparing the results of Fig.~\ref{fig:abspres} with those in Figs.~\ref{fig:defects2} and \ref{fig:defects01} shows that here, model selection requires considerably less measurements than parameter estimation. \begin{figure}[h!] \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig3} \caption{Accuracy of parameter estimation in the presence of two defects in a sample ($n_{\rm d}=2$). Normalized median squared error as a function of the number of estimates $N_{\rm est}$ for different parameters of the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:model}: $g_1$ (cyan with circles), $g_2$ (blue with asterisks), $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$ (red with squares), $\omega_{\rm d}^{(2)}$ (black solid), $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)}$ (brown with `+' symbols), and $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(2)}$ (magenta with crosses).} \label{fig:defects2} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[h!] \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig4} \caption{Accuracy of parameter estimation in the absence of any defects in a sample ($n_{\rm d}=0$) and in the presence of a single defect ($n_{\rm d}=1$). Normalized median squared error as a function of the number of estimates $N_{\rm est}$ for different parameters of the model described in Sec.~\ref{sec:model}: $g_1$ (brown with circles), $\omega_{\rm d}^{(1)}$ (black solid), $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(1)}$ (blue with `+' symbols), and $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ (red with squares).} \label{fig:defects01} \end{figure} \begin{figure}[h!] \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig5} \caption{Model selection in the presence of an unknown number of defects in a sample, cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:lindblad}). Different curves exhibit the medians of the Bayesian probabilities as a function of the number of measurement shots. The Bayesian probabilities are for the presence of at least a single defect ($P_{1,{\rm p}}$), for the presence of a second defect ($P_{2,{\rm p}}$), for the absence of any defects ($P_{1,{\rm a}}$), and for the absence of a second defect ($P_{2,{\rm a}}$). The true number of defects is denoted by $n_{\rm d}=0,1,2$.} \label{fig:abspres} \end{figure} \section{Conclusion} We have generalized the concept of adaptive measurements to account for simultaneous model selection and parameter estimation. We implemented a policy built on an adaptive Bayesian scheme using a generalization of sequential Monte Carlo method. Since global optimization through utility \cite{sivia06} maximization would generally be numerically challenging, many recent works making use of Bayesian inference have adopted either greedy algorithms \cite{berry00,fischer00,berry01,sergeevich11,huszar12,ferrie13,kravtsov13,struchalin16} that optimize a certain utility function assuming the next measurement is the last one, or different heuristics that choose measurement settings adaptively through a probability distribution \cite{wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,stenberg15,stenberg16}. Our work belongs to the latter category. Assuming the model is known and that only its parameter values are uncertain, it should be noted that the difficulty of parameter estimation depends on the model. In certain cases it is possible to drastically outperform nonadaptive measurements and, e.g., to improve the accuracy of the estimate exponentially as a function of the number of measurement shots \cite{sergeevich11,ferrie13,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14}. Basically, this is because in the systems considered in \cite{sergeevich11,ferrie13,wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14}, small changes in the coupling strength may correspond to a large change in the observable $P_{\rm e}$ when $t$ is long. However, in the system studied within this paper (with the parameters in the region discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}), long $t$ leads to loss of the signal due to rapid relaxation of the qubit which is why small changes in $g_j$ and $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(j)}$ always correspond to small differences in $P_{\rm e}$. Hence inferring $g_j$ and $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(j)}$ is difficult. Estimation of $T_{1,{\rm q}}$ is challenging because the competing contribution of $\Gamma_{1,{\rm d}}^{(j)}$ (that depends on $g_j$ and $T_{2,{\rm d}}^{(j)}$) on $P_{\rm e}$ is much stronger, cf. Eqs.~(\ref{eq:groundstate_oc}) and (\ref{eq:incohsum}) and Sec.~\ref{sec:iprior}. Furthermore, since the volume of the parameter space increases exponentially with its dimension, this makes the set of particles sparser. This ``curse of dimensionality'' decreases the effective sample size $N_{\rm ess}=\frac{1}{\sum_{i}w_i^2}$, making it smaller than, e.g., in the considerations of \cite{stenberg14,stenberg15,stenberg16}, which may increase the numerical error. We attribute the observed floors in accuracy in Figs.~\ref{fig:defects2} and \ref{fig:defects01} to competition between information obtained through measurements and accumulated numerical error. Despite these challenges, we are able to decrease the squared error of $\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$ by a factor of $\sim 10^3$ by making only $\sim 10^3$ updates in the measurement setting. We emphasize that $\omega_{\rm d}^{(j)}$ are the quantities that are the most relevant, e.g., to protect a qubit from unwanted decoherence since avoiding parking the qubit at these frequencies makes its coherence time longer. Even though in this paper we have considered characterization of incoherent TLSs as an example, the idea of simultaneous adaptive model selection and parameter estimation is applicable to a larger class of problems. For instance, once the required likelihood functions have been derived, it is straightforward to generalize the work in \cite{stenberg14,stenberg16} for an unknown number of coherent TLSs. For a larger number of TLSs in the frequency interval, we note that when their frequencies $\omega_i$ are sufficiently far from each others to neglect the overlaps in their swap spectra, a simple approximation holds. Denoting the mean squared error of a TLS frequency $\omega_i$ by $\mathcal{E}^2_{\omega_i}$, we expect that $\frac{1}{n_{\rm d}}\sum_{i=1}^{n_{\rm d}}\mathcal{E}^2_{\omega_i}(Mn_{\rm d})\|_{n_{\rm d}}\approx\mathcal{E}^2_{\omega_1}(M)\|_{n_{\rm d=1}}$, i.e., the mean squared error averaged over $n_{\rm d}$ defects after $Mn_{\rm d}$ measurement shots is approximately equal to $\mathcal{E}^2_{\omega_1}$ after $M$ shots in the presence of a single defect because in the former case the measurements have to be allocated among a larger number ($n_{\rm d}$) of different TLSs. In a more realistic scenario, one has to take into account the overlaps in the swap spectra which is difficult without doing the full numerical calculation. Another topic for further research is the influence of imperfections in the readout. Such errors are best tolerated when first quantified and then incorporated in the likelihood function. For instance, when the probability of misidentifying a qubit ground state as an excited state or vice versa equals $\gamma$ one has to replace Eq.~(\ref{eq:groundstate_oc}) by $P_{\rm e}=(1-2\gamma)\exp[-t/T_1]+\gamma$. As discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}, selecting the correct model usually requires much less data than achieving a reasonable degree of accuracy in parameter estimation, i.e., the correct model is usually found in a very early stage of the parameter estimation. On the other hand, adaptive Bayesian inference scheme combined with SMC approximation has been shown to be robust against substantial amount of readout errors for parameter estimation of different fixed models \cite{wiebe14a,wiebe14b,stenberg14,stenberg16} as well for estimation of different quantum states \cite{kravtsov13,stenberg15,struchalin16}. We thus expect that robustness against readout errors can also quite generally be achieved for simultaneous adaptive model selection and parameter estimation. In conclusion, assuming both the model and all its parameters are initially uncertain, we formulated system characterizion in a unified Bayesian framework and delivered numerical tools required for solving a concrete problem. We applied our method for efficient detection and characterization of a sparse bath of incoherent spurious two-level systems, a leading decoherence mechanism in the state-of-the-art superconducting qubits. \section*{ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS} We acknowledge O. K\"ohn for discussions. This work was supported by the European Union through ScaleQIT.
\section{Introduction} Subdivisions of polytopes often support cellular resolutions. Dochtermann, Joswig, and Sanyal~\cite{DJS} showed that regular mixed subdivisions of $n\Delta_k$ supports minimal cellular resolutions. Dochtermann, Fink, and Sanyal~\cite{DFS} recently generalized this, by showing that regular mixed subdivisions of Minkowski sums of simplices support minimal cellular resolutions. They asked if the regularity condition can be removed. We show that the condition can be removed in the fine mixed subdivision case by introducing the concepts of diced and sharp polytopes. The main result, Theorem~\ref{thm:maint}, is that subdivisions of a diced polytope into sharp cells always give cellular resolutions. It is immediate that a Minkowski sum of simplices is diced, and that cells in the fine mixed subdivision are sharp. A less developed version of the geometric methods of this paper was used by Engstr\"om and Nor\'en~\cite{EN} to reveal the fine structure of Betti numbers of powers of ideals in some classes. Based on that data Engstr\"om made a conjecture~\cite{E} that was proved by Mayes-Tang~\cite {M}. Erman and Sam~\cite{ES} give a good survey of the area, which contains open problems and questions that could be attacked with the methods of this paper. The limits of algebraic discrete Morse theory in a related setup to this paper was studied by Nor\'en in~\cite{N}. In Section~\ref{Cell} the basics of cellular resolutions and discrete Morse theory are reviewed, and in Section~\ref{Poly} the concepts of diced and sharp polytopes are introduced. Finally in Section~\ref{Main}, it is showed that a subdivisions of a diced polytope into sharp cells give a cellular resolution. \section{Cellular resolutions and Morse theory}\label{Cell} The theory of cellular resolutions was introduced by Bayer and Sturmfels~\cite{BS}. It provides a way to obtain free resolutions of monomial ideals from cell complexes. The cell complexes can be assumed to be CW-complexes, and cells are closed unless otherwise specified. The set of vertices, that is, the zero dimensional cells of a cell complex $X$, is denoted by $V(X)$. This notation is also used for polytopes and cells in general. The vertex set of a polytope $P$ is $V(P)$ and of a cell $\sigma$ it is $V(\sigma)$. \begin{definition} A \emph{labeled cell complex} is a cell complex $X$ together with a map $\ell$ from the set of cells of $X$ to the monic monomials in $\mathbb{K}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$. The map $\ell$ has to satisfy $\ell(\sigma)=\mathrm{lcm}\{\ell(v)\mid v\in V(\sigma)\}$ for all cells $\sigma\in X$. \end{definition} \begin{example}\label{ex:simp} If the vertices of the standard simplex $\Delta_n=\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_i\mid i\in [n]\}$ are labeled by $\ell(\mathbf{e}_i)=x_i$, then the complex becomes labeled and the label of the face $\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_i\mid i\in S\}$ is $\prod_{i\in S}x_i$. \end{example} \begin{definition} A labeled cell complex $X$ is a \emph{cellular resolution} of the ideal $I=\langle\ell(v)\mid v\in V(X)\rangle$ if the non-empty complexes $\{\sigma\in X\mid \ell(\sigma)$ divides $m\}$ are acyclic over $\mathbb{K}$ for all monomials $m$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} A cellular resolution is \emph{minimal} if no cell is properly contained in a cell with the same label. \end{definition} This definition of minimality implies that the complex obtained from the cell complex is minimal in the algebraic sense of free resolutions. See Remark 1.4 in~\cite{BS} for details. \begin{example} The standard simplex $\Delta_n=\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_i\mid i\in [n]\}$ labeled in Example~\ref{ex:simp} is a cellular resolution. The complex \[\left\{\sigma\in X\mid \ell(\sigma)\textrm{ divides }\prod_{i\in S}x_i\right\}\] is the simplex $\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_i\mid i\in S\}$, and it is convex and acyclic. The resolution is minimal as each face has a unique label. \end{example} Algebraic discrete Morse theory was developed by Batzies and Welker~\cite{BW}. It provides a way to make non-minimal cellular resolutions smaller. Discrete Morse theory is usually explained in terms of Morse functions, but in the algebraic setting it is more convenient to use acyclic matchings. A good introduction to the general theory of discrete Morse theory is by Forman~\cite{F}, who invented it. \begin{definition} A matching $M$ in a directed acyclic graph $D$ is \emph{acyclic} if the directed graph obtained from $D$ by reversing the edges in $M$ is acyclic. An acyclic matching of a poset $F$ is an acyclic matching of its Hasse diagram. \end{definition} \begin{definition} An acyclic matching $M$ of the face poset of a labeled cell complex is \emph{homogeneous} if $\ell(\sigma)=\ell(\tau)$ for any $\sigma,\tau\in M$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} Let $M$ be a matching of the face poset of a labeled cell complex $X$. The cells that are not matched are \emph{critical}. \end{definition} The main theorem of algebraic discrete Morse theory for cellular resolutions can be stated as follows. \begin{theorem}\label{thm:admt} Let $X$ together with the labeling $\ell$ be a cellular resolution of $I$, and let $M$ be an acyclic homogenous matching of the face poset of $X$. Then there is a cell complex $\tilde{X},$ homotopy equivalent to $X$, whose cells are in bijection with the critical cells of $X$. Moreover, the bijection preserve dimensions of cells, and $\tilde{X}$ with the labeling induced by $\ell$ is a cellular resolution of $I$. \end{theorem} The complex $\tilde{X}$ is called the Morse complex of $M$ on $X$. A proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:admt} and other important properties of the Morse complex are in the appendix to~\cite{BW}. The stronger results needed are best explained in terms of gradient paths. \begin{definition} Let $M$ be an acyclic matching of the cell complex $X$. A \emph{gradient path} is a directed path in the graph obtained from the Hasse diagram of the face poset of $X$ by reversing the edges in $M$. \end{definition} The following is Proposition 7.3 in~\cite{BW}. \begin{proposition}\label{prop:strong} Let $M$ be an acyclic matching of the cell complex $X$ and let $\sigma$ and $\tau$ be critical cells. The cell corresponding to $\sigma$ in the Morse complex of $X$ is on the boundary of the cell corresponding to $\tau$ if and only if there is a gradient path from $\sigma$ to $\tau$. \end{proposition} In fact the boundary maps can be explicitly described in terms of sums over all gradient paths between the two cells, this is a result by Forman explained in the algebraic setting in Lemma 7.7 in~\cite{BW}. For the matchings in this paper it will turn out that the gradient path between a cell and any of its facets is unique and the resulting complex is regular in the sense of CW-complexes. \begin{example}\label{ex:sq} Let $P$ be the square with vertices $(2,0,0),(1,1,0),(1,0,1),$ and $(0,1,1)$. Let $X_P$ be the subdivision of $P$ obtained by cutting with the plane $\{(e_1,e_2,e_3)\in\mathbb{R}^3\mid e_1=1\}$, this complex is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:subdiv}. The complex $X_P$ turns into a labeled complex by labeling the vertices by $\ell(e_1,e_2,e_3)=x_1^{e_1}x_2^{e_2}x_3^{e_3}$. This labeled complex is a cellular resolution, but it is not minimal. For example the line segment from $(1,1,0)$ to $(1,0,1)$ has the same label as the triangle with vertices $(1,1,0),(1,0,1)$, and $(0,1,1)$. Matching these two cells give a Morse complex isomorphic to the square $P$. \end{example} \begin{figure} \center\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{nsq.pdf} \caption{The subdivided square in Example~\ref{ex:sq}.}\label{fig:subdiv} \end{figure} The following result due to Jonsson, Lemma 4.2 in~\cite{J}, is highly useful when constructing acyclic matchings. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:pre} Let $f$ be a poset map from $P$ to $Q$, and let $M_i$ be an acyclic matching on the preimages $f^{-1}(i)$ for every $i\in Q$. Then the matching $M=\cup_{i\in Q} M_i$ is acyclic. \end{lemma} \section{Diced and sharp polytopes}\label{Poly} This section gives some important definitions regarding polytopes and their subdivisions. In particular we introduce the two new notions of diced and sharp polytopes. Some examples where the subdivisions support cellular resolutions are also provided. Sometimes the subdivisions are trivial in the sense that the only maximal cell is the polytope itself. \begin{definition} A polytope $P$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$ is a \emph{lattice polytope} if the vertex set of $P$ is a subset of $\mathbb{Z}^n$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} For a lattice polytope $P$ in $\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge0}$, define the ideal \[I_P=\langle x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}\mid (e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in P\cap \mathbb{Z}^n\rangle.\] \end{definition} \begin{definition} Define hyperplanes $H_{i,j}=\{(e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n\mid e_i=j\}$ and halfspaces $H^{\ge}_{i,j}=\{(e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n\mid e_i\ge j\}$, $H^{\le}_{i,j}=\{(e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n\mid e_i\le j\}$ for any integers $i$ and $j$. \end{definition} The next definition provides a large class of subdivisions of polytopes that often support cellular resolutions. Later discrete Morse theory will be used to make the resolutions smaller. \begin{definition} Let $P$ be a lattice polytope in $\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge0}$. Define $X_P$ to be the subdivision of $P$ obtained by cutting it with the hyperplanes $H_{i,j}$ for all integers $i$ and $j$. \end{definition} \begin{definition} Let $P$ be a lattice polytope in $\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge0}$. Define $O_P$ to be the face poset of cells in $X_P$ that are not contained in the boundary of $P$. \end{definition} The maximal cells in $O_P$ are exactly the cells in $X_P$ of the same dimension as $P$. \begin{example} Recall the complex $X_P$ in Example~\ref{ex:sq} where $P$ is the square with vertices $(2,0,0),(1,1,0),(1,0,1)$ and $(0,1,1)$. In this example only one of the hyperplanes was needed to define the complex. The poset $O_P$ consists of two triangles and their common facet. \end{example} The following definition is important. Most polytopes will be assumed to satisfy this property. \begin{definition} A lattice polytope $P$ in $\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge0}$ is \emph{diced} if $P\cap \mathbb{Z}^n=V(X_P)$. \end{definition} \begin{example}\label{ex:lines} The line from $(2,0)$ to $(0,2)$ is a diced polytope. The vertices of the subdivided complex are $(2,0),(1,1)$ and $(0,2)$. The line from $(0,0)$ to $(1,2)$ is not diced as the vertices of the subdivided complex are $(0,0),(1/2,1)$ and $(1,2)$. The polytopes are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:lines}. \end{example} \begin{figure} \center\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{lines.pdf} \caption{To the left is the subdivsion of the diced line from $(2,0)$ to $(0,2)$ in Example~\ref{ex:lines}. To the right is the subdivision of the line from $(0,0)$ to $(1,2)$ with the red vertex $(1/2,1)$ showing that the line is not diced.}\label{fig:lines} \end{figure} A rich class of diced polytopes come from totally unimodular matrices. \begin{definition} A matrix is \emph{totally unimodular} if all determinats of sub matrices are in $\{-1,0,1\}$. \end{definition} \begin{proposition}\label{prop:uno} Let $M$ be a totally unimodular matrix in $\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ and let $\beta\in\mathbb{Z}^m$. The polytope $P=\{(e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge 0}\mid M\cdot (e_1,\ldots,e_n)^T\le\beta\}$ is diced. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} It is well known that polytopes defined by totally unimodular matrices in this way only have vertices in $\mathbb{Z}^n$. As a consequence if $v$ is a vertex of $X_P$ then there is some hyperplane $H_{i,j}$ containing $v$. Fixing a coordinate to be a particular integer gives a slice of the polytope. This slice is defined by a smaller still totally unimodular matrix, obtained by deleting a column from $M$. Now the statement follows by induction on $n$. \end{proof} \begin{definition} Let $P$ be a diced polytope. Define $\ell(P)=\mathrm{lcm}\{x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}\mid (e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in P\cap\mathbb{Z}^n\}$. \end{definition} The complex $X_P$ supports a cellular resolution for any diced polytope $P$. Before proving this it is helpful to consider some properties of the complex $X_P$. A very important property is that all the cells in $X_P$ are lattice polytopes if $P$ is diced. This follows immediately from the definition of diced as all vertices in $X_P$ are in $\mathbb{Z}^n$. An equivalent way to describe the complex $X_P$, is that $X_P$ is the subdivision of $P$ induced by the subdivision of $\mathbb{R}^n$ into cubes $[e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times[e_n-1,e_n]$ where $(e_1,\ldots,e_n)\in\mathbb{Z}^n$. From this description it follows that each open cell in $X_P$ is contained in a unique half open cube $(e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times(e_n-1,e_n]$. This is useful when $P$ is diced as the label of a cell can be recovered from the half open cube containing its interior. If the open cell $\sigma$ is contained in $(e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times(e_n-1,e_n]$, then it has to have at least one vertex in each hyperplane $H_{i,e_i}$, as otherwise all vertices would be in some $H_{i,e_i-1}$ and that hyperplane does not intersect the half open cube. This shows that the label of $\sigma$ is $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$. \begin{proposition}\label{prop:diced} If $P$ is a diced polytope, then $X_P$ together with $\ell$ is a cellular resolution of $I_P$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} The preceding discussion showed that an open cell in $X_P$ has label $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ if and only if it is contained in the half open cube $(e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times(e_n-1,e_n]$. The label of a cell then divides $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ if and only if it is contained in $H^{\le}_{1,e_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{n,e_n}$. In particular, the geometric realization of \[\{\sigma\in X_P\mid \ell(\sigma)\textrm{ divides }x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}\}\] is $P\cap H^{\le}_{1,e_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{n,e_n}$. It is convex, and in particular acyclic or empty. We have verified that the complex is a cellular resolution. It resolves $I_P$ as $V(X_P)=P\cap\mathbb{Z}^n.$ \end{proof} A useful property of these resolutions is that the maximal cells in $O_P$ will have different labels as they are contained in different $[e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times[e_n-1,e_n]$ cubes. To reduce the size of cellular resolutions constructed from diced polytopes we introduce the well behaving sharp ones. \begin{definition} A diced polytope $P$ is \emph{sharp} if there is a cell $\sigma_P\in X_P$ so that $\dim \sigma_P=\dim P$ and $\ell(\sigma_P)=\ell(P)$. \end{definition} Recall that the maximal elements in the poset $O_P$ are the cells with the same dimension as $P$, in particular if $P$ is sharp then it has the maximal element $\sigma_P$. \begin{definition} A diced polytope $P$ is \emph{totally sharp} if all faces of $P$ are sharp. \end{definition} \begin{example} The line segment from $(2,0)$ to $(0,2)$ in Figure~\ref{fig:lines} viewed as a polytope is not sharp. The whole line has label $x_1^2x_2^2$, and the two full dimensional cells have labels $x_1^2x_2$ and $x_1x_2^2$. Observe that the full dimensional cells are sharp. \end{example} \begin{example} The square $P$ in Example~\ref{ex:sq} is sharp. The complex $X_P$ is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:subdiv}, the lower triangle is the cell $\sigma_P$. \end{example} There is a more geometric definition of sharpness. \begin{proposition} Let $P$ be a diced polytope with $\ell(P)=x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$. Then the polytope $P$ is sharp if and only if $\dim P\cap H^{\ge}_{1,e_1-1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\ge}_{n,e_n-1}=\dim P$. In this case $\sigma_P=P\cap H^{\ge}_{1,e_1-1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\ge}_{n,e_n-1}$. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} All maximal cells in $X_P$ are of the form \[P\cap H^{\ge}_{1,e'_1-1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\ge}_{n,e'_n-1}\cap H^{\le}_{1,e'_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{n,e'_n}.\] If $\ell(P)=x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ then $P$ is in $H^{\le}_{1,e_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{n,e_n}$. As in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:diced} a cell has label $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ if and only if the interior of the cell is contained in $(e_1-1,e_1]\times\cdots\times(e_n-1,e_n]$. A cell with label $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ is contained in $P\cap H^{\ge}_{1,e_1-1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\ge}_{n,e_n-1}$. If this intersection has the same dimension as $P$ then this cell is $\sigma_P$ and $P$ is sharp. To see this note that the cell cannot be contained in any of the hyperplanes $H_{i,e_{i}-1}$ as $P$ is not. If the intersection has lower dimension, then there is no cell $\sigma_P$ and $P$ is not sharp. \end{proof} \section{Subdivisions with sharp cells}\label{Main} Sharp polytopes work well with respect to algebraic discrete Morse theory. \begin{lemma}\label{lemma:main} Let $P$ be a sharp polytope in $\mathbb{R}^n_{\ge0}$. There is a homogeneous acyclic matching of $O_P$ where $\sigma_P$ is the only critical cell. \end{lemma} \begin{proof} The argument is by induction on the number of maximal cells in $O_P$, $\dim P$ and $n$. These are the base cases of the induction: \begin{itemize} \item[-] If $O_P$ has a single maximal cell then it is $\sigma_P$, as $\sigma_P$ is always maximal by definition. There are no other maximal cells beside $\sigma_P$ if and only if $\sigma_P=P$. In this case $O_P=\{\sigma_P\}$, and the empty matching leaves only $\sigma_P$ as critical. \item[-] If $\dim P=0$ then $\sigma_P=P$. \item[-] If $n=1$, then $\dim P=0$ or $P$ is a line segment. Let $P$ be the line segment $[a,b]$. Any cell $[i-1,i]$ with $i\neq b$ is matched to its endpoint $i$. The only critical cell is $[b-1,b]=\sigma_P$. \end{itemize} From here on, it can be assumed that $\|O_P\|>1,\dim P>0$, and $n>1.$ By induction on $n$, it can also be assumed that $P$ is not contained in any hyperplane $H_{i,j}$. The maximal elements of $O_P$ are polytopes of the same dimension as $P$. As the subdivision $X_P$ is not trivial, every maximal element is neighboring another maximal element. In particular, there is a maximal element $\tau$ in $O_P\setminus \{\sigma_P\}$ so that $\omega=\tau\cap\sigma_P$ is a facet of $\sigma_P$ and $\tau$. Let $H_{i_1,j_1},\ldots,H_{i_k,j_k}$ be the hyperplanes of the form $H_{i,j}$ containing $\omega$. As $P$ is not in any hyperplane $H_{i,j}$, the space $H=H_{i_1,j_1}\cap\cdots\cap H_{i_k,j_k}$ is the supporting subspace of $\omega$. Note that while $\omega=\sigma_P\cap H_{i_s,j_s}=\tau\cap H_{i_s,j_s}=\sigma_P\cap H=\tau\cap H$ for any single $i_s\in S=\{i_1,\ldots,i_k\}$ it could happen that $P$ is contained in a hyperplane so that $\omega$ is contained in multiple hyperplanes $H_{i,j}$. The space $H$ splits $P$ into two polytopes $P_{\ge}$ and $P_{\le}$. The polytope $P_{\ge}$ contains $\sigma_P$ and $P_{\le}$ contains $\tau$. In fact \[P_{\ge}=P\cap H^{\ge}_{i_1,j_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\ge}_{i_k,j_k}\] and \[P_{\le}=P\cap H^{\le}_{i_1,j_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{i_k,j_k}\] as otherwise one of the variables would have a higher degree in $\ell(\tau)$ than in $\ell(\sigma_P)$. Let $\ell(P)=x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ and recall that $H=H_{i_1,j_1}\cap\cdots\cap H_{i_k,j_k}$ and $S=\{i_1,\ldots,i_k\}$. Now $j_s=e_{i_s}-1$ for all $s\in[k]$ and equivalently $H_{i_s,j_s}=H_{i_s,e_{i_s}-1}$ for all $i_s\in S$. The next step is to show that $P_{\ge},P_{\le},$ and $P\cap H$ are all sharp. By construction $\sigma_P\subseteq P_{\ge}\subseteq P$ and it follows that $P_{\ge}$ is sharp with $\sigma_{P_{\ge}}=\sigma_P$. The polytope $P_{\le}$ is contained in $(\cap_{i\in S} H^{\le}_{i,e_i-1})\cap(\cap_{i\in [n]\setminus S} H^{\le}_{i,e_i})$ and in fact the cell $\tau$ can be described explicitly as \[\tau=P_{\le}\cap (\cap_{i\in S} H^{\ge}_{i,e_i-2})\cap(\cap_{i\in [n]\setminus S} H^{\ge}_{i,e_i-1}).\] In particular $P_{\le}$ is sharp with $\tau=\sigma_{P_{\le}}$. The polytope $P\cap H$ is also contained in $(\cap_{i\in S} H^{\le}_{i,e_i-1})\cap(\cap_{i\in [n]\setminus S} H^{\le}_{i,e_i})$ and \[\omega=P\cap H\cap (\cap_{i\in S} H^{\ge}_{i,e_i-2})\cap(\cap_{i\in [n]\setminus S} H^{\ge}_{i,e_i-1})\] is full dimensional in $P\cap H$. The polytope $P\cap H$ is sharp with $\sigma_{P\cap H}=\omega$ and $\ell(\omega)=\ell(\tau)=\prod_{i\in S}x_i^{e_i-1}\prod_{i\in[n]\setminus S}x_i^{e_i}$. The posets $O_{P_{\ge}}$ and $O_{P_{\le}}$ has fewer maximal elements than $O_P$, and $P\cap H$ has lower dimension than $P$. By induction there are acyclic matchings $M_{P_{\ge}},M_{P_{\le}}$ and $M_{P\cap H}$ of $O_{P_{\ge}},O_{P_{\le}}$ and $O_{P\cap H}$ respectively, leaving only $\sigma_{P},\tau,$ and $\omega$ as critical. The matching $M_{P_\ge}\cup M_{P_{\le}}\cup M_{P\cap H}$ is acyclic by Lemma~\ref{lemma:pre}. The poset map used is constructed as follows. Let $Q$ be the polytopes $P_\ge,P_{\le}$ and $P\cap H$ ordered by containment, and the poset map sends a cell $\sigma$ to the smallest polytope in $Q$ containing $\sigma$. The preimage of $P_\ge,P_{\le}$ and $P\cap H$ are $O_{P_{\ge}},O_{P_{\le}}$ and $O_{P\cap H}$, respectively. Adding $\tau\omega$ to the matching does not break acyclicity. To see this consider the poset map to the labels ordered by divisibility. There is no other maximal cell with the same label as $\tau$, and then there can be no cycle using the reversed edge between $\omega$ and $\tau$. Now $M_{P_\ge}\cup M_{P_{\le}}\cup M_{P\cap H}\cup \{\tau\omega\}$ is a homogenous acyclic matching leaving only $\sigma_P$ as critical. \end{proof} \begin{theorem}\label{thm:maint} If $X$ is any subdivision of a diced polytope $P$ into totally sharp polytopes, then $X$ together with $\ell$ is a cellular resolution of $I_P$. \end{theorem} \begin{proof} Subdivide $X$ further by all hyperplanes $H_{i,j}$ to obtain a complex $X'$. As all cells in $X$ are diced it follows that all cells in $X'$ are lattice polytopes. Arguing as in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:diced}, the geometric realization of \[\{\sigma\in X'\mid \ell(\sigma)\textrm{ divides }x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}\}\] is $P\cap H^{\le}_{1,e_1}\cap\cdots\cap H^{\le}_{n,e_n}$, and the complex give a cellular resolution of $I_P$. For each cell $\sigma$ in $X$, Lemma~\ref{lemma:main} provides a matching of the cells in $X'$ contained in $\sigma$. Lemma~\ref{lemma:pre} shows that the matchings glue together to a matching for all of $X'$ where the critical cells are in bijection with the cells of $X$. The bijection preserve both dimension and label. To show that the Morse complex in fact is isomorphic to $X$ a slight strengthening of Theorem~\ref{thm:admt} is needed. Proposition~\ref{prop:strong} ensures that a cell $\sigma$ is on the boundary of a cell $\tau$ in the Morse complex if and only if the corresponding faces in the polytope $\sigma'$ and $\tau'$ satisfy $\sigma'\subset\tau'$. It is enough to consider the case when $\sigma'$ is a facet of $\tau'$, in this case the gradient path can be constructed inductively by observing that the last step has to come from the interior of the cell in $X$ containing $\sigma$. This inductive argument also shows that the gradient path is unique. Note that the gradient paths are not unique if looking at faces of higher codimension. Proposition 7.7 in~\cite{BW} describes the boundary maps of the Morse complex in terms of sums over gradient paths between a cell and a codimension one cell on its boundary. As these gradient paths are unique it follows that the Morse complex is regular in the sense of CW-complexes and isomorphic to $X$. Essentially this also follows from inductively using the proof of Theorem 12.1 in~\cite{F}. \end{proof} The Minkowski sum of standard simplices $P_1,\cdots,P_m$ is the polytope $P=P_1+\cdots+P_m=\{p_1+\cdots+p_m\mid p_i\in P_i\}$. A fine mixed subdivision of the Minkowski sum $P$ is a subdivision of $P$ into polytopes $B_1+\cdots+B_m$ where each $B_i$ is a simplex and a facet of $P_i$ and furthermore the $B_i$ are in affinely independent subspaces. \begin{corollary}\label{thm:fine} Fine mixed subdivisions of Minkowski sums of standard simplices are minimal cellular resolutions. \end{corollary} \begin{proof} To show that it is a resolution it is enough to check that the cells are totally sharp. Corollary 4.9 in~\cite{OY} says that the matrices defining fine mixed cells are totally unimodular, in particular the cells are diced by Proposition~\ref{prop:uno}. Let $\Delta_1,\ldots,\Delta_N$ be the simplices so that $\Delta_1+\cdots+\Delta_N$ is a fine mixed cell. The label of the cell $\Delta_1+\cdots+\Delta_N$ is $x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_n^{e_n}$ where $e_i$ is the number of simplices containing the standard basis vector $\mathbf{e}_i$. It can be assumed that $e_i>0$ for all $i$. Lemma 2.6 in~\cite{OY} says that a the cell contains the simplex $(e_1-1,\ldots,e_n-1)+\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{e}_n\}$, this shows that it is sharp. Minimality follow from the fact that the degree of $\ell(\Delta_1+\cdots+\Delta_N)$ is $\|V(\Delta_1)\|+\cdots+\|V(\Delta_N)\|$ and all facets of $P$ have label of lower degree. \end{proof} A three-dimensional fine mixed cell is either a simplex, a triangular prism, or a cube. To illustrate the results, an example of each type is examined in more detail. \begin{example} If the cell $P$ is a simplex, then $P=\sigma_P$ and no matching is needed. \end{example} \begin{example}\label{ex:prism} Let $P$ be the triangular prism $\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_1,\mathbf{e}_2,\mathbf{e}_3\}+\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_1+\mathbf{e}_4\}$. The complex $X_P$ is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:prism}. The simplex is the cell $\sigma_P$. The interior triangle is matched to the pyramid. The subdivided cells on the boundary are isomorphic to the complex in Example~\ref{ex:sq}, which is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:subdiv}. \end{example} \begin{figure} \center\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{prism.pdf} \caption{The subdivided triangular prism in Example~\ref{ex:prism}. The unlabeled vertex is $(0,0,1,1)$. The hyperplane cutting the prism is $H_{1,1}$.}\label{fig:prism} \end{figure} \begin{example}\label{ex:cube} Let $P$ be the cube $\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_1,\mathbf{e}_2\}+\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_1,\mathbf{e}_3\}+\mathrm{conv}\{\mathbf{e}_3,\mathbf{e}_4\}$. The complex $X_P$ is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:cube}. The rightmost simplex is the cell $\sigma_P$. The interior triangles on the boundary of $\sigma_P$ are matched to the pyramids. Any of the remaining two interior triangles can be matched to the leftmost simplex. The line from $(1,0,1,1)$ to $(1,1,1,0)$ can be matched to the last remaining interior triangle. As in Example~\ref{ex:prism} the subdivided cells on the boundary are handled like the complex in Figure~\ref{fig:subdiv}. \end{example} \begin{figure} \center\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{cube.pdf} \caption{The subdivided cube in Example~\ref{ex:cube}. The unlabeled vertex at the back is $(1,0,1,1)$ and the one in front is $(1,1,1,0)$. The hyperplanes cutting the cube are $H_{1,1}$ and $H_{3,1}$.}\label{fig:cube} \end{figure} There are many more resolutions of this class. \begin{proposition} All zero one polytopes are diced and totally sharp. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} If $P$ is a zero one polytope then the subdivision $X_P$ is trivial and $P$ is diced. For all faces $F$ it also hold that $\sigma_F=F$ and $P$ is totally sharp. \end{proof} The resolutions coming from the zero one polytopes are the hull resolutions of square-free ideals. These resolutions can sometimes be made minimal using discrete Morse theory but in general the Morse complex is no longer a polytopes, and sometimes it is impossible to make the resolution minimal using only discrete Morse theory \cite{N}. Another polytopal subdivision where the cells are totally sharp occur in~\cite{EN}, where the resolution resolves a power of the edge ideal of a path. It is interesting to note that if a not subdivided diced polytope support a minimal resolution then it has to be sharp. \begin{proposition} Let $P$ be a diced polytope. If the not subdivided polytope $P$ together with $\ell$ supports a minimal cellular resolution of $I_P$ then $P$ is sharp. \end{proposition} \begin{proof} The subdivision $X_P$ also supports a resolution. As $P$ supports a minimal resolution and has a cell of dimension $\dim P$ with label $\ell(P)$ then $X_P$ also needs such a cell, this cell has to be $\sigma_P$ showing the sharpness of $P$. \end{proof} \section*{Acknowledgements} Thanks to Alex Engstr\"om and Anton Dochtermann for helpful comments on an early version of the manuscript.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.